A Texas patent troll under the name Corydoras Technologies LLC that first sued Samsung in March is now suing Apple with a series of patents that they acquired from Japan which they claim are “presumed valid.” The company claims that 20 specific models of Apple’s iPhones and iPads infringe on various claims of their patents in respect to cameras, call blocking, FaceTime calling and more.

More specifically, the official complaint filed by Corydoras Technologies covers six patents by the same title “Communication Device. The patents involved include 7,778,664, 7,945,236, 7,945,287, 7,996,037, 8,024,009 and 8,731,540. The products listed in the lawsuit include the following: the iPhone 4, 4S, 5, 5S, 5C, 6, 6 Plus, 6S, 6S Plus and SE (collectively “Accused iPhones”), and the iPad 2, iPad 3rd generation, iPad 4th generation, iPad Pro, iPad Air, iPad Air 2, iPad mini, iPad mini 2, iPad mini 3, and iPad mini 4 (collectively “Accused iPads”).

The Corydoras Technologies lawsuit file with the court states in-part that “Apple’s Accused iPhones and Accused iPads are capable of voice communication. For example, the Accused iPhones are made and sold with the capability to be used in telephone calls and FaceTime Audio calls. By way of further example, the Accused iPads are made and sold with the capability to be used in FaceTime Audio calls.

Apple’s Accused iPhones and Accused iPads include a camera on the same side as the display. Apple refers to this camera as the “Front camera” on the iPhone 4 and 4S, and as the “FaceTime camera” for the remaining models of Apple’s Accused iPhones and Accused iPads. When this camera is in use, Apple’s Accused iPhones and Accused iPads are capable of displaying a mirror image of the object, such as a person, that is in the view of this camera.

On information and belief, the Apple Accused iPhones and iPads are covered by one or more of the following claims of the ‘664 patent: 1, 3, 6-10, and/or 15-18.

In Count 2 (covering patent #7,945,236) the complaint notes that “Each of Apple’s Accused iPhones is capable of displaying its geographic location on its display. Each of Apple’s Accused iPhones is capable of displaying its geographic location on its display based, at least in part, on GPS data.

Each of Apple’s Accused iPads is capable of displaying its geographic location on its display. Each of Apple’s Accused iPads is capable of displaying its geographic location on its display based, at least in part, on GPS data.

On information and belief, the Apple Accused iPhones and Accused iPads are covered by one or more of the following claims of the ‘236 patent: 1-3, 5, 8-11, and/or 16-18.” This is a point also covered in Count 3 under patent #7,945,236.

In Count 4 (covering patent #7,996,037) the complaint notes that “Apple’s Accused iPhones are capable of making phone calls, FaceTime calls, and/or FaceTime Audio calls using voice commands. By way of example, Apple’s “Voice Control” or “Siri” feature provides the capability to make a phone call, FaceTime call and/or FaceTime Audio call in response to a voice command.

Apple’s Accused iPads are capable of making FaceTime calls, and/or FaceTime Audio calls using voice commands. By way of example, Apple’s “Siri” feature provides the capability to make a FaceTime call and/or FaceTime Audio call in response to a voice command.

On information and belief, the Accused iPhones and Accused iPads are covered by one or more of the following claims of the ‘037 patent: 1-3, 5, 8-11, and/or 16-18.

In Count 5 (covering Patent #8,024,009) the complaint notes that “Apple’s Accused iPhones and Accused iPads with iOS 7 or a later version of iOS software installed include capability to block unwanted callers. Such capability provided by Apple is identified as “Block this Caller.” If ‘Block this Caller” is enabled on an Accused iPhone or an Accused iPad, an incoming call from a caller that has been blocked will be blocked.

On information and belief, the Accused iPhones and Accused iPads are covered by one or more of the following claims of the ‘009 patent: 1-3, 5, 8-11, and/or 16-18.

In Count 6 (covering patent #8,731,540) the complaint notes that “Apple’s Accused iPhones and Accused iPads are capable of sending and receiving email. Apple’s Accused iPhones and Accused iPads are capable of authoring an email based on input from a user and wirelessly transmitting such email to a recipient.

On information and belief, the Accused iPhones and Accused iPads are covered by one or more of the following claims of the ”540 patent: 1-6, 8-11, 13-16 and/or 18.”

The patent infringement case presented in today’s report was filed in the Texas Eastern District Court, Marshall Office in Anderson County on May 20, 2016. The Presiding Judge in this case is noted as being Judge Rodney Gilstrap.

In July we reported that Apple remains the number one target of patent trolls in 2015. It should also be noted that Corydoras first sued Samsung back in March 2016 with the very same patents.

Patently Apple presents only a brief summary of certain legal cases/ lawsuits which are part of the public record for journalistic news purposes. Readers are cautioned that Patently Apple does not offer a legal opinion on the merit of the case. A lawyer should be consulted for any further details or analysis. 

Please visit the source link below to read the entire article.