Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
ReadyComm v. Net2Phone Global Services | Patent Lawsuit 1:26-cv-00233

ReadyComm LLC v. Net2Phone Global Services, LLC

1:26-cv-00233 D. Del. Closed US9179011B1
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 5 Mar 2026 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware and closed 20 Apr 2026, with US9179011B1 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case dismissed.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Patent involved
US9179011B1
Application no.
US14/727176
Case no.
1:26-cv-00233
Verdict cause
Infringement action
Court
D. Del.
Court level
District Court
Case region
Delaware
Chief judge
Maryellen Noreika
Trial level
First instance
Filed – Closed
5 Mar 2026 – 20 Apr 2026
Duration
46 days
Basis of termination
Case Dismissed
Products & marks
Telephone Communication System and Method of Using
Validity challenges
None recorded
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 1:26-cv-00233, United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Open this record in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

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
10,000 free credits to start
Patent at issue
US9179011B1 Active App. US14/727176

Telephone Communication System and Method of Using

A telephone communication system has at least two telephones and each telephone may be placed in activated mode or in the alternative, stand-by mode such that in stand-by mode a phone is incapable of making or receiving a call until or unless switched to active mode. The system includes a switch configured to activate one of the telephone to be an active mode telephone such that all remaining telephones are on standby mode prior to making an outgoing call or taking an incoming call. The system is configured such that a standby telephone may be switched to active mode during a telephone call on-the-fly.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Active
Granted
3 Nov 2015
Est. expiry
24 Jun 2028
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Inventors
NEWMAN, PAUL
Classification
H04M3/42H04M1/03H04M9/00H04M3/54H04M19/08
Prosecution counsel
Bourget Law, S.C.
Examiner
AUBAIDI, RASHA AL
US9179011B1 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US9179011B1 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
Source: Patsnap patent data + case record. Bibliographic fields and drawings reproduced from the published patent document. Break down the claims
Parties & counsel

Parties of record

Counsel of record

Source: case record + Patsnap company data. Attorney names appear as recorded in the docket. Compare both portfolios
Outcome

Basis of termination

From the record · verbatim

“Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the parties hereby stipulate to dismiss all claims against Net2Phone Global Services, LLC, WITH PREJUDICE and all counterclaims against ReadyComm LLC WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Each party shall bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.”

Case 1:26-cv-00233 · D. Del. · closed 20 April 2026
Source: case record, verbatim. The quoted paragraph is the basis-of-termination text as filed.

Related cases

Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 1:26-cv-00233?

1:26-cv-00233 is a patent infringement action brought by ReadyComm LLC against Net2Phone Global Services, LLC, filed on 5 Mar 2026 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The case closed on 20 April 2026.

Which patent was asserted in 1:26-cv-00233?

US9179011B1 (“Telephone Communication System and Method of Using”), assigned to READYCOMM LLC, currently active. The record also lists Telephone Communication System and Method of Using.

How was case 1:26-cv-00233 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is case dismissed. The termination text reads: “Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the parties hereby stipulate to dismiss all claims against Net2Phone Global Services, LLC, WITH PREJUDICE and all counterclaims against ReadyComm LLC WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Each party shall bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.”

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 1:26-cv-00233 take?

46 calendar days, from filing on 5 Mar 2026 to closure on 20 April 2026.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:26-cv-00233?

Chief Judge Maryellen Noreika presided. Brian E. Lutness is recorded as counsel for plaintiff ReadyComm. Grayson P. Sundermeir appears for defendant Net2Phone Global Services.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 1:26-cv-00233 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:26-cv-00233 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.

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.