This case was last updated from PACER on 06/09/2021 at 18:11:16 (UTC).

ThroughPuter, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation

Case Summary

On March 31, 2021, ThroughPuter, Inc. (“ThroughPuter” or “Plaintiff”), represented by Wayne Michael Helge of Davidson Berquist Jackson & Gowdey LLP, filed an intellectual property lawsuit against Microsoft Corp. (“Microsoft” or “Defendant”), seeking damages with prejudgment and post-judgment interests among other reliefs, for unlawful infringement of United States patents owned by Plaintiff. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia with Judge M. Hannah Lauck presiding.

 

The Plaintiff filed this complaint for the alleged infringement of United States Patent Nos. 10,963,306 (“the ’306 patent”), 10,620,998 (“the ’998 patent”), 10,437,644 (“the ’644 patent”), 10,430,242 (“the ’242 patent”), 10,318,353 (“the ’353 patent”), 10,310,902 (“the ’902 patent”), 10,133,599 (“the ’599 patent”), 9,632,833 (“the ’833 patent”), 9,424,090 (“the ’090 patent”) owned by them.

 

In the complaint, the Plaintiff alleged that “In 2013, Plaintiff disclosed a reconfigurable and dynamic parallel execution architecture running on Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) processors in writing to Microsoft. Two years later, Microsoft filed a patent application on the same hardware-based fabric (failing to disclose to the Patent Office any information about ThroughPuter’s technology or earlier patent filings). Microsoft was ultimately awarded the patent, which has claims that match almost exactly those of the plaintiff’s Patents-in-suit. Microsoft was awarded a patent on the same hardware-based fabric claimed in the ThroughPuter patents, wrongly suggesting that Microsoft had invented the architecture underlying Microsoft Azure cloud platform (“Azure”), However, ThroughPuter had already patented that architecture and disclosed it to Microsoft'' and therefore it even alleged that “Microsoft’s copying of ThroughPuter’s technology was deliberate and wanton & even though while ThroughPuter has managed to survive as a small company developing and offering for sale other innovative solutions enabled by the throughput improvements which result from ThroughPuter’s patented technology, Microsoft’s copying and infringement of ThroughPuter’s intellectual property has irreparably damaged ThroughPuter’s prospects of entering the PaaS market, which had grown from $3.8B in 2015 to $37.5B in 2019.”

 

The Plaintiff further alleged that “They had attempted repeatedly to engage with Microsoft to resolve this matter outside of litigation. Microsoft has rejected or ignored ThroughPuter’s proposals and requests for business resolution of the matter. Microsoft rejecting ThroughPuter’s proposals and offers to collaborate has created a highly inequitable situation by which Microsoft used its tremendous market power to scale up the world’s largest and most successful cloud computing platform. Microsoft did this based on the technology it copied from ThroughPuter: a small start-up that could have only competed based on its effort to protect and patent its innovations.”

 

In the nine claims for relief laid down by the Plaintiff, infringement of all the patents in suit in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), (b), and/or (c) has been alleged, wherein it has been alleged that Microsoft actively, knowingly, and intentionally had induced, or has threatened to induce, infringement of the ‘306, ‘599, ’902, ‘242, ‘644, ‘998, ‘353, ‘090, and ‘833 patents through a range of activities.

 

In its prayer for relief, the Plaintiff has requested the court to pass an adjudication that Microsoft has allegedly infringed one or more claims of the ’306, ’599, ’902, ’242, ’644, ’998, ’353, ’090, and ’833 patents; an order permanently enjoining Microsoft from further infringement of the ’306, ’599, ’902, ’242, ’644, ’998, ’353, ’090, and ’833 patents; an award of damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284; an order that the damages award be increased up to three times the actual amount assessed, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284; an award to ThroughPuter of its costs, pre- and post-judgment interest, and reasonable expenses to the fullest extent permitted by law; a declaration that this case is exceptional pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285; and an award of attorneys’ fees and costs.

 

This case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the status of this case. Sign up to view the latest case updates and court documents.




Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    1:21-CV-00397

  • Filing Date:

    03/31/2021

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Other Disposed

  • Case Type:

    Intellectual Property - Patent

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

ThroughPuter, Inc.

Defendant

Microsoft Corporation

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

Wayne Michael Helge

Attorney at Davidson Berquist Jackson & Gowdey LLP

8300 Greensboro Drive, Suite 500

Mclean, VA 22102

 

Court Documents

#10

#9

#8

7 #6

Exhibit 33

7 #5

Exhibit 32

7 #4

Exhibit 31

7 #3

Exhibit 30

7 #2

Exhibit 29

7 #1

Exhibit 28

#7

6 #3

Exhibit 27-3

6 #2

Exhibit 27-2

6 #1

Exhibit 27-1

#6

5 #9

Exhibit 22

5 #1

Exhibit 14

1 #1

Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet

#1

46 More Documents Available
View All Documents

 

Docket Entries

  • 04/01/2021
  • DocketIntradistrict Patent Case Transfer to Richmond Division Case Number 3:21cv216. (jsmi, ) (Entered: 04/01/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/31/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#10) Proposed Summons re #1 Complaint to Microsoft Corporation by ThroughPuter, Inc.. (Helge, Wayne) (Entered: 03/31/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/31/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#9) Financial Interest Disclosure Statement (Local Rule 7.1) by ThroughPuter, Inc.. (Helge, Wayne) (Entered: 03/31/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/31/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#8) NOTICE of Appearance by Wayne Michael Helge on behalf of ThroughPuter, Inc. (Helge, Wayne) (Entered: 03/31/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/31/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#7) NOTICE by ThroughPuter, Inc. re #1 Complaint (Notice of Filing of Exhibits (28-33)) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 28, #2 Exhibit 29, #3 Exhibit 30, #4 Exhibit 31, #5 Exhibit 32, #6 Exhibit 33)(Helge, Wayne) (Entered: 03/31/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/31/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#6) NOTICE by ThroughPuter, Inc. re #1 Complaint (Notice of Filing of Exhibits (27-1 to 27-3)) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 27-1, #2 Exhibit 27-2, #3 Exhibit 27-3)(Helge, Wayne) (Entered: 03/31/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/31/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#5) NOTICE by ThroughPuter, Inc. re #1 Complaint (Notice of Filing of Exhibits (14-26)) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 14, #2 Exhibit 15, #3 Exhibit 16, #4 Exhibit 17, #5 Exhibit 18, #6 Exhibit 19, #7 Exhibit 20, #8 Exhibit 21, #9 Exhibit 22, #10 Exhibit 23, #11 Exhibit 24, #12 Exhibit 25, #13 Exhibit 26)(Helge, Wayne) (Entered: 03/31/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/31/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#4) NOTICE by ThroughPuter, Inc. re #1 Complaint (Notice of Filing of Exhibits (13-4 to 13-6)) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 13-4, #2 Exhibit 13-5, #3 Exhibit 13-6)(Helge, Wayne) (Entered: 03/31/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/31/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#3) NOTICE by ThroughPuter, Inc. re #1 Complaint (Notice of Filing of Exhibits (13-1 to 13-3)) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 13-1, #2 Exhibit 13-2, #3 Exhibit 13-3)(Helge, Wayne) (Entered: 03/31/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/31/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#2) NOTICE by ThroughPuter, Inc. re #1 Complaint (Notice of Filing of Exhibits (1-12)) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7, #8 Exhibit 8, #9 Exhibit 9, #10 Exhibit 10, #11 Exhibit 11, #12 Exhibit 12)(Helge, Wayne) (Entered: 03/31/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/31/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#1) Complaint For Patent Infringement ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0422-7699862.), filed by ThroughPuter, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Helge, Wayne) (Entered: 03/31/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where Microsoft Corporation is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Wayne Michael Helge