Random Chat v. Stanley Black & Decker: TCP/IP Patent Dismissed With Prejudice in 89 Days
Random Chat, LLC filed suit against Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. in the Western District of Texas, asserting US8402099B2 — a method patent for network-protocol-based multimedia communication over TCP/IP and UDP. The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed all claims with prejudice just 89 days after filing, before the defendant had answered or moved for summary judgment.
A rapid exit: TCP/IP patent suit ends before defendant responds
On February 28, 2025, Random Chat, LLC filed an infringement action against Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (Case No. 7:25-cv-00098). The suit centred on US8402099B2, a patent covering a method for carrying out multimedia communications based on network protocols — specifically TCP/IP and UDP. Plaintiff was represented by Ramey LLP, a Texas firm with a track record of asserting network-technology patents in the Western District.
On May 23, 2025 — just 89 days after filing — Random Chat filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal With Prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Because Stanley Black & Decker had not yet served an answer or a motion for summary judgment, the notice was self-effectuating and required no court order to take effect. The court confirmed the closure on May 28, 2025, ordering each party to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorney fees.
The speed of resolution is notable: the case ended before any substantive litigation activity by the defendant entered the public record. Dismissal with prejudice — rather than without — means Random Chat cannot re-file the same claims against Stanley Black & Decker on this patent. What drove the decision to dismiss is not apparent from the public record; possibilities consistent with this pattern include a licensing agreement, a strategic reassessment of claim strength, or a business resolution reached before litigation costs escalated.
Filing to Voluntary dismissal in 89 days
89 days — resolved before defendant filed any responsive pleading
Voluntarily dismissed with prejudice: what the Rule 41 exit means for both parties
Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i): self-effectuating dismissal, no court order needed
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i) permits a plaintiff to dismiss an action unilaterally — without a court order — by filing a notice before the defendant serves an answer or a motion for summary judgment. Because Stanley Black & Decker had filed neither, Random Chat’s notice was immediately operative. The court’s subsequent order was administrative confirmation, not a judicial act of termination.
Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) — self-effectuatingWith prejudice bars re-filing on the same patent against this defendant
A voluntary dismissal with prejudice operates as a final adjudication on the merits for preclusion purposes. Random Chat cannot re-assert US8402099B2 against Stanley Black & Decker in any future action. Had the dismissal been without prejudice, re-filing would have been possible. The plaintiff’s choice of the stricter ‘with prejudice’ designation is commercially significant and may suggest a negotiated resolution rather than a unilateral retreat.
Final as to this defendant — no re-filingStanley Black & Decker exits without a merits ruling or cost award
Stanley Black & Decker achieved a clean exit: no answer filed, no legal costs awarded against it, and no adjudication on whether its products infringed US8402099B2. The own-costs order means it cannot recover defence expenditure even though it prevailed. This outcome is consistent with a scenario in which the parties resolved the dispute privately before adversarial litigation commenced in earnest.
No merits ruling — own costs each sidePatent survives — third parties and future defendants remain exposed
Dismissal with prejudice binds only the named parties. US8402099B2 remains an active, enforceable patent and Random Chat retains the right to assert it against other companies. The absence of any invalidity ruling means the patent’s claims have not been tested in litigation. Competitors and suppliers in the network-protocol communications space should treat this outcome as a reset, not a clearance.
US8402099B2 remains enforceableFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Random Chat, LLC | Company | IP assertion entity — holder of US8402099B2, TCP/IP multimedia communication methodSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. | Company | Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. — diversified industrial and tools manufacturerSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Jeffrey Eugene Kubiak | Attorney | Counsel for Random Chat, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | William P. Ramey , III | Attorney | Counsel for Random Chat, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Ramey LLP | Law Firm | Representing Random Chat, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | Texas Western District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The court’s order confirms the dismissal was self-effectuating under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) — the judicial entry served only to formally close the docket. The with-prejudice designation is the operative legal fact: it extinguishes Random Chat’s ability to re-litigate US8402099B2 against Stanley Black & Decker, functioning as a final adjudication on the merits for preclusion purposes. The own-costs order, standard in uncontested Rule 41 exits, leaves neither party with a fee remedy.
US8402099B2 — TCP/IP and UDP multimedia communication method patent
US8402099B2, filed under application number US12/675046, protects a method for carrying out multimedia communications over network protocols — specifically TCP/IP and UDP. The patent situates itself in the infrastructure layer of real-time or near-real-time data exchange: the kind of protocol-level innovation that underpins video calling, streaming, and connected-device communication. Its grant reflects patent office recognition of a specific technical implementation within the broader internet-protocol communications domain.
From a competitive intelligence standpoint, a method patent on TCP/IP and UDP-based multimedia communication is strategically positioned to reach a wide range of potential defendants — from consumer electronics and industrial IoT manufacturers to software platform providers. Stanley Black & Decker’s inclusion as a defendant is consistent with the increasing connectivity of power tools and industrial equipment, whose firmware and communication stacks may intersect with broad network-method claims. The patent’s enforceability remains intact following this dismissal, and holders of method claims in the networking space have historically pursued serial assertion strategies.
Should your team run an FTO check against US8402099B2?
Any company developing or commercialising products that implement TCP/IP or UDP-based multimedia communication — including connected devices, industrial IoT platforms, firmware with remote communication features, or software handling real-time data streams — should assess exposure to US8402099B2. The fact that Stanley Black & Decker was named suggests the patent holder views industrial connected-device ecosystems as within scope. This is not a patent confined to pure-play telecom or consumer software.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the claim scope of US8402099B2 against your product’s technical architecture, identify prior art that may support invalidity arguments, and surface related family members under application US12/675046 that could carry similar or modified claims. Automated monitoring alerts can flag new filings by the same plaintiff counsel — enabling proactive risk management before a demand letter arrives.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US8402099B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar TCP/IP and network-protocol patent cases in W.D. Texas
Cases involving method patents for TCP/IP and UDP-based communications filed in the Western District of Texas by NPE plaintiffs represented by Ramey LLP.
What this case signals for the network-protocol communications IP landscape
A rapid with-prejudice exit in the Western District of Texas rarely signals weakness alone — it more often reflects a private resolution.
Early dismissals with prejudice frequently follow undisclosed licence agreements
When a plaintiff voluntarily dismisses with prejudice before any answer is filed — and each side bears its own costs — the most commercially consistent explanation is a licensing or settlement arrangement. The 89-day window left little time for claim construction or discovery to expose weaknesses, suggesting the resolution was business-driven rather than legally compelled.
US8402099B2 remains live: other defendants face unresolved exposure
No invalidity determination was made. Third parties operating TCP/IP or UDP-based multimedia communication services that overlap with the patent’s method claims cannot rely on this dismissal as a clearance. An FTO analysis against US8402099B2 is warranted for any company in the network-communications or connected-device space — including tool ecosystems with embedded connectivity features.
Random v Stanley — key questions answered
It means Random Chat, LLC permanently relinquished its right to sue Stanley Black & Decker on US8402099B2. Dismissed with prejudice operates as a final judgment on the merits for preclusion purposes — the same claims cannot be re-filed against the same defendant. The dismissal was filed under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) before any responsive pleading was served.
No. The case terminated on procedural grounds via voluntary dismissal before Stanley Black & Decker filed an answer or any dispositive motion. No infringement, validity, or claim-construction ruling was issued. The patent’s claims remain legally untested by any court in this action.
Random Chat was represented by Ramey LLP, with attorneys Jeffrey Eugene Kubiak and William P. Ramey III listed as plaintiff agents. Ramey LLP is a Texas firm with an established practice in network-technology patent assertion in the Western District of Texas.
No. The with-prejudice dismissal binds only Stanley Black & Decker. US8402099B2 remains an enforceable patent, and Random Chat retains full rights to assert it against other parties. Companies in the connected-device, industrial IoT, or network-protocol communications space should conduct independent FTO analysis and not rely on this case as a clearance.
The public record does not disclose the reason. However, dismissal with prejudice — which permanently bars re-filing against this defendant — is consistent with a negotiated resolution such as a licence or settlement. A dismissal without prejudice would have preserved the option to re-file, making the with-prejudice designation a meaningful concession typically offered in exchange for something of value from the defendant.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.