Push Data LLC v. PGA Tour: Four-Patent Mobile App Infringement Suit Dismissed With Prejudice
Push Data LLC filed suit in the Eastern District of Texas asserting four patents covering push-based mobile data delivery against PGA Tour’s iOS app, Android app, and mobile web platform. The case closed 226 days after filing when Push Data voluntarily dismissed all claims with prejudice, forfeiting any right to re-file.
NPE targets PGA Tour’s mobile platform with four push-data patents
On 14 February 2024, Push Data LLC filed a patent infringement complaint against PGA Tour, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Case No. 4:24-cv-00124), before Judge Amos L. Mazzant. The plaintiff asserted four U.S. patents — US7292844B2, US7058395B2, US6983139B2, and US7212811B2 — covering mobile push data delivery and wireless content distribution technology. The accused products were PGA Tour’s consumer-facing mobile applications on iOS and Android, as well as its mobile web service at pgatour.com/mobile.
The case ended on 27 September 2024 when Push Data filed a voluntary dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), with no costs or fees awarded to either party. Dismissal with prejudice is a final adjudication on the merits as a matter of law: Push Data permanently relinquished the right to re-assert these four patents against PGA Tour for the same accused conduct. The no-cost stipulation suggests the resolution was consensual, consistent with a negotiated outcome rather than a unilateral concession.
At 226 days, the case closed before any substantive court orders appear in the public record, suggesting the parties reached an arrangement — whether a licence, covenant not to sue, or simply a walk-away — well before claim construction. The absence of defendant-side law firm data in the public record is notable; PGA Tour’s representation and any defence strategy it mounted remain undisclosed. Whether a financial component accompanied the dismissal is not reflected in the public record.
Filing to Voluntary dismissal in 226 days
226 days — resolved before trial, consistent with pre-discovery settlements in EDTX NPE actions
Dismissed with prejudice: what the Rule 41 filing means for both parties
Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i): plaintiff-initiated, permanent closure
A dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) may be filed by the plaintiff as of right before the defendant serves an answer or motion for summary judgment. Critically, Push Data specified ‘with prejudice’ — converting what would otherwise be a without-prejudice withdrawal into a final judgment on the merits. This permanently extinguishes Push Data’s ability to re-litigate these claims against PGA Tour on the same patents and accused products.
Final — no re-filing permittedPush Data exits permanently, retaining portfolio against third parties
By dismissing with prejudice, Push Data gave up enforcement rights against PGA Tour specifically. However, the four patents remain in force and enforceable against other defendants — the dismissal binds only the parties to this action. This structure is consistent with a licensing settlement where Push Data received value (financial or otherwise) and granted PGA Tour a release, while preserving its ability to assert the portfolio elsewhere.
Portfolio intact vs. third partiesPGA Tour secures permanent release on all four asserted patents
PGA Tour emerges with a with-prejudice dismissal — effectively a permanent shield against re-assertion of US7292844B2, US7058395B2, US6983139B2, and US7212811B2 by Push Data for the accused mobile applications. The no-costs term suggests PGA Tour did not seek — or did not obtain — a finding of exceptionality under 35 U.S.C. § 285. PGA Tour’s mobile products can continue operating without ongoing litigation risk from this plaintiff on these patents.
Clean exit, no fee awardPush Data’s mobile push-data portfolio remains active licensing risk for sports and media apps
The swift resolution — before any claim construction — means the validity and scope of all four patents remain untested on the merits. Other operators of real-time mobile data delivery applications in sports, media, and live-event verticals should treat this portfolio as an active enforcement risk. Push Data’s pattern of targeting consumer-facing mobile platforms suggests further assertion campaigns are plausible. An FTO analysis against these four patents is advisable for any company deploying comparable push-notification or live-score mobile architectures.
Active risk for mobile app operatorsFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Push Data, LLC | Company | Mobile data delivery patent licensing entity — holder of US7292844B2 and three related patentsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | PGA Tour, Inc. | Company | PGA Tour, Inc. — professional golf governing body operating consumer mobile apps on iOS, Android, and mobile webSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Clifford Chad Henson | Attorney | Counsel for Push Data, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Trevor James Beaty | Attorney | Counsel for Push Data, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Devlin Law Firm LLC (Wilmington) | Law Firm | Representing Push Data, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Shea Beaty | Law Firm | Representing Push Data, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Amos L. Mazzant | Judge | Texas Eastern District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The dismissal notice invokes Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) — a unilateral plaintiff filing available before answer — and expressly designates the dismissal ‘with prejudice.’ The with-prejudice designation is legally operative: it constitutes a final adjudication on the merits, permanently barring re-assertion of these claims by Push Data against PGA Tour. The ‘without costs or fees to any party’ clause forecloses any § 285 exceptional-case motion by either side. No merits ruling, claim construction, or validity finding was issued; the patents’ scope and validity remain judicially untested.
US7292844B2 and three related patents — mobile push data delivery technology
The four asserted patents — US7292844B2, US7058395B2, US6983139B2, and US7212811B2 — are U.S. utility patents in the mobile wireless data delivery space, with application numbers tracing to the mid-2000s filing period (application dates circa 2004–2005), a period of rapid innovation in push-notification and real-time data transmission to mobile handsets. The patents cover architectures for delivering data proactively to wireless devices — the core infrastructure underpinning real-time sports scores, live-event updates, and push-alert systems that modern sports apps rely upon.
From a strategic standpoint, this portfolio sits at the intersection of push-notification infrastructure and live-event mobile applications — a technology layer embedded in virtually every sports, media, and live-event consumer app. Because the patents date from early smartphone-era filings, they may claim broad foundational methods that read on contemporary implementations. Their continued validity and the absence of any successful IPR challenge make them a persistent risk for companies operating real-time mobile data delivery platforms in sports, streaming, and live-event verticals.
Should your mobile app team run an FTO against US7292844B2 and related patents?
Any product team operating a mobile application that delivers real-time data — live sports scores, push alerts, live-event updates, or dynamic content feeds — should assess exposure to this four-patent portfolio. Push Data’s assertion against PGA Tour’s iOS and Android apps signals that consumer-facing sports and media applications are within scope. If your platform uses push-notification infrastructure or server-initiated data delivery to mobile clients, these patents warrant review before deployment or expansion.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent enables R&D and IP teams to map claim language from US7292844B2, US7058395B2, US6983139B2, and US7212811B2 against your product architecture in minutes. Eureka surfaces claim-by-claim prior art, identifies design-around opportunities, and flags related continuation or divisional patents that may extend the portfolio’s reach — giving your team a defensible clearance record before Push Data’s next assertion campaign.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US7292844B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar mobile push-data patent cases in the Eastern District of Texas
Cases involving mobile push-data delivery and real-time wireless notification patents asserted in the Eastern District of Texas before Judge Mazzant and related NPE enforcement actions.
What this case signals for the mobile data delivery IP landscape
A four-patent assertion against a high-profile mobile platform that closed silently in under eight months — here is what practitioners should take away.
Pre-answer dismissals in EDTX NPE cases often mask licensing outcomes
A Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) dismissal with no costs and no public merits ruling is a structural signature of a negotiated licence or covenant not to sue. In the Eastern District of Texas, this pattern recurs frequently in NPE actions resolved before claim construction. The with-prejudice term protects the defendant; the no-costs term protects the deal from further dispute.
All four patents survive unscathed — validity untested, portfolio still dangerous
Because no IPR petition, no § 101 motion, and no claim construction order appears in the public record, US7292844B2, US7058395B2, US6983139B2, and US7212811B2 exit this litigation with full presumption of validity intact. Any mobile platform operator deploying real-time push-data or live-score functionality should conduct FTO analysis before assuming this portfolio is dormant.
Push v PGA — key questions answered
Push Data LLC asserted four U.S. patents: US7292844B2, US7058395B2, US6983139B2, and US7212811B2. All four relate to mobile push data delivery and wireless content distribution technology. The accused products were PGA Tour’s iOS app, Android app, and mobile web platform at pgatour.com/mobile.
Push Data filed a voluntary dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) on 27 September 2024. The filing specified no costs or fees to either party. The with-prejudice designation permanently bars Push Data from re-asserting these claims against PGA Tour. The public record does not disclose whether a financial settlement or licence accompanied the dismissal.
No. A voluntary dismissal with prejudice does not constitute a merits ruling on patent validity or infringement. No claim construction, IPR, or § 101 motion was decided in this case. All four patents — US7292844B2, US7058395B2, US6983139B2, and US7212811B2 — retain their full presumption of validity and remain enforceable against other parties.
Yes. The with-prejudice dismissal binds only Push Data and PGA Tour with respect to the accused conduct in this case. Push Data retains the right to assert US7292844B2, US7058395B2, US6983139B2, and US7212811B2 against any other defendant. Operators of real-time mobile data delivery platforms — particularly in sports, media, and live-event sectors — remain potential targets.
The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Case No. 4:24-cv-00124) and assigned to Judge Amos L. Mazzant. The Eastern District of Texas is a historically plaintiff-favourable venue for NPE patent actions, which may have influenced Push Data’s forum selection.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.