Linfo IP, LLC v. Trustpilot, Inc.

Linfo IP, LLC initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against Trustpilot, Inc., alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,092,428. Linfo IP, LLC is characterized as a patent assertion entity (PAE) or non-practicing entity (NPE), and a subsidiary of Dynamic IP Deals, LLC, whose business model focuses on acquiring and enforcing intellectual property rights without having its own disclosed products or manufacturing operations. Trustpilot, Inc. is a prominent Danish consumer business, founded in 2007, operating a global online platform that hosts reviews of businesses to foster trust and facilitate collaboration between consumers and businesses. The alleged infringement stemmed from Trustpilot's website and services, specifically features that enable users to post, filter by star ratings, and highlight comments in reviews of businesses. The asserted patent, US9092428, titled "System, methods, and user interface for discovering and presenting information in text content," generally describes a computer-assisted method for identifying information within text and providing user interface tools to interact with that information, such as extracting, displaying, hiding, highlighting, or un-highlighting words or phrases.

The case, 24-CV-2796, was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on April 12, 2024, and presided over by District Judge Jesse M. Furman. Trustpilot filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the '428 patent was directed to an unpatentable abstract idea under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Judge Furman granted this motion on January 3, 2025, finding that the patent's claims were directed to the abstract idea of extracting and presenting information and lacked an inventive concept. The court further denied Linfo IP's request to amend its complaint, deeming such an amendment futile due to substantive deficiencies.

This case is notable for several reasons, primarily reflecting broader trends in NPE litigation and the impact of early-stage patent eligibility challenges under Alice. Linfo IP, LLC is recognized as a highly active NPE, having asserted the '428 patent in a widespread litigation campaign against over 65 defendants across diverse industries since September 2021, including major retailers and e-commerce platforms. The successful Alice dismissal in the Southern District of New York had a significant preclusive effect, as another judge in the same district later invoked collateral estoppel based on Judge Furman's decision to dismiss a separate infringement claim by Linfo IP against Aero Global, LLC involving the same patent. This highlights how a favorable eligibility ruling at the pleading stage can be a powerful tool for defendants to efficiently resolve patent disputes and potentially prevent future litigation over the same patent. Furthermore, Unified Patents, an organization focused on deterring baseless patent assertions, launched a prior art search contest for the '428 patent in March 2022, underscoring its perceived threat from an NPE.

The patent infringement litigation of Linfo IP, LLC v. Trustpilot, Inc., Case No. 24-CV-2796 in the Southern District of New York, concluded at the district court level with a dismissal on January 3, 2025, but is currently on appeal.

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

• Filing & Initial Pleadings:

  • 2024-04-12: Plaintiff Linfo IP, LLC filed a patent infringement complaint against Trustpilot, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,092,428 (the "'428 patent"). The '428 patent is titled "System, methods, and user interface for discovering and presenting information in text content." Linfo alleged that Trustpilot's platform, which allows users to post and filter business reviews, infringed claims 1-20 of the '428 patent. This lawsuit was part of a broader litigation campaign by Linfo, which had asserted the '428 patent against over 65 defendants since September 2021.

• Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

  • Trustpilot filed a motion to dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Trustpilot argued that the claims of the '428 patent were directed to an unpatentable abstract idea under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and therefore ineligible for patent protection.

• Dismissal & Judgment:

  • 2025-01-03: District Judge Jesse M. Furman granted Trustpilot's motion to dismiss in its entirety. The court held that the '428 patent's claims were directed to an abstract idea, specifically "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis." Proceeding to Alice Step 2, the court found that the patent lacked an inventive concept sufficient to transform the abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention, noting that Linfo's allegations for an inventive concept were conclusory and relied on routine computer implementations. The court denied Linfo's request for leave to amend its complaint, concluding that further amendment would be futile due to substantive deficiencies.
  • Following the decision, the court directed the clerk to enter judgment in favor of Trustpilot and close the case.

• Appeal:

  • 2025-01-15: Linfo IP, LLC filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

• Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

  • No parallel inter partes review (IPR) or post-grant review (PGR) proceedings for U.S. Patent No. 9,092,428 were identified at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

Linfo IP, LLC was represented by the following counsel in Linfo IP, LLC v. Trustpilot, Inc.:

• David John Hoffman

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Law Office David J. Hoffman, New York, NY
  • Experience Note: Provided local counsel services for Linfo IP, LLC in this patent infringement action in the Southern District of New York.

• William P. Ramey III

  • Role: Lead Counsel (implied through firm representation and other Linfo IP cases)
  • Firm: Ramey LLP, Houston, Texas
  • Experience Note: Managing Partner at Ramey LLP, known for extensive experience in patent assertion entity (NPE) litigation across various technology sectors and multiple federal districts. Ramey LLP has a history of representing Linfo IP, LLC in numerous patent infringement lawsuits. In other cases involving Linfo IP, LLC and similar patents, Linfo's counsel has faced sanctions for bringing frivolous lawsuits.

Defendant Trustpilot, Inc. was represented by the following counsel from McDermott Will & Emery LLP:

• Kevin J. Meek

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm & Office: McDermott Will & Emery LLP, Austin, TX
  • Experience Note: Led the McDermott team that successfully secured the dismissal of the patent infringement lawsuit against Trustpilot, arguing that the patent was directed to an unpatentable abstract idea.

• Andrew Bennett Kratenstein

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm & Office: McDermott Will & Emery LLP, New York, NY
  • Experience Note: Part of the McDermott team representing Trustpilot in securing the dismissal of the case.

• Aashish G. Kapadia

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm & Office: McDermott Will & Emery LLP, Austin, TX
  • Experience Note: Supported the McDermott team in achieving the dismissal of the patent infringement lawsuit.

• Kyle S. Sorenson

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm & Office: McDermott Will & Emery LLP, Austin, TX
  • Experience Note: Assisted the McDermott team in the successful dismissal of the lawsuit against Trustpilot.