Lone Star SCM Systems, LP v. Becton, Dickinson and Company

Lone Star SCM Systems, LP, identified as a patent assertion entity (PAE) or non-practicing entity (NPE), initiated this patent infringement lawsuit against Becton, Dickinson and Company (BD), a global medical technology company. BD specializes in the manufacture and sale of medical devices, diagnostic products, and laboratory equipment, with divisions in Medical, Life Sciences, and Interventional technologies. The litigation concerns U.S. Patent No. 9,646,182, which broadly relates to "an interrogation system for identifying and tracking items" and is part of a patent family covering RFID/wireless interrogation technology, including applications in surgical procedures. The specific products, services, or technology offered by Becton, Dickinson and Company that were accused of infringement are not explicitly detailed in the readily available search results, but given BD's business, it would likely involve their medical device or diagnostic product lines that might incorporate RFID or similar tracking capabilities.

The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Waco Division, a venue historically significant for patent litigation due to the practices of Judge Alan D. Albright. Judge Albright, a former patent litigator appointed in 2018, actively sought to attract patent cases to his court, which led to a significant increase in patent filings, particularly from NPEs, with a vast majority initially assigned to his docket. This made the venue notable for its plaintiff-friendly reputation, characterized by fast-track scheduling orders and a reluctance to transfer cases. Although the Western District of Texas implemented an order in 2022 to randomly assign patent cases among its judges, this case was filed in August 2021, falling within the period when Judge Albright's court was a dominant choice for patent plaintiffs. The case was terminated on October 18, 2022, shortly after these assignment reforms began to take effect.

This case is notable as it reflects the broader trend of NPEs asserting patents in the Western District of Texas under Judge Albright's former case assignment rules. Lone Star SCM Systems, LP has been identified in other related litigation as a patent assertion entity involved in disputes over interrogation and RFID system technology. The patent at issue, US9646182, has also been challenged in inter partes reviews (IPRs) by Zebra Technologies Corporation, where the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) found its claims unpatentable, a decision later affirmed by the Federal Circuit in December 2025. While this specific district court case was terminated earlier, the IPR linkage highlights the common defense strategy against NPE assertions and the challenges to patent validity that often run in parallel to infringement suits.

Case Overview: Lone Star SCM Systems, LP v. Becton, Dickinson and Company

The patent infringement lawsuit, Lone Star SCM Systems, LP v. Becton, Dickinson and Company, Civil Action No. 6:21-cv-00844, was filed on August 11, 2021, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. The case involved U.S. Patent No. 9,646,182. The litigation was terminated on October 18, 2022.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings:

  • Complaint Filed: Lone Star SCM Systems, LP initiated the lawsuit by filing a complaint on August 11, 2021, in the Western District of Texas, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,646,182 by Becton, Dickinson and Company. Specific details regarding the answer or any counterclaims filed by Becton, Dickinson and Company are not publicly available without direct PACER access.

• Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

  • Specific substantive pre-trial motions, such as motions to dismiss, transfer, or for summary judgment, are not readily available in public search results for this particular case number and defendant.

• Claim Construction (Markman):

  • There is no publicly available information indicating that the case reached a formal Markman hearing or resulted in a claim construction order.

• Discovery Milestones:

  • No specific strategic discovery milestones are available from public records.

• Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-trial Motions:

  • Given the case's termination date of October 18, 2022, approximately 14 months after filing, it did not proceed to a full trial, verdict, or post-trial motions.

• Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal – Final Disposition:

  • The case was terminated on October 18, 2022. While the specific order or notice of termination is not publicly detailed, the rapid termination of patent litigation cases in this timeframe often indicates a confidential settlement and a subsequent stipulated dismissal by the parties. Without direct access to the court's docket entries, the precise nature of the termination (e.g., voluntary dismissal with or without prejudice) cannot be confirmed, but settlement is a highly probable outcome.

• Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

  • Searches for IPR/PGR proceedings specifically initiated by Becton, Dickinson and Company against U.S. Patent No. 9,646,182 were not found. However, U.S. Patent No. 9,646,182 was challenged in inter partes reviews (IPRs) by Zebra Technologies Corporation (IPR2022-01374, IPR2022-01375, IPR2022-01376, and IPR2022-01377), which resulted in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) concluding that all challenged claims were unpatentable. This decision was affirmed by the Federal Circuit on December 12, 2025. These IPRs involved the same patent but were part of separate litigation initiated by Lone Star SCM Systems, Ltd. against Zebra Technologies Corporation (Case No. 6:21-cv-00843), not Becton, Dickinson and Company. The PTAB and Federal Circuit decisions regarding the unpatentability of US9646182 against Zebra Technologies occurred after the termination of the Becton, Dickinson and Company case. The PTAB has also issued precedential decisions involving Becton, Dickinson and Company in other IPR cases, clarifying the analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) concerning discretionary denial of institution of IPRs. However, these do not directly pertain to IPRs filed by Becton, Dickinson and Company against patent 9,646,182.

I apologize, but I was unable to definitively identify the counsel of record representing the plaintiff(s), Lone Star SCM Systems, LP, in case 6:21-cv-00844.

While several search results referenced "Lone Star SCM Systems, Ltd. v. Bluebird Inc. 6:21-cv-00844" in the Western District of Texas, indicating the filing of an action on August 12, 2021, this case information refers to "Lone Star SCM Systems, Ltd." rather than "Lone Star SCM Systems, LP," as specified in your prompt. This discrepancy prevents me from definitively attributing counsel found for "Ltd." to "LP."

Furthermore, none of the search results provided direct access to the docket entries, such as the initial complaint (ECF No. 1) or attorney appearance records, for this specific case to list the attorneys who represented the plaintiff. Therefore, without direct docket access, I cannot provide the names of the counsel of record, their roles, firms, or relevant experience for Lone Star SCM Systems, LP in this matter.

I am unable to identify the counsel of record representing Becton, Dickinson and Company in case 6:21-cv-00844 with the available tools. Direct PACER access to the docket sheet is not available, and web searches for the specific case and defendant have not yielded a definitive list of attorneys who entered appearances. While Becton Dickinson has been identified as a client of Fredrikson & Byron, PA in general patent litigation, specific counsel for this particular case could not be confirmed through public search results.