throbber
Unified Patents Challenges America’s Most Litigious Patent Assertion Entity | Unified PatentsUnified Patents
`
`12/27/13, 2:41 AM
`
`
`
`
`Recent
`
`Blog
`
`Press Release
`
`WSJ Article – New Venture Enters
`Patent Fray (Sub. Required)
`
`CNET Article – Unified Patents,
`backed by Google, takes Fight to
`Patent Trolls
`
`The Gloves are Off : Unified
`Patents Inc. Unveils its “NPE
`Deterrent” Strategy
`
`Unified Patents Challenges
`Clouding IP Patent seeks To Push
`Patent Trolls out of Cloud Storage
`
`Unified Patents Challenges
`America’s Most Litigious Patent
`Assertion Entity
`
`UNIFIED PATENTS CHALLENGES AMERICA’S MOST LITIGIOUS PATENT
`ASSERTION ENTITY
`
`Unified Patents Launches Review of Broad IPNav Patent to Protect Cloud Storage
`
`Los Altos, CA – October 1, 2013 – Unified Patents (Unified) announced today that it will challenge a patent held by
`
`Parallel Iron and backed by notorious patent assertion entity (PAE) IPNav. IPNav and Parallel Iron have asserted the
`
`challenged patent, which covers “methods and systems for a storage system,” against many companies including
`
`Google, Amazon, Netflix, NetApp, and Rackspace, among others. IPNav and Parallel Iron broadly claim the patent
`
`covers a widely used cloud computing technology, the Hadoop Distributed File System.
`
`Unified filed an Inter-Partes review with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) today referencing prior art that
`
`raise substantial new questions about the validity of the patent, U.S. Patent No. 7,197,662 (“‘662 Patent”). The review,
`
`the second filed by Unified in two weeks, is part of Unified’s strategy to protect cloud storage technologies from PAE
`
`encroachment.
`
`“We want companies, big and small, to get back to innovating instead of litigating, and they can’t do that with the
`
`distraction of PAEs,” said Kevin Jakel, founder of Unified. “In the case of the ‘662 patent, Unified believes that IPNav is
`
`asserting an invalid patent against cloud storage products and services.”
`
`Parallel Iron’s broad interpretation of the ‘662 Patent and the widespread use of Hadoop have struck a nerve with
`
`many companies. Parallel Iron has asserted this patent in district court litigation against companies such as NetApp,
`
`Hitachi Data Systems, Amazon, EMC, Google, Facebook, Oracle, Adobe, LinkedIn, Cloudera, NetFlix, AT&T, LSI, and
`
`RackSpace.
`
`“Cloud computing is extraordinarily important to consumers, apps, and the app economy,” said Jon Potter, President
`
`of the Application Developers Alliance. “All app developers and publishers should applaud Unified Patents activity to
`
`protect cloud computing and to challenge trolls that seek to impose a tax on cloud storage and innovation.”
`
`Parallel Iron and IPNav owner Erich Spangenberg were recently profiled in a July 13, 2013 New York Times article
`
`about Patent Assertion Entities (PAE): “Has Patent, Will Sue.”
`
`ABOUT UNIFIED PATENTS
`
`Unified Patents (Unified) counters the risk and cost of Patent Assertion Entity (PAE) and/or Patent Troll litigation by
`
`protecting strategic technologies. Unified’s unique solution partners startups, SMBs and large companies and then
`
`proactively deters PAE/Patent Troll activity using deep patent expertise, monitoring, market intelligence, advisory
`
`services, and USPTO challenges in specific technologies. By protecting a strategic technology, Unified mitigates
`
`patent assertion risk for its members’ most important products and services. More information can be found at
`
`www.unifiedpatents.com
`
`CONTACT US
`
`http://unifiedpatents.com/2013/11/11/unified-patents-challenges-americas-most-litigious-patent-assertion-entity/#more-201
`
`Page 1 of 2
`
` 1-415-786-5007
`
`info@unifiedpatents.com
`
`HOME
`
`Follow @unifiedpatents
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ABOUT US
`
`WHAT WE DO
`
`NEWS/BLOG
`
`JOIN US
`
`CONTACT US
`
`

`

`Unified Patents Challenges America’s Most Litigious Patent Assertion Entity | Unified PatentsUnified Patents
`
`12/27/13, 2:41 AM
`
`Latest Tweets
`
`Ask a Quick Question
`
`Mailing Address
`
`unifiedpatents Merry Christmas to all. Even the trolls.
`http://t.co/ODliKSb94R
`
`unifiedpatents Are #patent #trolls as profitable as drug
`dealers? Pretty brazen. Disclaimer is entertaining too.
`http://t.co/mSbzTEYn9r
`
`unifiedpatents Invalidation can be a public service RT
`@IPNAV : The rise of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`troll - @Lexology http://t.co/WWwxz75nQi
`
`Name
`
`Email
`
`Query
`
`Submit
`
`171 Main St. #106
`LOS ALTOS CA 94022
`United States
`
`+1.415.786.5007
`
`info@unifiedpatents.com
`
`© 2013 Unified Patents, Inc. All Rights reserved.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`http://unifiedpatents.com/2013/11/11/unified-patents-challenges-americas-most-litigious-patent-assertion-entity/#more-201
`
`Page 2 of 2
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket