Push Data, LLC v. Smashburger IP Holder, LLC
Infringement action filed 14 Sep 2022 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California and closed 10 Feb 2023, with 4 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case settled.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US7292844B2US7058395B2US6983139B2US7212811B2
- Case no.
- 2:22-cv-06580
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- C.D. Cal.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- California
- Chief judge
- None recorded
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 14 Sep 2022 – 10 Feb 2023
- Duration
- 149 days
- Basis of termination
- Case Settled
- Products & marks
- Geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems
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
Geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems
A geographical web browser allows a user to navigate a network application such as the Word Wide Web by physically navigating in geographical coordinates. For example, a geographical web browser is implemented in a mobile unit such as a dashboard computer. The mobile unit includes one or more transducers such as antennas and is operative to receive locally broadcast signals or to operate a global positioning system (GPS) receiver. As the mobile unit navigates into different physical localities, different web pages are displayed by the geographical web browser. For example, a user desiring to buy a house can set the web browser to a real estate web page. Instead of clicking on a hyperlink to access web pages of properties in an area, the user drives into a first area and automatically receives web pages relating to homes in that area. When the mobile unit crosses town and enters a second area, a new set of web pages is downloaded relating to properties in the second area. The geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems disclosed herein enable improved road-navigation and traffic management, advertisement, and related services.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 6 Nov 2007
- Est. expiry
- 17 Nov 2018
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Classification
- H04Q7/22H04W4/029H04L29/06H04L29/08H04W4/02
- Prosecution counsel
- KOWERT, HOOD, MUNYON, RANKIN & GOETZEL, P.C.
- Examiner
- CONTEE, JOY K.
Geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems
A geographical web browser allows a user to navigate a network application such as the Word Wide Web by physically navigating in geographical coordinates. For example, a geographical web browser is implemented in a mobile unit such as a dashboard computer. The mobile unit includes one or more transducers such as antennas and is operative to receive locally broadcast signals or to operate a global positioning system (GPS) receiver. As the mobile unit navigates into different physical localities, different web pages are displayed by the geographical web browser. For example, a user desiring to buy a house can set the web browser to a real estate web page. Instead of clicking on a hyperlink to access web pages of properties in an area, the user drives into a first area and automatically receives web pages relating to homes in that area. When the mobile unit crosses town and enters a second area, a new set of web pages is downloaded relating to properties in the second area. The geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems disclosed herein enable improved road-navigation and traffic management, advertisement, and related services.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 6 Jun 2006
- Est. expiry
- 17 Nov 2018
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Classification
- H04Q7/22H04W4/029H04L29/06H04L29/08H04W4/02
- Prosecution counsel
- KOWERT, HOOD, MUNYON, RANKIN & GOETZEL, P.C.
- Examiner
- CONTEE, JOY
Also asserted in this case
2 moreThe docket lists 4 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining 2 asserted patents are one query away in Eureka.
Parties of record
Push Data, LLC
- Core tech
- H04Q7/22H04W4/029H04L29/06H04L29/08
- Counsel
- Seth W. Wiener
- Firm
- Law Offices of Seth W. Wiener
Smashburger IP Holder, LLC
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Not recorded
- Firm
- Not recorded
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Seth W. Wiener | Push Data, LLC | Plaintiff |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the parties have reached a settlement of this entire lawsuit. The Settlement Agreement requires certain actions, and the parties expect that Plaintiff will be filing a request for dismissal with prejudice of this entire lawsuit within 60 days from today’s date. The parties, thus, request that the Court stay this case for 60 days.”
Case 2:22-cv-06580 · C.D. Cal. · closed 10 February 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-06580?
2:22-cv-06580 is a patent infringement action brought by Push Data, LLC against Smashburger IP Holder, LLC, filed on 14 Sep 2022 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The case closed on 10 February 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 2:22-cv-06580?
US7292844B2 (“Geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems”), assigned to PUSH DATA LLC, currently inactive; US7058395B2 (“Geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems”), assigned to PUSH DATA LLC, currently inactive; US6983139B2 (“Geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems”), assigned to PUSH DATA LLC; US7212811B2 (“Geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems”), assigned to PUSH DATA LLC. The record also lists Geographical web browser, methods, apparatus and systems.
How was case 2:22-cv-06580 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is case settled. The termination text reads: “TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the parties have reached a settlement of this entire lawsuit. The Settlement Agreement requires certain actions, and the parties expect that Plaintiff will be filing a request for dismissal with prejudice of this entire lawsuit within 60 days from today’s date. The parties, thus, request that the Court stay this case for 60 days.”
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 2:22-cv-06580 take?
149 calendar days, from filing on 14 Sep 2022 to closure on 10 February 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:22-cv-06580?
Seth W. Wiener is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Push Data.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:22-cv-06580 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.