Judge Albright Names Lawyer For Patent Trolls As New Magistrate Judge For Waco

from the because-of-course dept

With the transformation of his Waco courtroom into the venue for more than 25% of all patent cases in the United States, Judge Albright can’t keep up with all the business he’s “drummed up” for his courtroom. He’s made heavy use of technical advisors—one of whom made more than $700,000 in the first half of 2021 alone—as well as deferring almost all non-patent cases to his magistrates for all pre-trial proceedings.

But even with a magistrate and technical advisors, it seems like Judge Albright needs more help managing the patent docket he created in Waco. Earlier this year, the Judicial Conference authorized a second magistrate judge for the Waco court. And Judge Albright has arrived at his selection for that role, naming litigator Derek Gilliland to the position.

Gilliland is a Texas lawyer, most recently operating out of Tyler in the Eastern District of Texas. But Gilliland hasn’t been a stranger to Waco. Most recently, he was plaintiff’s counsel in multiple NPE (Non-Practicing Entity) lawsuits in front of Judge Albright. Two of them stand out as particularly noteworthy.

In the first case, Gilliland helped represent Profectus in its lawsuit against Google. At trial, a jury found Google didn’t infringe the patent. This probably wasn’t a surprise to Gilliland—after all, Profectus had previously unsuccessfully asserted the same patent against Apple, Samsung, and Dell.

But it’s the second case that really drives home the concern with Gilliland. Gilliland represented Ikorongo in its litigation against Samsung. And in that litigation, Ikorongo engaged in a “bald-faced attempt to manipulate venue,” playing games with assignment of its patent to try to keep the case from being transferred out of Judge Albright’s courtroom. The Federal Circuit rejected this tactic as “collusive,” “artificial,” and “manipulative.” (CCIA filed an amicus brief in this case arguing that Ikorongo’s venue manipulation tactics were impermissible.)

These aren’t the only examples, only the most recent ones. Gilliland has also regularly represented hedge-fund backed NPEs like Intellectual Ventures and Fortress subsidiary DSS.

Charged with finding a magistrate who would engage in the “expeditious, proper, and impartial performance of their duties as judicial officers,” Judge Albright selected a plaintiff’s lawyer who most recently represented a client who engaged in collusive and manipulative tactics to try to keep their case in front of Judge Albright and another client who asserted a patent that had been repeatedly rejected.

If you were looking for a way to “undermine public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary,” it’d be hard to think of a better one.

Originally posted to Patent Progress and reposted with permission.

Filed Under: , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Judge Albright Names Lawyer For Patent Trolls As New Magistrate Judge For Waco”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anon E. Mous (profile) says:

LMAO You have to love the fact that a judge who turned his court district into the new patent go to venue to sue in, is so slammed he appoints a litigator whose client was engaged in dubious tactics to keep their troll lawsuit in a patent friendly court… The irony there and corruption is astounding.

Lets face it much like the Eastern District of Texas and Judge Gilstrap bent over backward to keep patent trolling alive and well and the money flowing thru their district and the courthouse, we are seeing Waco is wanting in on the gravy train.

It is astounding how courts have become so corrupt and all about revenue that fair justice is out the window, this is what happens when you have Judges who are political rather than impartial and who are elected by merit and their service and background in the law rather than who can grease enough wheels to get into an elected job as a judge and the appointment of a pro copyright litigator ought to send just the right signal to trolls wanting to sue, Waco is open and ready for your business and the law well…. we will worry about that another time.

Just when you thought we had seen enough of the Eastern District of Texas and the Judge Gilstraps, well guess what looks like we haven’t The problem is the trolls will keep abusing the patent system because politicians are too corrupt to want to pass the laws to help stamp out the trolls and the courts are way too divided half the time to care to step in and SCOTUS even with the Alice decision has left enough room that the patent trolls have found enough room to keep on going.

And if you think this is bad now wait until this bit with the administrative judges to avoid smaller cases going to court starts it will be open season. We have seen tons of abuses thru patent and troll litigation from non practicing entities suing over the vaguest of old patent claiming they cover everything under the sun to sue, to ADA trolling lawsuits to porn tolling lawsuit to movie companies trolling lawsuits and even lawsuits over the use of printers/copiers for god sakes. and it just keeps going and going

Anonymous Coward says:

Too late

Don’t need to look for a way to “undermine public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary.” That happened long ago, first in the clearly racist handling of criminal proceedings, then in the absurd rulings from the Supreme Court. Citizens United == yes, let’s sell our legislators to the highest bidder. Then "Rucho" = no, gerrymandering isn’t illegal and, besides, it’s a political problem (even if it does result in negating any concept of "one man, one vote.")

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anon E. Mous (profile) says:

Re: Too late

What really grinds me is when the Law Enforcement, Government and Prosecutors bring a case and when they dont follow the letter of the law and the defendant(s) calls them out on it before the court , that Judges trot out the phrase "good faith" and allow Law Enforcement, Government or Prosecutors to keep evidence or warrants or whatever to keep thing in case that should have been out or to keep cases alive.

The courts and judges in them have lost a lot of their impartiality and seem to be willing to bend over backwards to allow this in that should be because Law Enforcement, Government and Prosecutors didn’t follow the letter of the law as they are written and defined.

How many cases are there where a defendant got a good faith exemption from the court? Not as many as Law Enforcement, Government and Prosecutors have i would be willing to bet.

SCOTUS has been wishy-washy on a lot of things they could say the law is the law and bot allow some of this to go on but takes a hand off position a lot of times. It’s sad that the erosion of our right and freedoms are being eroded more and more, the forefathers would be aghast at how the constitution has become irrelevant in the eyes of the goverment, law enforcement the courts and those sworn to uphold it

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Too late

Well you should talk to my personal and long time friend the Honorable Alan D (no dot) Albright. He’ll help you out.

First, he reads and understands English really well. So he could point out to you that the "erosion of our rights and freedoms are being eroded more and more" is an erosion of an erosion, which means a smaller, less erosive erosion, which considered in the context of this comment and this article as a whole, means that’s great! There’s LESS erosion of our right(s) and freedoms. That’s what we want. Right?

As to "evidence and warrants and whatever", well, I have a good faith belief that you actually might mean well, you’re just too freaking stupid to say what you mean, or mean what you say. That doesn’t mean you’re bad, or that you are acting in bad faith. I doubt you have any faith at all, stupid people are usually faithless and well as clueless. Maybe focusing on gaining some faith would put you on the right track.

So, find some faith, study some English, and come on back! It’s always so exciting to see the handicapped take their first steps in public, no matter how awkward and ungainly. Kind of like watching a female poodle trained to dance on her hind legs and turn in a circle while barking in a high pitched "Yip! Yip! Yip!". It takes time to train them to do this, but it can be done with consistent effort. There are no lost causes (even yours).

Fun to watch, training and learning, that’s what I mean. Write some more, I like you.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

Hard to undermine something that's been burned to the ground

So, is anyone still pretending that Albright isn’t corrupt as hell and deliberately turning his court into a patent extortionist heaven, or has he reached the point where even that’s considered a bit too much of a stretch?

Ah who am I kidding, I’m sure the same CAFC that’s given him a stern finger wagging for his previous refusals to follow the gorram law will look at this and shrug their shoulders again because judges would never fall to the dark side and are always operating in good faith even if it might not look like it.

That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: 'He's a judge, judges are never wrong!'

No worries, I imagine at some point some official will make a vague statement about how concerned they are with the integrity of the legal profession and field and hand out some stern finger wagging before going back to looking the other way.

I always get a laugh when an official comes out talking about how vital it is to protect the integrity and trust in the legal system from those that would tarnish and undermine it respectively, and how that is of great concern to them despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: 'He's a judge, judges are never wrong!'

Do you have judges in England? Do they still wear wigs? I dunno, here in Texas, we don’t generally encourage grown men wearing white wigs and makeup to carry out official business related directly to the US Constitution. Wigs, face powder, too, right? Eye shadow? You English people, you are weird from the word go. Why do you need to dress up in wigs in order to argue about the law? Is it some sort of cross dressing legal system that hands out perverted justice where you live?

Come to Texas! You can wear a wig if you like, face powder, too. We’ll listen to any stupid crazy argument you want to make about the integrity of the US legal system, as soon as you explain why you have to be a wig wearing cross dresser in England to get the job done.

We wear boots here. Hats, too. Carved leather belts. Hand carved, slowly, with bucking broncos and topless teens all tangled together in a form of art known as rodeo nirvana, taught only by word of mouth between the old Mexicans, who invented it, in Tijuana I think. People don’t usually notice the belts, they’re subtle.

But wigs and face powder? That’s just weird. Yes, I mean you, That One Guy. You and your wigs and white face powder don’t count for much here in God’s country.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Are you stating in public that Dr. Joshua Yi, known inside the Waco court as that very friendly and knowledgeable Chinese fellow (and quite a good writer), is illegally paying the Honorable Alan D Albright "kickbacks"?

Really? Do you have evidence of this? Dr. Yi is one of the most honest and sincere and technically trained and religious people you will ever meet.


Or did you just pull this out of the air without thinking about what you are saying directly to a sitting US Federal Judge and one of his top assistants?

My advice to you:

Praise the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all His benefits – who forgives
all your sins and heals all your diseases, who redeems your life from the
pit and crowns you with love and compassion, who satisfies your desires
with good things so that your youth is renewed like the eagle’s.
– Psalm 103:2-5

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Maybe your "sneaking suspicion" comes from being a sneaky and suspicious fellow yourself.

As for my personal friend the Honorable Alan D Albright (no dot), he’s open to journalists all the time, there are hundreds of articles about him. He’s probably the most open, transparent and accessible judges to sit on the Federal bench. (Does he actually sit on a bench? That sounds uncomfortable.)

Anyway, if you knew him like I knew him, and you weren’t such a sneaky and suspicious fellow yourself (watch, I’m sure you will respond with something sneaky and suspicious), then you wouldn’t make such ridiculous suggestions.

Your new name is PixelationSS. Write that down.

So ordered.

And ordained.

This current Year of the Buddha 2,563.

From now until forever you will be known as PixelationSS.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Hey Mike!

You unblocked me for a day or an hour (not sure yet). Thanks for that.

My take on the current situation with The Honorable Alan D Albright is that he is a straight shooter that just wants to do one thing – allow patent holders to have their day in court. Let them make their case in front of an impartial jury, let defendants use their best attorneys to present counter arguments, and then let the jury decide. That’s the American way, enshrined in the constitution.

All your negative comments about him have no basis in fact or reality, just like many other comments on this site from foreigners and posers and not real Americans. Almost everyone here is either un-American or not American, from my experience of reading the comments and articles.

Since the American Invents law, patent holders now have the obstacles to enforcing their patents multiplied. With almost every significant patent, they must both litigate their patent (expensive) and defend against IPRs (also expensive). In short, it’s a "king’s game" that only very wealthy people or corporations can play.

That’s unfortunate, because many gifted inventors are not very wealthy, but they have a lot to contribute. Inventors want to invent, to contribute to the world in a positive way by formulating new compositions that solve important problems. Lights bulbs. Velcro. Zippers. Lots of useful things.

But now, big corporations are crushing small inventors with money. It’s just too expensive to get your case heard by a jury, and defend IPRs and appeals and such.

From my best understanding of his writings, that is the mission that the Honorable Alan D Albright has set out on – to try to bring impartial justice back to the patent system. Not personal attacks, not name calling (trolls and such), justice. Show your patent to the jury, explain how you came up with it, the time and work and research and development you put into it, how it’s useful, and why it’s good for the world. Explain your invention to the jury. Let the other attorneys try to argue with you, in front of ordinary people with ordinary lives. Come to a decision, and move on to the next. I don’t think the Honorable Judge Alan D Albright is trying to do anything more than that.

Who doesn’t like patents? The big corporations, and foreign countries like China. Their motive is to "sell what you got", not to invent newer, better, cheaper alternatives that generate less profit for them and more value to customers. Leave that to inventors, and then let them allow the public to use and pay for their inventions, or not use them and not pay for them. That seems fair.

Some people abuse driving cars, for example, when they drink and drive. Is the solution to outlaw cars or make them so expensive that no one can drive them? I think not. Some people abuse patents. Is the solution to call everyone with a patent a "patent troll" and make patents too expensive to enforce? I think not.

Yes, I understand the concept of "a utopian world" and "share and share alike". The communists tried that, it turned out kind of rough on everyone. Open Source is fine if the author wants to publish his own work. But when Open Source is actually not the work of the purported author, and the technique has already been patented (and everyone knew that), I think the constitution should allow the patent holder to have his day in court and make his case.

I think the Honorable Alan D Albright is on the right track, and the whole country (maybe the whole world) will benefit from his "rocket docket" in Texas, where cases involving small inventors can be heard without delays and tactics that only favor those who already have economic power. People should be judged by their contribution to the world, not their economic power to suppress others.

More power to him. Go Baylor. God Bless the Honorable Alan D Albright.


Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

Well, what do you think, actually, about the patent system? Don’t you think it’s just terrible that you need millions and millions of dollars just to defend your own documented inventions, which you already paid to develop and document? Sometimes I try to imagine what it’s like to NOT be a Hamilton, where would you even get millions and millions of dollars to go fight about patents? And even if you are a Hamilton, wow, you might be surprised just how cheap people can be, even when they have access to enormous mountains of wealth just because of their family name. It’s all just terrible the way it is now, with so much money required to sort anything out.

We should have (for patents) the equivalent of a "small claims court" where issues can be sorted out with all the huge sums of money. That would be good for everyone, right? Even you would agree with that, wouldn’t you?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

Does it seem strange to anyone but me that comments like the one above, rife with some sort of sexual perversion not pertinent to anything, never seems to be "hidden" by "the community"?

Perhaps people in "the community" would characterize the comment above as "insightful"?

Is that true? Or am I misreading the situation?

Could someone please speak on behalf of "the community" that hides so many comments, but not these?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

Hamilton, you personally admitted to having vivid sexual fantasies of Melania Trump and Shiva Ayyadurai making Donald a cuckold before taking over the United States. On some occasions maybe those fantasies involve you. Not that you’ve ever specified in what capacity, although I personally think you’re there to help as Shiva’s fluffer.

Comments of a sexual reference are not the problem here. You and your friend with benefit John Smith do it with regularity. The difference why yours gets hidden is because yours is trashy fanfiction written by 14 year olds pretending to be 17 year olds while mine is accurate parody.

And Shiva Ayyadurai still didn’t invent email.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...