Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
Interface IP v. Latam Airlines Group | Patent Lawsuit 2:23-cv-00200

Interface IP Holdings, LLC v. Latam Airlines Group, SA

2:23-cv-00200 E.D. Tex. Closed 3 patents
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 8 May 2023 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and closed 9 Aug 2023, with 3 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: dismissed with prejudice.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Case no.
2:23-cv-00200
Verdict cause
Infringement action
Court
E.D. Tex.
Court level
District Court
Case region
Texas
Chief judge
Rodney Gilstrap
Trial level
First instance
Filed – Closed
8 May 2023 – 9 Aug 2023
Duration
93 days
Basis of termination
Dismissed with Prejudice
Products & marks
Data input method and system with multi-sub-field matching of user entries into a graphical input device · Graphical device for comprehensive viewing and input of variable data via a browser-based display · Graphical input device with dynamic field width adjustment for input of variable data via a browser-based display
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 2:23-cv-00200, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Open this record in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

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
10,000 free credits to start
Patent at issue
US7080325B2 Inactive App. US10/080472

Graphical device for comprehensive viewing and input of variable data via a browser-based display

A graphical input device, preferably in a browser-based display, resembles a pull-down menu, with a displayed data entry field. The set of possible entries to be displayed along with the graphical input device varies depending on the user. The minimum display width needed for full-width display of the entries is evaluated by scripting and the actual display of the set is generated accordingly. The drop-down list and its listed entries may be wider than the data entry field. The user can thus view and select customized possible entries that cannot fit within the displayed data entry field. According to another aspect of the preferred embodiment of the invention, when the user is making selections from the drop-down list, multiple keyboard entries can be used to cause rapid scrolling to entries that match not only the first character entered, but also to entries whose first n characters match n characters entered while viewing the list. For hierarchically structured and itemized entry lists, matching is preferably performed first to the right of at least one delimiter. The various novel aspects of the invention are implemented using scripting embedded within HTML code so that they are available to users who are browsing web content.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
18 Jul 2006
Est. expiry
21 Apr 2023
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
G06F3/00G06F3/033G06F3/048
Prosecution counsel
Heck Family Trust
Examiner
HUYNH, BA
US7080325B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US7080325B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
US7500201B2 Inactive App. US11/445908

Data input method and system with multi-sub-field matching of user entries into a graphical input device

A current set of user-selectable choices is associated with a displayed graphical input device, which is used to select a value of an input parameter. Each user-selectable choice has at least one pair of information fields separated by a delimiter and each information field comprises sequentially ordered characters. A search for a matching entry to assign to the input parameter is carried out as the user enters each of a sequence of characters, and if a match is not found in a first information field, then (or simultaneously) it is sought in a different information field, also on the basis of the character-by-character user entries.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
3 Mar 2009
Est. expiry
22 Feb 2022
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
G06F3/048G06F3/00G06F3/033
Examiner
THERIAULT, STEVEN B
US7500201B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US7500201B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2

Also asserted in this case

1 more

The docket lists 3 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining asserted patent are one query away in Eureka.

Source: Patsnap patent data + case record. Bibliographic fields and drawings reproduced from the published patent document. Break down the claims
Parties & counsel

Parties of record

Counsel of record

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

“Having considered the Notice, the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES that all claims and causes of action asserted by Plaintiff against Defendant in the above-captioned case are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Case 2:23-cv-00200 · E.D. Tex. · closed 9 August 2023
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.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 2:23-cv-00200?

2:23-cv-00200 is a patent infringement action brought by Interface IP Holdings, LLC against Latam Airlines Group, SA, filed on 8 May 2023 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case closed on 9 August 2023.

Which patents were asserted in 2:23-cv-00200?

US7080325B2 (“Graphical device for comprehensive viewing and input of variable data via a browser-based display”), assigned to INTERFACE IP HOLDINGS LLC, currently inactive; US7500201B2 (“Data input method and system with multi-sub-field matching of user entries into a graphical input device”), assigned to INTERFACE IP HOLDINGS LLC, currently inactive; US7406663B2 (“Graphical input device with dynamic field width adjustment for input of variable data via a browser-based display”), assigned to INTERFACE IP HOLDINGS LLC. The record also lists Data input method and system with multi-sub-field matching of user entries into a graphical input device, Graphical device for comprehensive viewing and input of variable data via a browser-based display and Graphical input device with dynamic field width adjustment for input of variable data via a browser-based display.

How was case 2:23-cv-00200 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is dismissed with prejudice. The termination text reads: “Having considered the Notice, the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES that all claims and causes of action asserted by Plaintiff against Defendant in the above-captioned case 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 2:23-cv-00200 take?

93 calendar days, from filing on 8 May 2023 to closure on 9 August 2023.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:23-cv-00200?

Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap presided. Bradford J. Black and Eric Hugh Findlay are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Interface IP.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 2:23-cv-00200 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:23-cv-00200 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.

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.