Muvox LLC sued BMG for alleged patent infringement back in August 2024.
Nearly two years later, the company still appears not to have served BMG with that lawsuit.
Now, a federal judge has given Muvox 14 days to serve the defendant – or watch the case get dismissed.
In an order issued on Tuesday (June 2), which you can read here, Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas noted that Muvox “does not represent that it has served” BMG Rights Management GmbH.
The order, filed in the court’s Marshall division, states that “90 days have passed since filing and that Defendant has not been served”.
Under Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a court “must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time” if a defendant is not served within 90 days of a complaint being filed.
“If none of these actions are taken, the Court will dismiss the case pursuant to Rule 4(m) after fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order.”
Rodney Gilstrap, US District Judge
Gilstrap wrote that the court was issuing the order “sua sponte” – meaning on its own initiative, without a request from either side.
The judge has ordered Muvox to do one of three things within 14 days: file a notice that BMG has already been served; serve BMG and file a notice confirming it; or file a notice dismissing the case.
“If none of these actions are taken, the Court will dismiss the case pursuant to Rule 4(m) after fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order,” the order states.
Muvox‘s lawsuit, first covered by MBW in September 2024, centers on a patent titled Music streaming, playlist creation and streaming architecture.
According to the complaint, the patent describes “a method for selecting a song” based on other songs with similar “moods”. Patent-litigation resource RPX, which first reported the suit, said it targets the song-recommendation features of BMG’s Synch service.
In its filing, Muvox described BMG Synch as “a digital platform that allows clients to license music for synchronization purposes”.
An accompanying exhibit referred to the BMG Synch service as “the accused instrumentality”.
The patent cited in the suit was assigned to a company called Aperture Investments, LLC, and listed Jacquelyn Fuzell-Casey as an inventor.
It was filed in January 2023 and granted in February 2024.
Any dismissal would be “without prejudice”, according to the order, which would leave Muvox free to refile the claim.
Muvox filed a separate suit against IBM in the same Texas court on August 21, 2024, accusing the technology firm of infringing the same patent via its Watson AI platform.
BMG is not the first music company to face a patent claim of this kind.
In 2022, Warner Music Group and Universal Music Group were sued by Texas-based Blue Spike LLC over four patents related to “encoding and distributing digital content”, in cases tied to their partnership with hi-res audio firm MQA Ltd.Music Business Worldwide
In August 2024, Muvox LLC initiated a lawsuit against BMG Rights Management GmbH, claiming patent infringement related to a specific technology for music streaming and playlist creation. Nearly two years later, the case has not progressed because Muvox has failed to serve BMG with the lawsuit, prompting the federal court to intervene. On June 2, 2026, Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued an order requiring Muvox to serve BMG within 14 days or face dismissal of the case.
The court highlighted that Muvox had not indicated that BMG had been served, and noted that 90 days had elapsed since the filing of the complaint without any service being completed. Under Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, if a defendant is not served within 90 days, the court is obligated to dismiss the action against that defendant unless specific conditions are met. Judge Gilstrap’s order was made without a request from either party, indicating the court’s proactive approach to managing its docket.
Muvox must take one of three actions within the given timeframe: file a notice confirming that BMG has been served, serve BMG and file a notice of that service, or voluntarily dismiss the case. If Muvox fails to take any of these actions, the court will dismiss the case without prejudice, meaning Muvox would retain the option to refile the lawsuit in the future.
The patent at the center of this legal dispute is related to a method for song selection based on similar moods, which Muvox claims is being infringed upon by the song-recommendation features of BMG’s Synch service. This service is described as a digital platform that facilitates music licensing for synchronization purposes, and it has been referred to in the lawsuit as the “accused instrumentality.” The patent, which is assigned to Aperture Investments, LLC, was filed in January 2023 and granted in February 2024, with Jacquelyn Fuzell-Casey listed as the inventor.
Muvox’s legal actions are part of a broader trend in the music industry, where companies have increasingly faced patent infringement claims regarding technology related to music distribution and streaming. For instance, in 2022, both Warner Music Group and Universal Music Group were sued by Blue Spike LLC over patents concerning the encoding and distribution of digital content, specifically in relation to their collaboration with the high-resolution audio company MQA Ltd.
As the situation stands, Muvox has a crucial two-week window to either confirm service of the lawsuit on BMG or risk having the case dismissed entirely. This legal battle highlights the ongoing complexities of patent law within the rapidly evolving digital music landscape and underscores the importance of timely legal proceedings in patent infringement cases.
