Alto Dynamics, LLC v. Wayfair, Inc.
Infringement action filed 15 Jun 2023 in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts and closed 18 Sep 2023, with 9 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: voluntary dismissal.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US6662190B2US7392160B2USRE46513E1US6604100B1US7152018B2US7657531B2US6757662B1US8051098B2US6691103B1
- Case no.
- 1:23-cv-11351
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- D. Mass.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Massachusetts
- Chief judge
- Nathaniel M. Gorton
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 15 Jun 2023 – 18 Sep 2023
- Duration
- 95 days
- Basis of termination
- Voluntary dismissal
- Products & marks
- Learning automatic data extraction system · Method and system for display advertisement qualification and notification · Method for converting relational data into a structured document · Method for searching a database, search engine system for searching a database, and method of providing a key table for use by a search engine for a database · System and method for monitoring usage patterns · Systems and methods for state-less authentication
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- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Learning automatic data extraction system
An improvement to an automatic data extractor has the capability of discovering new values that are not recognized by the vocabulary of the automatic data extractor and adding them to the record being formed and to the vocabulary, thus accumulating new vocabulary through use. The extractor gleans new values by deducing them from the structure of the text data and learns them by adding them to its vocabulary. The data extractor determines the structure of the data in much the same way as prior art data extractors but then a discovery process is used to identify a series of field lists using preferably at least one field parser and a field grader. The results of the grader are returned to an attribute mapper that identifies the position in the field list for each of the attributes. The content of each field, if not already added to the record and associated with the correct attribute using the recognizer, can now be associated by its position in the field list with an attribute and written to the record as the value for that attribute. Furthermore, a learner assigns that field to the vocabulary list if not already present in the vocabulary.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 9 Dec 2003
- Est. expiry
- 8 Feb 2022
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- BAX, ERIC T · PELLICO, JULIAN
- Classification
- G06F17/27
- Prosecution counsel
- Meunier Carlin & Curfman LLC
- Examiner
- AMSBURY, WAYNE
System and method for monitoring usage patterns
A method of monitoring user usage patterns of a system, comprising the steps of: providing at least one state object (180), the object including a profile representative of user usage; storing the state object at a client location (110); passing, to a central server (120), the state object with each subsequent interaction initiation; and receiving, from the central server, the state object along with the response (170) of the central server, wherein the profile is modified to reflect the interaction between client location and central server. The present invention provides a system and a method for monitoring user usage patterns, and is particularly suited to use in Internet and World Wide Web applications.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 24 Jun 2008
- Earliest priority
- 18 Dec 2002
- Est. expiry
- 18 Dec 2022
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- WICKS, TONY
- Classification
- G06F15/16
- Prosecution counsel
- Meunier Carlin & Curfman LLC
- Examiner
- TSAI, CAROL S
Also asserted in this case
7 moreThe docket lists 9 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining 7 asserted patents are one query away in Eureka.
- USRE46513E1Systems and methods for state-less authentication
- US6604100B1Method for converting relational data into a structured document
- US7152018B2System and method for monitoring usage patterns
- US7657531B2Systems and methods for state-less authentication
- US6757662B1Method and system for display advertisement qualification and notification
- US8051098B2Systems and methods for state-less authentication
- US6691103B1Method for searching a database, search engine system for searching a database, and method of providing a key table for use by a search engine for a database
Parties of record
Alto Dynamics, LLC
- Core tech
- G06F17/27G06F15/16
- Counsel
- Carey Matthew Rozier · David S. Godkin · James E. Kruzer · James F. McDonough III · Jonathan L. Hardt · Travis E. Lynch
- Firm
- Birnbaum & Godkin, LLP, Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC
Wayfair, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Daniela Peinado Welsh · David Swetnam-Burland · Matthew C. Powers · Peter J. Brann · Stacy O. Stitham
- Firm
- Brann & Isaacson, Graves Dougherty Hearon & Moody PC
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Carey Matthew Rozier | Alto Dynamics, LLC | Plaintiff |
| David S. Godkin | Alto Dynamics, LLC | Plaintiff |
| James E. Kruzer | Alto Dynamics, LLC | Plaintiff |
| James F. McDonough III | Alto Dynamics, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Jonathan L. Hardt | Alto Dynamics, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Travis E. Lynch | Alto Dynamics, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Daniela Peinado Welsh | Wayfair, Inc. | Defendant |
| David Swetnam-Burland | Wayfair, Inc. | Defendant |
| Matthew C. Powers | Wayfair, Inc. | Defendant |
| Peter J. Brann | Wayfair, Inc. | Defendant |
| Stacy O. Stitham | Wayfair, Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), Plaintiff Alto Dynamics, LLC, by and through its counsel, hereby voluntarily dismisses all claims in its Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 18) in this action WITH PREJUDICE. Defendant has neither filed an Answer nor filed a motion for Summary Judgment in this matter”
Case 1:23-cv-11351 · D. Mass. · closed 18 September 2023
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case 1:23-cv-11351?
1:23-cv-11351 is a patent infringement action brought by Alto Dynamics, LLC against Wayfair, Inc., filed on 15 Jun 2023 in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The case closed on 18 September 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 1:23-cv-11351?
US6662190B2 (“Learning automatic data extraction system”), assigned to ALTO DYNAMICS, LLC, currently inactive; US7392160B2 (“System and method for monitoring usage patterns”), assigned to ALTO DYNAMICS, LLC, currently inactive; USRE46513E1 (“Systems and methods for state-less authentication”), assigned to ALTO DYNAMICS, LLC; US6604100B1 (“Method for converting relational data into a structured document”), assigned to ALTO DYNAMICS, LLC; US7152018B2 (“System and method for monitoring usage patterns”), assigned to ALTO DYNAMICS, LLC; US7657531B2 (“Systems and methods for state-less authentication”), assigned to ALTO DYNAMICS, LLC; US6757662B1 (“Method and system for display advertisement qualification and notification”), assigned to ALTO DYNAMICS, LLC; US8051098B2 (“Systems and methods for state-less authentication”), assigned to CALLAHAN CELLULAR L.L.C.; US6691103B1 (“Method for searching a database, search engine system for searching a database, and method of providing a key table for use by a search engine for a database”), assigned to ALTO DYNAMICS, LLC. The record also lists Learning automatic data extraction system, Method and system for display advertisement qualification and notification, Method for converting relational data into a structured document, Method for searching a database, search engine system for searching a database, and method of providing a key table for use by a search engine for a database, System and method for monitoring usage patterns and Systems and methods for state-less authentication.
How was case 1:23-cv-11351 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is voluntary dismissal. The termination text reads: “Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), Plaintiff Alto Dynamics, LLC, by and through its counsel, hereby voluntarily dismisses all claims in its Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 18) in this action WITH PREJUDICE. Defendant has neither filed an Answer nor filed a motion for Summary Judgment in this matter”
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 1:23-cv-11351 take?
95 calendar days, from filing on 15 Jun 2023 to closure on 18 September 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:23-cv-11351?
Chief Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton presided. Carey Matthew Rozier, David S. Godkin, James E. Kruzer, James F. McDonough III, Jonathan L. Hardt and Travis E. Lynch are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Alto Dynamics. Daniela Peinado Welsh, David Swetnam-Burland, Matthew C. Powers, Peter J. Brann and Stacy O. Stitham appear for defendant Wayfair.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:23-cv-11351 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.