US9529918B2 Patent litigation record

Patent 22 cases

US9529918B2 has been asserted in 22 cases on record. Each row links to that case’s full docket record.

Litigation indexPatsnap Litigation Data··Docket source: PACER

22 cases on record

Cases on record
22
Asserted by
HyperQuery
Asserted against
Siemens · Arashi Vision · QNAP Systems · Chaos Software · Synology · BigCommerce · Apple · The Access Technology Group · Canva US · ASUSTOR · Atlassian Pty · Fiserv · GOG sp. z o.o. · Nintendo · Amazon.com · Roku · OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) · ZTE · LG Electronics · Hewlett-Parkard · Samsung Electronics
Courts
W.D. Tex. · E.D. Tex. · D. Del.
Technology
electric digital data processing
Case no.PartiesCourtFiledDurationOutcome
7:25-cv-00178 HyperQuery LLC v. Siemens, Corp. W.D. Tex. 18 Apr 2025 123 d Voluntary dismissal
2:25-cv-00406 HyperQuery LLC v. Arashi Vision, Inc. E.D. Tex. 17 Apr 2025 6 d Voluntary dismissal
2:25-cv-00411 HyperQuery LLC v. QNAP Systems, Inc. E.D. Tex. 17 Apr 2025 89 d Voluntary dismissal
2:25-cv-00413 HyperQuery LLC v. Arashi Vision, Inc. E.D. Tex. 17 Apr 2025 9 d Voluntary dismissal
2:25-cv-00415 HyperQuery LLC v. Chaos Software GmbH E.D. Tex. 17 Apr 2025 42 d Dismissed without Prejudice
2:25-cv-00416 HyperQuery LLC v. Synology, Inc. E.D. Tex. 17 Apr 2025 169 d Voluntary dismissal
7:25-cv-00175 HyperQuery LLC v. BigCommerce, Inc, W.D. Tex. 17 Apr 2025 118 d Voluntary dismissal
1:25-cv-00334 HyperQuery LLC v. Apple, Inc. D. Del. 18 Mar 2025 8 d Voluntary dismissal
2:25-cv-00155 HyperQuery LLC v. The Access Technology Group Limited E.D. Tex. 6 Feb 2025 159 d Voluntary dismissal
7:25-cv-00055 HyperQuery LLC v. Canva US, Inc. W.D. Tex. 6 Feb 2025 231 d Voluntary dismissal
2:25-cv-00036 HyperQuery LLC v. ASUSTOR Inc E.D. Tex. 15 Jan 2025 145 d Voluntary dismissal
2:25-cv-00037 HyperQuery LLC v. Atlassian Pty Ltd E.D. Tex. 15 Jan 2025 37 d Voluntary dismissal
2:25-cv-00040 HyperQuery LLC v. Fiserv, Inc. E.D. Tex. 15 Jan 2025 72 d Voluntary dismissal
2:25-cv-00041 HyperQuery LLC v. GOG sp. z o.o. E.D. Tex. 15 Jan 2025 166 d Voluntary dismissal
2:24-cv-00613 HyperQuery LLC v. Nintendo Co., Ltd. E.D. Tex. 31 Jul 2024 133 d Voluntary dismissal
2:24-cv-00617 HyperQuery LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc. E.D. Tex. 31 Jul 2024 132 d Voluntary dismissal
6:24-cv-00399 HyperQuery LLC v. Roku, Inc. W.D. Tex. 31 Jul 2024 260 d Case Dismissed
6:23-cv-00205 HyperQuery, LLC v. OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. W.D. Tex. 22 Mar 2023 191 d Voluntary dismissal
6:23-cv-00210 HyperQuery, LLC v. ZTE Corporation W.D. Tex. 22 Mar 2023 191 d Voluntary dismissal
2:23-cv-00007 HyperQuery, LLC v. LG Electronics, Inc. E.D. Tex. 9 Jan 2023 254 d Case Transferred
6:23-cv-00006 HyperQuery, LLC v. Hewlett-Parkard, Co. W.D. Tex. 6 Jan 2023 266 d Voluntary dismissal
6:23-cv-00007 HyperQuery, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. W.D. Tex. 6 Jan 2023 266 d Voluntary dismissal
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases asserting US9529918B2 in the current snapshot. Run this in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

How strong is US9529918B2?

Closest prior art, compared claim by claim, with every reference rated for how hard it hits.

Run a novelty search
10,000 free credits to start

About this summary. This page summarises the litigation records within the coverage and snapshot dates stated here. Counts describe records in that dataset and do not, by themselves, establish the conduct, litigation success or legal position of any person or organisation.

Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.

No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed. The filing of a claim is not a court finding, and a docket marked “closed” does not by itself establish infringement, validity, settlement or a decision on the merits.

No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.

Third-party names and marks. Party, attorney, judge and company names appear for identification only. Company names may be trademarks of their owners; their appearance does not, by itself, imply affiliation with or endorsement by Patsnap.

Corrections and privacy requests. To report an inaccurate record or attribution, use the “Report an incorrect record” link on this page. For requests concerning your personal information, including, where applicable, the rights to access, rectify, erase, restrict or object to processing, use the “Privacy request” link. We assess requests under applicable law. See our Privacy Policy for details of this processing.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.