Nostromo, LLC v. Macy’s, Inc.
Infringement action filed 9 Jun 2025 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and closed 24 Mar 2026, with US8559970B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: dismissed with prejudice.
Case record
- Patent involved
- US8559970B2
- Application no.
- US12/644944
- Case no.
- 2:25-cv-00613
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- E.D. Tex.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Texas
- Chief judge
- None recorded
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 9 Jun 2025 – 24 Mar 2026
- Duration
- 288 days
- Basis of termination
- Dismissed with Prejudice
- Products & marks
- Macy’s Mobile Application
- Validity challenges
- 1 on record
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- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Method for providing location-based information services, location-based information services system, and portable electronic device
A method for providing location-based information services to a portable electronic device includes the steps of: providing an information platform and a user preference settings database for receiving and recording preference settings data of a user of the portable electronic device, respectively, the preference settings data including categories of information and location range; receiving positioning information from the portable electronic device using a positioning module; selecting location information from a location information database in accordance with the preference settings data recorded in the user preference settings database that corresponds to the positioning information received by the positioning module; and transmitting the selected location information to the portable electronic device. Since location-based information services are provided based on the preference settings data, the user receives only the location information that he or she prefers.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 15 Oct 2013
- Earliest priority
- 23 Dec 2008
- Est. expiry
- 25 Apr 2031
- Validity challenges
- 1 on record90019554 · EPR · filed by Unified Patents LLC
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- LEE, YUNG-CHAO
- Classification
- H04W88/02
- Prosecution counsel
- Stevens & Lee PC
- Examiner
- MIZRAHI, DIANE
Parties of record
Nostromo, LLC
- Core tech
- H04W88/02
- Counsel
- Alfred Ross Fabricant · Justin Kurt Truelove · Peter Lambrianakos · Vincent J. Rubino III
- Firm
- Fabricant, Rubino & Lambrianakos LLP, Truelove Law Firm
Macy’s, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Bryan P. Clark · Kent E. Baldauf Jr. · Michael C. Smith
- Firm
- Scheef & Stone, LLP, The Webb Law Firm PC
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Alfred Ross Fabricant | Nostromo, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Justin Kurt Truelove | Nostromo, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Peter Lambrianakos | Nostromo, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Vincent J. Rubino III | Nostromo, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Bryan P. Clark | Macy’s, Inc. | Defendant |
| Kent E. Baldauf Jr. | Macy’s, Inc. | Defendant |
| Michael C. Smith | Macy’s, Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Before the Court is the Joint Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”) filed by Nostromo LLC. (“Plaintiff”) and Macy’s Inc (“Defendants”). (Dkt. No. 51.) In the Motion, the parties represent that the above-captioned member case has been resolved and request dismissal of the abovecaptioned member case WITH prejudice. (Id. at 1.) Having considered the Motion, the Court finds that it should be and hereby is GRANTED. Accordingly, all claims and causes of action asserted between Plaintiff and Defendant in the abovecaptioned member case are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Each party is to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees. All pending requests for relief in the above-captioned member case not explicitly granted herein are DENIED AS MOOT”
Case 2:25-cv-00613 · E.D. Tex. · closed 24 March 2026
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case 2:25-cv-00613?
2:25-cv-00613 is a patent infringement action brought by Nostromo, LLC against Macy’s, Inc., filed on 9 Jun 2025 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case closed on 24 March 2026.
Which patent was asserted in 2:25-cv-00613?
US8559970B2 (“Method for providing location-based information services, location-based information services system, and portable electronic device”), assigned to NOSTROMO LLC, currently inactive. The record also lists Macy’s Mobile Application.
How was case 2:25-cv-00613 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is dismissed with prejudice. The termination text reads: “Before the Court is the Joint Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”) filed by Nostromo LLC. (“Plaintiff”) and Macy’s Inc (“Defendants”). (Dkt. No. 51.) In the Motion, the parties represent that the above-captioned member case has been resolved and request dismissal of the abovecaptioned member case WITH prejudice. (Id. at 1.) Having considered the Motion, the Court finds that it should be and hereby is GRANTED. Accordingly, all claims and causes of action asserted between Plaintiff and Defendant in the abovecaptioned member case are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Each party is to bear its own costs, exp
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 2:25-cv-00613 take?
288 calendar days, from filing on 9 Jun 2025 to closure on 24 March 2026.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:25-cv-00613?
Alfred Ross Fabricant, Justin Kurt Truelove, Peter Lambrianakos and Vincent J. Rubino III are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Nostromo. Bryan P. Clark, Kent E. Baldauf Jr. and Michael C. Smith appear for defendant Macy’s.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:25-cv-00613 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.