GOPs face Super Tuesday and an IP lawsuit

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

GOPs face Super Tuesday and an IP lawsuit

As the US Republican presidential candidates await the results of Super Tuesday, they are also being sued in California for patent infringement

Today, 10 US states are holding primary elections or caucuses that will help decide the Republican party nominee for the 2012 US presidential election.

The candidates include Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney, all of whom are also being sued in the US District Court for the Central District of California by an IP lawyer and patent owner.

The complaint alleges infringement of US patent number 7,644,122, which covers a method of online communication with both online and offline recipients. The lawsuit claims that the GOPs’ (and 1,000 others’) business Facebook accounts infringe the ‘122 patent, which is owned by EveryMD.

EveryMD’s website provides home pages for over 300,000 doctors and allows patients to obtain information about and communicate with them.

The business is a partnership of Frank Weyer and Troy Javaher, who both own the ‘122 patent. Weyer is an attorney with Techcoastlaw in California, which describes itself as a “cutting edge internet law” firm.

According to the complaint, EveryMD is suing the GOP candidates and other individuals (who are unidentified in the complaint) because Facebook refused to take a licence or purchase the ‘122 patent.

“Facebook’s failure to purchase the ‘122 patent…leaves holders of Facebook business accounts liable for infringement of the ‘122 patent for unauthorized commercial use of Facebook pages produced by Facebook using the ‘122 patent,” said the complaint.

Business account holders were offered a chance to take a licence for a reduced price of $500 per account in January 2011 to avoid liability, but none of the candidates agreed, according to the complaint.

EveryMD also sued Facebook in 2010 in the same California court, and Facebook subsequently requested reexamination of the ‘122 patent with the USPTO.

Facebook has argued that EveryMD’s invention is an obvious combination of technologies that existed at the time the patent application was filed in 1999.

The patents have so far been found invalid in reexamination. EveryMD has appealed to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences and claims that Facebook’s recent IPO prospectus proves the social network relies on the patented technology for its success.

The GOP candidates named in the most recent suit have until April 1 to respond - two days before primaries are scheduled to take place in Washington DC, Maryland and Wisconsin.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Powell Gilbert’s opening in Düsseldorf, complete with a new partner hire, continues this summer’s trend of UPC-related lateral movement
IP leaders at Brandsmiths and Bird & Bird, who were on opposing sides at the UK Supreme Court in Iconix v Dream Pairs, unpick the landmark case and its ramifications
Gift this article