Comarco Wireless Systems v. Walgreens: USB Power Patent Case Ends in Voluntary Dismissal
Was möchten Sie als Nächstes tun?
Wählen Sie Ihren Weg entsprechend Ihren aktuellen Bedürfnissen:
📋 Fallzusammenfassung
| Fallbezeichnung | Comarco Wireless Systems, LLC v. Walgreen, Co. |
| Fallnummer | 4:23-cv-01111 (E.D. Texas) |
| Gericht | US-Bezirksgericht für den östlichen Bezirk von Texas |
| Dauer | Dec 2023 – Mar 2024 88 days |
| Ergebnis | Plaintiff Withdrawal — Dismissed with Prejudice |
| Streitige Patente | |
| Beschuldigte Produkte | USB power supply comprising power circuitry to provide DC power to portable electronic devices |
Fallübersicht
Die Parteien
⚖️ Kläger
Patent-holding entity with an established IP portfolio in wireless power and charging technology.
🛡️ Beklagter
National retail pharmacy chain, likely as a distributor or retailer of accused USB power supply products.
Streitige Patente
This case involved three U.S. patents covering DC power delivery technology for portable electronic devices. These patents are registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and are relevant to the USB power supply and charging space.
- • US10855087B1 — directed to USB power supply circuitry
- • US10951042B2 — covering DC power delivery architecture
- • US9413187B2 — foundational patent in the Comarco charging technology portfolio
Designing a new USB power supply product?
Check if your power delivery design might infringe these or related patents before launch.
Das Urteil und die rechtliche Analyse
Ergebnis
Comarco Wireless Systems filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). The dismissal was entered with prejudice, meaning Comarco is permanently barred from re-asserting these same claims against Walgreens on the same patents. No damages were awarded and no injunctive relief was granted.
Wichtige rechtliche Fragen
The case never advanced beyond initial filing, resolving before Walgreens filed an answer or a motion for summary judgment. The “with prejudice” designation, paired with mutual cost-bearing, suggests either a confidential settlement or licensing agreement between the parties, or a strategic reassessment by Comarco of claim viability and litigation costs before formal adversarial proceedings commenced.
Freedom-to-Operate-Analyse (FTO)
This case highlights critical IP risks in USB power supply design. Choose your next step:
📋 Die Auswirkungen dieses Falls verstehen
Informieren Sie sich über die spezifischen Risiken und Auswirkungen dieses Rechtsstreits.
- Alle zugehörigen Patente in diesem Technologiebereich anzeigen
- See which companies are most active in USB power patents
- Muster der Anspruchsauslegung verstehen
🔍 Das Risiko meines Produkts überprüfen
Führen Sie eine umfassende FTO-Analyse für Ihre eigene Technologie oder Ihr eigenes Produkt durch.
- Geben Sie Ihre Produktbeschreibung oder technischen Merkmale ein.
- KI identifiziert potenziell blockierende Patente
- Erhalten Sie einen umsetzbaren Risikobewertungsbericht
Hochrisikogebiet
USB power supply circuitry
150+ Related Patents
In USB charging space
Design-Around-Optionen
Für viele Ansprüche verfügbar
✅ Wichtigste Erkenntnisse
Voluntary dismissal with prejudice under FRCP 41(a)(1) requires no court order if filed before defendant’s answer — a powerful and clean exit mechanism.
Verwandte Rechtsprechung suchen →Eastern District of Texas continues to attract USB technology patent assertions, highlighting its strategic importance for plaintiffs.
Entdecken Sie die Gerichtsanalyse →Häufig gestellte Fragen
Three U.S. patents: US10855087B1, US10951042B2, and US9413187B2 — all directed to USB power supply circuitry providing DC power to portable electronic devices.
Plaintiff Comarco filed a voluntary dismissal under FRCP 41(a)(1) before Walgreens answered. The with-prejudice designation permanently bars Comarco from reasserting these claims against Walgreens, suggesting either a negotiated resolution or strategic withdrawal.
It reinforces the viability of retailer-targeted assertions in this technology space and highlights early-stage resolution as a common outcome when patent holders use litigation as licensing leverage.
Sind Sie bereit, Ihre Patentstrategie zu stärken?
Schließen Sie sich den über 18.000 Fachleuten aus dem Bereich des geistigen Eigentums an, die PatSnap Eureka nutzen, um mit KI-gestützter Präzision Recherchen zum Stand der Technik durchzuführen, Patentanmeldungen zu erstellen und Wettbewerbslandschaften zu analysieren.
Referenzen
- PACER — U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Case 4:23-cv-01111
- US-Patent- und Markenamt – Patentzentrum
- World Intellectual Property Organization — Patents & Technology
- Cornell Legal Information Institute — Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)
- PatSnap – Lösungen für den Umgang mit geistigem Eigentum für Anwaltskanzleien
This article details the Comarco Wireless Systems v. Walgreen Co. case (4:23-cv-01111). All case information is drawn from publicly available court records. For platform capabilities, visit PatSnap.