Book a demo

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

Try now
M4siz v. Victoria’s Secret & | Patent Lawsuit 6:22-cv-00740

M4siz Limited v. Victoria’s Secret & Co.

6:22-cv-00740 W.D. Tex. Closed US6526402B2
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 6 Jul 2022 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas and closed 19 Oct 2023, with US6526402B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: dismissed without prejudice.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Patent involved
US6526402B2
Application no.
US09/732947
Case no.
6:22-cv-00740
Verdict cause
Infringement action
Court
W.D. Tex.
Court level
District Court
Case region
Texas
Chief judge
None recorded
Trial level
First instance
Filed – Closed
6 Jul 2022 – 19 Oct 2023
Duration
470 days
Basis of termination
Dismissed without Prejudice
Products & marks
Victoria’s Secret-branded websites https://www.victoriassecret.com
Validity challenges
None recorded
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 6:22-cv-00740, United States District Court for the Western 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
US6526402B2 Inactive App. US09/732947

Searching procedures

A searching procedure, particularly for searching on the Internet, using a search engine associated with a database and comprising submitting a request string comprising a locator (or URL) for the search engine and a search string including at least one search term. This will be an invalid address so an error signal is generated, and the generation thereof is monitored and used to trigger parsing of the request into the locator and the search string. The search string is then submitted to the search engine having the specified locator; and the data returned from the search engine is passed back to the user. The invention also includes a computer readable medium and a set of application program interfaces on such a medium for use in effecting the above procedure. The invention allows convenient searching from a command line.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
25 Feb 2003
Earliest priority
27 Oct 2000
Est. expiry
12 Jul 2021
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
G06F17/30
Examiner
METJAHIC, SAFET
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

“Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties hereby stipulate and agree to the dismissal of the above action, without prejudice. The parties further stipulate and agree that each will bear its own costs and fees.”

Case 6:22-cv-00740 · W.D. Tex. · closed 19 October 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 6:22-cv-00740?

6:22-cv-00740 is a patent infringement action brought by M4siz Limited against Victoria’s Secret & Co., filed on 6 Jul 2022 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. The case closed on 19 October 2023.

Which patent was asserted in 6:22-cv-00740?

US6526402B2 (“Searching procedures”), assigned to M4SIZ LIMITED, currently inactive. The record also lists Victoria’s Secret-branded websites https://www.victoriassecret.com.

How was case 6:22-cv-00740 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is dismissed without prejudice. The termination text reads: “Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties hereby stipulate and agree to the dismissal of the above action, without prejudice. The parties further stipulate and agree that each will bear its own costs and fees.”

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 6:22-cv-00740 take?

470 calendar days, from filing on 6 Jul 2022 to closure on 19 October 2023.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 6:22-cv-00740?

Jeffrey Eugene Kubiak, Joseph J. Zito and William P. Ramey III are recorded as counsel for plaintiff M4siz. Ashley Kissinger, Kyle A. Ceuninck and Richard W. Miller appear for defendant Victoria’s Secret &.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 6:22-cv-00740 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 6:22-cv-00740 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.