IoT Innovations LLC, an Empire IP LLC plaintiff, has sued D-Link (2:25-cv-01009) over the provision of its "various home security platforms and systems", ranging from mesh networking systems and switches to connected home hubs and websites. Asserted in the Eastern District of Texas complaint are ten patents received from Intellectual Ventures LLC (IV) in July 2022. Public records suggest that IV retains an interest in the monetization of the transacted portfolio, although IoT Innovations has not disclosed that interest in court. D-Link is already a defendant in another Empire IP campaign.
Four separate July 2022 assignments transferred that portfolio from IV into the hands of IoT Innovations, the transaction including more than 30 patents now asserted across roughly 30 cases filed, often in repeat fashion against the same defendants. The patents originated with disparate companies, including AT&T and Nokia, before moving into IV's hands years ago. An assertion grid for this campaign, begun back in November 2022, can be found on RPX Empower.
Against D-Link, the plaintiff asserts the 7,209,876 patent, generally relates to issuing a query to an "information repository containing natural language data" and producing an answer; the 7,246,173: patent, to quality of service (QoS) for a stream of packets; the 7,274,761 patent, to synchronizing a device's real-time clock with a common time reference; the 7,394,798; 7,408,872; 7,539,212; 7,643,423; and 7,974,260 patents, to wireless networking; the 7,593,428 patent, to a "formatter coupled to receive data from a data source"; and the 7,974,266 patent, to classifying Internet Protocol (IP) data.
New York attorneys Daniel Mitry and Timothy Salmon are the principals of Texas monetization firm Empire IP; the pair created IoT Innovations in Texas on July 18, 2020. Entities associated with Empire IP have initiated over 50 litigation campaigns since late 2011, with a fulsome treatment of the firm's operations over the years provided here. More recently, it seems to have largely focused litigation efforts on three portfolios received from IV in the indicated years: Fleet Connect Solutions LLC (FCS, in 2020), IoT Innovations (in 2022), and Integral Wireless Technologies LLC (in 2024).
Sued this past April, also filed in the Eastern District of Texas, D-Link was the first defendant in the Integral Wireless campaign. D-Link filed an answer to that complaint in late September. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap presides. There, Integral Wireless discloses that it "has no corporate parents, affiliates, and/or subsidiaries owning more than ten percent" of it. Note that IV (through Intellectual Ventures 194 LLC (IVA 194) and Intellectual Ventures 199 LLC (IVA 199)) retains an interest in any proceeds from the monetization of this portfolio, the original development work for which was conducted at disparate places, including BAE Systems, Mercedes-Benz, Nokia, STMicro, Synaptics, and ZTE.
Note also that FCS and IoT Innovations have established a pattern of, at best, making selective disclosure of IV's ongoing interest in their litigation efforts. In particular, despite early certificates of interested parties that represented to California courts that no nonparties had a financial interest in FCS's cases there, the plaintiff amended those disclosures to identify, as financially interested nonparties, Empire IP as well as "Invention Investment Fund I LP" and "Invention Investment Fund II LLC", presumably meaning IV affiliates Invention Investment Fund I, L.P. and Invention Investment Fund II, LLC.
Then, in its campaign, IoT Innovations filed a complaint against Lutron Electronics in the Central District of California, which requires parties to identify any nonparties with a pecuniary interest in the outcome of the litigation. IoT Innovations certified (in a document signed by Steven W. Ritcheson of Insight, PLC over a signature block that includes lead counsel Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC) to the court that there is no such interest to report. District Judge Serena R. Murillo presides. For more on this hit-and-miss compliance with disclosure rules, see here, here, and here.
That IoT Innovations case against Lutron Electronics has been particularly contentious. Lutron has filed a motion to compel license agreements with other parties, including other defendants in IoT's campaign, which include Ascent Capital Group (Monitronics), Hellman and Friedman (SimpliSafe), Leviton Manufacturing, and Savant Systems, each hit through multiple 2023 cases. Lutron complains about this strategy, among other things, in a motion for sanctions against IoT Innovations, having been sued a second time, that one in the Southern District of Florida. Judge Murillo has taken the sanctions motion under consideration, while the Florida court considers a Lutron motion to change venue.
2025 cases in the IoT Innovations campaign include complaints filed against Nice Group (Fibar Group) and Snap One (sued in January), Resideo Technologies (in February), and BH Security (d/b/a Brinks Home Security) and Nice Group (Nice North America) (in April), all in the Eastern District of Texas. Judge Gilstrap presides. The Snap One complaint is the second in another one-two punch from IoT, the first suit having been filed in August 2024. Claim construction briefing is underway there.
The other defendants in the Integral Wireless campaign include Sonim Technologies (sued in May 2025), MW International Ventures (d/b/a Social Mobile) (in June), Luminator Technology Group (in August), and Teltonika IoT Group (in September). All of those cases were also filed in the Eastern District of Texas, except the suit against Sonim, which was filed in West Texas. In June, Integral voluntarily dismissed that case without prejudice. The rest remain open.
FCS's campaign is also quite active. Just since the start of August, that plaintiff has sued Grady Rentals, Vehicle Tracking Solutions, Blue Ink Technology, Kerridge Commercial Systems (Remote Asset Management), Karooooo, NexTraq, Portable Multimedia, and Forward Thinking Systems, in that order and in various districts, including in the Northern District of Georgia. That court imposes heightened disclosure. Despite its prior representation that Empire IP and the above noted IV entities retain an interest in the outcome of at least one case filed in California, Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC has here signed yet another "None" certification (i.e., a certification that "a full and complete list of all other persons, associations, firms, partnerships, or corporations having either a financial interest in or other interest which could be substantially affected by the outcome of this particular case" is empty).
Judge Gilstrap has been assigned to preside over the IoT Innovations suit against D-Link as well. 10/3, Eastern District of Texas.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
