EcoFactor, Inc v. Ecobee, Ltd. et al.
Other action filed 2 May 2023 in the United States International Trade Commission and closed 4 Dec 2023, with 4 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case withdrawn.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US20020138450A1US8498753B2USD407039SUS8432322B2
- Case no.
- 337-TA-1185
- Verdict cause
- Other action
- Court
- United States International Trade Commission
- Court level
- ITC
- Case region
- District of Columbia
- Chief judge
- None recorded
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 2 May 2023 – 4 Dec 2023
- Duration
- 216 days
- Basis of termination
- Case Withdrawn
- Products & marks
- 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
Electronic payment method and device
The present invention relates to a process and device for electronic payment which comprises an operation of opening a communication session between a first user terminal and a merchant server, on a first communication support, such as the Internet. During said communication session, the user terminal constitutes a single use payment certificate. The user receives, on a second terminal, such as a mobile phone, confidential information such as a password and transmits it to the first support. The correspondence between the information transmitted to the second terminal and that transmitted by the first terminal is verified and if there is correspondence the payment is validated.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 26 Sep 2002
- Earliest priority
- 19 Apr 2000
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- KREMER, GILLES
- Classification
- G06Q20/00G07F7/08
- Prosecution counsel
- NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC
System, method and apparatus for just-in-time conditioning using a thermostat
Systems and methods for reducing the cycling time of a climate control system. For example, one or more of the exemplary systems can receive from a database a target time at which a structureis desired to reach a target temperature. In addition, the system acquires the temperature inside the structure and the temperature outside the structure at a time prior to the target time. The systems use a thermal characteristic of the structure and a performance characteristic of the climate control system, to determine the appropriate time prior to the target time at which the climate control system should turn on based at least in part on the structure, the climate control system, the inside temperature and the outside temperature. The systems then set a setpoint on a thermostatic controller to control the climate control system.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 30 Jul 2013
- Earliest priority
- 8 May 2009
- Est. expiry
- 5 Aug 2030
- Validity challenges
- 4 on recordIPR2020-01504 · Patentability · filed by Google LLCIPR2020-01504 · Other · filed by Google LLCIPR2020-01504 · filed by Google LLCIPR2021-00792 · filed by Ecobee, Inc.
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- STEINBERG, JOHN DOUGLAS · HUBLOU, SCOTT DOUGLAS · CHEUNG, LEO
- Classification
- G05D23/00
- Prosecution counsel
- Tanner IP, PLLC
- Examiner
- RODRIGUEZ, CARLOS ORTIZ
Also asserted in this case
2 moreThe docket lists 4 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining 2 asserted patents are one query away in Eureka.
Parties of record
EcoFactor, Inc
- Core tech
- G05D23/00
- Counsel
- Not recorded
- Firm
- Russ August & Kabat LLP
Ecobee, Ltd.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Not recorded
- Firm
- Foster, Murphy, Altman & Nickel, PC, Jenner & Block LLP, Latham & Watkins LLP, Venable LLP, White & Case LLP, Williams, Simons & Landis PLLC
- Also named
- Vivant, Inc. · Daikin Industries, Ltd. · Alarm.com Incorporated · Google, LLC · Schneider Electric USA, Inc. · Schneider Electric, SE · Ecobee, Ltd. · Daikin North America, LLC · Ecobee, Inc · Daikin America, Inc.
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Participant Disposition: Petition Withdrawn”
Case 337-TA-1185 · United States International Trade Commission · closed 4 December 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 337-TA-1185?
337-TA-1185 is a patent other action brought by EcoFactor, Inc against Ecobee, Ltd., filed on 2 May 2023 in the United States International Trade Commission. The case closed on 4 December 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 337-TA-1185?
US20020138450A1 (“Electronic payment method and device”), assigned to MAGIC AXESS, currently inactive; US8498753B2 (“System, method and apparatus for just-in-time conditioning using a thermostat”), assigned to ECOFACTOR, INC., currently active; USD407039S (“Wire support for lights”), assigned to OPENIANO, RENATO, MARTINEZ; US8432322B2 (“Electronic devices with capacitive proximity sensors for proximity-based radio-frequency power control”), assigned to APPLE INC..
How was case 337-TA-1185 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is case withdrawn. The termination text reads: “Participant Disposition: Petition Withdrawn”
How long did case 337-TA-1185 take?
216 calendar days, from filing on 2 May 2023 to closure on 4 December 2023.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 337-TA-1185 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.