AuthWallet, LLC v. Amarillo National Bank
Infringement action filed 22 Feb 2023 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas and closed 7 Jun 2023, with US8099368B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: voluntary dismissal.
Case record
- Patent involved
- US8099368B2
- Application no.
- US12/557457
- Case no.
- 6:23-cv-00140
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- W.D. Tex.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Texas
- Chief judge
- David Alan Ezra
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 22 Feb 2023 – 7 Jun 2023
- Duration
- 105 days
- Basis of termination
- Voluntary dismissal
- Products & marks
- Intermediary service and method for processing financial transaction data with mobile device confirmation
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
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
Intermediary service and method for processing financial transaction data with mobile device confirmation
A transaction processing service operates as an intermediary between acquirers of financial transaction requests and issuing institutions that process the financial transaction requests. The intermediary service utilizes a customer’s mobile device as an out-of-band communication channel to notify a customer of a received financial transaction request. To send the notification, the intermediary service retrieves stored customer information, including an address of the customer’s mobile device and a list of payment instruments that can be used to pay for the transaction. Before continuing to process the received financial transaction request, the service may first require the customer to confirm the transaction via the mobile device. The intermediary service retrieves financial account information associated with the customer from issuing institutions, and, if the transaction is confirmed, provides the account information to acquirers in order to allow transactions to be processed.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 17 Jan 2012
- Earliest priority
- 8 Nov 2008
- Est. expiry
- 10 Sep 2029
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- COULTER, TODD R. · KAPLINSKY, MORDECHAI E. · LEWIS, CHRISTOPHER E.
- Classification
- G06Q20/00
- Prosecution counsel
- PERKINS COIE LLP
- Examiner
- REAGAN, JAMES A
Parties of record
AuthWallet, LLC
- Core tech
- G06Q20/00
- Counsel
- Jeffrey Eugene Kubiak · William P. Ramey III
- Firm
- Ramey LLP
Amarillo National Bank
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Kelly Ransom
- Firm
- Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Jeffrey Eugene Kubiak | AuthWallet, LLC | Plaintiff |
| William P. Ramey III | AuthWallet, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Kelly Ransom | Amarillo National Bank | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Pursuant to Federal Rule 41 (a)(1)(A)(ii), the Plaintiff, AuthWallet, LLC hereby files this notice of dismissal of this action for all of Plaintiff’s claims as Defendant has not answered or filed a motion for summary judgment. The dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims shall be WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to the asserted patent and each party shall bear its own costs, expenses and attorneys’ fees.”
Case 6:23-cv-00140 · W.D. Tex. · closed 7 June 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 6:23-cv-00140?
6:23-cv-00140 is a patent infringement action brought by AuthWallet, LLC against Amarillo National Bank, filed on 22 Feb 2023 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. The case closed on 7 June 2023.
Which patent was asserted in 6:23-cv-00140?
US8099368B2 (“Intermediary service and method for processing financial transaction data with mobile device confirmation”), assigned to COULTER, TODD RUSSELL, currently active. The record also lists Intermediary service and method for processing financial transaction data with mobile device confirmation.
How was case 6:23-cv-00140 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is voluntary dismissal. The termination text reads: “Pursuant to Federal Rule 41 (a)(1)(A)(ii), the Plaintiff, AuthWallet, LLC hereby files this notice of dismissal of this action for all of Plaintiff’s claims as Defendant has not answered or filed a motion for summary judgment. The dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims shall be WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to the asserted patent and each party shall bear its own costs, expenses and attorneys’ fees.”
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 6:23-cv-00140 take?
105 calendar days, from filing on 22 Feb 2023 to closure on 7 June 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 6:23-cv-00140?
Chief Judge David Alan Ezra presided. Jeffrey Eugene Kubiak and William P. Ramey III are recorded as counsel for plaintiff AuthWallet. Kelly Ransom appears for defendant Amarillo National Bank.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 6:23-cv-00140 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.