US7428707B2 Patent litigation record

Patent 20 cases

US7428707B2 has been asserted in 20 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

20 cases on record

Cases on record
20
Asserted by
Lowe's Companies · Adaptive Avenue Associates · Carnition
Asserted against
Adaptive Avenue Associates · Petco Animal Supplies Stores · Michaels Cos. · Hibbett Retail · Opticsplanet · Menard · Living Spaces Furniture · Blick Art Materials · Overstock.com · MySpace · Lenovo (United States) · Dell · Huawei Device USA · MSI Computer · Panasonic Corporation of North America · Midern Computer · Sharp Electronics · Sony Corporation of America · Motion Computing
Courts
W.D.N.C. · W.D. Tex. · E.D. Tex. · N.D. Ill. · D. Del.
Technology
electric digital data processing
Case no.PartiesCourtFiledDurationOutcome
5:25-cv-00176 Lowe's Companies, Inc. v. Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. W.D.N.C. 24 Oct 2025 157 d Dismissed with Prejudice
7:25-cv-00153 Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. v. Petco Animal Supplies Stores, Inc. W.D. Tex. 4 Apr 2025 144 d Dismissed with Prejudice
4:25-cv-00326 Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. v. Petco Animal Supplies Stores, Inc. E.D. Tex. 31 Mar 2025 7 d Voluntary dismissal
4:24-cv-00738 Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. v. Michaels Cos. E.D. Tex. 15 Aug 2024 211 d Dismissed with Prejudice
1:24-cv-00690 Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. v. Hibbett Retail, Inc. N.D. Ill. 26 Jan 2024 140 d Voluntary dismissal
1:23-cv-15974 Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. v. Opticsplanet, Inc. N.D. Ill. 15 Nov 2023 691 d Dismissed with Prejudice
1:23-cv-03167 Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. v. Menard, Inc. N.D. Ill. 19 May 2023 129 d Dismissed with Prejudice
6:23-cv-00333 Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. v. Living Spaces Furniture, LLC W.D. Tex. 8 May 2023 114 d Voluntary dismissal
1:23-cv-02492 Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. v. Blick Art Materials, LLC N.D. Ill. 20 Apr 2023 124 d Dismissed with Prejudice
1:22-cv-00866 Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. v. Overstock.com, Inc. D. Del. 28 Jun 2022 295 d Consent Judgment
1:22-cv-00469 Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. v. MySpace D. Del. 12 Apr 2022 296 d Consent Judgment
2:15-cv-01505 Carnition, LLC v. Lenovo (United States), Inc. E.D. Tex. 8 Sep 2015 86 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01478 Carnition, LLC v. Dell, Inc. E.D. Tex. 3 Sep 2015 91 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01483 Carnition, LLC v. Huawei Device USA, Inc. E.D. Tex. 3 Sep 2015 91 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01489 Carnition, LLC v. MSI Computer, Corp. E.D. Tex. 3 Sep 2015 91 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01491 Carnition, LLC v. Panasonic Corporation of North America E.D. Tex. 3 Sep 2015 91 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01492 Carnition, LLC v. Midern Computer, Inc. E.D. Tex. 3 Sep 2015 91 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01493 Carnition, LLC v. Sharp Electronics Corporation E.D. Tex. 3 Sep 2015 91 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01494 Carnition, LLC v. Sony Corporation of America E.D. Tex. 3 Sep 2015 91 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01495 Carnition, LLC v. Motion Computing, Inc. E.D. Tex. 3 Sep 2015 91 d Likely Settlement
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases asserting US7428707B2 in the current snapshot. Run this in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

How strong is US7428707B2?

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.