Malikie Innovations v. Mara Holdings patent case cited
Company: Marathon Digital
The claim, verbatim
In a brief in an unrelated patent case (Redstone Logics v. Qualcomm), plaintiff Redstone cites a June 1, 2026 entry in Malikie Innovations LTD. et al v. Mara Holdings Inc., Case No. 7:25-cv-00222-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex.), as authority for the legal standard on motions to stay pending USPTO proceedings. The brief does not describe what that entry decided. Mara Holdings is not a party to the Redstone case.
Source (primary)
Redstone Logics LLC v. Qualcomm Inc. — Entry #65: Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Redstone Logics LLC, re [64] MOTION to Stay filed by Defendant Qualcomm Inc., Defendant Qualcomm Technologies, Inc (RECAP, court_filing)
View cached copy (2026-11-02)Live source ↗
Quote: “See Malikie Innovations LTD. et al v. Mara Holdings INC., Case No. 7:25-cv-00222-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex. June 1, 2026).”
How we checked this
This claim has not yet been checked assertion-by-assertion against its source. It carries a cited source and quote, but the deeper check has not run. When it does, the result appears here whatever it says.
Additional evidence
confirms Redstone Logics LLC v. Qualcomm Inc. — Entry #65: Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Redstone Logics LLC, re [64] MOTION to Stay filed by Defendant Qualcomm Inc., Defendant Qualcomm Technologies, Inc
Quote: “See Malikie Innovations LTD. et al v. Mara Holdings INC., Case No. 7:25-cv-00222-DC-DTG (W.D. Tex. June 1, 2026).”