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 2026

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

Judge Alan Albright is to leave his role at the Western District of Texas, and could return to private practice
Stobbs has successfully seen off a contempt of court application filed against the firm and two of its lawyers
After almost a quarter of a century, Marshall Gerstein has a new managing partner
Abbott winning another round against Sinocare and Menarini, and 'long arm' clarification on the UK's position within the UPC, were also among major developments
Maria Peyman, head of IP at Birketts, explains why the firm is adopting a ‘seamless approach’ for clients by integrating two of its practice areas
Matthew Swinn, who leads the firm’s IP practice, discusses why Mallesons is well-placed to remain a major IP force
Lawyers at A&O Shearman analyse developments regarding UPC’s long-arm jurisdiction, including its scope and jurisdictional limits
Michelle Lee discusses reaching milestones at the USPTO, AI’s role in legal work, and how to empower women in tech and IP
Executive chair Matt Dixon, who reveals a new associate hire, says the firm wants to offer a realistic pathway to partnership while avoiding the ‘corporate machine’ route
Mayer Brown’s role in cardiovascular technology dispute reflects how firms are pursuing precedent-setting cases to try and guide AI and patent law
Gift this article