HyperQuery LLC v. BigCommerce Pty Ltd

HyperQuery LLC, a patent assertion entity (PAE) associated with Jeffrey M. Gross, initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against BigCommerce Pty Ltd in the Eastern District of Texas on August 15, 2025. HyperQuery LLC is a Delaware corporation focused on enforcing intellectual property rights related to software and data management technologies. BigCommerce Pty Ltd is a prominent software-as-a-service (SaaS) e-commerce platform, founded in Australia and headquartered in Austin, Texas, providing tools for businesses to build and manage online stores. The specific accused products or services offered by BigCommerce are not explicitly detailed in the provided search results for this case, but given the asserted patent and HyperQuery's litigation history, the allegations likely pertain to BigCommerce's platform functionalities related to application downloading, distribution, or marketplace integration.

The sole patent asserted in this litigation is U.S. Patent No. 9,529,918, titled "System and methods thereof for downloading applications via a communication network." This patent generally describes a method and system for downloading applications by receiving a user's search query, determining their search intent, selecting relevant applications, displaying corresponding icons, establishing a direct communication link, and initiating the download to the user's device. The case is proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas under Case No. 2:25-cv-00801, with District Judge Rodney Gilstrap and Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne assigned. The Eastern District of Texas is a historically plaintiff-friendly venue for patent litigation, known for its "rocket docket" and specific local rules that can accelerate case timelines. While the TC Heartland Supreme Court decision in 2017 constrained patent venue options, plaintiffs, particularly PAEs, have continued to file in EDTX, sometimes by targeting foreign entities.

This case is notable due to HyperQuery LLC's status as an active patent assertion entity that has repeatedly asserted the '918 patent against various technology companies, including previous actions against Electronic Arts and Sony. Furthermore, the validity of the '918 patent is currently under challenge; Unified Patents filed an ex parte reexamination proceeding against it in November 2024, citing identified prior art. This ongoing reexamination could significantly impact the litigation's trajectory. BigCommerce itself has a history of successfully challenging venue in the Eastern District of Texas in prior patent disputes following the TC Heartland decision.

HyperQuery LLC v. BigCommerce Pty Ltd: Key Legal Developments

Case Caption: HyperQuery LLC v. BigCommerce Pty Ltd
Case Number: 2:25-cv-00801
Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Filed: 2025-08-15
Status: Active, ongoing

This patent infringement lawsuit, filed by HyperQuery LLC against BigCommerce Pty Ltd, concerns U.S. Patent No. 9,529,918, which relates to a system and methods for downloading applications via a communication network, particularly focusing on searching for apps based on user intent. HyperQuery LLC is identified as a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) associated with Jeffrey M. Gross. The case remains active as of June 1, 2026.

Here's a chronological overview of the key legal developments and related proceedings:

1. Filing & Initial Pleadings:

• Complaint Filed (2025-08-15): HyperQuery LLC initiated the patent infringement lawsuit against BigCommerce Pty Ltd in the Eastern District of Texas. The complaint alleges infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,529,918.

As of the last readily available docket information (2025-11-10), there is no public record indicating the filing of an answer or counterclaims by BigCommerce Pty Ltd.

2. Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

No specific substantive pre-trial motions (e.g., motions to dismiss, transfer, or for summary judgment) filed by either party in HyperQuery LLC v. BigCommerce Pty Ltd (2:25-cv-00801) are readily available in the provided search results as of the last docket activity mentioned (2025-11-10). Given the early stage of the litigation, such motions would typically follow initial pleadings.

3. Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes:

The case has not yet reached the claim construction (Markman) stage, as indicated by the current posture and limited docket information.

4. Discovery Milestones:

No specific discovery milestones with strategic significance for this particular case are available in the provided search results.

5. Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-Trial Motions:

The case is in its early stages and has not proceeded to trial.

6. Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal:

The case remains open and active. There has been no reported settlement, dismissal, judgment, or appeal.

7. Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

• Ex Parte Reexamination Request Filed (2024-11-05): Unified Patents filed an ex parte reexamination proceeding against U.S. Patent 9,529,918, owned by HyperQuery LLC. The request argued that the patent, which relates to searching for applications in a central repository based on user intent, was invalid based on prior art. This reexamination was filed prior to the HyperQuery LLC v. BigCommerce Pty Ltd case being filed.
• Reexamination Instituted (2024-12-17): Six weeks after Unified Patents' request, the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) granted the request, finding "substantial new questions of patentability" on all challenged claims of U.S. Patent 9,529,918.

The institution of the ex parte reexamination, finding substantial new questions of patentability on all claims of the asserted patent, could significantly impact the ongoing district court litigation. BigCommerce Pty Ltd may leverage this proceeding to seek a stay of the district court case pending the outcome of the reexamination, or to bolster its invalidity defenses. However, no such motion to stay has been found in the provided information for this specific case as of the last docket date.

To identify the counsel of record for HyperQuery LLC in HyperQuery LLC v. BigCommerce Pty Ltd, case number 2:25-cv-00801, a direct review of the case docket is necessary. Publicly available information from web searches about HyperQuery LLC's other patent litigation activities in the Eastern District of Texas, while extensive, does not explicitly name the counsel in this specific case.

Based on general knowledge of patent litigation in the Eastern District of Texas and the common practice of patent assertion entities (PAEs) like HyperQuery LLC, it is highly likely they would use a combination of lead counsel and local counsel. However, without direct access to the docket for 2:25-cv-00801, specific attorney names and firms cannot be definitively identified for this particular case.

The existing search results indicate HyperQuery LLC is a prolific patent assertion entity (PAE) associated with Jeffrey M. Gross, asserting U.S. Patent 9,529,918 in numerous cases across the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas. These cases often end in voluntary dismissal.

As of June 1, 2026, information directly identifying the counsel of record for HyperQuery LLC in 2:25-cv-00801, HyperQuery LLC v. BigCommerce Pty Ltd, is not available through the conducted web searches. If filings are not publicly available or attorneys have not yet entered an appearance on a public docket, this information would be sealed or not yet recorded.

The following counsel are representing the defendant, BigCommerce Pty Ltd, in HyperQuery LLC v. BigCommerce Pty Ltd:

Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C.

• Neil J. McNabnay (Lead Counsel)

  • Office Location: Dallas, Texas
  • Experience: Fish & Richardson is a prominent intellectual property law firm with extensive experience in patent litigation across various venues, including district courts, the Federal Circuit, the ITC, and the PTAB. The firm has handled more district court patent litigation cases than any other national IP law firm over the past five years. Many of their attorneys have STEM degrees and significant trial experience.

• Lance Wyatt (Counsel)

  • Office Location: Dallas, Texas
  • Experience: As part of Fish & Richardson, Wyatt is involved with a firm recognized for its depth of patent litigation experience and its work with high-tech sector clients.

• Shelby Farrand (Counsel)

  • Office Location: Dallas, Texas
  • Experience: Also part of the Fish & Richardson team, Farrand contributes to the firm's robust patent litigation practice.

In-House Counsel for BigCommerce Pty Ltd:

• Chuck Cassidy (General Counsel, In-house)
  • Office Location: Austin, Texas
  • Experience: Chuck Cassidy has been with BigCommerce since 2017 and was appointed General Counsel in May 2023. He is responsible for the company's legal strategy, managing legal risks, and ensuring regulatory compliance. He has broad experience representing growth-stage software and technology companies and previously practiced corporate and transactional law at Vinson & Elkins, L.L.P. Cassidy has been involved in BigCommerce's initial public offering, subsequent public offerings, global expansion, and acquisitions.