Infringement action filed 19 Jul 2022 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and closed 6 Jun 2023, with US8391826B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: dismissed without prejudice.
The present Reverse 911 Alarm System implements a central alarm distribution site that is capable of generating an alarm indication to warn individuals of a hazard and propagating the alarm indication to selected individuals via their wireless subscriber devices by the use of wireless multicasting in the existing cellular communication network and/or wireless-based Local Area Networks which are operational in the coverage area of the hazard. The central alarm distribution site dynamically selects the wireless coverage area to encompass the present extent of the hazard and can also provide advanced warning to individuals located in an area that extends beyond the present hazard extent area. The present Reverse 911 Alarm System thereby integrates the operation of the wireless communication network with the 911 and Reverse 911 services to provide efficient and comprehensive distribution of alarm indications to the individuals who are impacted by an emergency situation.
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 Stipulation of Dismissal Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) (the “Stipulation”) filed by Plaintiff Emergency Alerts Innovations, LLC (“Emergency Alerts”) and Defendant T-Mobile US, Inc. (“T-Mobile”) (collectively, “the Parties”). (Dkt. No. 63.) Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the Parties agree that this action, Case No. 2:22-cv-269-JRG, should be dismissed without prejudice with each party bearing its own costs and attorneys’ fees. (Id. at 1.) Having considered the Stipulation, and noting its joint nature, the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES that all claims and causes of action asserted in Member Case No. 2:22-cv00269-JRG by and between the Parties are hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. It is further ORDERED that each party bear its own costs, attorneys’ fees, and expenses. The Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE the above-captioned Lead and Member"
Case 2:22-cv-00269 · E.D. Tex. · closed 6 June 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.
2:22-cv-00269 is a patent infringement action brought by Emergency Alerts Innovations, LLC against T-Mobile, filed on 19 Jul 2022 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case closed on 6 June 2023.
Which patent was asserted in 2:22-cv-00269?
US8391826B2 (“System for controlling the operation of wireless multicasting systems to distribute an alarm indication to a dynamically configured coverage area”), assigned to EMERGENCY ALERTS INNOVATIONS, LLC, currently active. The record also lists System for controlling the operation of wireless multicasting systems to distribute an alarm indication to a dynamically configured coverage area.
How was case 2:22-cv-00269 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is dismissed without prejudice. The termination text reads: "Before the Court is the Stipulation of Dismissal Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) (the “Stipulation”) filed by Plaintiff Emergency Alerts Innovations, LLC (“Emergency Alerts”) and Defendant T-Mobile US, Inc. (“T-Mobile”) (collectively, “the Parties”). (Dkt. No. 63.) Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the Parties agree that this action, Case No. 2:22-cv-269-JRG, should be dismissed without prejudice with each party bearing its own costs and attorneys’ fees. (Id. at 1.) Having considered the Stipulation, and noting its joint nature, the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES that all claims and causes o
What does dismissal without prejudice mean?
A dismissal without prejudice ends this action but leaves the claims alive — the plaintiff may file them again later, subject to the limitation period.
How long did case 2:22-cv-00269 take?
322 calendar days, from filing on 19 Jul 2022 to closure on 6 June 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:22-cv-00269?
Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap presided. Alison Aubry Richards is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Emergency Alerts Innovations. Corinne Stone Hockman, David E. Finkelson, Matthew G Rosendahl and Robert William Weber appear for defendant T-Mobile.
Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 2:22-cv-00269 and do not constitute legal advice.Ask your own question
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:22-cv-00269 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.
Patsnap Eureka
Eureka AI Agent
Help us improve
Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.
