Calibrate Networks v. CVS Pharmacy: Voluntary Dismissal After 78 Days
Calibrate Networks LLC filed a patent infringement action against CVS Pharmacy, Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas, asserting US9584633B2 covering methods and systems for managing network communications. The case resolved in just 78 days when Calibrate voluntarily dismissed all claims without prejudice.
A short-lived E.D. Texas network patent dispute ends early
On 17 February 2026, Calibrate Networks LLC filed a patent infringement action against CVS Pharmacy, Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas before Judge Rodney Gilstrap. The single asserted patent, US9584633B2 (application no. US14/211928), covers a method and system for managing network communications. Calibrate was represented by Rabicoff Law LLC, a firm with a known presence in patent assertion matters, while CVS retained Foley & Lardner LLP.
The recorded Basis of Termination is Voluntary dismissal. The docket order states that the Court accepted and acknowledged a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice filed by Plaintiff, dismissing all claims against CVS Pharmacy without prejudice. Because the dismissal is without prejudice, Calibrate Networks is not barred from refiling the same claims in the future, subject to applicable procedural rules. The specific terms underlying the dismissal are not disclosed in the available public record.
The case closed just 78 days after filing — before any substantive motion practice or claim construction activity appears on the docket. This early exit is consistent with pre-trial resolution dynamics common in the Eastern District of Texas, though what specifically drove the dismissal at this stage is not disclosed in the available public record. The without-prejudice nature means the patent remains a live enforcement instrument.
See Complete Case & Patent Analysis →Filing to Voluntary dismissal in 78 days
78 days — resolved before any substantive court ruling
US9584633B2 — Method and system for managing network communications
Any organisation deploying methods or systems for managing network communications — particularly in retail, pharmacy, healthcare IT, or enterprise networking — should assess its exposure to US9584633B2. The patent exited this case with no invalidity finding and remains fully enforceable. Given the without-prejudice dismissal, the risk of re-assertion against current or new defendants is live. R&D and product teams building or procuring network management infrastructure should prioritise an FTO review before deployment.
Official order — verbatim text
The Court's order is narrow and procedural: it accepts and acknowledges the plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice, confirming that all claims against CVS Pharmacy are dismissed without prejudice. The order makes no finding on infringement, validity, or damages, and does not foreclose future litigation by Calibrate Networks on the same patent.
Voluntary dismissal: what the without-prejudice exit means for both parties
Voluntary dismissal without prejudice explained
A voluntary dismissal without prejudice is a plaintiff-initiated procedural step that ends the current case without a ruling on the merits. Critically, it does not extinguish the underlying claims — Calibrate Networks retains the right to reassert US9584633B2 against CVS Pharmacy in a future action, subject to applicable statutes of limitations and procedural rules. No court finding on infringement, validity, or damages was made.
No merits rulingThe prejudice distinction matters for future enforcement
The recorded Basis of Termination is 'Voluntary dismissal' without specifying 'with prejudice'. The docket order explicitly confirms the dismissal is without prejudice. This distinction is commercially significant: a with-prejudice dismissal would bar refiling, while a without-prejudice dismissal leaves Calibrate's enforcement options open. The specific terms or conditions, if any, behind the dismissal are not disclosed in the available public record.
Refiling risk remainsCalibrate Networks exits without losing its patent rights
By dismissing without prejudice, Calibrate Networks preserves US9584633B2 as an active enforcement asset. The patent's validity was never challenged or adjudicated in this proceeding. Calibrate could potentially pursue CVS or other defendants in a future action. Whether any negotiation or agreement preceded this dismissal is not disclosed in the available public record.
Patent still liveCVS Pharmacy avoids a merits ruling — but faces residual risk
CVS Pharmacy obtains a dismissal but not the finality of a with-prejudice disposition or an invalidity ruling. The without-prejudice nature means CVS could face renewed litigation over the same patent. Companies operating network communication management systems should note that US9584633B2 remains valid and enforceable. Whether CVS secured any commitment from Calibrate as part of this resolution is not disclosed in the available public record.
No invalidity findingFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Calibrate Networks LLC | Company | /Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | CVS Pharmacy, Inc. | Company | /Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Isaac Phillip Rabicoff | Attorney | Counsel for Calibrate Networks LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Rabicoff Law LLC | Law Firm | Representing Calibrate Networks LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Jeanne M. Gills | Attorney | Counsel for CVS Pharmacy, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Justin Mark Sobaje | Attorney | Counsel for CVS Pharmacy, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Foley & Lardner LLP (Chicago) | Law Firm | Representing CVS Pharmacy, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Foley & Lardner LLP (Los Angeles) | Law Firm | Representing CVS Pharmacy, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Rodney Gilstrap | Judge | Texas Eastern District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
R&D signals in the network communications management space
Forward-looking patent and innovation intelligence derived from the Calibrate Networks v. CVS Pharmacy dispute and the US9584633B2 technology domain.
Calibrate Networks' patent portfolio and assertion activity
US9584633B2 is the patent asserted in this action. Understanding the full breadth of Calibrate Networks' portfolio — including related continuations, family members, and co-pending applications — is essential for companies seeking to assess ongoing assertion risk. Monitoring filing activity by Calibrate and its associated entities can surface emerging enforcement vectors before new complaints are filed.
Portfolio monitoringFiling trends in network communications management patents
The network communications management space continues to attract significant patent filing activity across enterprise networking, cloud infrastructure, and healthcare IT. Tracking claim trends in this domain — particularly around methods for managing, routing, and optimising network traffic — can help R&D teams identify crowded claim spaces and design-around opportunities relative to US9584633B2 and related art.
Filing trendsCVS Pharmacy's patent position in network and health IT
CVS Pharmacy operates large-scale retail and healthcare IT infrastructure, making network management capability central to its operations. Analysing CVS's own patent filings in network and health IT can reveal whether the company is building defensive IP in adjacent areas and how it positions itself against assertion risk in this technology domain.
Defensive IP postureAdjacent innovation areas near US9584633B2's claim scope
Around the core claims of US9584633B2 — managing network communications via defined methods and systems — there may be white-space opportunities in adaptive network orchestration, AI-driven traffic management, and edge computing network control. R&D teams exploring these adjacencies should map existing claim density to identify where novel filings face less prior art friction.
Innovation white spaceSimilar network communications patent cases in E.D. Texas
Explore comparable patent infringement actions asserting network communication management patents before Judge Gilstrap in the Eastern District of Texas.
What this case signals for the network communications IP landscape
A 78-day lifecycle in E.D. Texas, no merits ruling, and a live patent suggest ongoing enforcement risk for network tech operators.
US9584633B2 remains enforceable — monitor for new filings
The without-prejudice dismissal means Calibrate Networks can refile against CVS or assert the same patent against other defendants. Companies operating network communication management systems should treat this patent as an active enforcement risk and consider monitoring Calibrate Networks' docket activity for new complaints.
E.D. Texas remains a high-velocity venue for early resolution
This case closed in 78 days with no substantive rulings, consistent with the Eastern District of Texas's pattern of early pre-trial resolutions. IP teams operating in this sector should be prepared for rapid procedural timelines and have FTO and response strategies ready before litigation commences.
Calibrate v CVS — key questions answered
The case was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice. On 6 May 2026, the Eastern District of Texas accepted and acknowledged Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice, ending the case 78 days after filing with no ruling on the merits. The specific terms underlying the dismissal are not disclosed in the available public record.
Calibrate Networks asserted US9584633B2 (application no. US14/211928), which covers a method and system for managing network communications. This was the sole patent asserted in the action filed in the Eastern District of Texas on 17 February 2026.
A voluntary dismissal without prejudice ends the current litigation without any finding on infringement, validity, or damages. Critically, it does not bar Calibrate Networks from refiling the same claims against CVS Pharmacy in a future action. CVS obtains no invalidity ruling and no covenant not to sue is recorded in the available public record, meaning residual enforcement risk from US9584633B2 remains.
Yes. Because the dismissal was without prejudice, Calibrate Networks retains the right to refile the same claims against CVS Pharmacy subject to applicable statutes of limitations and procedural rules. Whether any agreement or understanding between the parties limits this option is not disclosed in the available public record.
Calibrate Networks was represented by Isaac Phillip Rabicoff of Rabicoff Law LLC. CVS Pharmacy was represented by Jeanne M. Gills and Justin Mark Sobaje of Foley & Lardner LLP (Chicago and Los Angeles offices). The case was presided over by Judge Rodney Gilstrap in the Eastern District of Texas.
This page is compiled from public court dockets and third-party patent and litigation data via PatSnap Eureka, and is provided for general informational purposes only. The information shown — including party names, patent and application numbers, dates, case status, outcomes, and any analysis — may be incomplete, may not reflect the most recent filings or legal status, and may contain errors or omissions. Verify all details against official court records (for example, PACER) and the relevant patent office before relying on them.
Nothing on this page constitutes legal advice or a legal opinion on the validity, infringement, enforceability, or scope of any patent or case, and no attorney‑client relationship is created by its use. Any description of an outcome (such as a dismissal, settlement, or consent judgment) is a general summary, not a legal determination. All patents, trademarks, and company or law‑firm names are the property of their respective owners. PatSnap makes no warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of this content and disclaims, to the fullest extent permitted by law, all liability for reliance on it. For advice on a specific matter, consult qualified legal counsel.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.