small-logo
ProfessionalsCapabilitiesInsights & NewsCareersLocations
About UsAlumniOpportunity & InclusionPro BonoCorporate Social Responsibility
Stay Connected:
facebookinstagramlinkedintwitteryoutube
  1. WacoWatch

Blog

Judge Albright Orders Third-Party IPR Petitioner Unified Patents To Produce Member Lists and Communications With Members

  • PDFPDF
    • Email
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Share this page
  • PDFPDF
    • Email
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Share this page

Blog

Judge Albright Orders Third-Party IPR Petitioner Unified Patents To Produce Member Lists and Communications With Members

  • PDFPDF
    • Email
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Share this page

2 Min Read

Author

Tyler Boyce

Related Locations

Dallas
Houston

Related Topics

Patent Litigation
IPR

Related Capabilities

Patent Litigation
Intellectual Property

Related Regions

North America

November 15, 2022

On November 9, 2022, in Textile Computer Systems, Inc. v. Broadway National Bank d/b/a Broadway Bank, et al., Judge Albright denied non-party Unified Patents’ Motion to Quash subpoenas served by Plaintiff Textile Computer Systems, Inc. (“Textile”) on Unified Patents, LLC (“Unified Patents”).

In 2016, Textile sued three defendants in the Eastern District of Texas for alleged patent infringement of, among others, U.S. Patent No. 8,505,079 (“’079 patent”). Subsequently, Unified Patents filed IPR2017-00296 (“’296 IPR”) against the ’079 patent on November 21, 2016; this was ultimately unsuccessful.

Then, on October 12, 2021, Textile sued a number of defendants in the Western District of Texas for alleged infringement of, among others, the ’079 patent. During this litigation, Textile sought third-party discovery from Unified Patents to identify real parties in interest to the ’296 IPR, alleging that IPR estoppel applied not only to Unified Patents, but also to real parties in interest to the IPR and privies to be discovered through the subpoenas. Unified Patents then filed a Motion to Quash.

Judge Albright ordered Unified Patents to produce the following categories of documents for the dates spanning the original round of lawsuits and the ’296 IPR:

  • Any communications and any agreements with any named defendant in these actions and with American Express, Discover, Visa, Mastercard, Jack Henry, Fiserv, Apple, Google, and Samsung, limited to the period from July 1, 2016 through July 20, 2018.
  • Documents sufficient to identify meetings, and documents used or exchanged during meetings, with defendants, American Express, Discover, Visa, Mastercard, Jack Henry, Fiserv, Apple, Google, and Samsung, limited to the period from July 1, 2016 through July 20, 2018.
  • A list of all Unified Patents members with membership agreements active between July 1, 2016 and July 20, 2018.
  • A list of Unified Patents members in each of the content, cloud, transactions, retail, mobile, cybersecurity, open source, and networking zones with membership agreements active between July 1, 2016 and July 20, 2018.
  • External communications and external documents that mention or relate to Textile, Gopal Nandakumar, any related patent or patent application owned by Textile or for which Mr. Nandakumar is a named inventor, or the inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 8,505,079, limited to the period from July 1, 2016 through July 20, 2018.

Related Professionals

Related Professionals

Tyler Boyce

Tyler Boyce

This entry has been created for information and planning purposes. It is not intended to be, nor should it be substituted for, legal advice, which turns on specific facts.

Logo
facebookinstagramlinkedintwitteryoutube

Copyright © 2025. Winston & Strawn LLP

AlumniCorporate Transparency Act Task ForceDEI Compliance Task ForceEqual Rights AmendmentLaw GlossaryThe Oval UpdateWinston MinutePrivacy PolicyCookie PolicyFraud & Scam AlertsNoticesSubscribeAttorney Advertising