Judge Connolly Rises in Rankings as IP Edge Reboots After Scrutiny in His Court

Eastern District of Texas Judge Rodney Gilstrap was once again the nation’s top patent judge last quarter, overseeing 19% of all new patent litigation in Q1 2026.

In second place at 6% was Delaware District Judge Colm F. Connolly, who is well known for the broad disclosure rules that apply in his courtroom through two standing orders in place since April 2022: one requiring comprehensive corporate disclosure of certain parties and the other requiring disclosure of certain third-party litigation funding (TPLF), akin to what local rules in the District of New Jersey impose districtwide.

Judge Connolly’s standing order on corporate disclosures has shone a light on the individuals and entities behind some formerly opaque monetization outfits—perhaps most notoriously IP Edge LLC. That Texas-based monetization firm was once the top plaintiff, at least by volume, for years through the activity of numerous associated plaintiffs—until Judge Connolly’s scrutiny of the firm, based on its apparent noncompliance with this standing order, laid bare the inner workings of its “main” monetization model. Under that model, individuals with little to no prior experience with patent monetization would be selected to become “passive investors” in LLCs to which patent assets would be assigned. Many of those LLCs would then file suit against defendants in federal courts around the country, litigation run through a “consulting” arm of IP Edge, MAVEXAR LLC, itself run by IP Edge’s three principals.

IP Edge halted this aspect of its business in late 2022 as that scrutiny intensified, with Judge Connolly’s investigation ultimately leading him to suggest that this this “main” model may have involved fraud perpetrated on the USPTO and attorney actions incompatible with applicable rules of professional conduct. He both referred the situation to the US Department of Justice and the USPTO for further investigation and referred certain attorneys before him to state regulatory bodies for potential disciplinary proceedings. This left only the activity of a smaller number of IP Edge plaintiffs managed directly by IP Edge’s principals, with filing levels far below those at the firm’s peak.

Recently, though, IP Edge’s main monetization model began rumbling back to life. Intellectros LLC, an IP Edge-linked plaintiff, has begun a litigation campaign over former MediaTek patents, with Deere & Company, Fortinet, and Palo Alto Networks involved to date. Then, this past February, two Texas entities were formed under the “management” of two individuals behind numerous plaintiffs that once filed litigation under IP Edge’s main model: Althearidge LLC and Kreatosphere LLC. Both entities have received patent assets (from other IP Edge-linked entities) and appear poised to litigate them. Further coverage of those developments can be found here.

That said, while the entity formation patterns here may be familiar, the resulting cases may follow a different playbook—one focused less on quick settlements and more on substantive litigation. In a Bloomberg interview published on April 14, IP Edge principal and cofounder Gautham Bodepudi revealed that as Judge Connolly’s investigations proceeded, the firm began transitioning to a business strategy focused on the use of litigation funding with insurance policies provided as collateral: Per Bloomberg, “Bodepudi said the company is currently facilitating more than $40 million in patent financing and within the past year has structured more than $120 million in insurance-backed funding opportunities. He said the company is in 10 to 15 cases”. Bodepudi also stated that IP Edge “work[s] with private equity firms, private credit, and family offices looking for uncorrelated assets” rather than dedicated funders.

Bloomberg additionally reports that IP Edge has been involved in litigation from certain other plaintiffs—litigation that has proceeded much further than in its earlier file-and-settle days. For instance, Bodepudi stated in March that IP Edge facilitated the litigation of Secure Wi-Fi LLC against Samsung, characterizing its involvement as “the journey of a half a billion dollar patent case to trial” (the case settled shortly before trial). In January, RPX reported on the existence of a relationship between Secure Wi-Fi and the IP Edge entity from which it acquired its patents. As also reported by RPX, and as mentioned in the Bloomberg piece, IP Edge also has a relationship with plaintiff Lower48 IP, LLC.