Infringement action filed 7 Sep 2022 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and closed 4 Apr 2023, with 10 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: consent judgment.
Acknowledgement method and multi user transmission method · Apparatus and method for downlink and uplink multi-user transmissions · Long training field sequence construction · Method for transmitting and receiving frame in wireless local area network · Multiplexing acknowledgment messages in response to downlink frames · Protection methods for wireless transmissions · Sounding method · System and method for synchronization for OFDMA transmission
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 2:22-cv-00349, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.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.
An Acknowledgment (ACK) method is provided by a receiving device in a Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN). The receiving device receives a plurality of data units having a plurality of Traffic Identifiers (TIDs) and transmits an ACK frame including a plurality of ACK information fields for at least part of the plurality of data units. An ACK information field for a data unit satisfying a first condition among the plurality of ACK information fields includes a Traffic Identifier (TID) and a block ACK bitmap indicating whether the data unit has been successfully received. An ACK information field for a data unit satisfying a second condition and having been successfully received among the plurality of ACK information fields includes the first TID and does not include a block ACK bitmap.
A sounding method by a receiving device is provided. The receiving device receives an NDPA frame from a transmitting device, and then receives an NDP frame from the transmitting device. After receiving the NDP frame, the receiving device transmits to the transmitting device a feedback frame including subchannel information measured on a subchannel that is allocated to the first receiving device among a plurality of subchannels into which a predetermined band is divided.
The docket lists 10 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining 8 asserted patents are one query away in Eureka.
Alden Harris · Alejandra Christina Salinas · Alexander W. Aiken · Armstead Charlton Lewis · Blaine Andrew Larson · Elizabeth L. DeRieux · Eric James Enger · Joseph Samuel Grinstein · Kalpana Srinivasan · Max Lalon Tribble · Michael F. Heim · Robert Greenfeld · Sidney Calvin Capshaw III · William Brown Collier
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
"Before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”) filed by Atlas Global Technologies LLC (“Plaintiff”). (Dkt. No. 21). In the Motion, Plaintiff represents that the above-captioned case has been resolved and requests dismissal of the action with prejudice. (Id. at 1). Having considered the Motion, the Court finds that it should be and hereby is GRANTED. Accordingly, all claims and causes of action asserted by Plaintiff in the above-captioned case are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. All pending requests for relief in the above-captioned case not explicitly granted herein are DENIED AS MOOT"
Case 2:22-cv-00349 · E.D. Tex. · closed 4 April 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.
2:22-cv-00349 is a patent infringement action brought by Atlas Global Technologies, LLC against Arcadyan Technology Corp., filed on 7 Sep 2022 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case closed on 4 April 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 2:22-cv-00349?
US9825738B2 (“Acknowledgement method and multi user transmission method”), assigned to ATLAS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LLC, currently active; US9763259B2 (“Sounding method”), assigned to ATLAS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LLC, currently active; US10020919B2 (“Protection methods for wireless transmissions”), assigned to ATLAS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LLC; US9531520B2 (“Apparatus and method for downlink and uplink multi-user transmissions”), assigned to ATLAS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LLC; US10756851B2 (“Multiplexing acknowledgment messages in response to downlink frames”), assigned to ATLAS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LLC; US10153886B2 (“Apparatus and method for downlink and uplink multi-user transmissions”), assigned to ATLAS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LLC; US9628310B2 (“Long training field sequence construction”), assigned to ATLAS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LLC; US9848442B2 (“Method for transmitting and receiving frame in wireless local area network”), assigned to ATLAS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LLC; US10327172B2 (“Long training field sequence construction”), assigned to ATLAS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LLC; US9912513B2 (“System and method for synchronization for OFDMA transmission”), assigned to ATLAS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LLC. The record also lists Acknowledgement method and multi user transmission method, Apparatus and method for downlink and uplink multi-user transmissions, Long training field sequence construction, Method for transmitting and receiving frame in wireless local area network, Multiplexing acknowledgment messages in response to downlink frames, Protection methods for wireless transmissions, Sounding method and System and method for synchronization for OFDMA transmission.
How was case 2:22-cv-00349 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is consent judgment. The termination text reads: "Before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”) filed by Atlas Global Technologies LLC (“Plaintiff”). (Dkt. No. 21). In the Motion, Plaintiff represents that the above-captioned case has been resolved and requests dismissal of the action with prejudice. (Id. at 1). Having considered the Motion, the Court finds that it should be and hereby is GRANTED. Accordingly, all claims and causes of action asserted by Plaintiff in the above-captioned case are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. All pending requests for relief in the above-captioned case not explicitly granted herein are DENIED AS MOOT"
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 2:22-cv-00349 take?
209 calendar days, from filing on 7 Sep 2022 to closure on 4 April 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:22-cv-00349?
Alden Harris, Alejandra Christina Salinas, Alexander W. Aiken, Armstead Charlton Lewis, Blaine Andrew Larson, Elizabeth L. DeRieux, Eric James Enger, Joseph Samuel Grinstein, Kalpana Srinivasan, Max Lalon Tribble, Michael F. Heim, Robert Greenfeld, Sidney Calvin Capshaw III and William Brown Collier are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Atlas Global Technologies.
Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 2:22-cv-00349 and do not constitute legal advice.Ask your own question
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:22-cv-00349 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.
