Alpha Modus Corp. v. The Home Depot, Inc.

Patent Litigator Targets Home Depot with In-Store AI Tech Claims

A technology company, Alpha Modus Corp., has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against retail giant The Home Depot, Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. The suit alleges that The Home Depot's in-store systems, which likely include customer analytics and inventory management technologies, infringe on at least one of Alpha Modus's patents. This case is part of a broader enforcement campaign by Alpha Modus, which has filed numerous similar lawsuits against other major retailers, positioning itself as a key player in the emerging field of AI-driven, in-store retail technology.

The plaintiff, Alpha Modus Corp., is a subsidiary of the publicly-traded Alpha Modus Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: AMOD). The company describes itself as a "vertical AI company" focused on real-time, in-store shopper engagement and attribution. While it has commercial products and partnerships, its recent flurry of litigation—over 24 enforcement actions to date—suggests that patent licensing and enforcement is a primary component of its business model, a characteristic often associated with non-practicing entities (NPEs) or patent assertion entities (PAEs). The defendant, The Home Depot, is a major U.S. operating company and the largest home improvement retailer in the country, with a vast network of physical stores and a significant e-commerce presence. The lawsuit targets technologies allegedly used within The Home Depot's retail environments. The asserted patent, U.S. Patent No. 11,301,880, generally relates to systems and methods for retail intelligence and analytics.

The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (WDTX), a venue that became a hotbed for patent litigation under Judge Alan Albright, who actively cultivated a patent-friendly docket known for its fast trial schedules and reluctance to transfer cases. Although a 2022 standing order now requires patent cases filed in the Waco division to be randomly assigned among a dozen judges, the district remains a popular choice for patent plaintiffs. This case is notable as it represents a continued wave of litigation by Alpha Modus targeting the retail sector's adoption of AI and machine learning to analyze consumer behavior, manage inventory, and personalize advertising at the point of purchase. The outcomes of these cases could significantly impact how retailers deploy and license in-store analytics and customer engagement technologies.

As of May 8, 2026, the litigation between Alpha Modus Corp. and The Home Depot, Inc. shows minimal public docket activity. The key developments revolve around the plaintiff's broad, ongoing enforcement campaign and a significant discrepancy in the provided case information.

Contradictory Case Information:

A notable conflict exists between the provided case metadata and publicly available court records. The case number, 1:25-cv-01527, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, corresponds to a lawsuit filed by Alpha Modus Corp. against a different entity, Mood Media, LLC, not The Home Depot, Inc. That case was filed on September 18, 2025, and was quickly resolved, ending in a joint stipulated dismissal with prejudice on February 10, 2026. The parties in the Mood Media case agreed to bear their own attorneys' fees and costs, and the specific terms of the underlying settlement were not made public.

Despite extensive searches, no public docket has been identified for a case captioned Alpha Modus Corp. v. The Home Depot, Inc. with the case number 1:25-cv-01527. While Alpha Modus has filed over two dozen lawsuits against major retailers, including Lowe's, Circle K, and Walgreens, a suit against The Home Depot under this specific case number is not reflected in available legal databases.

Parallel Proceedings at the PTAB

There is no evidence of any Inter Partes Review (IPR) or Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceedings filed at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) by The Home Depot challenging the validity of the asserted U.S. Patent No. 11,301,880.

Public records do show that The Home Depot is an active participant in PTAB proceedings, having previously filed IPRs against patents owned by other entities, such as H2 Intellect LLC and Lynk Labs, Inc. However, these proceedings are unrelated to Alpha Modus or the '880 patent.

Chronological Developments (Based on available information for the asserted litigant)

Given the case number points to the Mood Media litigation and no docket is publicly available for the Home Depot case, a chronological summary for the specified litigation is not possible. The related Alpha Modus litigation campaign provides context:

• 2025-2026 (Ongoing): Alpha Modus Corp. engages in a widespread patent assertion campaign, filing more than 24 lawsuits primarily in the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas. The suits target retailers and technology providers, alleging infringement of patents related to in-store AI, real-time consumer analytics, and smart retail technologies.
• 2026-02-10: In a separate case bearing the same number as the instant matter (1:25-cv-01527), Alpha Modus and defendant Mood Media, LLC file for dismissal with prejudice, suggesting a settlement.
• 2026-03-06: Alpha Modus announces the settlement of its lawsuit against Brookshire Grocery Co., another case in its campaign filed in the Eastern District of Texas.
• 2026-04-24: Alpha Modus files a new patent infringement lawsuit against Circle K in the Eastern District of Texas, continuing its enforcement efforts.

Based on the available information, the case Alpha Modus Corp. v. The Home Depot, Inc., 1:25-cv-01527 appears to be either miscaptioned, filed under seal, or has not proceeded in a publicly accessible manner. The provided case number is definitively associated with a different, resolved lawsuit.

Based on the docket for the case number provided, 1:25-cv-01527 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, the counsel of record for the plaintiff, Alpha Modus Corp., is identifiable. However, as noted in the "Key legal developments & outcome" section, this case number corresponds to Alpha Modus Corp. v. Mood Media, LLC, not The Home Depot, Inc. No public docket has been found for a case captioned Alpha Modus Corp. v. The Home Depot, Inc. under this number.

The legal team representing Alpha Modus in its broader litigation campaign, including the Mood Media case, has been consistent across multiple filings. The following attorneys appeared for Alpha Modus in the lawsuit against Mood Media, LLC and other parallel cases.

Counsel for Plaintiff Alpha Modus Corp.

• Name: Jonathan K. Waldrop

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP (Redwood Shores, CA)
  • Note: Waldrop is a prominent patent litigator known for representing plaintiffs in major enforcement campaigns, including for clients like Adaptix, Inc. and Uniloc, against large technology companies.

• Name: Darcy L. Jones

  • Role: Of Counsel
  • Firm: Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP (Redwood Shores, CA)
  • Note: Jones has extensive experience in patent litigation alongside Jonathan Waldrop, representing plaintiffs in complex technology cases.

• Name: S. Calvin Capshaw

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Capshaw DeRieux LLP (Gladewater, TX)
  • Note: Capshaw is a veteran East and West Texas-based attorney frequently retained as local counsel for both plaintiffs and defendants in high-stakes patent litigation.

• Name: Elizabeth L. DeRieux

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Capshaw DeRieux LLP (Gladewater, TX)
  • Note: DeRieux is a partner at a well-known East Texas litigation boutique and regularly serves as local counsel in patent infringement cases filed in Texas district courts.

No Counsel of Record for The Home Depot in This Case

As established in prior updates, the case captioned Alpha Modus Corp. v. The Home Depot, Inc., 1:25-cv-01527, does not appear on any public docket. The specified case number corresponds to Alpha Modus Corp. v. Mood Media, LLC, which was filed on September 18, 2025, and terminated via a stipulated dismissal on February 10, 2026.

Consequently, no attorneys have filed a notice of appearance on behalf of The Home Depot, Inc. in connection with this specific case number.

Counsel for Defendant in Corresponding Case Number (Mood Media, LLC)

For the record, the attorneys who represented the defendant, Mood Media, LLC, in case number 1:25-cv-01527 before the case was dismissed are listed below. This information is derived from the docket of that proceeding.

• Name: Michael A. Hawes

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Baker Botts L.L.P. (Austin, TX)
  • Note: Hawes is a seasoned IP litigator with extensive experience defending technology companies in patent disputes in Texas and other key jurisdictions.

• Name: Samara L. Kline

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Baker Botts L.L.P. (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: Kline's practice focuses on complex commercial and intellectual property litigation, including patent, trademark, and trade secret cases.

Law Firms Frequently Representing The Home Depot in Patent Litigation

While no counsel has appeared in the specific, miscaptioned matter, The Home Depot is a frequent defendant in patent infringement and other intellectual property disputes. Analysis of their litigation history reveals representation by several prominent national law firms. These firms would be the likely candidates to defend The Home Depot in a suit brought by Alpha Modus.

• Firm: DLA Piper US LLP

  • Note: DLA Piper represented The Home Depot in a recent inter partes review (IPR) proceeding at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and on appeal to the Federal Circuit. Attorneys Jennifer Nall (Austin) and Michael Burns (Chicago) were among the counsel of record in these proceedings.

• Firm: Alston & Bird LLP

  • Note: Alston & Bird has a long-standing relationship with the Atlanta-based Home Depot and frequently represents the company in major litigation. Their intellectual property group is consistently ranked among the top in the nation.

• Firm: Jones Day

  • Note: Jones Day successfully defended The Home Depot in a multi-patent International Trade Commission (ITC) investigation, securing a finding of non-infringement and invalidity against the asserted patents. Ryan Walsh (Atlanta) and Rita Yoon (San Francisco) were part of the Jones Day team.

• Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C.

  • Note: As one of the most active and highly-regarded patent litigation firms in the United States, Fish & Richardson represents numerous Fortune 100 companies in high-stakes IP disputes and is a likely choice for a defendant of Home Depot's size.