AutoScribe Corp. v. Payment Savvy, LLC — Active Patent Infringement Dispute in E.D. Texas
AutoScribe Corp. filed suit against Payment Savvy, LLC in the Eastern District of Texas, asserting infringement of US11620621B2 through Payment Savvy’s online payment solution. The case is before Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap, one of the most active patent benches in the US.
Active payment tech patent battle before Judge Gilstrap in E.D. Texas
AutoScribe Corp. filed this patent infringement action on 29 August 2023 in the Eastern District of Texas (Case No. 2:23-cv-00390), asserting that Payment Savvy, LLC infringes US11620621B2 through its online payment solution. AutoScribe is represented by Ahmad, Zavitsanos & Mensing, PLLC, while Payment Savvy has engaged Scheef & Stone LLP across its Marshall and Frisco offices. The case sits before Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap, whose docket is among the highest-volume patent benches in the United States.
The case remains open as of the data available. No verdict, basis of termination, or costs ruling has been recorded in the public docket, indicating that substantive litigation is ongoing. The Eastern District of Texas is a plaintiff-favoured jurisdiction with relatively streamlined scheduling orders, and cases before Judge Gilstrap typically move to claim construction and trial on defined timelines.
With the case having been active since late August 2023, the litigation is consistent with the pre-trial phase typical of E.D. Texas patent matters — likely encompassing contentions exchanges, claim construction briefing, and potentially a Markman hearing. The absence of a termination record suggests no early settlement or dismissal has occurred. What remains unknown from the public record is whether any inter partes review petition has been filed against US11620621B2 or whether licensing discussions are underway.
Filing to filing in 154 days
Case duration to date — filed August 2023 in E.D. Texas
Full party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | AutoScribe Corp. | Company | Payment technology IP licensor — holder of US11620621B2Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Payment Savvy, LLC | Company | Payment Savvy, LLC — provider of online payment processing solutionsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Jason Scott Mcmanis | Attorney | Counsel for AutoScribe Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Mark David Nielsen | Attorney | Counsel for Payment Savvy, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Michael Charles Smith | Attorney | Counsel for Payment Savvy, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Rodney Gilstrap | Chief Judge | Texas Eastern District Court — Chief JudgeSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Stipulation of dismissal — official text
No verdict has been recorded in this case. The matter remains active before Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap in the Eastern District of Texas. The absence of a verdict or termination record is consistent with a case still in its pre-trial phase — likely navigating claim construction, fact discovery, or expert proceedings. Both parties should anticipate a Markman hearing before any dispositive motions or trial scheduling is finalised.
US11620621B2 — Online Payment Processing Technology
US11620621B2 (application number US16/535424) is the patent asserted by AutoScribe Corp. in this infringement action. The patent relates to online payment processing technology and is being enforced against Payment Savvy’s commercial payment solution. The application number indicates a filing in the 2019–2020 timeframe, placing it squarely within the modern era of digital payment infrastructure — a domain that encompasses payment gateways, bill-pay platforms, and merchant transaction systems.
Payment processing patents with broad functional claims present meaningful risk across the fintech and SaaS payments ecosystem. US11620621B2’s assertion against a generically described ‘online payment solution’ suggests the claims may be drafted broadly enough to implicate multiple commercial products. For any company operating in the digital payments space — from established processors to emerging fintech platforms — this patent warrants close monitoring, particularly given AutoScribe’s active enforcement posture in a high-velocity venue.
Should you run an FTO analysis against US11620621B2?
Any company developing, licensing, or deploying an online payment solution should treat US11620621B2 as a live enforcement risk. AutoScribe has already demonstrated willingness to assert this patent in a plaintiff-favourable court. Product teams building payment gateways, bill-pay portals, or transaction processing workflows should confirm their design does not fall within the patent’s claim scope — especially before launching new payment features or entering new markets.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can analyse the claims of US11620621B2 against your product architecture and flag potential overlap. Eureka also supports ongoing claim monitoring — alerting your team if continuation patents or related applications are published, or if new infringement actions citing this patent appear in the litigation database. Early awareness significantly expands your strategic options.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11620621B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar payment technology patent infringement cases in E.D. Texas
PatSnap Eureka tracks related litigation across truck body equipment, vehicle accessories, and comparable infringement actions in the Georgia district system.
What this case signals for the online payment processing IP landscape
Active enforcement of payment technology patents in E.D. Texas continues to accelerate. This case is a marker worth monitoring.
E.D. Texas remains the top venue for payment tech patent enforcement
AutoScribe’s choice of the Eastern District of Texas — and Chief Judge Gilstrap specifically — is consistent with a deliberate venue strategy. Plaintiffs in patent cases favour this court for its established patent rules, predictable scheduling, and historically plaintiff-friendly outcomes. Companies operating online payment platforms should treat E.D. Texas filings as a credible enforcement signal.
US11620621B2 targets broad online payment processing workflows
The asserted patent, US11620621B2, covers technology applied to online payment solutions — a domain with hundreds of commercial implementations. Any company operating a payment gateway, bill-pay portal, or transaction processing platform should assess their exposure to this patent’s claims, particularly given that the accused product is described generically as an ‘online payment solution’.
AutoScribe v Payment — key questions answered
AutoScribe Corp. asserts US11620621B2 (application no. US16/535424) against Payment Savvy, LLC. The patent covers online payment processing technology, and the accused product is described as Payment Savvy’s online payment solution.
The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Case No. 2:23-cv-00390) before Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap, one of the most experienced patent law judges in the US federal court system.
As of the available data, Case No. 2:23-cv-00390 remains open. No verdict, settlement, or basis of termination has been recorded in the public docket. The case was filed on 29 August 2023 and is consistent with active pre-trial proceedings.
AutoScribe Corp. is represented by Ahmad, Zavitsanos & Mensing, PLLC, with Jason Scott McManis named as counsel. Payment Savvy, LLC is represented by Scheef & Stone LLP (Marshall and Frisco offices), with Mark David Nielsen and Michael Charles Smith listed as defence counsel.
AutoScribe Corp. accuses Payment Savvy’s online payment solution of infringing US11620621B2. The product is characterised broadly in the case record as an online payment solution, suggesting the infringement allegations may target Payment Savvy’s core payment processing platform.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.