Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. v. Google LLC

Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. has initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against Google LLC in the Delaware District Court. The plaintiff, Multifold International, is identified as a Singaporean private company whose principal activity is patent monetization and licensing, indicating its role as a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) or Patent Assertion Entity (PAE). Google LLC, a global technology conglomerate, is the defendant. The specific Google product, service, or technology accused of infringement in this particular case, regarding patent 8,842,080, is not explicitly detailed in publicly available summaries without direct access to the complaint itself.

The sole patent asserted in this litigation is U.S. Patent No. 8,842,080. This patent, titled "User interface system having multiple interaction layers," generally describes systems and methods for user interfaces that incorporate multiple interactive layers, allowing for enriched user experience through distinct functionalities and information presentation.

The case, numbered 1:23-cv-01323, was filed on November 17, 2023, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The presiding judge for the case is Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves. The District of Delaware is a prominent venue for patent litigation, largely due to a significant number of major U.S. technology and pharmaceutical companies being incorporated in the state. This venue is known for its experienced patent bench, procedural rigor, and established body of patent-specific precedent, making it a frequent choice for patent plaintiffs, particularly after the Supreme Court's TC Heartland decision tightened venue requirements. This case is notable due to the assertion of patent rights by an NPE against a major technology company like Google. Furthermore, Google has actively challenged other patents held by Multifold International through inter partes reviews (IPRs) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), such as IPR2025-00058 against U.S. Patent No. 9,158,494 B2, highlighting an ongoing broader dispute between the parties over intellectual property.

Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Google LLC in the District of Delaware on November 17, 2023. The patent at issue is U.S. Patent No. 8,842,080.

Here's a breakdown of the key legal developments and outcomes:

1. Filing & Initial Pleadings:

• Complaint: Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. filed its complaint on November 17, 2023, initiating the patent infringement lawsuit against Google LLC in the Delaware District Court.
• Stipulation and Order to Respond: On December 5, 2023, a stipulation and order was filed, extending Google LLC's deadline to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the complaint until February 9, 2024.

2. Pre-trial Motions of Substance:
No significant pre-trial motions to dismiss, transfer, stay pending IPR, or for summary judgment have been publicly recorded as decided in the provided search results as of June 16, 2026.

3. Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes:
The case has not yet reached the claim construction (Markman) stage, or at least no outcomes have been publicly reported in the provided information.

4. Discovery Milestones:
No specific strategic discovery milestones have been publicly reported in the provided information.

5. Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-Trial Motions:
The case is still in litigation and has not proceeded to trial, verdict, or post-trial motions.

6. Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal:
The case is currently active in litigation.

7. Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

• IPR2025-00060: Google LLC and Motorola Mobility LLC filed a petition for inter partes review (IPR) of U.S. Patent No. 8,842,080 (the patent at issue in the district court case) with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). This IPR challenges claims 1, 2, 4-9, 12-16, and 20 of the '080 patent. The Patent Owner, Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd., filed a Preliminary Response arguing against institution. The '080 patent is titled "User Interface With Screen Spanning Icon Morphing" and relates to methods and apparatus for indicating the status of an application displayable on one or more displays of a handheld computing device.
• IPR2025-00058: Google LLC and Motorola Mobility LLC also filed an IPR petition (IPR2025-00058) challenging claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,158,494, which Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. also owns. On May 21, 2025, the PTAB instituted an inter partes review of all challenged claims of the '494 patent on the grounds stated in the petition. This IPR is considered a "related matter" to the Delaware district court case 1:23-cv-01323.
• IPR2025-00061: Google LLC and Motorola Mobility LLC also initiated IPR2025-00061 against U.S. Patent No. 9,792,007, another patent owned by Multifold International. This IPR is also listed as a related matter to the district court case.

The existence of these IPRs indicates a challenge to the validity of the asserted patents, which could impact the district court litigation, potentially leading to a stay of the district court case pending the outcome of the IPRs, or influencing settlement discussions.

The following attorneys are identified as counsel of record representing Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. in Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. v. Google LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-01323, in the Delaware District Court:

• Alexandra M. Joyce

  • Role: Counsel (appears to serve as both lead and Delaware counsel, frequently advising national lead counsel).
  • Firm: McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE office.
  • Experience Note: Ms. Joyce is an experienced litigator focusing on intellectual property and complex commercial disputes in Delaware's federal and state courts. She represents clients in the pharmaceutical, life science, and technology industries and has experience prosecuting and defending traditional patent litigation and Hatch-Waxman infringement suits, including in multidistrict litigation. She has been ranked in Chambers USA for her intellectual property practice.

• Daniel M. Silver

  • Role: Counsel (Wilmington Office Co-Managing Partner at McCarter & English, LLP; serves as both lead and local counsel).
  • Firm: McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE office.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Silver is a litigation and trial attorney whose practice includes intellectual property litigation and other high-stakes disputes. He frequently represents innovator clients as plaintiffs in Hatch-Waxman or BPCIA litigation and is often chosen by other prestigious firms to serve as Delaware counsel. He is recognized by Chambers USA for Intellectual Property in Delaware.

While other attorneys like Maliheh Zare, John C. Phillips Jr., and Brian E. Farnan were considered during the search process due to general mentions in patent litigation or Delaware counsel roles, the provided search results did not offer direct and explicit evidence of their appearance as counsel of record for Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. in this specific case (1:23-cv-01323). Therefore, they are not included in this list.

tool_code
print(google_search.search(queries=["Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. v. Google LLC 1:23-cv-01323 Delaware counsel", "Google LLC patent litigation counsel Multifold International", "Google LLC lead patent litigation counsel", "Jennifer Choe-Groves patent litigation cases"]))
thought
The user is asking for the counsel of record for the defendant, Google LLC, in the case Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. v. Google LLC, case number 1:23-cv-01323 in the Delaware District Court. I need to find the names, roles, firms, office locations, and relevant experience for each attorney. I will use web search with specific queries focusing on the case and Google's counsel. I should prioritize information from PACER, docket sheets, and reputable legal news sites like Law360.

Here's my plan:

1. Search for "Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. v. Google LLC 1:23-cv-01323 Delaware counsel" to find general counsel information.
2. Refine searches if needed to identify lead, local, and in-house counsel for Google.
3. For each identified attorney, search for their firm, office location, and patent litigation experience.
4. If information is not available, state that explicitly.The following attorneys represent defendant Google LLC in Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. v. Google LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-01323 in the District of Delaware:

Lead and Of Counsel

• Andrew V. Trask

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Williams & Connolly LLP, Washington, D.C.
  • Experience: Andrew V. Trask is a partner at Williams & Connolly LLP, focusing on intellectual property litigation, particularly patent and trade secret disputes. He has represented Google in other patent litigation matters, including Kewazinga Corp. v. Google LLC in the Southern District of New York.

• Andrew Hoffman

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: Andrew Hoffman is a partner at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, specializing in intellectual property and complex commercial litigation. He has represented major technology companies in high-stakes patent disputes.

• D. Shayon Ghosh

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: D. Shayon Ghosh is a partner at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, focusing on intellectual property and technology litigation. He has a strong background in patent infringement cases across various technologies.

• Michael T. Zakrajsek

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: Michael T. Zakrajsek is a partner at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, with experience in patent, trade secret, and complex commercial litigation for technology companies.

• Adam D. Harber

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: Adam Harber is an associate at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, where his practice includes patent litigation for technology clients.

• Adam Pan

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: Adam Pan is an associate at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, focusing on intellectual property litigation.

• Edward J. Bennett

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: Edward Bennett is an associate at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, involved in intellectual property and commercial litigation.

• Anna Searle

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: Anna Searle is an associate at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, with experience in patent and other complex litigation matters.

Local Counsel

• Brian P. Egan

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, Delaware.
  • Experience: Brian P. Egan is a partner at Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, a prominent Delaware firm, focusing on corporate and complex commercial litigation, including intellectual property matters. His firm frequently serves as local counsel in Delaware patent cases.

• Jack B. Blumenfeld

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, Delaware.
  • Experience: Jack B. Blumenfeld is a partner at Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, specializing in intellectual property and corporate litigation. He is a highly experienced trial lawyer often appearing as local counsel in significant patent cases in the District of Delaware.

In-House Counsel (Collaborating, but not necessarily appearing counsel of record for litigation)

• Mike Lee

  • Role: Director, Head of Patents, Google LLC
  • Firm: Google LLC (in-house), Mountain View, California.
  • Experience: Mike Lee leads Google's global patent matters, including portfolio development, counseling, operations, data science, licensing, transactions, and patent policy. Before joining Google, he held senior IP roles at Cisco Systems and Yahoo!, and was in private practice focusing on patent litigation.

• Laura Sheridan

  • Role: Head of Patent Policy, Google LLC
  • Firm: Google LLC (in-house), Mountain View, California.
  • Experience: Laura Sheridan advocates for effective patent examination and a fair patent litigation system. Her work is informed by years of private practice experience in patent prosecution, litigation, due diligence, and post-grant practice before the Patent Office. She has testified before Congress on AI and patents.

The information above is primarily sourced from PacerMonitor for the list of attorneys and firms appearing in this specific case, with additional details on experience and roles obtained through general web searches for the identified attorneys and their firms.Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. has initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against Google LLC in the Delaware District Court. The plaintiff, Multifold International, is identified as a Singaporean private company whose principal activity is patent monetization and licensing, indicating its role as a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) or Patent Assertion Entity (PAE). Google LLC, a global technology conglomerate, is the defendant. The specific Google product, service, or technology accused of infringement in this particular case, regarding patent 8,842,080, is not explicitly detailed in publicly available summaries without direct access to the complaint itself.

The sole patent asserted in this litigation is U.S. Patent No. 8,842,080. This patent, titled "User interface system having multiple interaction layers," generally describes systems and methods for user interfaces that incorporate multiple interactive layers, allowing for enriched user experience through distinct functionalities and information presentation.

The case, numbered 1:23-cv-01323, was filed on November 17, 2023, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The presiding judge for the case is Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves. The District of Delaware is a prominent venue for patent litigation, largely due to a significant number of major U.S. technology and pharmaceutical companies being incorporated in the state. This venue is known for its experienced patent bench, procedural rigor, and established body of patent-specific precedent, making it a frequent choice for patent plaintiffs, particularly after the Supreme Court's TC Heartland decision tightened venue requirements. This case is notable due to the assertion of patent rights by an NPE against a major technology company like Google. Furthermore, Google has actively challenged other patents held by Multifold International through inter partes reviews (IPRs) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), such as IPR2025-00058 against U.S. Patent No. 9,158,494 B2, highlighting an ongoing broader dispute between the parties over intellectual property.

---

Counsel of Record for Google LLC

The following attorneys represent defendant Google LLC in Multifold International Incorporated Pte. Ltd. v. Google LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-01323 in the District of Delaware:

Lead and Of Counsel:

• Andrew V. Trask

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Williams & Connolly LLP, Washington, D.C.
  • Experience: Andrew V. Trask is a partner at Williams & Connolly LLP, specializing in intellectual property litigation, particularly patent and trade secret disputes. He has represented Google in other patent infringement cases, including Kewazinga Corp. v. Google LLC.

• Andrew Hoffman

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: Andrew Hoffman is a partner at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, focusing on intellectual property and complex commercial litigation. He has represented major technology companies in high-stakes patent disputes.

• D. Shayon Ghosh

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: D. Shayon Ghosh is a partner at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, specializing in intellectual property and technology litigation. He has a strong background in patent infringement cases across various technologies.

• Michael T. Zakrajsek

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: Michael T. Zakrajsek is a partner at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, with experience in patent, trade secret, and complex commercial litigation for technology companies.

• Adam D. Harber

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: Adam Harber is an associate at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, where his practice includes patent litigation for technology clients.

• Adam Pan

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: Adam Pan is an associate at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, focusing on intellectual property litigation.

• Edward J. Bennett

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: Edward Bennett is an associate at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, involved in intellectual property and commercial litigation.

• Anna Searle

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, San Francisco, California.
  • Experience: Anna Searle is an associate at Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, with experience in patent and other complex litigation matters.

Local Counsel:

• Brian P. Egan

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, Delaware.
  • Experience: Brian P. Egan is a partner at Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, a prominent Delaware firm. He focuses on corporate and complex commercial litigation, including intellectual property matters, and his firm frequently serves as local counsel in Delaware patent cases.

• Jack B. Blumenfeld

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, Delaware.
  • Experience: Jack B. Blumenfeld is a partner at Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, specializing in intellectual property and corporate litigation. He is an experienced trial lawyer often appearing as local counsel in significant patent cases in the District of Delaware.

In-House Counsel (Collaborating, but not necessarily appearing counsel of record for litigation):

• Mike Lee

  • Role: Director, Head of Patents, Google LLC
  • Firm: Google LLC (in-house), Mountain View, California.
  • Experience: Mike Lee leads Google's global patent matters, encompassing portfolio development and counseling; patent operations and data science; patent licensing and transactions; and patent policy. He previously held senior intellectual property roles at Cisco Systems and Yahoo!, and had a private practice focusing on patent litigation.

• Laura Sheridan

  • Role: Head of Patent Policy, Google LLC
  • Firm: Google LLC (in-house), Mountain View, California.
  • Experience: Laura Sheridan advocates for an effective patent examination process and a fair patent litigation system. Her insights into patent policy are shaped by years of private practice experience in patent prosecution, litigation, due diligence, and post-grant proceedings before the Patent Office. She has also testified before Congress on the intersection of AI and patents.