Wapp Tech Limited Partnership et al. v. Google LLC

Wapp Tech Limited Partnership and Wapp Tech Corp. (collectively, "Wapp Tech") have initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against Google LLC in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, case number 3:24-cv-02256. Wapp Tech is characterized as a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) primarily engaged in patent assertion, with no commercial products or services of its own. Google LLC is accused of infringing the asserted patent through its Android Studio software development tools, specifically the features that enable the simulation of network conditions for mobile application testing.

The sole patent asserted in this litigation is U.S. Patent No. 8,924,192, titled "Systems Including Network Simulation for Mobile Application Development and Online Marketplaces for Mobile Application Distribution, Revenue Sharing, Content Distribution, or Combinations thereof". This patent broadly covers systems designed for developing mobile applications, which include a software authoring interface capable of visually emulating various network characteristics to gauge an application's performance during execution. This functionality allows developers to identify performance issues, such as CPU spikes, and directly link them to specific functions or lines of code, thereby streamlining the debugging process. The case is currently ongoing in the Southern District of California.

This case is notable due to Wapp Tech's extensive history as a patent plaintiff. The NPE has aggressively asserted its patent portfolio, which relates to mobile application development and testing, against numerous major technology and financial services companies. Past defendants include Apple, Bank of America, Salesforce, Capital One, Samsung, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Micro Focus International PLC, against whom Wapp Tech secured a $172.5 million jury verdict that later settled for $67.5 million. While Wapp Tech has frequently litigated in the Eastern District of Texas, a venue known for its patentee-friendly reputation, the current action against Google in the Southern District of California represents a notable shift in venue for the plaintiff. There is no information available to confirm any Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs) specifically targeting U.S. Patent No. 8,924,192 at this time.

Wapp Tech Limited Partnership and Wapp Tech Corp. initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against Google LLC in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, case number 3:24-cv-02256. The case is currently ongoing. The sole patent asserted in this litigation is U.S. Patent No. 8,924,192.

Key Legal Developments:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings: The exact filing date of the complaint and details regarding Google's answer or any counterclaims are not readily available through public web searches of the docket. However, the case is referenced in documents from 2024, indicating its initiation around that time.
• Pre-Trial Motions of Substance: Specific pre-trial motions, such as motions to dismiss, transfer, or stay, filed by Google in this particular case are not detailed in publicly accessible summaries.
• Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes: A scheduling order is in place with various deadlines, including those for discovery and claim construction, in late 2025 and 2026. This suggests that claim construction has not yet been completed, or has only recently been completed, and its outcome is not yet publicly detailed.
• Discovery Milestones: Significant discovery milestones are subject to the scheduling order's deadlines in late 2025 and 2026.
• Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-Trial Motions: Given the ongoing status and the scheduled deadlines extending into late 2025 and 2026, the case has not yet reached trial.
• Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal: The case remains active and ongoing.
• Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings: While Wapp Tech Corp. has been involved as a patent owner in at least one inter partes review (IPR) proceeding concerning U.S. Patent No. 8,924,192B1, that IPR (IPR2025-01325) was initiated by Capital One NA, not Google LLC. It was filed on July 18, 2025, and terminated on November 20, 2025. There is no publicly available information indicating that Google LLC has filed an IPR specifically challenging U.S. Patent No. 8,924,192 in relation to this case. Google has, however, been involved in other IPRs and legal challenges to USPTO policies regarding IPRs.

Due to the limited public availability of detailed docket information for ongoing district court cases, specific dates for initial pleadings and detailed rulings on motions are not available without direct PACER access or specialized legal database subscriptions.

Plaintiff Wapp Tech Limited Partnership and Wapp Tech Corp. are represented by attorneys from the firms Friedman, Suder & Cooke P.C. and Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP.

The counsel of record for the plaintiffs include:

• Jonathan T. Suder (Lead Counsel)

  • Firm: Friedman, Suder & Cooke P.C., Fort Worth, Texas.
  • Experience: Mr. Suder co-founded Friedman, Suder & Cooke and has primarily focused on representing plaintiffs in intellectual property litigation since approximately 1998. His firm has extensive experience in patent litigation, including both plaintiff and defense-side representation, and has handled appeals before the Federal Circuit. Friedman, Suder & Cooke also offers local counsel services for patent litigation in the Northern and Western Districts of Texas. He has been recognized as a Super Lawyer by Texas Super Lawyers® and a Top Lawyer by Fort Worth, Texas magazine.

• Christopher P. King (Local Counsel)

  • Firm: Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP, likely from one of their California offices, though a specific office location for patent litigation was not immediately clear from available information.
  • Experience: Mr. King is a registered patent attorney whose legal practice includes intellectual property, patents, and patent prosecution, with an emphasis on computer software. He has practiced patent law for many years and is a Silicon Valley native.

• K. Nicole Stafford (Of Counsel)

  • Firm: Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP.
  • Experience: While specific patent litigation experience for K. Nicole Stafford within Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP was not detailed in the search results, the firm itself has a "Cyber Liability & Technology Law" practice area and publishes on various legal topics. There are other attorneys named Karen C. Stafford and Jonathan Stafford with experience in litigation and patent law, respectively, but their affiliation with Pietragallo or this specific case is not confirmed. Given K. Nicole Stafford's role as "Of Counsel" for the plaintiff's firm, it is reasonable to infer involvement in the intellectual property aspects of the case.

While specific counsel for the Wapp Tech Limited Partnership et al. v. Google LLC (3:24-cv-02256) case in the Southern District of California are not immediately available through public web searches, general information about Google's patent litigation counsel and in-house intellectual property leadership can provide some insight. It is important to note that without access to the specific PACER docket for this case, the definitive list of appearing counsel cannot be confirmed.

However, based on Google's extensive history in patent litigation, the following types of counsel are typically involved:

In-House Counsel (Google LLC):

• Michael Lee
  • Role: Director, Head of Patents at Google LLC.
  • Firm: Google LLC (Mountain View, CA).
  • Note: Leads a global team responsible for Google's patent matters, including portfolio development, counseling, licensing, transactions, and policy. Previously focused on patent litigation in private practice and served as Senior Director of Intellectual Property at Cisco Systems.

Outside Counsel (Law Firms):

Google frequently retains prominent law firms with strong intellectual property and patent litigation practices. While not confirmed for this specific case, firms that have represented Google in past patent disputes and have a presence in California include:

• Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP

  • Andrew Bramhall
    • Role: Partner.
    • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP (Silicon Valley office).
    • Note: Focuses on high-stakes intellectual property disputes with an emphasis on patent and trade secret litigation. Has represented Google in past patent suits, including one brought by Bedrock Computer Technologies in the Eastern District of Texas. His practice includes cases in the Southern District of California.

• Desmarais LLP

  • John M. Desmarais, Karim Z. Oussayef, Steven M. Balcof, Leslie M.F. Spencer, Lee Matalon, Deborah Mariottini, Caitrianne Feddeler, Allan E. Carlsen, Tuhin Ganguly, Rebecca Lindhorst and Anthony Pericolo (as seen in a past case).
  • Firm: Desmarais LLP.
  • Note: This firm has represented Google in significant patent trials, such as Kewazinga Corp. v. Google LLC in the Southern District of New York, which involved patent infringement allegations against Google Maps' Street View feature and settled during trial.

Given the case is ongoing in the Southern District of California, it is highly probable that Google will be represented by a team of experienced patent litigators from one or more of these types of firms, potentially including local counsel. Without direct access to the docket for case 3:24-cv-02256, specific appearances cannot be definitively stated.