This case was last updated from U.S. District Courts on 06/09/2022 at 07:51:52 (UTC).

Peter Pedersen v. Adobe, Inc.

Case Summary

On June 8, 2022, Peter Pedersen (“Pedersen” or “Plaintiff”), represented by Donald H. Mahoney, III, Kyril V. Talanov, and William P. Ramey, III of Ramey & Schwaller, LLP, filed an intellectual property lawsuit against Adobe, Inc. (“Adobe” or “Defendant”), seeking declaratory relief and damages for an alleged infringement of a U.S. patent owned by the plaintiff. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, with Judges Alan D. Albright and Derek T. Gilliland presiding.

The plaintiff filed this complaint for the alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,965,920 (“the ‘920 Patent” or the “Patent-in-Suit”), entitled “Profile Responsive Electronic Message Management System.” 

 In the complaint, the plaintiff alleged, “Defendant directly and/or indirectly develops, designs, manufactures, distributes, markets, offers to sell and/or sells infringing products and services in the United States, including in the Western District of Texas, and otherwise directs infringing activities to this District in connection with its products and services.”

The plaintiff further alleged, “Defendant has committed acts of infringing the patent-in-suit within this District and the State of Texas by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing in or into this District and elsewhere in the State of Texas, products claimed by the patent-in-suit, including without limitation products made by practicing the claimed methods of the patent-in-suit. Defendant, directly and through intermediaries, makes, uses, sells, offers for sale, imports, ships, distributes, advertises, promotes, and/or otherwise commercializes such infringing products into this District and the State of Texas.”

 The plaintiff then alleged, “Defendant has, under 35 U.S.C. §271(a), directly infringed, and continues to directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, one or more claims, including without limitation at least claim 1 of the '920 Patent, by making, using, testing, selling, offering for sale and/or importing into the United States Defendant’s Accused Products.”

The plaintiff additionally alleged, “Defendant provides information and technical support to its users, including product manuals, brochures, videos, demonstrations, and website materials encouraging its users to purchase and instructing them to use Defendant’s Accused Products. Defendant has made no attempt to design around the claims of the '920 Patent.”

 The plaintiff also alleged, “Defendant did not have a reasonable basis for believing that the claims of the '920 Patent were invalid. Defendant’s Accused Products are available to businesses and individuals throughout the United States and in the State of Texas, including in this District. Pedersen has been damaged as the result of Defendant’s infringement. Defendant has caused and will continue to cause Pedersen injury and damage by infringing one or more claims of the '920 Patent.”

 The plaintiff presented one claim for the alleged infringement of the Patent-in-Suit owned by the plaintiff. In its prayer for relief, the plaintiff requested a judgment granting declaratory relief and an award of damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284, including past and supplemental damages for any continuing post-verdict infringement, together with pre- and post-judgment interest and compulsory ongoing royalties.

 This is a summary of a legal complaint. All statements, claims, and allegations listed herein reflect the position of the plaintiff only and do not represent the position of UniCourt. Additionally, this case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the current status of this case. To view the latest case updates and court documents, please sign up for a UniCourt account.

 

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    6:22-CV-00583

  • Filing Date:

    06/08/2022

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Intellectual Property - Patent

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

Alan D Albright

Referral Judge

Derek T. Gilliland

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

Peter Pedersen

Defendant

Adobe, Inc.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

Donald H. Mahoney, III

Attorney at Ramey & Schwaller, LLP

5020 Montrose, Suite 800

Houston, TX 77006

Kyril Vladimir Talanov

Attorney at Ramey LLP

5020 Montrose Blvd., Suite 800

Houston, TX 77006

William P. Ramey, III

Attorney at Ramey LLP

5020 Montrose Blvd., Suite 800

Houston, TX 77006

 

Court Documents

#1

(#1) COMPLAINT ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0542-16118426), filed by Peter Pedersen. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit US6965920, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Ramey, William) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

1 #1

Exhibit A

1 #2

Exhibit US6965920

1 #3

Civil Cover Sheet

#2

(#2) Notice of Filing of Patent/Trademark Form (AO 120). AO 120 forwarded to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (Ramey, William) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

#3

(#3) REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS by Peter Pedersen. (Ramey, William) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

#4

(#4) Certificate of Interested Parties by Peter Pedersen. (Ramey, William) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

#5

(#5) Summons Issued as to Adobe, Inc.. (sm3) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/08/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#5) Summons Issued as to Adobe, Inc.. (sm3) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • DocketCase assigned to Judge Alan D Albright and Judge Derek T. Gilliland. CM WILL NOW REFLECT THE JUDGE INITIALS AS PART OF THE CASE NUMBER. PLEASE APPEND THESE JUDGE INITIALS TO THE CASE NUMBER ON EACH DOCUMENT THAT YOU FILE IN THIS CASE. (sm3) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • DocketAll parties shall flatten all documents before e-filing. All parties shall comply with the Standing Orders located at https://www.txwd.uscourts.gov/judges-information/standing-orders/ (sm3) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • DocketPursuant to the Standing Order Regarding Patent/Trademark Cases effective 12/9/19, attorneys filing Patent/Trademark cases in TXWD Waco division must prepare the attached form AO120, flatten the document and then e-file upon opening of the case using the event Notice of Filing of Patent/Trademark Form. (sm3) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#4) Certificate of Interested Parties by Peter Pedersen. (Ramey, William) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#3) REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS by Peter Pedersen. (Ramey, William) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#2) Notice of Filing of Patent/Trademark Form (AO 120). AO 120 forwarded to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (Ramey, William) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#1) COMPLAINT ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0542-16118426), filed by Peter Pedersen. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit US6965920, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Ramey, William) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where ADOBE INC is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Donald Hopkins Mahoney, III

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Kyril Vladimir Talanov

Latest cases represented by Lawyer William P. Ramey, III