Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
Bandspeed v. Anker Innovations | Patent Lawsuit 1:22-cv-01322

Bandspeed, Inc. v. Anker Innovations, Limited.

1:22-cv-01322 W.D. Tex. Closed 8 patents
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 16 Dec 2022 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas and closed 16 May 2023, with 8 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case dismissed.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Case no.
1:22-cv-01322
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
16 Dec 2022 – 16 May 2023
Duration
151 days
Basis of termination
Case Dismissed
Products & marks
Approach for managing communications channels based on performance · Approach for managing the use of communications channels based on performance · Approach for selecting communications channels based on performance
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 1:22-cv-01322, United States District Court for the Western 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.

Get an FTO claim chart
10,000 free credits to start
Patent at issue
US7903608B2 Inactive App. US12/352595

Approach for managing the use of communications channels based on performance

An approach for selecting sets of communications channels involves determining the performance of communications channels. A set of channels is selected based on the results of performance testing and specified criteria. The participant generates data that identifies the selected set of channels and provides that data to other participants of the communications network. The participants communicate over the set of channels, such as by using a frequency hopping protocol. When a specified time expires or monitoring of the performance of the channel set identifies poor performance of the set of channels, the participant selects another set of channels for use in communications based on additional performance testing. By selecting channels based on the initial performance testing and performance monitoring, the communications network adaptively avoids channels with poor performance.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
8 Mar 2011
Earliest priority
25 Jan 2001
Est. expiry
19 Oct 2021
Validity challenges
2 on record90015194 · EPR · filed by UNIFED PATENTS, LLCIPR2015-00237 · filed by Marvell Semiconductor, Inc.
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
H04W4/00H04W4/80H04W72/54H04W84/18
Examiner
DUONG, FRANK
US7903608B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US7903608B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
US9379769B2 Inactive App. US14/525120

Approach for managing the use of communications channels based on performance

An approach for selecting sets of communications channels involves determining the performance of communications channels. A set of channels is selected based on the results of performance testing and specified criteria. The participant generates data that identifies the selected set of channels and provides that data to other participants of the communications network. The participants communicate over the set of channels, such as by using a frequency hopping protocol. When a specified time expires or monitoring of the performance of the channel set identifies poor performance of the set of channels, the participant selects another set of channels for use in communications based on additional performance testing. By selecting channels based on the initial performance testing and performance monitoring, the communications network adaptively avoids channels with poor performance.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
28 Jun 2016
Earliest priority
25 Jan 2001
Est. expiry
13 Jan 2022
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
H04W4/00H04B1/715H04W24/08H04W72/08H04W84/18H04W4/80H04W72/54
Examiner
DUONG, FRANK
Source: Patsnap patent data + case record. Bibliographic fields and drawings reproduced from the published patent document. Break down the claims
Parties & counsel

Parties of record

Counsel of record

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

“This matter came before the Court upon the Rule 41 Unopposed Motion to Dismiss filed by Plaintiff Bandspeed LLC (“Bandspeed”. Pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is hereby: ORDERED that all claims asserted by Bandspeed against Defendant Anker Innovations Ltd. (“Defendant”) in this action are hereby dismissed WITH prejudice. It is further ORDERED that Bandspeed and Defendant shall bear their own costs, expenses, and legal fees in this cas”

Case 1:22-cv-01322 · W.D. Tex. · closed 16 May 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.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 1:22-cv-01322?

1:22-cv-01322 is a patent infringement action brought by Bandspeed, Inc. against Anker Innovations, Limited., filed on 16 Dec 2022 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. The case closed on 16 May 2023.

Which patents were asserted in 1:22-cv-01322?

US7903608B2 (“Approach for managing the use of communications channels based on performance”), assigned to BANDSPEED, LLC, currently inactive; US9379769B2 (“Approach for managing the use of communications channels based on performance”), assigned to BANDSPEED, LLC, currently inactive; US7570614B2 (“Approach for managing communications channels based on performance”), assigned to BANDSPEED, LLC; US7477624B2 (“Approach for managing the use of communications channels based on performance”), assigned to BANDSPEED, LLC; US7027418B2 (“Approach for selecting communications channels based on performance”), assigned to BANDSPEED, LLC; US8542643B2 (“Approach for managing the use of communications channels based on performance”), assigned to BANDSPEED, LLC; US8873500B2 (“Approach for managing the use of communications channels based on performance”), assigned to BANDSPEED, LLC; US9883520B2 (“Approach for managing the use of communications channels based on performance”), assigned to BANDSPEED, LLC. The record also lists Approach for managing communications channels based on performance, Approach for managing the use of communications channels based on performance and Approach for selecting communications channels based on performance.

How was case 1:22-cv-01322 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is case dismissed. The termination text reads: “This matter came before the Court upon the Rule 41 Unopposed Motion to Dismiss filed by Plaintiff Bandspeed LLC (“Bandspeed”. Pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is hereby: ORDERED that all claims asserted by Bandspeed against Defendant Anker Innovations Ltd. (“Defendant”) in this action are hereby dismissed WITH prejudice. It is further ORDERED that Bandspeed and Defendant shall bear their own costs, expenses, and legal fees in this cas”

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 1:22-cv-01322 take?

151 calendar days, from filing on 16 Dec 2022 to closure on 16 May 2023.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:22-cv-01322?

Chief Judge David Alan Ezra presided. Adam G. Price, Christopher V. Goodpastor, Gabriel R. Gervey and Gregory S. Donahue are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Bandspeed.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 1:22-cv-01322 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:22-cv-01322 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.

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.