PopSockets Has Lost A Major Lawsuit to Quest and The Trademark Trial and Appeals Board Has Revoked PopSockets 031 Accordion Grip Design


PopSockets is trying to appeal the decision but they are not going to prevail.


Here is what the TTAB ordered.

In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby
ORDERED that claims 9–11, 16, and 17 of the ’031 patent are unpatentable;
FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motion to File Under Seal and Enter Proposed Protective Order (Paper 22) and Patent Owner’s Second Motion to File Under Seal (Paper 31) are granted;
FURTHER ORDERED that the proposed Protective Order (Paper 2090) is hereby entered in this proceeding;
FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion to Exclude Evidence under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64© (Paper 40) is dismissed as moot; and
FURTHER ORDERED that because this is a final written decision, parties to the proceeding seeking judicial review of the decision must comply with the notice and service requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 90.2.


Research on Google will also show Molly Hobbs was the original inventor of the PopSockets concept. Barnett likes to take credit as the founder and originator of the concept. If you read what is online and the motions filed with the Quest PopSockets lawsuit, Quest clearly defines the PopSockets fraud and misrepresentations made to the USPTO by Barnett and Kelly Fraser. Barnett and Molly Hobbs had a disagreement and parted ways. Barnett swindled Hobbs to assign the PopSockets patent to him for $5k.


Here are the Quest cases so encase you want to research and read upon on PopSockets.

PopSockets LLC (pla) 1:2018mc00222 PopSockets LLC v. Quest USA Corp. et al| Colorado District Court 12/07/2018 04/02/2019

PopSockets LLC (cd) 1:2017cv03653 PopSockets LLC v. Quest USA Corp. et al New York Eastern District Court 06/16/2017

PopSockets LLC (pla) 1:2017cv03653 PopSockets LLC v. Quest USA Corp. et al| New York Eastern District Court 06/16/2017

PopSockets LLC (pla) 1:2018cv02584 PopSockets LLC v. Quest USA Corp. et al| New York Eastern District Court 05/01/2018

|PopSockets LLC (cd) 1:2018cv02584 PopSockets LLC v. Quest USA Corp. et al| New York Eastern District Court 05/01/2018

PopSockets LLC (pla) 1:2018cv05546 PopSockets LLC v. Quest USA Corp. et al| New York Eastern District Court 10/03/2018

PopSockets LLC (cd) 1:2018cv05546 PopSockets LLC v. Quest USA Corp. et al| New York Eastern District Court 10/03/2018


PopSockets also has another case pending before the Trial Trademark and Appeals Board. The case # is IPR2018-01294. A decision on this case is due by 01-23-2020. Here is an excerpt from the petition filed by Quest.

Quest USA Corp. (“Petitioner”) requests inter partes review (“IPR”) of claims 1–3 and 6 (“the challenged claims”) of U.S. Patent No. 8,560,031 (“the ‘031 patent”) (Ex. 1001) in accordance with 35 U.S.C. §§ 311–319 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 et seq. According to USPTO records, the ‘031 patent is assigned to PopSockets LLC (“Patent Owner”).
The ‘031 patent is at issue in a co-pending litigation captioned as PopSockets LLC v. Quest USA Corp., et al., Case No. 1:17-cv-03653 (E.D.N.Y.) Under the Scheduling Order in that case, Patent Owner served its original infringement contentions on Petitioner on December 8, 2017, the deadline for doing so. Those contentions asserted infringement of only claims 9–11, 16, and 17 against the accused product. On January 15, 2018 Petitioner filed a petition for IPR, Case No. IPR2018-00497, challenging the patentability and requesting cancellation of those claims. On January 31, 2018, Patent Owner served “supplemental” infringement contentions directed at the same product. In those contentions, Patent Owner asserted claims 1–3 and 6 against the same exact accused product. Patent Owner’s unexpected assertion of these additional claims, after the deadline in the Scheduling Order, necessitated the filing of this additional petition to challenge the patentability of those claims.


I remember when we started selling them when they first came out, they contacted us and purchased all of our inventory on Amazon then told us never to sell it again, I increased my inventory to 50 pieces each and they bought it all…


Here is PopSockets and Vorys Lawfirm case information for the complaint I have lodged against PopSockets and Vorys Lawfirm with the Texas Attorney General. Please feel free to share your PopSockets/ Vorys experience and evidence with the Texas AG or any other brand Vorys has harassed or sued you over. There is strength in numbers. Just be sure to reference “complaint number - CGS-214140” in the subject line of your email. You can send all files types: pdfs, photos, jpeg, Word doc ect. You can also go online and supplement the case.

The chief complaints against Vorys and PopSockets are: Violations of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, unfair competition, fraud, deception, malicious prosecution, tortious interference with your Amazon contract, conspiracy, restraining trade, deceptive trade practices, racketeering, defamation per se, fraud upon the court and duress.

complaint number is CGS-214140.
Consumer Protection Division
Office of the Texas Attorney General, Ken Paxton


The complaint filed with the Texas Attorney General will also be filed with the Colorado Attorney General (PopSockets Jurisdiction) and the Ohio Attorney General (Vorys Lawfirm Jurisdiction). Will provide the complaint numbers once they are filed. The Colorado Bar Association, Ohio Bar Association and The American Bar Association are also going to receive the complaints.


May I ask if there has been any movement on this front? :crossed_fingers:


So does that mean any company can produce pop socket like pieces now?


PopSockets just requested that one of my listings be removed for infringing patent number 8,560,031 !!!
I was careful to never use their brand name in my listing or keywords.
Was there an appeal that PopSockets won since last September?


Can you email to {removed email}

(edit by Oneida)


This thread discusses quite a number of interesting patent issues, but I don’t see anything here supporting the statement that the trademark has been invalidated (and actually, I’m not aware of a legal basis for doing so).

Does anyone happen to know the venue and case number for that?


Recent update seems to contradict earlier posts…

BOULDER, Colo., Jan. 15, 2020 /PRNewswire/ – On November 18, 2019, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) denied a bid by Quest USA Corp., maker of SpinPop™, to invalidate PopSockets’ U.S. Patent No. 9,958,107. PopSockets sued Quest in the Eastern District of New York for patent infringement, prompting Quest’s challenge.

This development follows the International Trade Commission’s June 14, 2018 decision to grant PopSockets a General Exclusion Order. The GEO makes it illegal to import into the United States any products that infringe upon PopSockets’ U.S. Patent No. 8,560,031. PopSockets’ GEO remains in full force and effect.

After protracted litigation, Quest agreed to take a license to PopSockets’ patents. The license ends a global dispute in which PopSockets’ asserted intellectual property rights against Quest in several forums across the United States, the United Kingdom, and China.


No, this is the reason PopSockets settled instead of going before the TTAB. The TTAB had already ruled PopSockets had a high likelihood of CB loosing the rest of their 031 patent on 01-2020.


No trademarks have been invalidated. Just parts of PopSockets 031 patent were invalidated last year. The remainder of the 031 patent was set for hearing and trial in 01-2020 before the TTAB. This is the reason PopSockets settled instead of litigating because the TTAB ruled Quest can proceed and there is a high likelihood PopSockets will loose. PopSockets is a giant trademark bully just like Monster Cable, Otterbox and The North Face


any update on this thread, I’m lost so can we sell pop socket or similar products with our own brand?


So, a knock off? A counterfeit?


I guess, I just saw a listing on amazon and its a knock off and has amazons choice approval on it, so i’m lost, not that I’m planning to sell it anyways, just curious.


Your question would be best answered by a reputable IP attorney who can research the case and advise. Quest and PopSockets agreed to a licensing deal in order to settle and dismiss the case.