F45 Training Pty, Ltd. et al. v. Body Fit Training USA, Inc. et al.
Infringement action filed 29 Dec 2022 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and closed 17 Apr 2023, with US10143890B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: appeal dismissed.
Case record
- Patent involved
- US10143890B2
- Application no.
- US14/931920
- Case no.
- 23-1304
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- Fed. Cir.
- Court level
- Court of Appeals
- Case region
- District of Columbia
- Chief judge
- William C. Bryson
- Trial level
- Appeal
- Filed – Closed
- 29 Dec 2022 – 17 Apr 2023
- Duration
- 109 days
- Basis of termination
- Appeal Dismissed
- Products & marks
- Remote configuration and operation of fitness studios from a central server
- 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
Remote configuration and operation of fitness studios from a central server
A method for configuring and operating one or more fitness studios each comprising a plurality of exercise stations at which users perform associated exercise routines, each station having an associated display, the method comprising, for each fitness studio, periodically retrieving, by a server from a database, fitness information for the studio in question for a specified period, from a multi-period fitness library; communicating, by the server to a studio computer, the retrieved fitness information over a communications network; periodically receiving, by the studio computer, the retrieved fitness information; configuring the exercise stations dependent upon the received fitness information; and communicating, by the studio computer to the exercise station displays, dependent upon the received fitness information, station directions to users exercising at the stations for performing an exercise.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 4 Dec 2018
- Earliest priority
- 4 Nov 2014
- Est. expiry
- 13 Sep 2036
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- DEUTSCH, ROBERT · GILCHRIST, ADAM
- Classification
- A63B24/00G06F19/00G16H40/67G16H20/30G09B19/00G06F17/30G05G9/047G16Z99/00
- Prosecution counsel
- King & Spalding, LLP
- Examiner
- GANESAN, SUNDHARA
Parties of record
F45 Training Pty, Ltd.
- Core tech
- A63B24/00G06F19/00G16H40/67G16H20/30
- Counsel
- Abby Parsons · Angela Campbell Tarasi · James P. Brogan · Jonathan Weinberg · Thomas Friel
- Firm
- King & Spalding LLP
- Also named
- F45 Training, Inc.
Body Fit Training USA, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Devon Wesley Edwards · Indranil Mukerji · Stephen Marshall
- Firm
- Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
- Also named
- BFT Franchise Holdings LLC
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Abby Parsons | F45 Training Pty, Ltd. | Plaintiff |
| Angela Campbell Tarasi | F45 Training Pty, Ltd. | Plaintiff |
| James P. Brogan | F45 Training Pty, Ltd. | Plaintiff |
| Jonathan Weinberg | F45 Training Pty, Ltd. | Plaintiff |
| Thomas Friel | F45 Training Pty, Ltd. | Plaintiff |
| Devon Wesley Edwards | Body Fit Training USA, Inc. | Defendant |
| Indranil Mukerji | Body Fit Training USA, Inc. | Defendant |
| Stephen Marshall | Body Fit Training USA, Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“The parties having so agreed, it is ordered that: (1) The proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App. P. 42 (b).(2) Each side shall bear their own costs.”
Case 23-1304 · Fed. Cir. · closed 17 April 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 23-1304?
23-1304 is a patent infringement action brought by F45 Training Pty, Ltd. against Body Fit Training USA, Inc., filed on 29 Dec 2022 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The case closed on 17 April 2023.
Which patent was asserted in 23-1304?
US10143890B2 (“Remote configuration and operation of fitness studios from a central server”), assigned to F45 TRAINING PTY LTD, currently active. The record also lists Remote configuration and operation of fitness studios from a central server.
How was case 23-1304 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is appeal dismissed. The termination text reads: “The parties having so agreed, it is ordered that: (1) The proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App. P. 42 (b).(2) Each side shall bear their own costs.”
How long did case 23-1304 take?
109 calendar days, from filing on 29 Dec 2022 to closure on 17 April 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 23-1304?
Chief Judge William C. Bryson presided. Abby Parsons, Angela Campbell Tarasi, James P. Brogan, Jonathan Weinberg and Thomas Friel are recorded as counsel for plaintiff F45 Training Pty. Devon Wesley Edwards, Indranil Mukerji and Stephen Marshall appear for defendant Body Fit Training USA.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 23-1304 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.