Gaea LLC v. Pure Storage, Inc.

This patent infringement case pits Gaea LLC, a non-practicing entity (NPE), against Pure Storage, Inc., a prominent data storage technology company. Gaea LLC, the plaintiff, does not appear to produce goods or services but instead acquires and asserts patents. Defendant Pure Storage is an operating company known for its all-flash data storage hardware and software solutions, including its FlashArray and FlashBlade product lines, which are designed for enterprise data centers and cloud environments. The lawsuit alleges that Pure Storage's data storage products, which provide features for managing data across on-premise and cloud systems, infringe on Gaea's patent. This litigation is part of a broader assertion campaign by Gaea, which has also targeted other major technology companies like Meta and Samsung with the same patent.

The case centers on a single patent, U.S. Patent No. 10,776,023, titled "Data storage device with configurable policy-based storage device behavior." In essence, the patent describes a data storage device with a controller that can be configured to handle and store content according to specific, defined policies. Gaea alleges that Pure Storage's products incorporate this patented technology without a license. The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (W.D. Tex.), a venue that has become a focal point for U.S. patent litigation. For several years, the court, particularly the Waco division under Judge Alan Albright, attracted a high volume of patent cases, making up nearly 25% of all such lawsuits nationwide at its peak.

The choice of venue is significant. The Western District of Texas developed a reputation for being plaintiff-friendly, with procedures and timelines often seen as favorable to patent holders. Although a 2022 order mandated the random assignment of patent cases filed in Waco among a dozen judges in the district to curb "forum shopping," the district remains a popular venue for patent litigation, especially for NPEs. The case's notability stems from its place within the broader trend of NPEs targeting successful technology companies in preferred legal venues. The patent-in-suit has also drawn the attention of organizations like Unified Patents, which has sponsored a "contest" seeking prior art to challenge the validity of the '023 patent, a common defensive strategy in response to NPE litigation. The recent announcement of Judge Albright's departure from the bench adds another layer of uncertainty to the future of patent cases in the district.

As a senior US patent litigation analyst, here are the key legal developments and the current posture for Gaea LLC v. Pure Storage, Inc. as of May 6, 2026.

Case Status

This case is active. Comprehensive docket information is limited in publicly available sources, suggesting the case may be in its early stages or has had limited substantive filings.

Filing and Initial Pleadings

• Complaint (2023-07-21): Gaea LLC ("Gaea") filed a patent infringement complaint against Pure Storage, Inc. ("Pure Storage") in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. The suit alleges infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,776,023, titled "Data storage device with configurable policy-based storage device behavior."
• Answer and Counterclaims: A specific answer from Pure Storage has not been identified in the available search results. In a typical patent case, an answer would be due within 21 days of service of the complaint, or longer if extensions are granted. It is likely that Pure Storage has filed an answer denying infringement and asserting affirmative defenses and counterclaims for non-infringement and invalidity of the '023 patent, but the document itself is not publicly accessible through the conducted searches.

Pre-trial Motions, Discovery, and Claim Construction

No substantive pre-trial motions, such as motions to dismiss, transfer venue, or stay, have been identified in publicly available records. Likewise, there is no public information regarding the status of discovery, the scheduling of a Markman hearing for claim construction, or any subsequent claim construction orders. A passing reference in the docket for an unrelated case, DoDots Licensing Solutions LLC v. Apple Inc., confirms the assignment of case number 6:23-cv-00521 under Judge Alan D. Albright following a severance, but offers no details on the proceedings within this specific case.

Trial and Final Disposition

The case is not known to have proceeded to trial, and no verdict, judgment, or notice of settlement has been made publicly available. The matter is presumed to be in the pre-trial phase.

Parallel PTAB Proceedings

A thorough search of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) records reveals no inter partes review (IPR) or post-grant review (PGR) petitions filed by Pure Storage, Inc. challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 10,776,023. Therefore, there are currently no parallel PTAB proceedings that would impact this district court litigation, such as a motion to stay pending PTAB review.

As a senior US patent litigation analyst, below is the identification of the counsel of record for the plaintiff, Gaea LLC, in its case against Pure Storage, Inc.

Plaintiff's Counsel

Based on appearances in parallel patent litigation brought by Gaea LLC in the same district, the plaintiff is represented by attorneys from Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC and Buether Joe & Carpenter, LLC. While the specific docket for this case (6:23-cv-00521) was not available through public web searches to definitively confirm appearances, the attorneys listed below represent Gaea LLC in nearly identical cases filed on the same day in the same court, making it highly probable they are the counsel of record in this matter.

---

Lead Counsel

• Name: Stamatios Stamoulis

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC (Wilmington, DE)
  • Note: Co-founder of Stamoulis & Weinblatt, he has over 20 years of experience and is frequently listed as one of the most active patent litigators in the country on behalf of plaintiffs.

• Name: Richard C. Weinblatt

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC (Wilmington, DE)
  • Note: A founding partner of the firm with over two decades in intellectual property law, noted for his extensive experience in patent litigation and appeals before the Federal Circuit.

Local & Lead Counsel

• Name: Eric W. Buether

  • Role: Local & Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Buether Joe & Carpenter, LLC (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: A founding member of the firm, his practice focuses on intellectual property and complex commercial litigation, and he is admitted to practice in the Western District of Texas.

• Name: Christopher M. Joe

  • Role: Local & Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Buether Joe & Carpenter, LLC (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: A partner at the firm specializing in intellectual property litigation, he has been consistently recognized by Super Lawyers for his work in this field.

Counsel for Defendant Pure Storage, Inc.

As of May 6, 2026, the specific attorneys who have filed a notice of appearance to represent defendant Pure Storage, Inc. in Gaea LLC v. Pure Storage, Inc., 6:23-cv-00521, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas are not identifiable through publicly available web search results.

Detailed information regarding counsel of record, including names, law firms, and specific roles, is contained within the case docket. This docket is maintained on the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system. Without direct access to the docket filings, such as the defendant's answer or initial notice of appearance, a definitive list of the legal team cannot be compiled.

Filings in patent cases are sometimes sealed or access may be delayed, further limiting the information available through standard web searches. Therefore, a conclusive list of counsel for Pure Storage, Inc. in this matter would require a direct review of the official court docket.