Defendant
1 case as defendant.
I'll research Opodo Ltd. to build an accurate profile.
Let me verify the litigation context and NPE characterization.
Opodo Ltd. ("Opodo") is a UK-incorporated online travel agency, incorporated 8 August 2000 and registered at 12 Hammersmith Grove, London W6 7AE. It was founded by a consortium of nine European airlines (Air France, British Airways, Alitalia, Iberia, KLM, Lufthansa, Aer Lingus, Austrian Airlines, Finnair); Amadeus held ~99.4% until 2011. Since 2011 Opodo has been owned by eDreams ODIGEO S.A., a group publicly listed on the Spanish exchanges (Bolsa de Madrid) under ticker EDR since April 2014. Group headquarters are in Madrid (the Opodo brand FAQ cites Barcelona); group headcount is roughly 1,860 and group revenue about €670–775M. Opodo Limited itself is a holding/operating subsidiary with a UK filing showing only about six employees and £3.1M turnover.
Operations. Opodo is a consumer-facing online travel brand — the website and app through which customers search, compare and book travel. It sells scheduled and low-cost flights, hotels, car hire, dynamic packages, city breaks, package holidays, cruises, excursions, ski holidays and travel insurance, operating branded sites such as opodo.co.uk, opodo.de and opodo.fr. It sits alongside group brands eDreams, Go Voyages, Travellink and Liligo; the group also runs a subscription (Prim) product.
Litigation posture. Opodo appears in the tracked data once, as a defendant, with zero plaintiff cases — the profile of an operating company being attacked rather than an enforcer. The sole tracked matter is InternetAd Systems, LLC v. Opodo Ltd. et al., filed in 2006 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division (No. 3:06-CV-1084-P). InternetAd is a subsidiary of Acacia Research Corporation and has been characterized in the litigation record as a non-practicing entity. The suit also named Amadeus Global Travel Distribution, Amadeus North America, OpenTable and Best Western.
Context. The asserted patents (U.S. 5,572,643; 5,737,619; 6,185,586; 6,456,025) cover interstitial advertising and content display during idle time. The January 2007 opinion (481 F. Supp. 2d 596) denied the defendants' summary-judgment motion on standing, holding InternetAd held all substantial rights as exclusive licensee. Opodo's co-defendant Amadeus was then its majority shareholder. N.D. Texas was a favored venue for such assertions, though not the Eastern District of Texas.
InternetAd Systems sued Opodo Ltd. and related defendants. The court analyzed the TechSearch–InternetAd license and held that InternetAd held all substantial rights and had standing to sue; the merits were not resolved.