Ride the Lightning
Cybersecurity and Future of Law Practice Blog
by Sharon D. Nelson Esq., President of Sensei Enterprises, Inc.
Patent Troll Clobbers E-Discovery Companies with Lawsuits
March 26, 2012
I suppose that it was only a matter of time before a patent troll set its sights on e-discovery companies. It appears that this has now happened.
The e-discovery world was rocked on its heels Friday when Law Technology News published an articleabout lawsuits brought by Lone Star Document Management (the purported patent troll) again Catalyst; CaseCentral; Digital Reef; Gallivan, Gallivan & O'Melia; Trial Solutions of Texas (operating as Cloud Nine); Breeze; Lexbe; Atalasoft and Business Intelligence Associates. It's an impressive list.
Lone Star is described as a "nonpracticing entity," known in common parlance as a shell company, formed to acquire and enforce patents. The suits were filed in the Eastern District of Texas and request jury trials.
The U.S. patent in question is 6,918,082, Electronic Document Proofing System, filed in 1998 and granted in 2005.
Our long time friend John Tredennick, CEO of Catalyst, has come out of the gate fighting, while recognizing that settling could be accomplished for less than $100,000, while litigation could cost millions.
Lone Star, be forewarned. Taking on John Tredennick has all the wisdom of kicking a sleeping rattlesnake.
According to John, some of the patent claims don't apply to e-discovery software. Of those that might, the primary claim involves the ability for users to add comments to documents, something that John says was standard a decade before the patent was filed. Describing the suits as "baloney," John said he would attempt to form a common defense fund with the other defendants to lower expenses – and then go after Lone Star for sanctions for filing a frivolous lawsuit.
One intellectual property attorney has suggested that the defendants' best bet is to force a re-examination of the patent. If the patent falls, and John seems to believe it is invalid, the lawsuits go away. And that process, including a detailed prior art search, is far less expensive than extended litigation.
The other defendants who have spoken on the record seem equally feisty. This particular patent troll may have clubbed an entire nest of sleeping rattlesnakes.
Listen to the Podcast
