On April 30, 2013, Neiman Marcus filed a declaratory judgment lawsuit (available here) in the Northern District of Texas against “Doe No. 1.” Neiman Marcus filed its lawsuit after receiving a letter from IP Nav, who was acting as “Doe No. 1’s” agent. The letter from IP Nav allegedly “assert[ed] that Nieman Marchus infringes Defendant’s patents[.]” Specifically:
9. The letter states that IP Nav has been engaged by Defendant, an unnamed holder of “valuable patents in the field of automation of application programs.” IP Nav indicates that it has conducted an “analysis” of Neiman Marcus’s “products” and, if and only if a condition precedent is met, “intends to identify specific patents and provide information outlining the basis for any license under the patents.”
10. The letter demands that Neiman Marcus enter into discussions with IP Nav regarding a license agreement with Defendant. As a condition precedent to disclosing the identity of “specific patents,” the “basis for any license under the patents,” and Defendant’s “basic licensing structure,” the letter states that Neiman Marcus must sign the attached “Confidentiality and Forbearance Agreement” (hereinafter “the Agreement”).
Neiman Marcus seeks a declaratory judgment that it does not infringe “Doe No. 1’s” patents.
Neiman Marcus is represented by Thomas Adair, Daniel Crowe, and Nick Williamson, all of Bryan Cave.