Data Recognition & Presentation and Electric Digital Data Processing Patent litigation record

Technology 18 cases

18 cases on record in Data Recognition & Presentation and Electric Digital Data Processing. Each row links to that case’s full docket record.

Map this field in Eureka
Litigation indexPatsnap Litigation Data··Docket source: PACER

18 cases on record

Cases on record
18
Classification
G06K9/32 · G06F17/30 · G06K9/00 · G06F3/033 · G06F3/01 · G02B27/01 · G06T19/00 · A63F13/428 · A63F13/20 · G06K9/22 · G06F3/0481 · G06F3/0354 · G06F3/0346 · G06F3/03 · G01B21/04 · G06T7/73 · G06F3/0484 · A63F13/211 · A63F13/213 · A63F13/812 · G06K7/10 · G06Q20/10 · G06Q50/18 · G06Q30/02 · G06F17/00 · G06F7/00 · G06K9/68 · G06V30/10 · G06F13/00
Courts involved
W.D. Tex. · N.D. Ohio · N.D. Tex. · E.D. Tex. · C.D. Cal.
Case no.PartiesCourtFiledDurationOutcome
1:25-cv-01826 Malikie Innovations Ltd. v. Canon, Inc. W.D. Tex. 12 Nov 2025 131 d Dismissed with Prejudice
1:24-cv-02026 Electronic Scripting Products, Inc. v. A.W. Faber-Castell USA, Inc. N.D. Ohio 20 Nov 2024 47 d Voluntary dismissal
3:23-cv-02866 Symbology Innovations v. American Automobile Association, Inc. N.D. Tex. 28 Dec 2023 146 d Case Stayed
2:23-cv-00630 Symbology Innovations, LLC v. Roche Diagnostics Gmbh, Ltd. E.D. Tex. 27 Dec 2023 170 d Dismissed with Prejudice
2:23-cv-00583 Symbology Innovations, LLC v. Macy's, Inc. E.D. Tex. 8 Dec 2023 234 d Dismissed with Prejudice
6:23-cv-00707 Electronic Scripting Products, Inc. v. Havenly, Inc. W.D. Tex. 13 Oct 2023 47 d Voluntary dismissal
3:23-cv-01902 Symbology Innovations v. Alexander Mcqueen Trading America, Inc. N.D. Tex. 24 Aug 2023 125 d Case Consolidated
3:23-cv-01881 Symbology Innovations v. Bottega Veneta, Inc. N.D. Tex. 22 Aug 2023 127 d Dismissed without Prejudice
2:23-cv-00320 Symbology Innovations, LLC v. The B-12 Store, LLC E.D. Tex. 11 Jul 2023 156 d Case Dismissed
2:23-cv-00268 Symbology Innovations, LLC v. The Aaron's Company, Inc. E.D. Tex. 2 Jun 2023 87 d Dismissed with Prejudice
2:23-cv-00249 Symbology Innovations, LLC v. Keurig Dr. Pepper, Inc. E.D. Tex. 30 May 2023 175 d Case Dismissed
6:23-cv-00402 Symbology Innovations, LLC v. ADT Inc. W.D. Tex. 24 May 2023 126 d Dismissed with Prejudice
6:23-cv-00194 Electronic Scripting Products, Inc. v. EQ3, Ltd. W.D. Tex. 14 Mar 2023 185 d Voluntary dismissal
6:23-cv-00119 Electronic Scripting Products, Inc. v. Herschel Supply Company W.D. Tex. 15 Feb 2023 153 d Voluntary dismissal
2:22-cv-00410 Ridgeview IP, LLC v. Qualtrics, LLC E.D. Tex. 19 Oct 2022 125 d Consent Judgment
3:22-cv-02354 Ridgeview IP, LLC v. Anthology, Inc. N.D. Tex. 19 Oct 2022 83 d Voluntary dismissal
6:22-cv-01088 Ridgeview IP, LLC v. Cvent, Inc. W.D. Tex. 19 Oct 2022 85 d Voluntary dismissal
8:20-cv-02116 Open Text, Inc. v. Hyland Software, Inc. C.D. Cal. 2 Nov 2020 793 d Consent Judgment
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases classified under Data Recognition & Presentation and Electric Digital Data Processing. Run this in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

Where the claim space is crowded

Which patents are asserted most in this field, and which branches are still open.

Map this field
10,000 free credits to start

About this summary. This page summarises the litigation records within the coverage and snapshot dates stated here. Counts describe records in that dataset and do not, by themselves, establish the conduct, litigation success or legal position of any person or organisation.

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. The filing of a claim is not a court finding, and a docket marked “closed” does not by itself establish infringement, validity, settlement or a decision on the merits.

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.

Third-party names and marks. Party, attorney, judge and company names appear for identification only. Company names may be trademarks of their owners; their appearance does not, by itself, imply affiliation with or endorsement by Patsnap.

Corrections and privacy requests. To report an inaccurate record or attribution, use the “Report an incorrect record” link on this page. For requests concerning your personal information, including, where applicable, the rights to access, rectify, erase, restrict or object to processing, use the “Privacy request” link. We assess requests under applicable law. See our Privacy Policy for details of this processing.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.