Infringement action filed 30 Aug 2024 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and closed 15 May 2026, with 6 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: dismissed with prejudice.
A method for transferring audio data and audio-related information includes: a generation step of generating second audio data from first audio data; a transmission step of transmitting the second audio data and audio-related information associated with the second audio data; and a reception step of receiving the second audio data and the audio-related information, wherein the audio-related information includes information representing a sampling frequency of the first audio data.
A communication system including a transmitter, a receiver, and a serial link, in which encoded data (e.g., encoded video data and encoded auxiliary data) are transmitted from the transmitter to the receiver. The serial link can but need not be a TMDS or TMDS-like link. In typical embodiments, alternating bursts of encoded video data and encoded auxiliary data are transmitted over each of one or more channels of the link. Other aspects of the invention are transmitters for use in encoding data for transmission over a serial link, and methods for sending encoded data over a serial link. In accordance with the invention, the data to be transmitted are encoded using a subset (sometimes referred to as a selected set of code words) of a full set of code words. The selected set of code words is selected such that each stream of encoded data (comprising only such code words) transmitted over a serial link has a bit pattern that is less susceptible to inter-symbol interference (“ISI”) during transmission than is the bit pattern determined by a conventionally encoded version of the same data (comprising not only the selected set of code words but also other members of the full set). In general, the best choice for the selected set of code words selected from a full set of binary code words depends on the particular coding implemented by the full set. Typically, the selected set of code words includes words whose serial patterns (during transmission) have fewer contiguous zeros and ones (and thus are less susceptible to ISI during transmission) than do those code words in the full set that are not selected. In preferred embodiments in which the bits of the selected set of code words are transmitted over a serial link as sequences of rising and falling voltage transitions, the bit pattern of each transmitted stream of the selected set of code words implements DC balancing to limit the voltage drift over time.
The docket lists 6 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining 4 asserted patents are one query away in Eureka.
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 parties’ Joint Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice of All Claims Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Docket No. 43. The parties stipulate and agree to dismiss with prejudice all claims asserted by Plaintiff in this action. Id. They also state that each party shall bear its own costs, expenses, and attorney’s fees. Id. After review, and because it is agreed, the Court ACCEPTS the joint stipulation (Docket No. 43). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that all claims made by Plaintiff against Defendant ASUSTeK Computer Inc. in this action are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Each party shall bear its own costs, expenses, and attorney’s fees. It is further ORDERED that all motions pending in this action and in the former consolidated, lead case (Cause No. 5:24-CV-122) are DENIED-AS-MOOT."
Case 5:24-cv-00126 · E.D. Tex. · closed 15 May 2026
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.
5:24-cv-00126 is a patent infringement action brought by General Video, LLC against Asustek Computer, Inc., filed on 30 Aug 2024 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case closed on 15 May 2026.
Which patents were asserted in 5:24-cv-00126?
US7069224B2 (“Receiver for receiving audio data and audio-related information”), assigned to GENERAL VIDEO, LLC, currently inactive; US7359437B2 (“Encoding method and system for reducing inter-symbol interference effects in transmission over a serial link”), assigned to GENERAL VIDEO, LLC, currently inactive; US9036010B2 (“Transport of stereoscopic image data over a display interface”), assigned to KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N V; US9843786B2 (“Transport of stereoscopic image data over a display interface”), assigned to GENERAL VIDEO, LLC; US7225282B1 (“Method and apparatus for a two-wire serial command bus interface”), assigned to GENERAL VIDEO, LLC; US6584443B1 (“Apparatus and method for audio data/audio-related information transfer”), assigned to GENERAL VIDEO, LLC. The record also lists DP Standards.
How was case 5:24-cv-00126 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is dismissed with prejudice. The termination text reads: "Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice of All Claims Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Docket No. 43. The parties stipulate and agree to dismiss with prejudice all claims asserted by Plaintiff in this action. Id. They also state that each party shall bear its own costs, expenses, and attorney’s fees. Id. After review, and because it is agreed, the Court ACCEPTS the joint stipulation (Docket No. 43). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that all claims made by Plaintiff against Defendant ASUSTeK Computer Inc. in this action are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
What does dismissal with prejudice mean?
A dismissal with prejudice permanently ends the claims that were filed, so the same claims cannot be brought again against that defendant. It is the usual form when the parties have settled.
How long did case 5:24-cv-00126 take?
623 calendar days, from filing on 30 Aug 2024 to closure on 15 May 2026.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 5:24-cv-00126?
Chief Judge Robert W. Schroeder III presided. Geoffrey Patton Culbertson, Kelly B. Tidwell, Matthew George McAndrews and Peter J McAndrews are recorded as counsel for plaintiff General Video. Gregory Blake Thompson, Jeffrey Lance Johnson and Robert J. Benson appear for defendant Asustek Computer.
Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 5:24-cv-00126 and do not constitute legal advice.Ask your own question
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 5:24-cv-00126 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.
