Modulus Systems LLC v. Smart & Green

Case Overview and Background

Modulus Systems LLC v. Smart & Green, 2:26-cv-00332 (E.D. Tex.)

In a case indicative of ongoing patent assertion trends in the high-tech sector, Modulus Systems LLC has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against French company Smart & Green. Filed on April 22, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, the suit alleges that Smart & Green's radio frequency (RF) modules infringe upon at least one patent held by Modulus. Public records strongly suggest that Modulus Systems is a non-practicing entity (NPE), also known as a patent assertion entity (PAE), given its pattern of litigation against numerous technology companies without evidence of providing its own products or services. The defendant, Smart & Green, appears to be an operating company that manufactures and sells wireless technology products.

The technology at the heart of the dispute involves radio frequency modules, which are critical components for wireless data transmission in a wide array of modern electronics. The complaint accuses Smart & Green's RF modules, and the methods they use for transmitting and receiving data, of infringement. The sole patent asserted is U.S. Patent No. 8,610,573, which, based on a skeletal complaint analysis, relates to an antenna layout with a "generally U-shape" for 2.4 GHz technology. This frequency is commonly used in applications like Wi-Fi and Bluetooth.

The case has been filed in the Marshall Division of the Eastern District of Texas and assigned to Judge Rodney Gilstrap, the nation's busiest patent judge. This venue is historically favored by patent plaintiffs due to its local rules, accelerated timelines, and a perception of being plaintiff-friendly, although this has been moderated somewhat by the Supreme Court's 2017 TC Heartland decision on patent venue. The Eastern District of Texas has recently seen a resurgence as the top district for patent litigation. This case is notable as part of a broader assertion campaign by Modulus Systems, which has filed similar suits against other technology companies, reflecting a common NPE strategy of targeting multiple defendants with the same patent or portfolio. The outcome could have implications for manufacturers and importers of RF modules and devices that incorporate them.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome

As the case was filed on April 22, 2026, and the current date is May 1, 2026, the litigation is in its earliest stage. Court records show minimal activity, which is standard for a case that is only nine days old.

Chronology of Events:

• 2026-04-22: Complaint Filed
  Modulus Systems LLC filed a patent infringement complaint against Smart & Green, asserting U.S. Patent No. 8,610,573. The case was assigned to Judge Rodney Gilstrap in the Marshall Division of the Eastern District of Texas. This filing is part of a broader litigation campaign by Modulus Systems, which filed numerous similar lawsuits against other technology companies on the same day, all asserting the '573 patent.

• 2026-04-23: Summons Issued
  The clerk of the court issued a summons for the defendant, Smart & Green. This formally begins the process of notifying the defendant of the lawsuit and the requirement to respond.

Current Posture and Next Steps:

The case is currently pending, with no substantive legal developments having yet occurred. Smart & Green has not yet filed an answer or any other responsive pleading. The next significant steps will be:

1. Service of Process: Modulus Systems must formally serve the complaint and summons on Smart & Green.
2. Defendant's Response: Once served, Smart & Green will have a deadline (typically 21 days after service, but this can be extended) to file an answer to the complaint or to file pre-trial motions, such as a motion to dismiss or transfer venue.
3. Initial Case Management: Judge Gilstrap will likely issue a scheduling order setting deadlines for discovery, claim construction briefing (Markman hearing), and other pre-trial events.

Parallel PTAB Proceedings:

A search of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) records indicates that, as of May 1, 2026, no Inter Partes Review (IPR) or other post-grant proceedings have been filed against U.S. Patent No. 8,610,573. It is too early for such a filing to have been made in response to this specific lawsuit. However, given Modulus Systems' widespread litigation campaign, it is possible that one or more defendants will challenge the patent's validity at the PTAB in the coming months. Such a challenge could lead to a request to stay this district court case pending the PTAB's review.

Plaintiff's Counsel of Record

As of May 1, 2026, the initial complaint filed on behalf of the plaintiff, Modulus Systems LLC, identifies the following counsel. This information is publicly available from the court docket.

Based on the filing, the legal team for Modulus Systems LLC consists of attorneys from a firm known for its frequent representation of patent assertion entities.

• Name: Matthew J. Antonelli

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Antonelli, Harrington & Thompson LLP (Houston, TX)
  • Note: Mr. Antonelli has extensive experience representing non-practicing entities in patent infringement campaigns across the country, particularly in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Name: Zachariah S. Harrington

  • Role: Of Counsel
  • Firm: Antonelli, Harrington & Thompson LLP (Houston, TX)
  • Note: Mr. Harrington is a frequent litigator in the Eastern District of Texas, often appearing alongside Mr. Antonelli in patent assertion cases.

• Name: Larry D. Thompson, Jr.

  • Role: Of Counsel
  • Firm: Antonelli, Harrington & Thompson LLP (Houston, TX)
  • Note: Mr. Thompson is a named partner at the firm and regularly represents patent holders in litigation within Texas federal courts.

• Name: Elizabeth L. DeRieux

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Capshaw DeRieux, LLP (Marshall, TX)
  • Note: Ms. DeRieux serves as local counsel in numerous patent cases in the Eastern District of Texas, providing essential expertise on local court rules and procedures for out-of-district firms.

Defendant's Counsel of Record

As of May 1, 2026, the court docket for Modulus Systems LLC v. Smart & Green, 2:26-cv-00332, does not show that any counsel has made an appearance on behalf of the defendant, Smart & Green.

The complaint was filed on April 22, 2026, and a summons was issued the following day. It is typical for a defendant's counsel to file a notice of appearance after the defendant has been formally served with the complaint and has had time to retain a legal team. Given the early stage of this litigation—only nine days have passed since the initial filing—it is not unusual that responsive pleadings or notices of appearance have not yet been filed.

Information regarding the defendant's counsel will be updated as it becomes available on the public docket.