Intercurrency Software v. Tor Currency Exchange: 4-Patent Currency Platform Suit Dismissed With Prejudice
Intercurrency Software, LLC asserted four patents covering consolidated currency trading and money transfer technology against Tor Currency Exchange Limited’s TorFX platforms. Filed in the Eastern District of Texas before Judge Rodney Gilstrap, the case ended in a voluntary dismissal with prejudice after 150 days — each party bearing its own costs.
Currency platform patent suit ends with finality before any merits ruling
Intercurrency Software, LLC filed this patent infringement action on January 21, 2025 in the Eastern District of Texas (Case No. 2:25-cv-00057) before Judge Rodney Gilstrap. The complaint targeted Tor Currency Exchange Limited’s TorFX Business and Personal Money Transfers platforms — including the torfx.com web platform and mobile TorFX app — alleging infringement of four US patents covering consolidated trading and currency exchange technology.
On June 20, 2025, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Judge Gilstrap accepted and acknowledged the dismissal, ordering all claims in Member Case No. 2:25-cv-57-JRG dismissed with prejudice, with each party bearing its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees. All pending relief requests were denied as moot.
The 150-day resolution — before any publicly docketed claim construction or substantive merits ruling — is consistent with a negotiated resolution or licensing agreement, though the public record is silent on any commercial terms. The ‘with prejudice’ designation is significant: Intercurrency Software cannot refile these specific claims against Tor Currency Exchange on the same patents, providing TorFX with finality on this dispute.
Filing to Voluntary dismissal in 150 days
150 days — resolved before any claim construction or trial in E.D. Texas
Dismissed with prejudice: what the Rule 41 exit means for both parties
Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) dismissal with prejudice explained
A voluntary dismissal with prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) is filed by the plaintiff unilaterally before the defendant has answered or moved for summary judgment. The ‘with prejudice’ designation is critical: it operates as a final adjudication on the merits, permanently barring Intercurrency Software from refiling the same claims against Tor Currency Exchange on these four patents in any US federal court.
Permanent bar on refilingWith prejudice — a permanent resolution for TorFX
Unlike a dismissal without prejudice — which leaves the door open for re-litigation — a with-prejudice dismissal gives Tor Currency Exchange lasting protection against Intercurrency Software on these specific patent claims. The court record does not disclose whether a licensing agreement or settlement payment accompanied the dismissal. What is clear is that TorFX faces no further litigation risk from Intercurrency on these four asserted patents.
No re-litigation risk on these patentsIntercurrency Software cannot refile these claims against TorFX
By filing a with-prejudice dismissal, Intercurrency Software extinguished its ability to reassert these four patents against Tor Currency Exchange in US federal court. Whether this reflects a licensing resolution, a strategic portfolio decision, or a substantive weakness identified during early litigation is not disclosed in the public record. However, the patents themselves remain valid and enforceable against other defendants unless separately challenged.
Patents remain live against othersCurrency platform operators: four patents remain active enforcement tools
The four Intercurrency patents — covering consolidated trading platforms and money transfer systems — remain in force and have not been adjudicated on the merits. Other fintech and currency exchange operators running similar consolidated trading or money transfer platforms should treat this dismissal as a pause, not a conclusion. Intercurrency Software retains the right to assert these patents against other parties in the sector, and E.D. Texas remains a favored venue for such actions.
Ongoing sector risk from these patentsFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Intercurrency Software, LLC | Company | Patent assertion entity — holder of US10776863B1 and 3 further currency platform patentsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Tor Currency Exchange Limited | Individual | UK-based international money transfer provider operating TorFX business and personal platformsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Christopher A. Honea | Attorney | Counsel for Intercurrency Software, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Garteiser Honea PLLC | Law Firm | Representing Intercurrency Software, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Erik J. Halverson | Attorney | Counsel for Tor Currency Exchange LimitedSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Theodore J. Angelis | Attorney | Counsel for Tor Currency Exchange LimitedSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | K&L Gates LLP | Law Firm | Representing Tor Currency Exchange LimitedSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | K&L Gates LLP (Seattle) | Law Firm | Representing Tor Currency Exchange LimitedSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Rodney Gilstrap | Judge | Texas Eastern District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The court’s order accepts Plaintiff’s Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) notice without substantive analysis, confirming the procedural nature of the exit — no claims were adjudicated on the merits. The ‘with prejudice’ designation, explicitly acknowledged by the court, elevates the dismissal to a final judgment for res judicata purposes as between these parties. The cost-bearing order — each party bearing its own fees — is standard for Rule 41 exits and does not suggest any finding of litigation misconduct or exceptional case status under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
US10776863B1, US11449930B1, US10062107B1 & US11620701B1 — Consolidated Currency Trading Platform Patents
The four asserted patents — US10776863B1, US11449930B1, US10062107B1, and US11620701B1 — cover apparatus and method claims directed to consolidated trading platforms for currency exchange and money transfer operations. The portfolio spans application dates from 2007 (US11/736583) through 2022 (US17/948217), suggesting a continuation strategy to extend protection as the technology and relevant platforms evolved. All four issued as B1 patents, indicating they were examined without any pre-grant publication.
This portfolio is strategically significant for the fintech and international money transfer sector. Consolidated trading platforms — which aggregate currency exchange, personal transfers, and business payment flows into unified systems — are now standard infrastructure for operators like TorFX, Wise, and OFX. The breadth of the application filing history, spanning over 15 years, suggests claim families potentially broad enough to cover modern mobile and web-based implementations, making FTO analysis essential for any operator in this space.
Should your currency platform team run an FTO against this 4-patent portfolio?
Any company operating a consolidated currency trading, personal money transfer, or business FX platform with US users should treat this portfolio as a live risk. The asserted products in this case — TorFX’s web platform and mobile app — are structurally similar to platforms operated across the international money transfer sector. The absence of a merits ruling means no claim has been narrowed or invalidated through litigation, leaving the full issued scope intact.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the claim language of US10776863B1, US11449930B1, US10062107B1, and US11620701B1 against your platform architecture, identify prior art relevant to validity challenges, and surface continuation applications that may not yet have issued. For in-house teams and outside counsel advising fintech clients, early FTO work is materially cheaper than defending an E.D. Texas infringement action.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US10776863B1 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar currency platform and fintech patent cases in E.D. Texas
Cases involving consolidated trading platform and money transfer patents before Judge Gilstrap in the Eastern District of Texas, with comparable assertion and dismissal patterns.
What this case signals for the fintech currency platform IP landscape
Four live patents, a fast exit, and no merits ruling — the currency transfer sector should take note.
E.D. Texas remains the venue of choice for fintech patent assertions
Judge Gilstrap’s docket in the Eastern District of Texas continues to attract patent assertion cases targeting technology platforms. Currency exchange and money transfer operators with US-facing platforms should monitor new filings here closely. The Intercurrency portfolio covers platform consolidation logic that could read across multiple fintech products.
With-prejudice exit protects TorFX but leaves the broader market exposed
The dismissal with prejudice resolves only Intercurrency Software’s claims against Tor Currency Exchange. The four asserted patents — US10776863B1, US11449930B1, US10062107B1, and US11620701B1 — remain enforceable. Fintech operators offering consolidated trading or multi-currency transfer platforms face ongoing exposure until these patents are invalidated or expired.
Intercurrency v Tor — key questions answered
Intercurrency Software, LLC filed a patent infringement suit against Tor Currency Exchange Limited in the Eastern District of Texas on January 21, 2025, asserting four patents over TorFX’s money transfer platforms. The case was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice on June 20, 2025, after 150 days, with each party bearing its own costs. No merits ruling was issued.
Intercurrency Software asserted US10776863B1 (App. No. US16/113289), US11449930B1 (App. No. US17/019359), US10062107B1 (App. No. US11/736583), and US11620701B1 (App. No. US17/948217) — all directed to consolidated currency trading platform apparatus and methods. All four remain in force following the dismissal.
A dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) permanently bars Intercurrency Software from refiling these specific patent claims against Tor Currency Exchange in US federal court. It operates as a final adjudication for res judicata purposes. TorFX faces no further litigation risk from Intercurrency on these four patents, though the patents remain enforceable against other defendants.
The public record does not disclose the reason. A 150-day voluntary dismissal with prejudice before any answer or claim construction is consistent with a negotiated licensing agreement or commercial settlement, but this is not confirmed. It may also reflect a strategic portfolio or venue decision. The court order is silent on any underlying commercial terms.
Yes. The dismissal only resolves claims against Tor Currency Exchange. US10776863B1, US11449930B1, US10062107B1, and US11620701B1 were not adjudicated on the merits, invalidated, or expired. Other operators running consolidated currency trading or money transfer platforms — particularly those with US-facing web or mobile products — should assess FTO exposure against this portfolio.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.