Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
1 Group v. Stove Guard International et al. | Patent Lawsuit 1:22-cv-02174

1 Group LLC v. Stove Guard International, Ltd. et al.

1:22-cv-02174 N.D. Ohio Closed 3 patents
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 4 Dec 2022 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio and closed 15 Aug 2023, with 3 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case settled.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Case no.
1:22-cv-02174
Verdict cause
Infringement action
Court
N.D. Ohio
Court level
District Court
Case region
Ohio
Trial level
First instance
Filed – Closed
4 Dec 2022 – 15 Aug 2023
Duration
254 days
Basis of termination
Case Settled
Products & marks
Interior corner joint simulating grout line for wall boards simulating tiles embedded in grout · Method and apparatus for positioning a patient for radiation therapy · Stove top cover
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 1:22-cv-02174, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. 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
US6254561B1 Inactive App. US09/365881

Method and apparatus for positioning a patient for radiation therapy

The method and apparatus for positioning a patient for radiation therapy includes a stabilization bar placed between the legs and secured to the legs of a patient to hold the legs in the frogleg position. The frogleg position is attained by positioning the patient in the supine position, then drawing the feet of the patient up as much as possible. The patient then abducts their thighs. The feet of the patient are then strapped together and the stabilization bar positioned between the patient’s legs.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
3 Jul 2001
Est. expiry
3 Aug 2019
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
A61N5/10
Examiner
BROWN, MICHAEL A.
US5444953A Inactive App. US07/742977

Interior corner joint simulating grout line for wall boards simulating tiles embedded in grout

An interior corner joint for joining wall board panels, particularly wall board panels simulating tiles embedded in grout, in a corner. The interior corner joint comprises a first base section; a second base section extending upwardly from said first base section and being perpendicular to said first base section; a rib extending upwardly from said first base section disposed adjacent to said second base section and canted toward said second base section, said rib, second base section, and first base section defining a channel adapted to receive a first wall board panel; and a flange at the distal end of said rib extending outwardly from said rib and inclined toward said first base section, said rib, flange and first base section defining a second channel adapted to receive a second wall board panel in substantially perpendicular relationship to said first wall board panel. With the two wall board panels inserted into the two channels the only exposed part of the joint is the flange. The flange can be provided with a concave outer surface to simulate a corner grout line.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
29 Aug 1995
Est. expiry
29 Aug 2012
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
E04F19/02E04F13/18
Prosecution counsel
MASCO CORPORATION
Examiner
FRIEDMAN, CARL D.

Also asserted in this case

1 more

The docket lists 3 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining asserted patent are one query away 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

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

“On August 14, 2023, a Notice of Settlement (Doc. No. 16) was filed by Plaintiff notifying the Court that the parties have reached a settlement. In light of the parties’ representation that the matter has settled, the docket shall be marked “dismissed without prejudice.” On or before September 13, 2023, the parties shall submit a proposed and executed Stipulation and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice, which, if approved, shall supersede this Order. The Case Management Conference set for August 15, 2023, is cancelled.”

Case 1:22-cv-02174 · N.D. Ohio · closed 15 August 2023
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.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 1:22-cv-02174?

1:22-cv-02174 is a patent infringement action brought by 1 Group LLC against Stove Guard International, Ltd., filed on 4 Dec 2022 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The case closed on 15 August 2023.

Which patents were asserted in 1:22-cv-02174?

US6254561B1 (“Method and apparatus for positioning a patient for radiation therapy”), assigned to DIVERSIFIED MARKETING ASSOCIATES, INC., currently inactive; US5444953A (“Interior corner joint simulating grout line for wall boards simulating tiles embedded in grout”), assigned to CARESTREAM HEALTH, INC., currently inactive; US11359821B2 (“Stove top cover”), assigned to MCCARTHY, MATTHEW. The record also lists Interior corner joint simulating grout line for wall boards simulating tiles embedded in grout, Method and apparatus for positioning a patient for radiation therapy and Stove top cover.

How was case 1:22-cv-02174 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is case settled. The termination text reads: “On August 14, 2023, a Notice of Settlement (Doc. No. 16) was filed by Plaintiff notifying the Court that the parties have reached a settlement. In light of the parties’ representation that the matter has settled, the docket shall be marked “dismissed without prejudice.” On or before September 13, 2023, the parties shall submit a proposed and executed Stipulation and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice, which, if approved, shall supersede this Order. The Case Management Conference set for August 15, 2023, is cancelled.”

What does dismissal with prejudice mean?

A dismissal with prejudice permanently ends the claims that were filed, so the same claims cannot be brought again against that defendant. It is the usual form when the parties have settled.

How long did case 1:22-cv-02174 take?

254 calendar days, from filing on 4 Dec 2022 to closure on 15 August 2023.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:22-cv-02174?

Chief Judge Bridget Meehan Brennan presided. John D. Gugliotta and William W. Carrier III are recorded as counsel for plaintiff 1 Group. R. Eric Gaum appears for defendant Stove Guard International.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 1:22-cv-02174 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:22-cv-02174 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.

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.

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.

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.