Cronos Technologies, LLC v. Expedia, Inc.

2016-2528 Fed. Cir. Closed US5664110A
Get a prior-art report

Other action filed 22 Aug 2016 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and closed 17 Aug 2017, with US5664110A asserted. Recorded basis of termination: .

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Patent involved
US5664110A
Application no.
US08/351795
Case no.
2016-2528
Verdict cause
Other action
Court
Fed. Cir.
Court level
Court of Appeals
Case region
District of Columbia
Judge
None recorded
Trial level
Appeal
Filed – Closed
22 Aug 2016 – 17 Aug 2017
Duration
360 days
Basis of termination
None recorded
Products & marks
www.expedia.com - Operation of website (Remote ordering terminal, associated with order processing system)
Validity challenges
4 on record
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 2016-2528, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Open this record in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

Check this patent against your own product

Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.

Get an FTO claim chart
10,000 free credits to start
Patent at issue
US5664110A Inactive App. US08/351795

Remote ordering system

CRONOS TECHNOLOGIES, LLC

A remote ordering system provides a user the ability to build and edit one or more order lists, resident in memory within a user device, and the further ability to review and manipulate a user interpretable display of the contents of such lists. A system comprising merchant stock databases, a data format/transfer computer (DFTC), and display/processor units (DPUs) (the user devices) enable creation and transmission of the order lists. Coded data read into each DPU identifies items to be added to the order lists. A DPU database contains user-discernable item information stored according to the associated coded data and is capable of learning new or updating old item information when in communication with the merchant database. Item information can be automatically or manually deleted to free DPU memory.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
2 Sep 1997
Est. expiry
8 Dec 2014
Validity challenges
4 on recordCBM2014-00082 · filed by Travelocity.com LPCBM2013-00048 · Other · filed by eBay, Inc.90013591 · EPR · filed by CHRISTOPHER J. ROURKCBM2015-00047 · Other · filed by Travelocity.com LP
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
G06Q10/00G06Q10/08G06Q30/06
Prosecution counsel
CAPITAL LEGAL GROUP, PLLC
US5664110A patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1 · US5664110A, from the published patent document
US5664110A patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2 · US5664110A, from the published patent document
Get a novelty search report in Eureka
Source: Patsnap patent data + case record. Bibliographic fields and drawings reproduced from the published patent document. Break down the claims
Parties & counsel

Parties of record

Counsel of record

AttorneyForRole
Brian David LedahlCronos Technologies, LLCPlaintiff
John Martin JacksonExpedia, Inc.Defendant
Source: case record + Patsnap company data. Attorney names appear as recorded in the docket. Compare both portfolios
Outcome

Basis of termination

From the record · verbatim

Case 2016-2528 · Fed. Cir. · closed 17 August 2017
Source: case record, verbatim. The quoted paragraph is the basis-of-termination text as filed.

Related cases

Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.

Who else has this plaintiff sued? Every case naming Cronos Technologies, with the patent, court and outcome for each Could my product read on this patent? Claim-by-claim comparison against your own design What else is litigated in this field? The dispute map for business, commerce & admin data processing
FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 2016-2528?

2016-2528 is a patent other action brought by Cronos Technologies, LLC against Expedia, Inc., filed on 22 Aug 2016 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The case closed on 17 August 2017.

Which patent was asserted in 2016-2528?

US5664110A (“Remote ordering system”), assigned to CRONOS TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, currently inactive. The record also lists www.expedia.com - Operation of website (Remote ordering terminal, associated with order processing system).

How long did case 2016-2528 take?

360 calendar days, from filing on 22 Aug 2016 to closure on 17 August 2017.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2016-2528?

Brian David Ledahl is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Cronos Technologies. John Martin Jackson appears for defendant Expedia.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 2016-2528 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question
Next step

Go further with this record

Read how the method works, run it on your own product, then size the next step.

  • 01 / How-toUsing patent search for competitive intelligenceRead a rival's filings to see where its products are going.GuideRead
  • 02 / AI agentFTO ReportCheck whether your own product could read on these claims.Patsnap EurekaRun it
  • 03 / Free toolAI prior art searchDescribe an idea, get the closest patents.AI resultTry tool

More next stepsHow to run a freedom-to-operate analysis

Browse related dockets
Cases in Fed. Cir. Cases on business, commerce & admin data processing All patent litigation records

General information only. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2016-2528 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such. It does not create an attorney-client relationship.

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.

Patent figures. Any patent drawings shown are reproduced from the identified patent publications to illustrate the cited documents, and do not establish the scope, validity or enforceability of any patent.

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.