Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 31 JULY 2025

IngenioSpec Sues Apple In West Texas, Files Third ITC Complaint

RPX Corporation
Explore more from RPX Corporation

IngenioSpec LLC has filed a pair of Western District of Texas complaints against Apple (1:25-cv-00867, 1:25-cv-00877), targeting a range of features provided with AirPods (Pro) and iPhones.

United StatesIntellectual Property
RPX Corporation
RPX Corporation

IngenioSpec LLC has filed a pair of Western District of Texas complaints against Apple (1:25-cv-00867, 1:25-cv-00877), targeting a range of features provided with AirPods (Pro) and iPhones. The plaintiff has also filed another complaint before the International Trade Commission (ITC), naming as proposed respondents Brilliant Labs, DJI, DVPR, Even Realities, Halliday, Holoswim, INMO, and NRMyW (337-TA-3833), the lot accused over the alleged importation of "eyewear products containing electronic components in the frames and/or lenses, associated components, and related charging apparatuses".

In the -867 case against Apple, IngenioSpec asserts three patents, one (8,582,789) generally related to a hearing aid with an external audio receiver to receive broadcast signals and convert them to wireless for the hearing aid. The plaintiff focuses allegations of infringement of the '789 patent on the accused products' functionality for adjusting aspects of Transparency Mode,

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

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.

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

UMG v. DistroKid: When AI Becomes A Consumer Protection Issue

Universal Music Group's lawsuit against DistroKid raises a critical question about AI disclosure in consumer markets: when does the use of artificial intelligence become material information that must be disclosed to consumers? The case centers on allegations that DistroKid distributed mass-generated AI music while creating the impression it was created by legitimate human artists, potentially violating existing consumer protection laws even without specific AI disclosure requirements.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Article

The Trademark Scam Field Guide: Look-Alike Filing Sites, Fake USPTO Notices, And How To Get Out If You’ve Been Caught

A business decides to file a trademark. Someone on the team searches for a familiar online legal-services brand, clicks the first result, and lands on a site with a similar-sounding name, a polished design, five-star reviews, and a low flat fee. The application gets filed. Months later the business learns the “service” was not who they thought it was, the filing was signed by someone with no authority to sign it, and the USPTO has suspended the application along with hundreds or thousands of others from the same shop.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Harness IP
Harness IP
Article

PTAB/USPTO Update - October 2026

The USPTO has released new templates and guidance for AIA trial proceedings, announced key appointments including a Chief AI Officer, and published updated procedures for patent applications and subject matter eligibility declarations. Director Squires delivered multiple addresses emphasizing the constitutional importance of intellectual property rights while the agency expanded its community engagement efforts and international collaboration through WIPO's Global IP Assignment Platform pilot program.
United StatesIntellectual Property
WilmerHale
WilmerHale
Article

U.S. Government Backs Fair Use For AI Training In OpenAI Copyright Litigation

The U.S. government has filed a Statement of Interest of the United States of America under 28 U.S.C. § 517 in the Southern District of New York multidistrict litigation over OpenAI’s use of copyrighted works to train large language models. The filing appears to be the federal government’s first direct intervention in the wave of artificial intelligence (AI) training copyright cases, and it advises the court to treat model training (separate from use of AI to generate outputs) on copyrighted text standing alone as a highly transformative fair use under current law.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Lowenstein Sandler LLP