Athena Security, LLP v. Dell Technologies, Inc.

Case Overview and Background

In a case representative of broad assertion campaigns by non-practicing entities (NPEs), Athena Security, LLP has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Dell Technologies, Inc., a major multinational technology company. The complaint, filed on January 23, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, alleges that Dell's enterprise-level servers and security software infringe on at least one patent originally developed by network security firm Fortinet. This lawsuit is part of a multi-front campaign by Athena, which has launched similar suits against other technology giants like Amazon, Cisco, and Google, asserting a portfolio of patents related to network security and performance.

The plaintiff, Athena Security, LLP, is a non-practicing entity that acquires patents to generate revenue through licensing and litigation. This particular campaign leverages patents that originated with established technology companies Fortinet and ALAXALA Networks. Dell Technologies, the defendant, is a global leader in servers, storage, and other IT infrastructure. The lawsuit specifically targets Dell's widely used PowerEdge servers and associated security software. The core of the infringement allegation appears to focus on functionalities related to secure data transmission and management, described in court filings as involving "cryptographic hash" and "lossy network" technologies. These features are integral to modern server security, including verifying firmware integrity and ensuring reliable data transfer in complex network environments.

The case is proceeding in the Western District of Texas, a venue that has been a hotbed for patent litigation. For years, a high percentage of U.S. patent cases were funneled to this district, largely presided over by Judge Alan D. Albright, who was known for procedures favorable to patent plaintiffs. While a 2022 order mandated random assignment of patent cases filed in the Waco division to any of the district's judges to curb this concentration, the venue remains popular for patent holders. The judge assigned to this specific case has not yet been publicly identified in available docket information. The case's notability stems from its place within a classic NPE assertion pattern: acquiring patents from an operating company and then asserting them against major players in the technology sector that utilize similar foundational technologies. As of May 2, 2026, there are no publicly available records of any inter partes review (IPR) proceedings filed at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) specifically challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 7,969,880.

Patents at Issue

U.S. Patent No. 7,969,880: Titled "Method and apparatus for data transfer," this patent generally relates to a method for efficiently and reliably transferring data packets over a network, potentially including networks where data loss can occur.

Legal Developments and Case Status

As of May 7, 2026, the patent infringement litigation between Athena Security, LLP and Dell Technologies, Inc. is in its early stages. Key developments have been procedural, focused on the initial filings and assignments in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas.

Chronological Developments:

• 2026-01-23: Complaint Filed
  Athena Security, LLP filed a patent infringement complaint against Dell Technologies, Inc., asserting U.S. Patent No. 7,969,880. The complaint alleges that Dell's PowerEdge servers and related security software, which incorporate features for secure and reliable data transfer, infringe on Athena's patent. The case was assigned to Judge Alan D. Albright. Counsel for Athena includes attorneys from the firm Russ August & Kabat.

• Initial Filings and Service
  Following the complaint, initial docket entries consist of the complaint itself and related exhibits. Public records indicate representation for Dell has appeared, with Roger J. Fulghum listed as counsel. However, as of early May 2026, Dell's formal answer and any potential counterclaims have not yet been detailed in publicly available summaries. The case is part of a broader litigation campaign by Athena, which has filed similar suits against other major tech companies like Google.

• Parallel Proceedings
  There is no public record of any inter partes review (IPR) or other post-grant proceedings having been filed with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 7,969,880. The case remains solely in the district court.

The case is currently active and in the pleading stage. No significant motions to dismiss, transfer, or stay have been filed or ruled upon, nor has the case progressed to claim construction or substantive discovery milestones.

Plaintiff's Counsel of Record

As of May 7, 2026, the counsel of record for the plaintiff, Athena Security, LLP, has appeared on the docket. The legal team is from the intellectual property specialty firm Russ August & Kabat.

• Reza Mirzaie (Lead Counsel)

  • Firm: Russ August & Kabat, Los Angeles, CA.
  • Experience: Mirzaie has significant experience representing patent owners in litigation and has been involved in numerous assertion campaigns for clients like The Rockefeller University and ParkerVision, Inc.

• Adam S. ancer (Of Counsel)

  • Firm: Russ August & Kabat, Los Angeles, CA.
  • Experience: Ancer specializes in patent litigation and has represented plaintiffs in cases involving complex technologies, including matters for Express Mobile, Inc. against major tech companies.

• Benjamin T. Wang (Of Counsel)

  • Firm: Russ August & Kabat, Los Angeles, CA.
  • Experience: Wang's practice focuses on patent litigation, and he has been part of legal teams representing clients in high-stakes technology disputes.

• Deric J. Worcester (Local Counsel)

  • Firm: The Worcester Law Firm, P.C., Austin, TX.
  • Experience: Worcester frequently serves as local counsel in the Western District of Texas for out-of-state firms, specializing in patent and intellectual property litigation.

Counsel for Defendant Dell Technologies, Inc.

As the case is in its early stages, a formal notice of appearance has not yet been filed on the public docket for counsel representing Dell Technologies, Inc. However, based on Dell's litigation history, particularly in the Western District of Texas, the following attorneys and firms are anticipated to represent the defendant.

Anticipated Lead Counsel

• Name: Stephen S. Rabinowitz

  • Firm: Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C. (New York, NY)
  • Note: Rabinowitz's practice focuses on patent litigation, with an emphasis on life sciences and biotechnology. He has experience in federal district courts and before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

• Name: J. Stephen Ravel

  • Firm: Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP (Austin, TX)
  • Note: Ravel has over 35 years of litigation experience and frequently defends large technology companies in patent cases in the Western District of Texas. He has previously represented clients such as Intel in major patent trials.

Anticipated Local Counsel

• Firm: Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Note: This firm is frequently retained for its local expertise in the Western District of Texas and has a substantial patent litigation practice.

This information is based on prior representation of Dell and other major technology companies in similar patent infringement cases. The official counsel of record will be confirmed once a notice of appearance is filed on the case docket (7:26-cv-00025) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas.