US6839731B2 Patent litigation record

Patent 18 cases

US6839731B2 has been asserted in 18 cases on record. Each row links to that case’s full docket record.

Analyse this patent in Eureka
Litigation indexPatsnap Litigation Data··Docket source: PACER

18 cases on record

Cases on record
18
Asserted by
Banertek · Red Anvil · Olivistar
Asserted against
Ecobee · ABB · Emerson Electric · Endress + Hauser · Pepperl Fuchs North America · Smar International · Grindr · MeetMe · Motion Computing · Facebook · Smartlabs · Toshiba America · Lowe's Companies · Technical Consumer Products · Lennox Industries · The Chamberlain Group · American Traffic Solutions · Global Media Group
Courts
D. Mass. · D. Del. · E.D. Tex. · N.D. Cal.
Technology
digital information transmission · pictorial communication (video/tv) and digital information transmission · digital information transmission and electric digital data processing
Case no.PartiesCourtFiledDurationOutcome
1:17-cv-12276 Banertek, LLC v. Ecobee, Inc D. Mass. 17 Nov 2017 80 d Voluntary dismissal
1:17-cv-01460 Banertek, LLC v. ABB, Ltd. D. Del. 17 Oct 2017 332 d Likely Settlement
2:17-cv-00243 Banertek, LLC v. Emerson Electric, Co. E.D. Tex. 30 Mar 2017 146 d Other
2:17-cv-00244 Banertek, LLC v. Endress + Hauser, Inc E.D. Tex. 30 Mar 2017 172 d Likely Settlement
2:17-cv-00245 Banertek, LLC v. Pepperl Fuchs North America E.D. Tex. 30 Mar 2017 118 d Procedural Outcome
2:17-cv-00247 Banertek, LLC v. Smar International Corporation E.D. Tex. 30 Mar 2017 68 d Voluntary dismissal
2:16-cv-00837 Banertek, LLC v. Grindr, LLC E.D. Tex. 2 Aug 2016 72 d Voluntary dismissal
2:16-cv-00838 Banertek, LLC v. MeetMe, Inc. E.D. Tex. 2 Aug 2016 244 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-00994 Red Anvil, LLC v. Motion Computing, Inc. E.D. Tex. 5 Jun 2015 164 d Likely Settlement
4:15-cv-01718 Olivistar, LLC v. Facebook, Inc. N.D. Cal. 16 Apr 2015 48 d Likely Settlement
2:14-cv-00619 Olivistar, LLC v. Smartlabs, Inc. E.D. Tex. 12 May 2014 396 d Other
2:14-cv-00555 Olivistar, LLC v. Toshiba America, Inc. E.D. Tex. 25 Apr 2014 360 d Likely Settlement
2:14-cv-00514 Olivistar, LLC v. Lowe's Companies, Inc. E.D. Tex. 24 Apr 2014 330 d Likely Settlement
2:14-cv-00526 Olivistar, LLC v. Technical Consumer Products, Inc. E.D. Tex. 24 Apr 2014 302 d Likely Settlement
2:14-cv-00531 Olivistar, LLC v. Lennox Industries, Inc. E.D. Tex. 24 Apr 2014 334 d Likely Settlement
2:14-cv-00391 Olivistar, LLC v. The Chamberlain Group, Inc. E.D. Tex. 23 Apr 2014 303 d Likely Settlement
2:14-cv-00338 Olivistar, LLC v. American Traffic Solutions, Inc. E.D. Tex. 14 Apr 2014 371 d Likely Settlement
2:14-cv-00342 Olivistar, LLC v. Global Media Group, LLC E.D. Tex. 14 Apr 2014 291 d Likely Settlement
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases asserting US6839731B2 in the current snapshot. Run this in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

How strong is US6839731B2?

Closest prior art, compared claim by claim, with every reference rated for how hard it hits.

Run a novelty search
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.