VB Assets, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc.

Case Overview & Background

This patent infringement suit involves plaintiff VB Assets, LLC, a patent assertion entity (PAE), and defendant Amazon.com, Inc., a global technology and e-commerce leader. VB Assets holds and asserts a portfolio of patents originally developed by VoiceBox Technologies, an early pioneer in conversational AI and natural language processing. VB Assets was reportedly formed by former investors and employees of VoiceBox and is now focused on licensing and litigating this patent portfolio. The lawsuit accuses Amazon's Alexa-powered products—including its Echo line of smart speakers and other devices and software that incorporate the Alexa voice assistant—of infringing its patents. This case is a continuation of a long-running dispute between the two parties over the technology underpinning Amazon's popular voice-controlled ecosystem.

The asserted patent, U.S. Patent No. 10,510,341, is titled "System and method for contextual voice searching" and generally relates to technology that improves the accuracy of voice search by using context to understand and execute user commands. The case (1:24-cv-01368) is filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, a premier venue for patent litigation due to its experienced judiciary and well-developed case law. The case is likely to be assigned to Judge Maryellen Noreika, who presided over the previous litigation between VB Assets and Amazon that resulted in a significant jury verdict. This history between the parties and the judge is a crucial element of the procedural posture.

The case is notable as part of a broad, multi-front litigation campaign by VB Assets against the biggest players in the voice assistant market. Following a November 2023 trial in which a Delaware jury awarded VB Assets over $40 million after finding Amazon willfully infringed related patents (case 1:19-cv-01410), VB Assets has launched new suits asserting patents from the same family against Apple, Google, and Samsung. The prior verdict, and Judge Noreika's subsequent rulings setting ongoing royalty rates, have likely fueled this wider campaign, making it a significant and high-stakes battle over the core technology in the multi-billion dollar conversational AI industry. The campaign has also drawn challenges at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), with defendants like Samsung filing petitions for inter partes review (IPR) against other patents in the VB Assets portfolio.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome

Analyst Note: Publicly available court records and legal news sources indicate a discrepancy in the case metadata provided for this analysis. The case number 1:24-cv-01368 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware corresponds to a complaint filed by VB Assets, LLC against Apple, Inc., not Amazon.com, Inc.. This report details the developments for the case assigned that docket number, VB Assets, LLC v. Apple, Inc. The patent-at-issue specified in the prompt, U.S. Patent No. 10,510,341, is also not listed among the patents asserted in the complaint for this case number..

Based on available information, the litigation is in its earliest stages.

Filing & Initial Pleadings

• 2024-12-16: Complaint Filed
  VB Assets, LLC filed a patent infringement complaint against Apple, Inc. in the District of Delaware.. The lawsuit accuses Apple's products that incorporate the Siri virtual assistant of infringing six natural language processing patents.. Accused products include the iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, HomePod, and Mac-series computers.. In its complaint, VB Assets alleges that its predecessor, VoiceBox Technologies, had engaged in licensing and acquisition discussions with Apple between 2012 and 2014, putting Apple on notice of the patent portfolio and supporting the claim of willful infringement..

• Patents Asserted in Complaint
  The docket record indicates the following patents were asserted against Apple in case 1:24-cv-01368: U.S. Patent Nos. 8,073,681; 8,515,765; 10,297,249; and others.. Notably, U.S. Patent No. 10,510,341 is not among them.

• Case Assignment
  The case has been assigned to District Judge Maryellen Noreika.. This assignment is significant as Judge Noreika presided over the related, long-running litigation between VB Assets and Amazon (see VB Assets, LLC v. Amazon.com Services LLC, No. 1:19-cv-01410), which resulted in a substantial jury verdict and involved extensive post-trial proceedings. Her familiarity with the underlying technology and VB Assets' patent portfolio will be a key factor in this new case.

Pre-trial Motions and Other Developments

As of the current date (2026-05-07), there are no substantive legal developments publicly available beyond the initial filing. The case is in its infancy, and key events such as Apple's Answer and Counterclaims, motions to dismiss or transfer, and the scheduling of a Markman hearing for claim construction have not yet occurred.

Parallel PTAB Proceedings

There is no information available from the searches conducted to indicate that an inter partes review (IPR) or other post-grant proceeding has been filed at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) specifically challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 10,510,341. Other patents in the broader VB Assets portfolio have been the subject of prior and ongoing PTAB challenges from other defendants in parallel litigation..

Present Posture

The case is active and pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. It remains in the initial pleading stage following the December 2024 complaint.

Plaintiff's Counsel of Record

Note on Case Caption: Research indicates a discrepancy between the case metadata provided in the prompt and publicly available court records. While the prompt lists the defendant as Amazon.com, Inc., multiple docket reporting services and legal news outlets confirm that U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware case number 1:24-cv-01368 is captioned VB Assets, LLC v. Apple, Inc.. This analysis proceeds based on the publicly reported case caption against Apple, Inc.

Based on an analysis of available docket information and patterns in related litigation, counsel for plaintiff VB Assets, LLC includes both Delaware-based local counsel and national lead counsel.

Lead Counsel

Name	Role	Firm & Location	Notes
Isaac Rabicoff	Lead Counsel (Presumed)	Rabicoff Law LLC (Chicago, IL)	Rabicoff's firm is highly active in patent litigation, leading licensing campaigns against major tech companies including Apple, Amazon, and Google. While his name has not appeared on initial filings for this specific case, his firm frequently acts as lead counsel for high-volume patent plaintiffs, making his role as lead trial counsel highly probable.

Local Counsel

Name	Role	Firm & Location	Notes
Brian E. Farnan	Local Counsel	Farnan LLP (Wilmington, DE)	Farnan LLP serves as Delaware counsel, with Brian Farnan listed on the complaint. His practice focuses on complex commercial and patent litigation, and he regularly acts as local counsel for out-of-state firms in the District of Delaware.
Michael J. Farnan	Local Counsel	Farnan LLP (Wilmington, DE)	A partner at Farnan LLP alongside Brian E. Farnan, Michael Farnan also focuses on patent litigation and complex commercial cases in Delaware's federal and state courts.

Defendant's Counsel of Record

As of May 7, 2026, no attorneys have formally filed a notice of appearance for the defendant Amazon.com, Inc. in case number 1:24-cv-01368. The case is in its early stages, and an appearance of counsel is expected following service of the complaint.

NOTE: Research indicates a likely discrepancy in the case caption provided for case number 1:24-cv-01368. Multiple sources, including a report from intellectual property analyst RPX Corporation, identify the case as VB Assets, LLC v. Apple. This contradicts the prompt's authoritative metadata. Proceeding under the assumption that Amazon.com, Inc. is the correct defendant, the legal team that represented Amazon in the recent, factually related litigation VB Assets, LLC v. Amazon.com Services LLC, No. 1:19-cv-01410 (D. Del.), is the most probable counsel for this matter.

The counsel who represented Amazon in the prior case are detailed below.

---

Likely Lead Counsel

• Name: J. David Hadden

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Fenwick & West LLP (Mountain View, CA)
  • Note: Hadden is a top-tier patent litigator who frequently represents major technology companies and has served as lead counsel for Amazon in other intellectual property disputes.

• Name: Saina S. Shamilov

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Fenwick & West LLP (Mountain View, CA)
  • Note: A partner in Fenwick's patent litigation group, Shamilov has a track record of representing Amazon in significant patent cases.

• Name: Ravi R. Ranganath

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Fenwick & West LLP (Mountain View, CA)
  • Note: Ranganath was part of the core Fenwick & West team representing Amazon in the previous VB Assets trial.

• Name: Vigen Salmastlian

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Fenwick & West LLP (Mountain View, CA)
  • Note: Salmastlian was an integral member of the trial team for Amazon in the November 2023 jury trial against VB Assets.

Likely Local Counsel

• Name: Steven J. Balick

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Ashby & Geddes, P.A. (Wilmington, DE)
  • Note: Balick is a veteran Delaware patent litigator and frequently serves as local counsel for major corporations in the district.

• Name: Andrew C. Mayo

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Ashby & Geddes, P.A. (Wilmington, DE)
  • Note: Mayo is a director at Ashby & Geddes with extensive experience in Delaware patent litigation, and worked alongside Steven Balick for Amazon in the prior VB Assets case.