Better Browsing, LLC v. Opera Norway AS
Infringement action filed 17 Jan 2023 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and closed 10 Oct 2023, with 2 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: voluntary dismissal.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US8838736B2US11150779B2
- Case no.
- 2:23-cv-00020
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- E.D. Tex.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Texas
- Chief judge
- None recorded
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 17 Jan 2023 – 10 Oct 2023
- Duration
- 266 days
- Basis of termination
- Voluntary dismissal
- Products & marks
- Internet browser zoom function · Systems and methods for providing an internet browser zoom and group bookmark functions
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
Internet browser zoom function
Methods are described to preload and display a plurality of webpages from a hyperlink list either previously saved or returned by one or more search engines, where said webpages are displayed in a web browser. The web browser has been augmented to display multiple webpages simultaneously and to allow changing the number of webpages displayed and their physical arrangement within the web browser display. Hyperlinks associated with any portion of this plurality of webpages can be saved as a list of hyperlinks (group bookmark) for later retrieval. Preloading may be dynamically altered to take advantage of network bandwidth availability and processor non-saturation. Descendant webpages of preloaded webpages may also be preloaded to further speed performance. The zoom factor for a displayed webpage may be altered by clicking on a zoom icon or alternately rotating a mouse wheel while the cursor is held over the zoom icon.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 16 Sep 2014
- Est. expiry
- 9 Sep 2023
- Validity challenges
- 2 on record90020154 · EPR2025-000709 · Patentability · filed by BETTER BROWSING LLC
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- SWAHN, ALAN, EARL
- Classification
- G06F15/16G06F17/30G09G5/00
- Prosecution counsel
- KASHA LAW LLC
- Examiner
- WHIPPLE, BRIAN P
Systems and methods for providing an internet browser zoom and group bookmark functions
A computerized method for operating a zoom function in a web browser is described. The method uses a user’s computer to access a network; operate a web browser; and control the operation of a method for performing a zoom function within the web browser. The zoom function presents to the user an icon which directly controls the zoom function for a webpage displayed in an active window. The zoom icon indicates a current zoom factor and where a single selection of the zoom icon directly causes the web browser to perform several actions. The actions include changing the current zoom factor for the webpage displayed in the active window and updating the zoom icon to indicate the zoom factor. Changing the zoom factor enlarges a viewed area or makes it smaller, thereby improving the rendering of information that may be too small or too large to be useful.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 19 Oct 2021
- Earliest priority
- 10 Sep 2002
- Est. expiry
- 9 Sep 2023
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- SWAHN, ALAN EARL
- Classification
- G06F3/0481G06F16/957G06F16/955G06F3/0484G06F15/16G09G5/00
- Prosecution counsel
- KASHA LAW LLC
- Examiner
- STANLEY, KAVITA
Parties of record
Better Browsing, LLC
- Core tech
- G06F15/16G06F17/30G09G5/00G06F3/0481
- Counsel
- Carey Matthew Rozier · James Francis McDonough III · Jonathan Lloyd Hardt
- Firm
- Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC
Opera Norway AS
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Alexander R. Wolfe · Jack Shaw
- Firm
- Procopio Cory Hargreaves & Smith, LLP
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Carey Matthew Rozier | Better Browsing, LLC | Plaintiff |
| James Francis McDonough III | Better Browsing, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Jonathan Lloyd Hardt | Better Browsing, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Alexander R. Wolfe | Opera Norway AS | Defendant |
| Jack Shaw | Opera Norway AS | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Before the Court is the Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (the “Notice”) filed by Better Browsing LLC (“Plaintiff”). (Dkt. No. 32.) In the Notice, Plaintiff represents that the abovecaptioned case is voluntarily dismissed with prejudice. (Id. at 1.) In light of the Notice, which the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), that all pending claims and causes of action 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. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the above-captioned case as no parties or claims remain.”
Case 2:23-cv-00020 · E.D. Tex. · closed 10 October 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 2:23-cv-00020?
2:23-cv-00020 is a patent infringement action brought by Better Browsing, LLC against Opera Norway AS, filed on 17 Jan 2023 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case closed on 10 October 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 2:23-cv-00020?
US8838736B2 (“Internet browser zoom function”), assigned to BETTER BROWSING LLC, currently inactive; US11150779B2 (“Systems and methods for providing an internet browser zoom and group bookmark functions”), assigned to BETTER BROWSING LLC, currently inactive. The record also lists Internet browser zoom function and Systems and methods for providing an internet browser zoom and group bookmark functions.
How was case 2:23-cv-00020 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is voluntary dismissal. The termination text reads: “Before the Court is the Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (the “Notice”) filed by Better Browsing LLC (“Plaintiff”). (Dkt. No. 32.) In the Notice, Plaintiff represents that the abovecaptioned case is voluntarily dismissed with prejudice. (Id. at 1.) In light of the Notice, which the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), that all pending claims and causes of action 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. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE t
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 2:23-cv-00020 take?
266 calendar days, from filing on 17 Jan 2023 to closure on 10 October 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:23-cv-00020?
Carey Matthew Rozier, James Francis McDonough III and Jonathan Lloyd Hardt are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Better Browsing. Alexander R. Wolfe and Jack Shaw appear for defendant Opera Norway AS.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:23-cv-00020 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.