Intercurrency Software vs. Crypto.com: Dismissal in Fintech Patent Dispute

Case Overview

The Parties

The Patents at Issue

This case involved four U.S. patents relating to software architectures governing currency conversion, transaction management, and financial platform operations:

• • US10776863B1 — Financial software systems
• • US11449930B1 — Financial transaction processing
• • US10062107B1 — Currency exchange and transaction systems
• • US11620701B1 — Advanced financial platform methods

The Verdict & Legal Analysis

Outcome

The case concluded via Joint Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice (Dkt. No. 31), accepted by the Court. All claims asserted by Intercurrency Software against both Foris DAX Asia Pte., Ltd. and Foris DAX Inc. were dismissed. Critically, each party was ordered to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees — a standard provision in stipulated dismissals that forecloses fee-shifting motions under 35 U.S.C. § 285. No damages were awarded. No injunctive relief was granted. All pending motions were denied as moot.

Verdict Cause Analysis

The dismissal with prejudice is the operative legal event. While no judicial findings on validity or infringement were issued, several strategic dynamics merit analysis:

• Unlike a dismissal without prejudice, a with-prejudice dismissal permanently extinguishes the asserted claims against these defendants. Intercurrency Software cannot re-litigate these four patents against Foris DAX entities on these same claims. This represents a complete resolution, even absent a damages award.
• The mutual cost-bearing provision is a signal. In cases where defendants extract licensing agreements or plaintiffs receive compensation, fee arrangements typically differ. The “each party bears its own costs” structure most often reflects either a confidential license/settlement payment occurring outside the court record, or a plaintiff’s decision to abandon claims — potentially after evaluating the strength of the defendant’s invalidity positions or non-infringement arguments.

This case does not produce a precedential ruling. However, it contributes to the observable pattern of fintech and cryptocurrency patent assertions reaching resolution before claim construction — a critical juncture where patents covering broad software methods often face significant narrowing or invalidation risk under *Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International* (134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014)) and its progeny.