Ruby Sands, LLC Patent litigation record

Company 28 cases

28 cases on record naming Ruby Sands, LLC: 28 as claimant, 0 as respondent. Each row links to that case’s full docket record.

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

28 cases on record

Cases on record
28
As claimant
28
As respondent
0
Patents held
Not recorded
Core tech
Not recorded
Case no.PartiesRoleCourtFiledDurationOutcome
2:17-cv-00002 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Southwest Bank Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 2 Jan 2017 115 d Likely Settlement
2:17-cv-00003 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Texas Trust Credit Union Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 2 Jan 2017 115 d Likely Settlement
2:16-cv-01304 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Amarillo National Bank Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 24 Nov 2016 21 d Voluntary dismissal
2:16-cv-01305 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Cadence Bank, N.A. Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 24 Nov 2016 203 d Voluntary dismissal
2:16-cv-01306 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Falcon International Bank Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 24 Nov 2016 21 d Likely Settlement
2:16-cv-01307 Ruby Sands, LLC v. First Financial Bank, N.A. Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 24 Nov 2016 98 d Voluntary dismissal
2:16-cv-01308 Ruby Sands, LLC v. First National Bank Southwest Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 24 Nov 2016 154 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01935 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Ally Bank Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 102 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-01936 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Amegy Bank, N.A. Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 212 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01955 Ruby Sands, LLC v. American National Bank of Texas Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 283 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01957 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Bank of Internet USA Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 120 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-01959 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Bank of Texas Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 234 d Other
2:15-cv-01961 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Cathay Bank Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 235 d Judgment on the Merits
2:15-cv-01963 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Charles Schwab Corporation Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 172 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-01965 Ruby Sands, LLC v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 2 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-01966 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Citizens National Bank Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 283 d Other
2:15-cv-01968 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Comerica Bank Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 270 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01971 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Commercial Bank of Texas, N.A. Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 212 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01975 Ruby Sands, LLC v. CommunityBank of Texas, N.A. Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 171 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-01976 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Extraco Banks, National Association Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 171 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-01985 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Fidelity Investments Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 366 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-01987 Ruby Sands, LLC v. First National Bank of Texas Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 102 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-02007 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Independent Bank Group, Inc. Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 133 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-02015 Ruby Sands, LLC v. NetSpend Corporation Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 133 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-02016 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Plains Capital Bank Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 133 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-02020 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Patriot Bank Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 171 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-02023 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Texas Capital Bank, N.A. Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 133 d Voluntary dismissal
2:15-cv-02026 Ruby Sands, LLC v. Woodforest Bank Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 86 d Likely Settlement
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases naming Ruby Sands, LLC in the current snapshot. Run this in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

See what Ruby Sands 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.