UltimatePointer, L.L.C. v. LG ELECTRONICS, INC. et al

On October 18, 2022, UltimatePointer, L.L.C. ("Plaintiff”), represented by Michael C. Smith of Scheef & Stone, LLP, filed an intellectual property lawsuit against LG Electronics, Inc. ("LGE") and LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. ("LGEUSA") (collectively, "Defendants"), seeking declaratory and injunctive relief with damages for alleged infringement of the U.S. patent owned by the plaintiff. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for Eastern District of Texas.

Plaintiff filed this complaint for the alleged infringement of U.S. patent No. 11,402,927 ("the '927 Patent" or “Patent-in-suit”), entitled "POINTING DEVICE” owned by the plaintiff.

In the complaint, the plaintiff stated, “UltimatePointer was assigned and owns all right, title and interest to the '927 Patent, having the full and exclusive right to bring suit to enforce the '927 Patent, including the right to recover for past, present and future infringement.”

The plaintiff further stated, “The '927 Patent generally is directed to pointing systems using, among other things, gyroscopes and accelerometers to control cursor locations on displays.”

Plaintiff then alleged, “LG has been and is infringing by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing into the United States, without authority, products/systems that fall within the scope of one or more of the claims of the '927 Patent, such products/systems including, but not limited to, television controllers and associated televisions.”

The plaintiff also alleged, “LG has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, the '927 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by making, using, offering for sale, selling, and/or importing Accused Instrumentalities, their components, and/or products containing the same to, for example, its alter egos, agents, intermediaries, distributors, importers, customers, subsidiaries, and/or consumers.”

Plaintiff additionally alleged, “LG has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe the '927 Patent through its direct involvement in the activities of its subsidiaries (including LGEUSA), including by selling and offering for sale the Accused Instrumentalities directly to LGEUSA and importing the Accused Instrumentalities into the United States for LGEUSA.”

The plaintiff further alleged, “LGE is vicariously liable for this infringing conduct of LGEUSA (under both the alter ego and agency theories) because, as an example and upon information and belief, LGE and LGEUSA are essentially the same company, and LGE has the right and ability to control LGEUSA's infringing acts and receives a direct financial benefit from LGEUSA's infringement.”

Plaintiff also alleged, “UltimatePointer has been damaged and will suffer additional damages due to LG's infringement. As a direct and proximate result of LG's acts of patent infringement, UltimatePointer has been and continues to be injured and has sustained and will continue to sustain substantial damages.”

Plaintiff presented one claim for relief from alleged infringement of the patent-in-suit.

In the prayer for relief, the plaintiff requested declaratory and permanent injunctive relief along with an award for damages, including enhanced damages, an accounting of all damages, reasonable royalty, and costs and disbursements.

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.