Infringement action filed 21 Jul 2020 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey and closed 25 Aug 2023, with US9652993B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case terminated.
A system and method is disclosed for providing differentiated content to a user comprising determining a skill level of the user, obtaining unmodified content, aligning the unmodified content to a set of content standards, modifying the aligned content in accordance with the user's skill level, providing the modified aligned content to the user, re-assessing the user's skill level based on a response from the user to the modified aligned content, and modifying new aligned content in accordance with the re-assessed user's skill level.
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
"TEXT ORDER that on a review of the docket, the Court notes that the parties have sought and obtained a series of extensions of time for briefing and for discovery in this matter. (See ECF Nos. 28 , 51 , 70 , 83 , 123 , 128 , 129 , 131 , 132 , 133 , 134 ). Based on these extensions and the Courts inherent authority to manage its docket, it finds good cause to instruct the Clerks Office to ADMINISTRATIVELY TERMINATE this matter without prejudice to the parties right to seek its re-opening upon letterapplication to the Magistrate Judge. So Ordered by Judge Zahid N. Quraishi on 8/25/2023."
Case 3:20-cv-09211 · D.N.J. · closed 25 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.
3:20-cv-09211 is a patent infringement action brought by AC Holdco, Inc. against BEABLE EDUCATION, Inc., filed on 21 Jul 2020 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The case closed on 25 August 2023.
Which patent was asserted in 3:20-cv-09211?
US9652993B2 (“Method and apparatus for providing differentiated content based on skill level”), assigned to ACHIEVE3000, INC., currently inactive. The record also lists BeableIQ Engine” (the “Beable Life-Ready Literacy System” or “System”).
How was case 3:20-cv-09211 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is case terminated. The termination text reads: "TEXT ORDER that on a review of the docket, the Court notes that the parties have sought and obtained a series of extensions of time for briefing and for discovery in this matter. (See ECF Nos. 28 , 51 , 70 , 83 , 123 , 128 , 129 , 131 , 132 , 133 , 134 ). Based on these extensions and the Courts inherent authority to manage its docket, it finds good cause to instruct the Clerks Office to ADMINISTRATIVELY TERMINATE this matter without prejudice to the parties right to seek its re-opening upon letterapplication to the Magistrate Judge. So Ordered by Judge Zahid N. Quraishi on 8/25/2023."
What does dismissal without prejudice mean?
A dismissal without prejudice ends this action but leaves the claims alive — the plaintiff may file them again later, subject to the limitation period.
How long did case 3:20-cv-09211 take?
1130 calendar days, from filing on 21 Jul 2020 to closure on 25 August 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 3:20-cv-09211?
Henry A. Gabathuler, John A. Boyle and Kevin Harry Marino are recorded as counsel for plaintiff AC Holdco. Christine Intromasso Gannon, Liza M. Walsh, Richard C. Yeskoo and William T. Walsh appear for defendant BEABLE EDUCATION.
Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 3:20-cv-09211 and do not constitute legal advice.Ask your own question
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 3:20-cv-09211 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.
