Plaintiff
28 cases as plaintiff.
Intellectual Ventures I LLC is one of the primary legal entities used by Intellectual Ventures Management, LLC, a private firm founded in 2000. The parent company, headquartered in Bellevue, Washington, was co-founded by former Microsoft executives Nathan Myhrvold and Edward Jung. While the broader Intellectual Ventures organization employs researchers and inventors in a lab division, its primary business model centers on acquiring patents and monetizing them through licensing campaigns and litigation. It is considered one of the world's largest patent aggregators and has been frequently characterized as a non-practicing entity (NPE) or "patent troll."
As a non-practicing entity, Intellectual Ventures I LLC does not manufacture products or provide services based on the patents it holds. Instead, its operations consist of acquiring patents from inventors, universities, and other companies and then licensing these intellectual property assets to technology companies under threat of litigation. The firm's aggregated portfolio is vast, spanning technologies from software and cybersecurity to telecommunications and semiconductors. Investors in its funds have reportedly included major technology companies like Microsoft, Apple, Intel, and Google.
The company's patent-litigation posture is exclusively that of a plaintiff, a fact supported by its record of two plaintiff cases and zero defendant cases in the provided data. Intellectual Ventures I LLC acts as a patent assertion entity, initiating lawsuits to generate revenue from its acquired patent portfolio. The two tracked cases are representative of its strategy: both were filed on December 8, 2010, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against major cybersecurity companies Symantec Corp. and Trend Micro Inc.
The notable cases against Symantec and Trend Micro involved patents related to email filtering and computer security. These lawsuits, part of the first litigation campaign ever filed by Intellectual Ventures, were intensely fought for several years. Ultimately, the patents asserted by Intellectual Ventures I LLC in these cases were declared invalid and ineligible for patent protection by the courts, a significant setback for the assertion campaign.
Watchlist
Email-only, free, anonymous. We'll notify you when Intellectual Ventures I LLC files another patent-infringement lawsuit. One-click unsubscribe from any alert.
Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC filed a patent infringement suit against Deere & Co. in the Texas Western District Court. The case is open, with the defendant's response deadline extended to May 19, 2026.
A scheduling order has been signed, with a Markman Hearing set for May 29, 2026, and a jury trial set for August 16, 2027. Home Depot has filed counterclaims against Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC.
This case, filed by Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC against Southwest Airlines Co. in the Texas Western District Court, was electronically transferred to the Northern District of Texas, becoming case number 3:25-cv-02885.
The court has denied American Airlines' motions to sever and stay claims and partial motion to dismiss. An order was issued compelling American Airlines to produce discovery relating to its use of the accused instrumentalities prior to the complaint's filing.
An agreed scheduling order was filed, setting deadlines for infringement contentions, invalidity contentions, and other pre-trial matters. The defendant's deadline to answer or respond to the complaint was extended to January 10, 2025.
Patent infringement suit filed by Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC against American Airlines. The narrative states six patents-in-suit, including US 7,324,469; additional patents were identified only by shorthand ('785, '844, '722, '582, '326). American's motion to sever and stay Viasat-related claims was denied on July 30, 2025, and claim construction remained pending.
Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC are suing American Airlines, Inc. for patent infringement. The case is open in the Texas Eastern District Court, with preliminary claim constructions provided as of January 13, 2026.
Intellectual Ventures I LLC asserted three patents against HP Inc. in the Western District of Texas, accusing HP OfficeJet Pro printers and the HP ScanJet Enterprise Flow 7500 of infringement. The case was closed on June 18, 2021, but the specific terminating event was not confirmed.
Patent infringement action in which the '298 patent was asserted against the Erie Defendants. The district court held the '298 claims patent-ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and granted Erie's Rule 12(b)(6) motion; the Federal Circuit affirmed in Appeal No. 2017-1147.
Listed in the Stanford NPE Litigation Database as a case involving the '666 patent, with Intellectual Ventures II LLC identified as the patent asserter. The outcome was not confirmed in the narrative.
Intellectual Ventures I LLC sued Bank of America Corporation and several other financial entities for patent infringement. The case was filed on August 7, 2013, and dismissed on November 20, 2013.
Intellectual Ventures I LLC sued JP Morgan Chase & Co. and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. for patent infringement. The case was filed on July 26, 2013, and dismissed on October 2, 2013.
Intellectual Ventures I LLC sued Capital One Financial Corporation for patent infringement. The case was filed on June 21, 2013, and dismissed on December 13, 2013.
Intellectual Ventures I LLC sued Bank of America, N.A. and related entities for patent infringement. The case was filed on June 21, 2013, and dismissed on September 19, 2014.
Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC filed a patent infringement suit against Fidelity National Information Services Inc. and related entities. The case was filed on May 24, 2013, and dismissed on December 16, 2013.
This was a multi-defendant litigation where claims against most defendants were eventually dismissed, following settlements or as a result of the § 101 invalidity finding in the separate Symantec case.
IV sued Canon and originally Olympus entities; Olympus was dismissed with prejudice on Dec. 11, 2012. Jury verdicts in 2014 went for Canon on induced infringement of claims 19 and 20 of the '960 patent and for IV on '081 claim 3 and '686 claims 14 & 16. The court later found the '960 claims anticipated and granted IV a new trial on infringement of the '348 and '960 patents; a subsequent ruling found a claim 1 limitation indefinite. No final liability win on the '960 patent for IV against Canon.
The district court found the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,073,142 to be ineligible for patenting under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The decision was subsequently appealed.
A jury initially found infringement, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the decision on September 30, 2016. The Federal Circuit held the asserted claim of the patent invalid for being directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
This case was severed from the Symantec lawsuit in 2012. Intellectual Ventures later voluntarily withdrew the infringement claims related to patent 5,987,610, though the litigation continued over other patents.
This was a consolidated action where Intellectual Ventures I LLC sued several cybersecurity companies for infringement. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants, ruling that the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,460,050 were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they were directed to an abstract idea without an inventive concept.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, holding that the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,073,142 were invalid because they were directed to the abstract idea of filtering email without adding an inventive concept.
This appeal concerned the district court's award of attorneys' fees to Trend Micro after finding the case exceptional. The CAFC vacated the fee award and remanded the case, instructing the district court to reconsider the award under the 'totality of the circumstances.'
The narrative identifies this as a known litigation lead involving US Patent 7,233,260. A CourtListener docket record references an exhibit in which Intellectual Ventures I alleges Southwest infringes the '326 patent, consistent with US Patent 7,233,260, but the exact patent number, filing date, and current procedural status were not independently verified.
Federal Circuit appeal from the W.D. Pa. decision holding the '298 patent claims ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The court affirmed in a nonprecedential opinion decided November 1, 2017.
Original Southwest Airlines infringement action filed in W.D. Tex., asserting the same six patents as the American Airlines case, including US 7,324,469. The case was later transferred to the N.D. Tex. as 3:25-cv-02885.
IV asserted the '960 patent against Nikon's Coolpix S4100 and S6100 cameras. Sendai Nikon was dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction in 2013. Nikon moved for summary judgment of invalidity of claims 1, 7, 12, 26, and 28–29 of the '960 patent; the case was terminated by stipulation of dismissal on May 20, 2015.
IV asserted the '960 patent against Motorola Mobility, a wholly-owned Google subsidiary. The suit is the basis for Google's IPR standing because Motorola was served within one year of the petition. The final disposition is not confirmed in the narrative.