Massive SportBrain Patent Litigation Officially Ends
A company that sued more than 140 defendants drops its appeal of PTAB decision that invalidated all its patent claims.
November 19, 2018 at 06:38 PM
3 minute read
Unified Patents has harpooned one of its biggest whales.
SportBrain Holdings, a nonpracticing entity that had sued some 140 different companies over wearable fitness technology, dropped its appeal last week of a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision that invalidated all 16 claims of its sole asserted patent.
Unified Patents is a member-supported organization designed to deter NPE litigation. It obtained the PTAB decision last spring against what it describes as one of the most prolific patent filers of the last few years.
The patents originated with SportBrain Inc., a company that marketed fitness trackers in the early 2000s before going out of business. The company assigned its patents to SportBrain Holdings, which has sued wearables companies like Fitbit and Jawbone, medical device makers such as Medtronic, and insurance companies that gather health-related data such as Aetna and Blue Cross and Blue Shield.
SportBrain CEO Harry Heslop reportedly told Law360 that SportBrain was first to market and was then squeezed out by goliath companies. “As the 'David' in this story, we will slingshot our IP at all the offenders and unleash the full extent of the law until justice is served,” Heslop had said.
Unified chief IP counsel Jonathan Stroud said the goal of its PTAB challenge was protecting the industry from “harassing litigation”—the kind “where somebody feels they can sue 142 companies and get away with it.”
SportBrain did get away with it by some measures. The company has voluntarily dismissed all of its lawsuits over the years, many of them within months of filing. Some of those dismissals presumably included settlement payments, even if of modest value.
Stroud said an oddity of the litigation was that—even after the PTAB instituted trial proceedings, a move that often leads to the cancellation of patent claims—SportBrain continued filing dozens more suits. Most were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
The PTAB ultimately concluded that the patent was obvious in light of prior fitness tracking inventions.
Stroud argued the case before the PTAB. Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr partner David Cavanaugh was in charge of depositions. Stroud credited associate Michael Van Handel, now with DLA, with playing a key role in framing the petition.
SportBrain lead counsel Isaac Rabicoff of Rabicoff Law could not immediately be reached for comment. Patent agent Brian Lynch of Niro-McAndrews and Rene Vazquez of Sinergia Technology Law Group assisted him before the PTAB.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All11th Circuit Revives Project Veritas' Defamation Lawsuit Against CNN
'Rapidly Closing Window': Progressive Groups Urge Senate Votes on Biden's Judicial Nominees
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250