CA Technologies Sues AppDynamics Over IT PatentsChristie Smythe
CA Technologies, a maker of software for managing information technology, filed a patent infringement suit against AppDynamics Inc., a company started by a former CA Inc. employee.
AppDynamics’ founder, Jyoti Bansal, previously worked at CA on developing products related to the three IT patents, Islandia, New York-based CA said in a complaint made public today in Central Islip, New York, federal court.
AppDynamics, a San Francisco-based provider of application performance-management software for the entertainment, retail and gambling industries, has “actual knowledge of the patents-in-suit and hasn’t ceased its infringing activities,” CA said in its complaint.
CA, the world’s sixth-largest maker of infrastructure software by market share, acquired the patents when it bought Wily Technology in 2006 for $375 million, according to the company. Bansal formerly “led the design and architecture for several products” at Wily and founded AppDynamics in 2008, according to the San Francisco company’s website.
In November, CA sued San Francisco-based New Relic Inc., also asserting that it had infringed patents obtained through the acquisition of Wily. New Relic was founded by Lewis Cirne, formerly a senior Wily executive, according to CA. That suit is pending.
Greg Howard, a spokesman for AppDynamics, said in an e-mail that the company hasn’t received the official paperwork.
“We do strongly believe” AppDynamics doesn’t infringe upon any protected intellectual property, he said.
“We encourage our competitors to compete in the marketplace on the basis of their technology and not engage in frivolous lawsuits,” he said.
CA spokeswoman Jennifer L. Hallahan said in an e-mail today that the company is a “recognized leader” in the application performance-management market and has invested heavily in development.
“We are committed to taking the steps necessary to protect our intellectual property and our investment,” she said. “We are unwilling to allow others to infringe on our patents in order to introduce competing offerings.”
The case is CA Inc. v. AppDynamics Inc., 2:13-cv-2111, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York (Central Islip).