13 unchanged sentences
Three of the patents were found unpatentable in reexamination.
−Removed: EcoFactor appealed the decision with respect to one of the patents to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on July 9, 2024, EcoFactor filed a pending request for rehearing in the U.S.
−Removed: Patent Trial and Appeal Board, or PTAB, with respect to a second patent on March 28, 2025, and EcoFactor appealed the rejection of the third patent to the PTAB, filing its appeal brief on June 10, 2024.
+Added: EcoFactor appealed the decision with respect to one of the patents to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on July 9, 2024, EcoFactor has until October 3, 2025 to appeal the rejection of the second patent to the Federal Circuit, and EcoFactor appealed the rejection of the third patent to the U.S.
+Added: Patent Trial and Appeal Board, or PTAB, filing its appeal brief on June 10, 2024.
Ex parte reexamination of a fourth patent concluded on August 23, 2023 after the claims were amended.
19 unchanged sentences
Causam did not appeal the ITC decision with respect to Alarm.com and EnergyHub.
+Added: Oral arguments on the appeal are scheduled for September 3, 2025.
Should Causam prevail in its district court lawsuit we could be required to pay damages and/or a reasonable royalty for sales of our solution, we could be enjoined from making, using and selling our solution if a license or other right to continue selling such elements is not made available to us, and we could be required to pay ongoing royalties and comply with unfavorable terms if such a license is made available to us.
While we believe we have valid defenses to Causam’s claims, the outcome of these legal claims cannot be predicted with certainty, and any of these outcomes could result in an adverse effect on our business.
+Added: On July 3, 2025, SkyBell Technologies, Inc., or SkyBell, filed a lawsuit against us in U.S.
+Added: District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, alleging that Alarm.com misappropriated SkyBell’s trade secrets relating to video doorbells.
+Added: SkyBell is seeking injunctive relief, enhanced damages, attorneys’ fees, a constructive trust, and an order that Alarm.com assign to SkyBell the alleged trade secrets.
+Added: We have not yet responded to the complaint.
+Added: Should SkyBell prevail in its lawsuit, we could be required to pay damages and/or a reasonable royalty for sales of our solution, we could be enjoined from making, using and selling our solution if a license or other right to continue selling such elements is not made available to us, we could be required to pay ongoing royalties and comply with unfavorable terms if such a license is made available to us, and we could be required to assign, transfer, and return any SkyBell trade secret that we are found to improperly possess.
+Added: While we believe we have valid defenses to SkyBell’s claims, the outcome of these legal claims cannot be predicted with certainty, and any of these outcomes could result in an adverse effect on our business.
In addition to the matters described above, we may be required to provide indemnification to certain of our service provider partners for certain claims regarding our solutions.
3 unchanged sentences
District Court, Northern District of Oklahoma, alleging infringement of two U.S.
−Removed: The case was stayed by agreement of the parties for several years while the patents in suit were challenged before the PTAB.
+Added: The case was stayed by agreement of the parties for several years while the patents in
+Added: suit were challenged before the PTAB.
In January 2021, the PTAB deemed 42 out of 46 claims of the two asserted patents unpatentable.
3 unchanged sentences
The case is currently in the discovery phase.
−Removed: The court held a claim construction hearing on December 12, 2024, but has not yet rendered a claim construction opinion.
+Added: The court held a claim construction hearing on December 12, 2024, and rendered a claim construction opinion on May 20, 2025.
A hearing on dispositive motions, including for summary judgment, is scheduled for April 15, 2026.
8 unchanged sentences
Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.