Expedia, Inc. Patent litigation record

Company 19 cases

19 cases on record naming Expedia, Inc.: 0 as claimant, 19 as respondent. Each row links to that case’s full docket record.

Profile this company in Eureka
Litigation indexPatsnap Litigation Data··Docket source: PACER

19 cases on record

Cases on record
19
As claimant
0
As respondent
19
Patents held
Not recorded
Core tech
Not recorded
Case no.PartiesRoleCourtFiledDurationOutcome
7:26-cv-00053 GeoSymm Ventures, LLC v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant W.D. Tex. 17 Feb 2026 112 d Voluntary dismissal
6:23-cv-00597 Patent Armory, Inc. v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant W.D. Tex. 15 Aug 2023 195 d Voluntary dismissal
6:22-cv-01057 Tron Holdings, LLC v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant W.D. Tex. 7 Oct 2022 24 d Voluntary dismissal
22-1682 Ameranth, Inc. v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 18 Apr 2022 512 d Appeal Dismissed
6:21-cv-00245 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant W.D. Tex. 11 Mar 2021 246 d Voluntary dismissal
2:19-cv-02296 International Business Machines Corporation v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant D. Ariz. 9 Apr 2019 176 d Voluntary dismissal
1:17-cv-01875 International Business Machines Corporation v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant D. Del. 29 Dec 2017 647 d Voluntary dismissal
2016-2528 Cronos Technologies, LLC v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 22 Aug 2016 360 d Closed
2:16-cv-00680 Retrospection Marketing, LLC v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant E.D. Tex. 23 Jun 2016 91 d Likely Settlement
2:16-cv-00095 Global Equity Management (SA) Pty., Ltd. v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant E.D. Tex. 29 Jan 2016 1285 d Likely Settlement
2:16-cv-00099 Global Equity Management (SA) Pty., Ltd. v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant E.D. Tex. 29 Jan 2016 936 d Likely Settlement
2:16-cv-00100 Global Equity Management (SA) Pty., Ltd. v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant E.D. Tex. 29 Jan 2016 936 d Likely Settlement
2:16-cv-00101 Global Equity Management (SA) Pty., Ltd. v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant E.D. Tex. 29 Jan 2016 936 d Likely Settlement
2:16-cv-00102 Global Equity Management (SA) Pty., Ltd. v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant E.D. Tex. 29 Jan 2016 936 d Likely Settlement
6:15-cv-01096 Encoditech, LLC v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 158 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-01791 CryptoPeak Solutions, LLC v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant E.D. Tex. 20 Nov 2015 500 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01457 Vilox Technologies, LLC v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant E.D. Tex. 25 Aug 2015 148 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-00534 uLogin, LLC v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant E.D. Tex. 22 Apr 2015 133 d Likely Settlement
1:13-cv-01538 Cronos Technologies, LLC v. Expedia, Inc. Defendant D. Del. 4 Sep 2013 1079 d Judgment on the Merits
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases naming Expedia, Inc. in the current snapshot. Run this in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

See what Expedia is protecting

Portfolio, claim scope and where its coverage is thin. Every answer cites the records behind it.

Analyse this portfolio
10,000 free credits to start

About this summary. This page summarises the litigation records within the coverage and snapshot dates stated here. Counts describe records in that dataset and do not, by themselves, establish the conduct, litigation success or legal position of any person or organisation.

Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.

No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed. The filing of a claim is not a court finding, and a docket marked “closed” does not by itself establish infringement, validity, settlement or a decision on the merits.

No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.

Third-party names and marks. Party, attorney, judge and company names appear for identification only. Company names may be trademarks of their owners; their appearance does not, by itself, imply affiliation with or endorsement by Patsnap.

Corrections and privacy requests. To report an inaccurate record or attribution, use the “Report an incorrect record” link on this page. For requests concerning your personal information, including, where applicable, the rights to access, rectify, erase, restrict or object to processing, use the “Privacy request” link. We assess requests under applicable law. See our Privacy Policy for details of this processing.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.