Gamehancement, LLC v. Mediatek, Inc.
Infringement action filed 9 Dec 2023 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas and closed 12 Dec 2023, with US7046252B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: dismissed without prejudice.
Case record
- Patent involved
- US7046252B2
- Application no.
- US10/810137
- Case no.
- 6:23-cv-00844
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- W.D. Tex.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Texas
- Chief judge
- Kathleen Cardone
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 9 Dec 2023 – 12 Dec 2023
- Duration
- 3 days
- Basis of termination
- Dismissed without Prejudice
- Products & marks
- Method and system for adaptive color and contrast for display devices
- 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
Method and system for adaptive color and contrast for display devices
A method and apparatus that allows a display device to adaptively and automatically control display contrast and color is disclosed. The method and system in accordance with the present invention can be described by the following sequential process:
- 1. Separating an input image data value into its luma and chroma components.
- 2. Collecting the luma distribution data over the entire image or a specified window.
- 3. Analyzing the luma distribution.
- 4. Generating an appropriate contrast control response that modifies the input luma component to generate an output luma component, on a pixel by pixel basis.
- 5. Analyzing the input luma component and the output luma component, and an input chroma component, to generate an appropriate modification for the chroma component, on a pixel by pixel basis.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 16 May 2006
- Est. expiry
- 10 Jul 2022
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- NAIR, HARI · AGRAWAL, NEHA · CHOUDHARY, SAIF · NEEMA, ASHISH · JOHARY, ARUN
- Classification
- G09G5/02G09G5/06
- Prosecution counsel
- COJK
- Examiner
- BELLA, MATTHEW C.
Parties of record
Gamehancement, LLC
- Core tech
- G09G5/02G09G5/06
- Counsel
- Isaac Rabicoff
- Firm
- Rabicoff Law LLC
Mediatek, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Not recorded
- Firm
- Not recorded
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Isaac Rabicoff | Gamehancement, LLC | Plaintiff |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), Plaintiff hereby dismisses this action without prejudice. Defendant has not yet answered the Complaint or moved for summary judgment.”
Case 6:23-cv-00844 · W.D. Tex. · closed 12 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 6:23-cv-00844?
6:23-cv-00844 is a patent infringement action brought by Gamehancement, LLC against Mediatek, Inc., filed on 9 Dec 2023 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. The case closed on 12 December 2023.
Which patent was asserted in 6:23-cv-00844?
US7046252B2 (“Method and system for adaptive color and contrast for display devices”), assigned to GAMEHANCEMENT LLC, currently inactive. The record also lists Method and system for adaptive color and contrast for display devices.
How was case 6:23-cv-00844 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is dismissed without prejudice. The termination text reads: “Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), Plaintiff hereby dismisses this action without prejudice. Defendant has not yet answered the Complaint or moved for summary judgment.”
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 6:23-cv-00844 take?
3 calendar days, from filing on 9 Dec 2023 to closure on 12 December 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 6:23-cv-00844?
Chief Judge Kathleen Cardone presided. Isaac Rabicoff is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Gamehancement.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 6:23-cv-00844 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.