Book a demo

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

Try now
Comarco Wireless Systems v. Anker Innovations | Patent Lawsuit 2:22-cv-00266

Comarco Wireless Systems, LLC v. Anker Innovations Ltd.

2:22-cv-00266 E.D. Tex. Closed 2 patents
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 18 Jul 2022 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and closed 12 May 2023, with 2 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: consent judgment.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Patents involved
US10855087B1US10951042B2
Case no.
2:22-cv-00266
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
18 Jul 2022 – 12 May 2023
Duration
298 days
Basis of termination
Consent Judgment
Products & marks
Power supply systems
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 2:22-cv-00266, United States District Court for the Eastern 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
US10855087B1 Inactive App. US16/991295

Power supply systems

Exemplary power supply systems according to the present invention include circuitry that is configured to provide DC power and configured to receive a input signal that originates from a portable electronic device (the “PED”) and to provide a output signal to be sent to the PED. Such circuitry is configured to be coupled to the PED via a connector having a first, second, third, and fourth conductor. Such a connector is configured to be detachably mated with a power input interface of the PED to transfer the DC power to the PED, a ground reference to the PED, the input signal from the PED to the circuitry, and, in coordination with the input signal, the output signal from the circuitry to the PED, which is usable by the PED in connection with control of charging a battery of the PED based on the DC power provided by the circuitry.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
1 Dec 2020
Est. expiry
15 Jan 2024
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
H02J7/00H01R29/00
Examiner
CAVALLARI, DANIEL J
US10855087B1 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US10855087B1 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
US10951042B2 Inactive App. US17/077699

Power supply systems

Exemplary power supply systems according to the present invention include circuitry that is configured to provide DC power and configured to receive a input signal that originates from a portable electronic device (the “PED”) and to provide a output signal to be sent to the PED. Such circuitry is configured to be coupled to the PED via a connector having a first, second, third, and fourth conductor. Such a connector is configured to be detachably mated with a power input interface of the PED to transfer the DC power to the PED, a ground reference to the PED, the input signal from the PED to the circuitry, and, in coordination with the input signal, the output signal from the circuitry to the PED, which is usable by the PED in connection with control of charging a battery of the PED based on the DC power provided by the circuitry.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
16 Mar 2021
Est. expiry
15 Jan 2024
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
H01R29/00H02J7/00
Examiner
CAVALLARI, DANIEL J
US10951042B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US10951042B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
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

“Before the Court is the Joint Stipulation of Dismissal (the “Stipulation”) filed by Comarco Wireless Systems LLC (“Plaintiff”) and Anker Innovations Ltd. (“Defendant”). (Dkt. No. 51.) In the Stipulation, the parties represent that the above-captioned case has been resolved and request dismissal of the above-captioned action with prejudice. (Id. at 1.) Having considered the Stipulation, the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES that all claims and causes of action asserted between Plaintiff and Defendant in the above-captioned case are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, subject to the terms of the May 8, 2023 “SETTLEMENT AND LICENSE AGREEMENT.” Each party is to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees. 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 2:22-cv-00266 · E.D. Tex. · closed 12 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 2:22-cv-00266?

2:22-cv-00266 is a patent infringement action brought by Comarco Wireless Systems, LLC against Anker Innovations Ltd., filed on 18 Jul 2022 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case closed on 12 May 2023.

Which patents were asserted in 2:22-cv-00266?

US10855087B1 (“Power supply systems”), assigned to COMARCO WIRELESS SYSTEMS LLC, currently inactive; US10951042B2 (“Power supply systems”), assigned to COMARCO WIRELESS SYSTEMS LLC, currently inactive. The record also lists Power supply systems.

How was case 2:22-cv-00266 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is consent judgment. The termination text reads: “Before the Court is the Joint Stipulation of Dismissal (the “Stipulation”) filed by Comarco Wireless Systems LLC (“Plaintiff”) and Anker Innovations Ltd. (“Defendant”). (Dkt. No. 51.) In the Stipulation, the parties represent that the above-captioned case has been resolved and request dismissal of the above-captioned action with prejudice. (Id. at 1.) Having considered the Stipulation, the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES that all claims and causes of action asserted between Plaintiff and Defendant in the above-captioned case are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, subject to the terms of the May 8, 2023

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 2:22-cv-00266 take?

298 calendar days, from filing on 18 Jul 2022 to closure on 12 May 2023.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:22-cv-00266?

Matthew Christian Holohan, Michael Charles Smith and Patrick Aubrey Fitch are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Comarco Wireless Systems. Aaron S. Lukas, Christopher James Hanlon and William Blake Coblentz appear for defendant Anker Innovations.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 2:22-cv-00266 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:22-cv-00266 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.