Famous Group Technologies v. Rago & Cue Audio: Patent Suit Dismissed Without Prejudice
The Famous Group Technologies, Inc. filed suit in the Central District of California against Tony Rago and Cue Audio, Inc., asserting two patents covering its FanSee and PostUp interactive fan experience products. The case ended in a voluntary dismissal without prejudice after just 173 days — leaving the door open for refiling.
Interactive fan tech patents dismissed without prejudice in under six months
The Famous Group Technologies, Inc., a technology company holding patents on interactive live-event fan engagement products, filed suit on 29 November 2023 in the Central District of California against Tony Rago and Cue Audio, Inc. The complaint alleged infringement of two U.S. patents — US11736545B2 and US10482660B2 — both directed at technology underlying The Famous Group’s FanSee and PostUp products used in live sports and entertainment environments.
The action was terminated on 20 May 2024 pursuant to a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice (Dkt. 29), which the court formally ordered. A dismissal without prejudice means the plaintiff has not surrendered its infringement claims; it may refile the same action against either defendant in a competent court, subject to any applicable statute of limitations. No merits ruling, claim construction, or invalidity determination was made.
At 173 days, the resolution timeline is notably swift. Cases of this nature that proceed to claim construction typically run 18–30 months in the C.D. Cal. The speed of dismissal — combined with the absence of a settlement on the public record — suggests the parties may have reached a private arrangement, or that plaintiff elected to recalibrate strategy before significant litigation costs accrued. The precise motivation for the dismissal is not disclosed in the public record.
Filing to Voluntary dismissal in 173 days
173 days — resolved well below the median district court patent case lifespan of 2–3 years
Voluntarily dismissed: what the without-prejudice ruling means for both parties
Voluntary dismissal under Rule 41 — no merits decided
A voluntary dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) terminates the current action without any adjudication on the merits. The court’s order (Dkt. 29) confirmed the entire action is dismissed. Critically, no patent validity, infringement, or claim scope rulings were made — the legal status of both asserted patents remains unchanged from the filing date.
Rule 41(a) — no merits rulingWithout prejudice confirmed — refiling remains available
The court order expressly states dismissal is ‘without prejudice in its entirety,’ meaning The Famous Group Technologies retains the right to reassert these claims against Tony Rago, Cue Audio, or both in a future action. This stands in contrast to a with-prejudice dismissal, which would bar refiling on the same claims. The public record is silent on whether any private agreement accompanied the dismissal.
Refiling right preservedDefendants walk away — but risk of renewed suit persists
Tony Rago and Cue Audio, Inc. exit this proceeding without an adverse finding. However, a without-prejudice dismissal provides no lasting shield: plaintiff may refile on the same patents. Defendants — and any business partners operating in the live-event fan engagement technology space — should treat this as a deferral of risk, not its elimination. Freedom-to-operate review of US11736545B2 and US10482660B2 remains prudent.
No adverse finding — re-suit risk remainsUncertainty persists in interactive fan experience technology
Neither patent was invalidated nor was infringement adjudicated, leaving the competitive landscape in the live-event fan engagement sector unresolved. Companies developing or commercialising audience synchronisation, interactive broadcast, or stadium engagement tools that may overlap with FanSee or PostUp functionality should note that both patents remain fully enforceable. The swift dismissal may signal a business resolution, but that cannot be confirmed from the public record.
Patents remain enforceableFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | The Famous Group Technologies, Inc. | Company | Interactive live-event fan engagement tech company — holder of US11736545B2 and US10482660B2Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Tony Rago | Individual | Tony Rago (individual) and Cue Audio, Inc. — defendants in FanSee/PostUp patent infringement actionSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Cue Audio, Inc. | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Jose L. Patino | Attorney | Counsel for The Famous Group Technologies, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Willmore F. Holbrow , III | Attorney | Counsel for The Famous Group Technologies, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Buchalter APC | Law Firm | Representing The Famous Group Technologies, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Brian J. Sodikoff | Attorney | Counsel for Tony RagoSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Janella T. Gholian | Attorney | Counsel for Tony RagoSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP | Law Firm | Representing Tony RagoSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | California Central District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The court’s order adopts the language of the Notice of Voluntary Dismissal verbatim, confirming dismissal ‘without prejudice in its entirety.’ The phrase ‘in its entirety’ is significant: it forecloses any argument that partial claims or individual defendants were carved out. No substantive findings — on infringement, validity, or claim scope — were made, meaning neither patent’s enforceability has been tested. The order is effectively administrative, converting plaintiff’s unilateral procedural act into a formal court judgment of dismissal.
US11736545B2 & US10482660B2 — Interactive Fan Experience Technology
US11736545B2 (application no. US17/502569) and US10482660B2 (application no. US15/042773) together form the core patent portfolio asserted by The Famous Group Technologies in connection with its FanSee and PostUp products. These patents are directed at technology enabling real-time interactive engagement between live-event audiences and broadcast or in-venue systems — a domain spanning signal coordination, user device integration, and synchronised audience participation in sports and entertainment contexts.
The strategic importance of this portfolio lies in the fast-growing live-event technology market, where stadium operators, sports leagues, and entertainment companies are investing heavily in second-screen and audience participation experiences. With both patents surviving this litigation without validity challenge, The Famous Group holds meaningful IP leverage over competitors developing functionally similar audience engagement or fan participation platforms. Any company operating in adjacent spaces — including mobile fan apps, LED audience wristband systems, or broadcast-integrated stadium technology — should map their product features against these patent claims.
Should you run an FTO against US11736545B2 and US10482660B2?
If your product or platform involves real-time audience engagement, synchronised fan participation, interactive in-venue experiences, or broadcast-integrated mobile fan tools, these two patents warrant a freedom-to-operate review. The Famous Group’s enforcement action — even though dismissed without prejudice — confirms an active intent to assert these rights. Product teams building FanSee-adjacent or PostUp-adjacent functionality are directly in scope.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent allows R&D and IP teams to run structured claim-mapping analyses against US11736545B2 and US10482660B2, identifying overlap with your product features, flagging prior art, and surfacing related family members or continuation risk. Because neither patent was narrowed or invalidated in this litigation, claim scope analysis against the issued claims is the correct starting point — Eureka automates and accelerates that workflow.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11736545B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar patent cases: interactive fan technology & live-event engagement IP
Cases involving interactive audience engagement and live-event technology patents in U.S. district courts, with comparable voluntary dismissal or early exit patterns.
What this case signals for the live-event fan technology IP landscape
A without-prejudice exit preserves plaintiff’s options and leaves two live patents unresolved — here is what sector participants should watch.
Both asserted patents remain fully enforceable post-dismissal
US11736545B2 and US10482660B2 were never subject to invalidity proceedings or claim construction in this action. Any competitor or partner in the live-event fan engagement technology space should treat these patents as active enforcement risks. A freedom-to-operate assessment is warranted before building on overlapping technology.
Swift voluntary dismissal may signal a private commercial resolution
Cases dismissed voluntarily within six months, before substantive motions practice, frequently reflect private licensing negotiations or business settlements. If a confidential licence was granted to Cue Audio, it would not appear in the public record — but it may establish a royalty benchmark relevant to future licensing discussions in this space.
The v Tony — key questions answered
The Famous Group Technologies filed a patent infringement suit in the C.D. Cal. on 29 November 2023 against Tony Rago and Cue Audio, Inc., asserting US11736545B2 and US10482660B2 over FanSee and PostUp products. The case was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice on 20 May 2024 after 173 days, with no merits adjudication.
A dismissal without prejudice means The Famous Group Technologies retains the right to refile its infringement claims against Tony Rago and/or Cue Audio, Inc. in the future. No finding was made on validity, infringement, or claim scope. Both asserted patents — US11736545B2 and US10482660B2 — remain fully enforceable.
Both patents are associated with The Famous Group’s FanSee and PostUp products, which are directed at interactive live-event fan engagement and audience synchronisation technology. The patents cover real-time integration between fan devices and broadcast or in-venue systems in sports and entertainment settings.
Yes. Because the dismissal was expressly without prejudice, The Famous Group Technologies is not barred from refiling the same or similar infringement claims against either defendant, subject to applicable statutes of limitations. The court’s order confirmed the dismissal covered the action ‘in its entirety’ but did not release any claims.
The Famous Group Technologies was represented by Jose L. Patino and Willmore F. Holbrow III of Buchalter APC. Tony Rago and Cue Audio, Inc. were represented by Brian J. Sodikoff and Janella T. Gholian of Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.