Plaintiff
14 cases as plaintiff.
XR Communications, LLC, which does business as Vivato Technologies, is a Delaware limited liability company with a principal place of business at 2809 Ocean Front Walk, Venice, California 90291, according to complaints filed in its cases. It is privately held with no public ticker and no disclosed parent; headcount and revenue figures are not published, and the entity files no financial statements, so size cannot be verified.
Operations. XR Communications is a patent-holding and patent-assertion entity, not an operating company — it does not manufacture or sell products. Its portfolio derives from Vivato Inc./Vivato Networks, a venture-backed (reported $80M+) Wi-Fi infrastructure developer founded in 2000 that built beamforming phased-array access points. After Vivato Networks defaulted on secured loans from Aequitas Capital, Aequitas sold the patent portfolio to XR Communications in December 2009. XR's own complaints describe a portfolio of 17+ issued patents and applications covering adaptive/steered antenna arrays, beamforming, forced beam switching, and "Directed MIMO"/MU-MIMO wireless communication. Asserted patents include U.S. 6,611,231; 7,062,296; 7,729,728; 7,177,369; 8,289,939; 8,737,511; 10,594,376; 10,715,235; 11,750,256; and 11,777,569. It appears in Stanford's NPE Litigation Database.
Litigation posture. XR is a one-way plaintiff: 14 of 16 tracked cases list it as plaintiff, and its two "defendant" entries are Ericsson-filed PTAB proceedings where XR is the patent owner. It asserts an acquired portfolio rather than defending products.
Notable cases. The tracked cases are a 2017 C.D. Cal./S.D. Cal. campaign against Wi-Fi vendors (D-Link, NETGEAR, Belkin, Cisco, Aruba, Extreme Networks, Ruckus, Ubiquiti, Xirrus, Newo/Amped Wireless) plus an N.D. Cal. suit against ARRIS, generating nine 2018 IPRs by Aruba, Cisco, Ruckus/ARRIS/NETGEAR/Belkin. In Cisco Systems v. XR Communications (Fed. Cir. 2020, No. 20-1105) the Board's no-obviousness holding on the '231 patent was affirmed. Public dockets also show later suits against AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile in E.D. Tex.
Watchlist
Email-only, free, anonymous. We'll notify you when XR Communications, LLC files another patent-infringement lawsuit. One-click unsubscribe from any alert.
2018 Northern District of California case involving the '231 patent. It was related/consolidated by order on May 30, 2018, and resolved via appeal.
2018 Central District of California case related to the N.D. Cal. Ruckus matter and involving the '231 patent. It was resolved via appeal Nos. 22-1125/22-1141.
2017 Central District of California case asserting the '231 patent along with U.S. 7,062,296 and 7,729,728. It was dismissed with prejudice by stipulation pursuant to a confidential settlement agreement.
2017 Central District of California case asserting the '231 patent along with U.S. 7,062,296 and 7,729,728. It was consolidated and stayed, and was covered by the invalidity/collateral-estoppel resolution.
2017 Central District of California case asserting the '231 patent along with U.S. 7,062,296 and 7,729,728. It was consolidated and stayed, resolved via the indefiniteness/collateral-estoppel path, and was subject to CAFC 22-1787/22-1789.
2017 Central District of California case asserting the '231 patent along with U.S. 7,062,296 and 7,729,728. Final judgment was entered for Cisco on April 15, 2022, on the pleadings of invalidity of the '231 patent based on collateral estoppel from the N.D. Cal. indefiniteness judgment.
2017 Central District of California case asserting the '231 patent along with U.S. 7,062,296 and 7,729,728. Final judgment was entered for Extreme Networks on April 15, 2022, on the same collateral-estoppel basis.
2017 Central District of California case asserting the '231 patent along with U.S. 7,062,296 and 7,729,728. It was consolidated and stayed, then resolved via the indefiniteness/collateral-estoppel path.
2017 Central District of California case asserting the '231 patent along with U.S. 7,062,296 and 7,729,728. It was consolidated and stayed, and was superseded by the N.D. Cal. action No. 3:18-cv-01992.
2017 Central District of California case asserting the '231 patent along with U.S. 7,062,296 and 7,729,728. It was consolidated and stayed, then resolved via the indefiniteness/collateral-estoppel path.
Lead consolidated 2017 Central District of California case asserting the '231 patent along with U.S. 7,062,296 and 7,729,728. It was stayed for IPRs and the '231 claims were held invalid via collateral estoppel.
2017 Central District of California case asserting the '231 patent along with U.S. 7,062,296 and 7,729,728. It was consolidated and stayed, then resolved via the indefiniteness/collateral-estoppel path.
2017 Southern District of California case listed in the Stanford NPE Litigation Database and identified as part of the wave asserting the '231 patent along with U.S. 7,062,296 and 7,729,728; outcomes were not confirmed in the retrieved records.
Companion/member appeal from the same district-court campaign; terminated with affirmed ledgers reported.