Transaction Secure, LLC v. GitHub, Inc.

5:19-cv-04050 N.D. Cal. Closed US8738921B2
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 15 Jul 2019 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California and closed 25 Oct 2019, with US8738921B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: voluntary dismissal.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Patent involved
US8738921B2
Application no.
US11/944358
Case no.
5:19-cv-04050
Verdict cause
Infringement action
Court
N.D. Cal.
Court level
District Court
Case region
California
Judge
Edward J. Davila
Trial level
First instance
Filed – Closed
15 Jul 2019 – 25 Oct 2019
Duration
102 days
Basis of termination
Voluntary dismissal
Products & marks
https://membrane-soa.org/serviceproxy-doc/4.4/oauth2-github.htm and similar websites - System for authenticating a person’s identity
Validity challenges
1 on record
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 5:19-cv-04050, United States District Court for the Northern District of California. 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
US8738921B2 Active App. US11/944358

System and method for authenticating a person's identity using a trusted entity

VERIZON PATENT AND LICENSING INC.

A system and method are provided for authenticating a person's identity to a business using a trusted entity with a secure repository to store and protect the person's identity information. The person accesses their account on the trusted entity's server using a user name and a password. Then, the trusted entity grants the person a unique code so the person can authenticate their identity to the business. The person delivers the unique code to the transactional entity. The business makes a request to verify the unique code with the trusted entity. The trusted entity verifies the unique code, which authenticates the person's identity to the business.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Active
Granted
27 May 2014
Earliest priority
16 May 2006
Est. expiry
2 Nov 2030
Validity challenges
1 on recordIPR2020-00321 · filed by Unified Patents, LLC
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
G06F21/00G06F12/14H04L9/32H04L29/06G06F7/04G06F21/31
Prosecution counsel
VERIZON
US8738921B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1 · US8738921B2, from the published patent document
US8738921B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2 · US8738921B2, 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
Coleman Washington WatsonTransaction Secure, LLCPlaintiff
Jared BobrowGitHub, 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 5:19-cv-04050 · N.D. Cal. · closed 25 October 2019
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 Transaction Secure, 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 electric digital data processing
FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 5:19-cv-04050?

5:19-cv-04050 is a patent infringement action brought by Transaction Secure, LLC against GitHub, Inc., filed on 15 Jul 2019 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The case closed on 25 October 2019.

Which patent was asserted in 5:19-cv-04050?

US8738921B2 (“System and method for authenticating a person's identity using a trusted entity”), assigned to VERIZON PATENT AND LICENSING INC., currently active. The record also lists https://membrane-soa.org/serviceproxy-doc/4.4/oauth2-github.htm and similar websites - System for authenticating a person’s identity.

What does voluntary dismissal mean?

A voluntary dismissal is one the plaintiff asks for rather than one the court imposes. Where both sides stipulate to it, it commonly signals a settlement that is not filed on the public docket.

How long did case 5:19-cv-04050 take?

102 calendar days, from filing on 15 Jul 2019 to closure on 25 October 2019.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 5:19-cv-04050?

Judge Edward J. Davila presided. Coleman Washington Watson is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Transaction Secure. Jared Bobrow appears for defendant GitHub.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 5:19-cv-04050 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 N.D. Cal. Cases on electric digital data processing All patent litigation records

General information only. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 5:19-cv-04050 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.