Onstream Media, Corp. v. Zerify, Inc.
Infringement action filed 9 Sep 2022 in the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming and closed 9 Mar 2023, with US10674109B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case dismissed.
Case record
- Patent involved
- US10674109B2
- Application no.
- US16/048761
- Case no.
- 2:22-cv-00192
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- D. Wyo.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Wyoming
- Chief judge
- None recorded
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 9 Sep 2022 – 9 Mar 2023
- Duration
- 181 days
- Basis of termination
- Case Dismissed
- Products & marks
- Remotely accessed virtual recording room
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
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
Remotely accessed virtual recording room
An audio/video stream recording, storage, and delivery system 10 utilizes an Internet-based browser connection. The system 10 includes recording software 20, storage memory 30, a code generator 40, and a user interface 50. Preferably, the recording software 20 is located on the host back end 60 where it processes and records audio and video material that originates from the user front end 70 and is streamed to the host back end. The storage memory 30, which is also located on the host back end 60, stores the recorded audio and video material. The user interface 50 to the system provides a user located at the user front end 70 with remote access to a virtual recording room. The user interface 50 further enables the user to record audio and video material streamed from the user front end 70 by activating the recording software 20 located on the host back end 60. This is accomplished without requiring recording functionality on the user front end 70. The code generator 30 produces code associated with the recorded audio and video material. This code can be easily copied and pasted to an additional location 80, such as an auction website. Activating the code pasted at the additional location 80 provides access to the recorded audio and video material from the additional location while allowing the recorded audio and video material to remain stored at the host back end 60.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 2 Jun 2020
- Est. expiry
- 24 Mar 2024
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- ELLIS, GREGORY DUANE
- Classification
- H04N5/77H04N21/231H04N21/2747H04N21/2543G11B27/031H04N21/658H04N21/6587H04N21/4143H04N21/475H04N7/173H04N21/643H04N21/61H04N21/4782H04N21/232H04N5/91
- Prosecution counsel
- PLUMSEA LAW GROUP, LLC
- Examiner
- LANGHNOJA, KUNAL
Parties of record
Onstream Media, Corp.
- Core tech
- H04N5/77H04N21/231H04N21/2747H04N21/2543
- Counsel
- Rick L. Koehmstedt
- Firm
- Schwartz Bon Walker & Studer
Zerify, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Not recorded
- Firm
- Not recorded
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Rick L. Koehmstedt | Onstream Media, Corp. | Plaintiff |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“THIS MATTER, having come before the Court on Plaintiffs Notice of Dismissal (ECF No. 6), and the Court, being fully advised in the premises: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to R. CiV. P. 41 (a) (A) (i) IT IS FURTHER ORDERED each party shall bear its own attorney fees and costs. The Clerk of Court will please close this case.”
Case 2:22-cv-00192 · D. Wyo. · closed 9 March 2023
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 2:22-cv-00192?
2:22-cv-00192 is a patent infringement action brought by Onstream Media, Corp. against Zerify, Inc., filed on 9 Sep 2022 in the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming. The case closed on 9 March 2023.
Which patent was asserted in 2:22-cv-00192?
US10674109B2 (“Remotely accessed virtual recording room”), assigned to ONSTREAM MEDIA CORPORATION, currently inactive. The record also lists Remotely accessed virtual recording room.
How was case 2:22-cv-00192 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is case dismissed. The termination text reads: “THIS MATTER, having come before the Court on Plaintiffs Notice of Dismissal (ECF No. 6), and the Court, being fully advised in the premises: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to R. CiV. P. 41 (a) (A) (i) IT IS FURTHER ORDERED each party shall bear its own attorney fees and costs. The Clerk of Court will please close this case.”
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 2:22-cv-00192 take?
181 calendar days, from filing on 9 Sep 2022 to closure on 9 March 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:22-cv-00192?
Rick L. Koehmstedt is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Onstream Media.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:22-cv-00192 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.