Dynapass IP Holdings, LLC v. East West Bancorp, Inc. et al.
Infringement action filed 20 Feb 2023 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and closed 9 Jun 2023, with US6993658B1 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: dismissed with prejudice.
Case record
- Patent involved
- US6993658B1
- Application no.
- US09/519829
- Case no.
- 2:23-cv-00065
- 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
- 20 Feb 2023 – 9 Jun 2023
- Duration
- 109 days
- Basis of termination
- Dismissed with Prejudice
- Products & marks
- Use of personal communication devices for user authentication
- Validity challenges
- 6 on record
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
Use of personal communication devices for user authentication
A password setting system for a secure system includes a user token server and a communication module. The user token server generates a random token in response to a request for a new password from a user. The server creates a new password by concatenating a secret passcode that is known to the user with the token. The server sets the password associated with the user’s user ID to be the new password. The communication module transmits the token to a personal communication device, such as a mobile phone or a pager carried by the user. The user concatenates the secret passcode with the received token in order to form a valid password, which the user submits to gain access to the secure system. Accordingly, access to the system is based upon: nonsecret information known to the user, such as the user ID; secret information known to the user, such as the passcode; and information provided to the user through an object possessed by the user, such as the token.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 31 Jan 2006
- Est. expiry
- 6 Mar 2020
- Validity challenges
- 6 on recordIPR2023-01406 · Patentability · filed by Experian Information Solutions, IncIPR2023-00367 · Patentability · filed by BANK OF AMERICA, N.AIPR2024-00283 · Patentability · filed by Amazon.com, Inc.IPR2023-00425 · Patentability · filed by JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.IPR2023-01331 · Patentability · filed by JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.IPR2023-01406 · filed by Experian Information Solutions, Inc.
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- ENGBERG, STEN-OLOV · JONSSON
- Classification
- G07F7/10H04L12/14H04L9/32H04M15/00G06F21/00H04L29/06
- Prosecution counsel
- DynaPass Inc
- Examiner
- BARRO , JR., GILBERTO
Parties of record
Dynapass IP Holdings, LLC
- Core tech
- G07F7/10H04L12/14H04L9/32H04M15/00
- Counsel
- Fred Irvin Williams
- Firm
- Williams, Simons & Landis PLLC (Austin)
East West Bancorp, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Charles S. Baker · Kent Hofmann · Ryan Edward Dornberger
- Firm
- Locke Lord LLP, Locke Lord, LLP (Houston)
- Also named
- East West Bank
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Fred Irvin Williams | Dynapass IP Holdings, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Charles S. Baker | East West Bancorp, Inc. | Defendant |
| Kent Hofmann | East West Bancorp, Inc. | Defendant |
| Ryan Edward Dornberger | East West Bancorp, Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Before the Court is the Joint Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”) filed by Plaintiff Dynapass IP Holdings LLC (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants East West Bancorp, Inc. and East West Bank (“Defendants”). (Dkt. No. 53.) In the Motion, the parties represent that they have resolved Plaintiff’s claims for relief against Defendants in this case and request dismissal of the abovecaptioned action with prejudice. (Id. at 1.) Having considered the Motion, the Court finds that it should be and hereby is GRANTED. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s claims for relief against Defendants in the above-captioned case are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Each party is to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees. All pending requests for relief in the above-captioned case between Plaintiff and Defendants not explicitly granted herein are DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the above-captioned member case and MAINTAIN AS OPEN the lead case.”
Case 2:23-cv-00065 · E.D. Tex. · closed 9 June 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-00065?
2:23-cv-00065 is a patent infringement action brought by Dynapass IP Holdings, LLC against East West Bancorp, Inc., filed on 20 Feb 2023 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case closed on 9 June 2023.
Which patent was asserted in 2:23-cv-00065?
US6993658B1 (“Use of personal communication devices for user authentication”), assigned to DYNAPASS IP HOLDINGS LLC, currently inactive. The record also lists Use of personal communication devices for user authentication.
How was case 2:23-cv-00065 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is dismissed with prejudice. The termination text reads: “Before the Court is the Joint Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”) filed by Plaintiff Dynapass IP Holdings LLC (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants East West Bancorp, Inc. and East West Bank (“Defendants”). (Dkt. No. 53.) In the Motion, the parties represent that they have resolved Plaintiff’s claims for relief against Defendants in this case and request dismissal of the abovecaptioned action with prejudice. (Id. at 1.) Having considered the Motion, the Court finds that it should be and hereby is GRANTED. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s claims for relief against Defendants in the above-captioned case are DISMIS
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-00065 take?
109 calendar days, from filing on 20 Feb 2023 to closure on 9 June 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:23-cv-00065?
Fred Irvin Williams is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Dynapass IP. Charles S. Baker, Kent Hofmann and Ryan Edward Dornberger appear for defendant East West Bancorp.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:23-cv-00065 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.