Cascade Systems LLC v. Teacher Synergy LLC
Infringement action filed 15 Jan 2026 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and closed 18 May 2026, with US7739238B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case settled.
Case record
- Patent involved
- US7739238B2
- Application no.
- US11/753024
- Case no.
- 1:26-cv-00383
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- S.D.N.Y.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- New York
- Chief judge
- Edgardo Ramos
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 15 Jan 2026 – 18 May 2026
- Duration
- 123 days
- Basis of termination
- Case Settled
- Products & marks
- Method of digital media management in a file sharing system
- 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
Method of digital media management in a file sharing system
Provided are methods and systems for legally sharing files in a peer-to-peer network on the internet in a manner that compensates the content owners, artists, authors and/or programmers, and the like. Example methods include incentive programs, which allow users to earn credits that may be redeemable for later file downloads and/or for merchandise at an online store or other compensation. Example methods do not permit file exchanges or downloads when the file is tagged with ownership information that indicates a gap in ownership of the file, in which one or more content owners was not compensated. Further example methods permit file exchanges or downloads, but provide that one or more of the users is disqualified from receiving credits for files tagged with information indicating a gap in ownership of the file.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 15 Jun 2010
- Earliest priority
- 14 Mar 2005
- Est. expiry
- 6 May 2027
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- STRICKLAND, MARK
- Classification
- G06F17/30
- Prosecution counsel
- CASTELLANO PLLC
- Examiner
- WONG, LESLIE
Parties of record
Cascade Systems LLC
- Core tech
- G06F17/30
- Counsel
- Isaac Rabicoff
- Firm
- Rabicoff Law LLC
Teacher Synergy LLC
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Derek Austin Rhea · James S. Blank · Joshua Scott Wolkoff
- Firm
- Baker & McKenzie LLP, Baker McKenzie, Pierson Ferdinand, LLP
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Isaac Rabicoff | Cascade Systems LLC | Plaintiff |
| Derek Austin Rhea | Teacher Synergy LLC | Defendant |
| James S. Blank | Teacher Synergy LLC | Defendant |
| Joshua Scott Wolkoff | Teacher Synergy LLC | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“The Court having been advised that all claims asserted herein have been settled, it is ORDERED, that the above-entitled action be and hereby is discontinued, without costs to either party, subject to reopening should the settlement not be consummated within thirty (30) days of the date hereof. Any application to reopen must be filed within thirty (30) days of this Order; any application to reopen filed thereafter may be denied solely on that basis. Further, the parties are advised that if they wish the Court to retain jurisdiction in this matter for purposes of enforcing any settlement agreement, they must submit the settlement agreement to the Court within the next thirty (30) days with a request that the agreement be “so ordered” by the Court. All deadlines are vacated and all conferences are canceled. SO ORDERED.”
Case 1:26-cv-00383 · S.D.N.Y. · closed 18 May 2026
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 1:26-cv-00383?
1:26-cv-00383 is a patent infringement action brought by Cascade Systems LLC against Teacher Synergy LLC, filed on 15 Jan 2026 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The case closed on 18 May 2026.
Which patent was asserted in 1:26-cv-00383?
US7739238B2 (“Method of digital media management in a file sharing system”), assigned to CASCADE SYSTEMS LLC, currently active. The record also lists Method of digital media management in a file sharing system.
How was case 1:26-cv-00383 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is case settled. The termination text reads: “The Court having been advised that all claims asserted herein have been settled, it is ORDERED, that the above-entitled action be and hereby is discontinued, without costs to either party, subject to reopening should the settlement not be consummated within thirty (30) days of the date hereof. Any application to reopen must be filed within thirty (30) days of this Order; any application to reopen filed thereafter may be denied solely on that basis. Further, the parties are advised that if they wish the Court to retain jurisdiction in this matter for purposes of enforcing any settlement agreem
How long did case 1:26-cv-00383 take?
123 calendar days, from filing on 15 Jan 2026 to closure on 18 May 2026.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:26-cv-00383?
Chief Judge Edgardo Ramos presided. Isaac Rabicoff is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Cascade Systems. Derek Austin Rhea, James S. Blank and Joshua Scott Wolkoff appear for defendant Teacher Synergy.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:26-cv-00383 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.