OrderMagic LLC vs. Chick-fil-A: Voluntary Dismissal in Remote Ordering Patent Case

Case Overview

In a case that closed nearly as quietly as it opened, OrderMagic LLC’s patent infringement action against Chick-fil-A, Inc. ended in a voluntary dismissal with prejudice before the Eastern District of Texas — one of the nation’s most patent-litigation-active venues. Filed on April 9, 2025, and resolved by September 18, 2025, the dispute centered on U.S. Patent No. 7,831,475 B2, covering remote ordering system technology. The case resolved in just 162 days without a merits ruling, judgment, or disclosed settlement terms.

For IP professionals tracking remote ordering and food-service technology patent litigation, this outcome carries meaningful signals. Voluntary dismissals with prejudice — particularly those in which each party bears its own fees — often indicate behind-the-scenes resolution, strategic retreat, or a plaintiff’s reassessment of claim viability. Understanding why cases like OrderMagic v. Chick-fil-A terminate the way they do is critical intelligence for patent attorneys, in-house counsel, and R&D teams operating in the competitive digital ordering technology space.

Primary Keyword Focus: Remote ordering patent infringement litigation, Eastern District of Texas patent case.

The Parties

Patents at Issue

This case involved one patent covering foundational remote ordering system technology that underpins modern digital food service:

• • US7831475B2 — Remote ordering systems (Application No. US11/757998)

The Verdict & Legal Analysis

Outcome

The Eastern District of Texas dismissed all claims with prejudice on September 18, 2025, pursuant to OrderMagic’s voluntary Notice of Dismissal. The dismissal was entered under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), and the court ordered that each party bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees. No damages were assessed. No injunctive relief was granted. No merits ruling on patent validity or infringement was issued.

Key Legal Issues

The case was classified as an infringement action — meaning OrderMagic initiated suit alleging Chick-fil-A’s remote ordering system infringed one or more claims of US7831475B2. However, because the case terminated via voluntary dismissal before substantive merits rulings, no formal judicial determination of infringement or non-infringement was made. A dismissal with prejudice is legally significant: unlike a dismissal without prejudice, it bars OrderMagic from re-filing the same claims against Chick-fil-A on the same patent. This is a complete, final resolution — not a procedural pause. The absence of a fee-shifting award under 35 U.S.C. § 285 (which permits attorney fee awards in “exceptional” patent cases) is notable. Chick-fil-A’s defense team — which included Jones Day’s resources — did not secure, or did not pursue, fee recovery, suggesting either a negotiated resolution or an agreed clean exit.