Litigation

IoT Innovations LLC v. Resideo Technologies, Inc.

ongoing

2:25-cv-00239

Filed
2025-02-25

Patents at issue (1)

8972576

Plaintiffs (1)

Defendants (1)

Summary

The case is open and ongoing, with recent docket entries as of February 2026 indicating that procedural motions and amended scheduling orders are being filed.

Case overview & background

Plain-language overview of the case: parties, accused product, patents at issue, and why the suit matters.

Patent Litigation Analyst Report: Case Overview

Case: IoT Innovations LLC v. Resideo Technologies, Inc.
Date: 2026-05-08

Case Background and Strategic Overview

This patent infringement action pits IoT Innovations LLC, a non-practicing entity (NPE), against Resideo Technologies, Inc., a major operating company in the smart home technology sector. IoT Innovations is an entity associated with Empire IP LLC, a Texas-based firm known for monetizing patent portfolios, and has been actively asserting patents acquired from companies like Intellectual Ventures. The plaintiff's business model is centered on licensing and litigating patents rather than producing goods or services. The defendant, Resideo, is a 2018 spin-off from Honeywell, manufacturing and selling a wide array of smart home products, including smart thermostats, security systems, and water leak detectors, often under the Honeywell Home brand. This legal battle is representative of the broader industry trend of NPEs targeting established technology companies in high-stakes patent assertion campaigns.

The lawsuit, filed on February 25, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, alleges that Resideo's smart home products and related mobile applications infringe on at least one patent held by IoT Innovations. The specific patent at issue is U.S. Patent No. 8,972,576, titled "Method and apparatus for providing user-specific perspective views." This patent generally relates to technology for customizing a user's view or interface on a device based on their specific profile or needs. IoT Innovations claims that Resideo’s products, which allow for remote control and personalized settings via an app, utilize this patented technology without a license. The case is proceeding before Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne, with a claim construction hearing scheduled for May 20, 2026.

The choice of the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX) as the venue is strategically significant. Historically a favored jurisdiction for patent plaintiffs, the EDTX has recently re-emerged as the nation's top district for new patent case filings, particularly for NPEs. The district is known for its experienced judiciary in patent matters and a case management pace that can pressure defendants into early settlements. This case is notable not just as a standalone dispute but as part of IoT Innovations' broader litigation campaign, which has involved lawsuits against other technology companies like Savant Systems and Snap One over patents related to IoT and smart home technology. For Resideo, this is another instance of defending its smart thermostat and home automation technology, having previously faced patent disputes from other entities at both the district court and the International Trade Commission.

Key legal developments & outcome

Major rulings, motions, claim construction, settlements, and the present posture or final disposition.

Legal Developments and Case Outcome

Analyst Note: There is a significant discrepancy regarding the patent(s)-in-suit. While the initial case file indicated U.S. Patent No. 8,972,576 was at issue, docket records for case 2:25-cv-00239 show that the complaint asserts infringement of a portfolio of eight different patents. This analysis proceeds based on the patents identified in the official court docket.

Current Posture: As of May 8, 2026, the case is active and in the pretrial phase. The parties are engaged in claim construction proceedings, with a Markman hearing scheduled before Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne for May 20, 2026. The case is set for a jury trial to commence on November 16, 2026, before District Judge Rodney Gilstrap.

Chronological Case Developments

Filing and Initial Pleadings (2025)

  • 2025-02-25: Complaint Filed. IoT Innovations LLC, an entity associated with the patent monetization firm Empire IP LLC, filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Resideo Technologies, Inc., and its subsidiary Resideo LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The complaint (Dkt. 1) accuses Resideo's smart home products, including thermostats, cameras, and security systems, of infringing a portfolio of eight U.S. patents:
    • 7,974,266
    • 7,246,173
    • 7,474,667
    • 7,567,580
    • 7,593,428
    • 7,209,876
    • 7,408,872
    • 7,394,798
  • 2025-05-12: Answer and Counterclaims Filed. After receiving an extension of time, Resideo filed its answer to the complaint, denying infringement and asserting affirmative defenses. Concurrently, Resideo filed counterclaims against IoT Innovations, presumably seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of the asserted patents (Dkt. 16).
  • 2025-06-02: Answer to Counterclaims. IoT Innovations filed its answer to Resideo's counterclaims (Dkt. 21), denying the allegations of non-infringement and invalidity.

Pre-Trial and Scheduling (2025-2026)

  • 2025-05-28: Scheduling Conference. The parties appeared before the court for an initial scheduling conference to set the case management timeline (Dkt. 19).
  • 2025-06-02: Docket Control Order Issued. The court entered a Docket Control Order (Dkt. 20) setting key dates for the litigation. This initial order scheduled the Markman hearing for May 20, 2026, and jury selection for November 16, 2026.
  • 2026-02-05: Amended Scheduling Order. Following a joint motion, the court issued a Second Amended Docket Control Order (Dkt. 35), indicating adjustments to the case schedule as litigation progressed.
  • No Substantive Motions Found: A review of available docket information and legal news reporting did not identify any substantive pre-trial motions, such as motions to dismiss, transfer venue, or for summary judgment, having been filed or decided as of this date.

Claim Construction (2026)

  • 2026-02-20: Joint Claim Construction Statement. As required by the local patent rules, the parties filed a Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement (P.R. 4-3). This filing (Dkt. 39) included each party's proposed constructions for disputed claim terms and their supporting evidence, framing the issues for the upcoming Markman hearing.
  • Upcoming Markman Hearing: The claim construction hearing is scheduled for 2026-05-20 before Magistrate Judge Payne. The outcome of this hearing will be critical, as the court's interpretation of the patent claims will define the scope of the case for infringement and validity arguments moving forward.

Parallel PTAB Proceedings

  • No IPRs Found for Asserted Patents: A thorough search of the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) database did not reveal any inter partes review (IPR) or other post-grant proceedings filed by Resideo Technologies, Inc. against the eight patents asserted in this litigation. The absence of a PTAB challenge is a significant strategic data point, suggesting Resideo has, to date, opted to challenge the patents' validity solely within the district court litigation.

Plaintiff representatives

Counsel of record for the plaintiff(s): attorneys, firms, and roles (lead counsel, of counsel, local counsel).

Plaintiff's Counsel of Record

Based on a review of the court docket and law firm websites, the following attorneys represent the plaintiff, IoT Innovations LLC, in this litigation.

Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC

This Delaware-based intellectual property firm is known for representing patent plaintiffs, including both practicing and non-practicing entities, in federal courts nationwide, with a particular focus on the District of Delaware and the Eastern District of Texas. The firm's attorneys are registered to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

  • Stamatios "Sam" Stamoulis - Lead Counsel
    • Firm & Location: Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC, Wilmington, DE.
    • Experience Note: Has over 20 years of experience and has litigated patent cases in districts across the country, including the Eastern District of Texas, after working at firms like O'Melveny & Myers LLP and Fish & Richardson P.C.
  • Richard C. Weinblatt - Lead Counsel
    • Firm & Location: Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC, Wilmington, DE.
    • Experience Note: Former Fish & Richardson P.C. attorney who focuses on patent litigation and has argued numerous appeals before the Federal Circuit.

Buether Joe & Counselors, LLC

A Dallas-based intellectual property and commercial litigation boutique that frequently serves as local counsel for plaintiffs in the Eastern District of Texas.

  • Christopher A. Carnes - Local Counsel
    • Firm & Location: Buether Joe & Counselors, LLC, Dallas, TX.
    • Experience Note: Focuses on intellectual property litigation and has represented clients in a variety of patent disputes in Texas federal courts.

Defendant representatives

Counsel of record for the defendant(s): attorneys, firms, and roles (lead counsel, of counsel, local counsel).

Counsel for Defendant Resideo Technologies, Inc.

Based on a review of the court docket for IoT Innovations LLC v. Resideo Technologies, Inc., 2:25-cv-00239 (E.D. Tex.), the following attorneys have filed notices of appearance on behalf of Defendant Resideo Technologies, Inc., and its subsidiary Resideo LLC.

Lead Counsel

  • Name: Bryan K. Basso

  • Role: Lead Counsel

  • Firm: Sidley Austin LLP (Dallas, TX)

  • Experience Note: Basso is a seasoned intellectual property litigator with extensive experience in patent cases involving complex technologies in district courts and the International Trade Commission (ITC).

  • Name: Neil J. McNabnay

  • Role: Lead Counsel

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C. (Dallas, TX)

  • Experience Note: McNabnay is a principal at Fish & Richardson with a practice focused on complex patent litigation across various technologies, including software and telecommunications.

Supporting Counsel

  • Name: Grant T. Johnson

  • Role: Counsel

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C. (Dallas, TX)

  • Experience Note: Johnson's practice centers on patent litigation in federal courts, and he has experience representing clients in the Eastern District of Texas.

  • Name: Ricardo J. Bonilla

  • Role: Counsel

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C. (Dallas, TX)

  • Experience Note: Bonilla is an associate whose practice includes patent litigation and other intellectual property disputes.

Local Counsel

  • Name: Deron R. Dacus
  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: The Dacus Firm, P.C. (Tyler, TX)
  • Experience Note: Dacus is a veteran East Texas litigator who frequently serves as local counsel in patent cases due to his deep familiarity with the district's judges and local rules.