8 known cases. View patent page →
Parus filed an infringement action asserting U.S. Patent 7,076,431 and U.S. Patent 9,451,084. The case was designated the lead case when five W.D. Tex. actions were consolidated on Dec. 20, 2019. The '431 claims were later held unpatentable in IPR2020-00846, affirmed on appeal.
Parus filed an infringement action asserting U.S. Patent 7,076,431 and U.S. Patent 9,451,084. The case was consolidated into 6:19-cv-00432-ADA on Dec. 20, 2019.
Parus filed an infringement action asserting U.S. Patent 7,076,431 and U.S. Patent 9,451,084. This LG dispute was consolidated into 6:19-cv-00432-ADA and later moved out of the Texas consolidation to a refiled N.D. Cal. action.
Parus filed an infringement action asserting U.S. Patent 7,076,431 and U.S. Patent 9,451,084. The case was consolidated into 6:19-cv-00432-ADA on Dec. 20, 2019.
Parus filed an infringement action asserting U.S. Patent 7,076,431 and U.S. Patent 9,451,084. The case was consolidated into 6:19-cv-00432-ADA on Dec. 20, 2019. Some sources list this docket as 6:19-cv-0484-ADA.
Apple filed an inter partes review of U.S. Patent 7,076,431 against Parus. The PTAB issued a final written decision on Sept. 9, 2021.
Petitioners filed an inter partes review of U.S. Patent 7,076,431 against Parus. The PTAB held claims 1, 2, 4–7, 10, 13, and 14 unpatentable in a final written decision on Oct. 19, 2021.
Parus sued its former IP litigation counsel Mintz (including attorneys Renaud and McNamara) for professional negligence. The complaint alleges counsel's failure to properly present and cite antedating evidence in the '431 IPR caused invalidation of the '431 patent claims and reduced Parus's settlement/licensing values.