Untitled case

Case Overview: IPR2026-00247

Inter Partes Review (IPR) case IPR2026-00247, currently pending before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), involves Petitioner Meta Platforms, Inc. challenging U.S. Patent No. 9,817,562, owned by Cogmedia LLC. Meta Platforms, Inc. is a major multinational technology company, primarily known for its social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, and is considered an operating company in the technology sector. Cogmedia LLC is identified as a patent owner, and a related district court case categorizes it as an operating company, though further details about its primary business operations are not readily available in the search results.

The asserted patent, U.S. Patent No. 9,817,562, broadly relates to computer-implemented methods for interacting with data items and is generally described in related litigation as covering "social-media content display and user-interaction technologies." Specifically, it involves an information processing system that collects and reuses data from external sources, such as links to news stories or merchandise, enabling the effective recycling and propagation of information across different users and purposes within a distributed card collection system. The technology was initially developed to support team efforts in the building industry and later refined for intelligence analysis with funding from the Department of Defense.

This IPR proceeding is linked to a co-pending patent infringement lawsuit, Cogmedia LLC v. Meta Platforms, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-12127, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. In this district court case, Judge Brian E. Murphy denied Meta's motion to transfer the case to the Northern District of California, emphasizing the plaintiff's chosen forum. The IPR's procedural posture at the PTAB is notable due to recent shifts in PTAB policy under Director John Squires, which have tightened access to IPRs. These changes include centralized Director control over institution decisions, an increased rate of discretionary denials, and new considerations such as U.S. manufacturing activity and the "settled expectations" doctrine. This evolving landscape at the PTAB means that the institution of IPR2026-00247, and its potential outcome, could be significantly influenced by these discretionary factors beyond the merits of the prior art.

I have the following information and will structure the response accordingly.

Filing & initial pleadings:

• Complaint: Filed July 30, 2025.
• Answer: Meta Platforms, Inc. filed an Answer with a Jury Demand. Based on the docket snippets, it was filed before or around the time of the December 15, 2025 motion hearing, and certainly before the January 27, 2026 orders. I cannot find a specific distinct docket entry date for the Answer itself from the snippets, but its existence prior to the December 2025 hearing is clear.

Pre-trial motions of substance:

• Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 24): Denied by Judge Brian E. Murphy on January 27, 2026.
• Motion to Transfer (Dkt. 47): Denied by Judge Brian E. Murphy on January 27, 2026.
• Motion to Stay pending IPR: My searches did not yield a specific docket entry for a motion to stay the district court litigation pending the IPRs. This suggests either such a motion has not been filed yet, or it was filed but not significant enough to appear in the top search results providing docket summaries. Given the recent filing of the IPRs (March 2026), it's plausible a motion to stay might be filed later or is still being considered.

Claim construction (Markman) outcomes:

• No information found. This is typical for cases still in the early discovery phase.

Discovery milestones:

• Stipulation to Extend Time to Submit Proposed Protective Order: Filed February 19, 2026.
• Joint Motion for Entry of Proposed Protective Order: Filed February 26, 2026, indicating the parties are establishing rules for managing confidential discovery materials, including source code.

Trial events, verdict, post-trial motions:

• The case is marked as "Open", indicating no trial or final verdict has occurred.

Settlement, dismissal, judgment, or appeal:

• The case is "Open" and ongoing.

Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR proceedings:

• IPR2026-00247: Filed March 18, 2026, by Meta Platforms, Inc. challenging U.S. Patent No. 9,817,562. This IPR is pending.
• IPR2026-00249: Filed March 19, 2026, by Meta Platforms, Inc. challenging U.S. Patent Nos. 11,036,371, 9,817,562, and 10,664,141. This IPR is also pending. [cite: 8 in previous search results]

I have completed all the planned searches and have enough information to construct the response.The patent infringement litigation Cogmedia LLC v. Meta Platforms Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-12127, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, remains active and is proceeding through pre-trial phases.

Here are the key legal developments and current posture:

• Filing of Complaint (2025-07-30): Cogmedia LLC initiated the lawsuit by filing an original complaint for patent infringement against Meta Platforms, Inc. The complaint asserted infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 11,036,371, 9,817,562, and 10,664,141.
• Meta's Answer with Jury Demand (Pre-2025-12-15): Meta Platforms, Inc. filed an Answer to the complaint, including a demand for a jury trial. The precise docket entry date for the answer is not explicitly detailed in publicly available summaries, but it was filed before the motion hearing held on December 15, 2025.
• Denial of Meta's Motion to Dismiss (2026-01-27): Judge Brian E. Murphy issued an Electronic Order denying Meta's motion to dismiss for failure to plausibly allege direct infringement (Dkt. 24). The Court concluded that Cogmedia's complaint plausibly alleged direct infringement.
• Denial of Meta's Motion to Transfer (2026-01-27): Concurrently, Judge Murphy entered a Memorandum and Order denying Meta's motion to transfer the case to the Northern District of California (Dkt. 47).
• Protective Order Proceedings (2026-02-19 to 2026-02-26): The parties engaged in discussions regarding the handling of confidential information during discovery. A "Stipulation to Extend Time to Submit Proposed Protective Order" was filed on February 19, 2026, followed by a "Joint Motion for Entry of Proposed Protective Order" on February 26, 2026. This motion indicated the parties were establishing procedures for managing confidential documents, including "HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL SOURCE CODE," signaling the commencement of discovery.
• Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings Initiated (2026-03-18 & 2026-03-19): Meta Platforms, Inc. filed two separate inter partes review (IPR) petitions against Cogmedia's patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB):
  • IPR2026-00247: Filed on March 18, 2026, challenging U.S. Patent No. 9,817,562. This IPR is currently pending.
  • IPR2026-00249: Filed on March 19, 2026, challenging U.S. Patent Nos. 11,036,371, 9,817,562, and 10,664,141. This IPR is also pending. [cite: 8 in previous search results]
• Current Posture: The district court case is currently "Open" and in the early stages of discovery. No Markman hearing, summary judgment motions, trial, or final judgment has occurred. There is no public record of a motion to stay the district court litigation pending the outcome of the IPR proceedings as of the current date.

Meta Platforms Inc., the Petitioner in IPR2026-00247, is represented by counsel from Paul Hastings LLP. While specific docket entries for IPR2026-00247 detailing counsel were not directly accessible, information from the closely related case IPR2026-00249, also involving Meta Platforms Inc. as Petitioner and Cogmedia LLC as Patent Owner, explicitly lists Paul Hastings LLP as the attorneys for Meta. It is common for the same legal team to handle serial or parallel IPRs for the same client against the same patent owner.

Based on the filings in IPR2026-00249, the following attorneys from Paul Hastings LLP are identified as counsel for Meta Platforms Inc.:

• David M. Tennant

  • Role: Counsel (likely lead or significant role given listing).
  • Firm: Paul Hastings LLP. Office location typically varies for patent litigators; Paul Hastings has several offices with strong IP practices, including Palo Alto, San Francisco, and Washington D.C.
  • Note: David Tennant is an experienced patent litigator with a focus on intellectual property, including PTAB proceedings, often representing major technology companies.

• Lisa K. Nguyen (Reg. No. 58,018)

  • Role: Counsel.
  • Firm: Paul Hastings LLP, Palo Alto, CA office.
  • Note: Lisa Nguyen is a partner at Paul Hastings focusing on intellectual property litigation, including PTAB inter partes reviews, and has represented Meta Platforms in other PTAB matters.

While Paul Hastings LLP appears to be the primary counsel for Meta Platforms Inc. in its IPRs against Cogmedia LLC, Meta also uses Perkins Coie LLP for other PTAB proceedings. For example, in IPR2026-00347 (Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Tir Technologies Limited), Perkins Coie LLP is identified as counsel, with the following attorneys:

• Jessica C. Kaiser (Reg. No. 58,937)

  • Role: Lead Counsel.
  • Firm: Perkins Coie LLP, Denver, CO office.
  • Note: Ms. Kaiser is a partner and co-chair of Perkins Coie's Post-Grant Patent practice, specializing in PTAB proceedings.

• Matthew A. Lembo (Reg. No. 75,633)

  • Role: Backup Counsel.
  • Firm: Perkins Coie LLP, New York, NY office.
  • Note: Mr. Lembo is an experienced patent litigator with a focus on inter partes reviews and other post-grant proceedings.

• Christopher Marando (Reg. No. 67,898)

  • Role: Backup Counsel.
  • Firm: Perkins Coie LLP, Washington, DC office.
  • Note: Mr. Marando is an attorney at Perkins Coie, practicing in intellectual property with an emphasis on patent litigation and post-grant proceedings.

For IPR2026-00247 specifically, the primary counsel is inferred to be Paul Hastings LLP, based on the highly similar IPR2026-00249.

The counsel of record representing defendant Meta Platforms, Inc. in the parallel district court litigation, Cogmedia LLC v. Meta Platforms Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-12127 (D. Mass.), are from Paul Hastings LLP. The team includes attorneys admitted to the District of Massachusetts bar and several admitted pro hac vice from California offices.

The following attorneys represent Meta Platforms, Inc.:

• Matthias A. Kamber

  • Role: Counsel (appears to be lead or co-lead counsel with Massachusetts bar admission).
  • Firm & Office: Paul Hastings LLP, San Francisco, CA (with Massachusetts Bar admission #654217).
  • Relevant Experience: Kamber is a partner at Paul Hastings and focuses on intellectual property litigation, particularly in patent disputes for technology and life sciences companies. He has represented major technology companies in complex patent infringement cases across various district courts and at the PTAB.

• Lisa K. Nguyen

  • Role: Counsel (admitted pro hac vice).
  • Firm & Office: Paul Hastings LLP, Palo Alto, CA.
  • Relevant Experience: Nguyen is a partner at Paul Hastings specializing in intellectual property litigation, with a focus on patent, trade secret, and copyright disputes for technology and life sciences companies. She has extensive experience in federal district courts, the International Trade Commission (ITC), and the PTAB.

• Eric Lancaster

  • Role: Counsel (admitted pro hac vice).
  • Firm & Office: Paul Hastings LLP, Palo Alto, CA and Boston, MA.
  • Relevant Experience: Lancaster is a partner at Paul Hastings focusing on patent litigation across various technologies, including software, hardware, and telecommunications. He has represented leading technology companies in high-stakes patent disputes.

• Joshua Yin

  • Role: Counsel (admitted pro hac vice).
  • Firm & Office: Paul Hastings LLP, Palo Alto, CA.
  • Relevant Experience: Yin is an associate at Paul Hastings with experience in patent litigation, particularly within the software and technology sectors. He has been involved in multiple patent infringement cases for technology clients.

• Michelle Zhang

  • Role: Counsel (admitted pro hac vice).
  • Firm & Office: Paul Hastings LLP, Palo Alto, CA.
  • Relevant Experience: Zhang is an associate at Paul Hastings, focusing on patent litigation. Her experience includes working on cases involving various technologies and assisting in all phases of litigation.