ThreatModeler vs. IriusRisk: Threat Modeling Patent Dispute Ends in Settlement
What would you like to do next?
Choose your path based on your current needs:
📋 Litigation Overview
| Case Name | ThreatModeler Software, Inc. v. IriusRisk, Inc. |
| Case Number | 1:22-cv-00912 (D. Del.) |
| Court | U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware |
| Duration | July 2022 – January 2026 3 years 6 months |
| Outcome | Confidential Settlement – Dismissed with Prejudice |
| Patents at Issue | |
| Accused Products | IriusRisk Threat Modeler Platform (IaC, AWS/Terraform, OTM features) |
Case Overview
The Parties
⚖️ Plaintiff
U.S.-based cybersecurity company offering automated threat modeling solutions integrated into software development and DevSecOps pipelines.
🛡️ Defendant
Developer of a competing threat modeling platform enabling automated risk identification, cloud integration, and standardized threat models.
Patents at Issue
This dispute centered on two software patents covering automated threat modeling methodologies critical to cybersecurity. These patents, registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), protect specific technical processes within software systems for identifying and assessing security risks.
- • US10699008B2 — Automated threat modeling methodology within software systems
- • US10713366B2 — Threat modeling processes relating to software architecture analysis
Developing similar cybersecurity software?
Check if your platform’s features might infringe these or related patents before launch.
The Verdict & Legal Analysis
Outcome
The case concluded through a stipulated dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). This dismissal, jointly filed by ThreatModeler and IriusRisk, confirms a binding, negotiated resolution. No damages award, royalty rate, or injunctive relief was publicly disclosed, as is standard practice in confidential IP settlements.
Key Legal Issues
The litigation, presided over by Chief Judge Maryellen Noreika in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, reflected several important legal dynamics for software patent practitioners:
- § 101 Vulnerability of Software Patents: Threat modeling method patents remain susceptible to Alice-based § 101 challenges. Patent holders must ensure claims reflect specific technical improvements to computer functionality.
- Cloud Integration as Infringement Nexus: ThreatModeler’s targeting of IaC features and AWS/Terraform integrations reflects an emerging litigation strategy: asserting patents against cloud-native product extensions.
- Claim Construction Centrality: In software patent disputes, the outcome often hinges on how terms like “threat model,” “infrastructure component,” or “security risk” are construed during Markman hearings.
The 1,281-day duration suggests substantial litigation activity, including likely completion of fact discovery and potentially expert reports, indicating both sides invested significantly before concluding that settlement served their respective interests.
Freedom to Operate (FTO) Analysis
This case highlights critical IP risks in cybersecurity threat modeling software. Choose your next step:
📋 Understand This Case’s Impact
Learn about the specific risks and implications from this litigation.
- View related patents in cybersecurity threat modeling
- See which companies are most active in DevSecOps IP
- Understand claim scope in software architecture analysis
🔍 Check My Product’s Risk
Run a comprehensive FTO analysis for your own technology or product.
- Input your product description or technical features
- AI identifies potentially blocking patents
- Get actionable risk assessment report
High Risk Area
Automated threat modeling with cloud integration (IaC)
100+ Related Patents
In DevSecOps & threat modeling
Design-Around Options
Available for most software claims
✅ Key Takeaways
Cybersecurity software patents are actively asserted in Delaware; IaC and cloud integration features present viable infringement theories.
Search related case law →§ 101 eligibility and claim construction remain critical battlegrounds in threat modeling patent cases.
Explore precedents →Stipulated dismissals with prejudice after multi-year litigation reflect the ongoing trend toward pre-trial settlement in software IP disputes.
Analyze litigation trends →Frequently Asked Questions
ThreatModeler asserted US10699008B2 and US10713366B2, both covering automated threat modeling methods in software security systems.
The case settled and was dismissed with prejudice via stipulation under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) on January 9, 2026. Financial terms were not publicly disclosed.
It reinforces Delaware as a venue of choice for software IP disputes and signals that cloud integration features in security platforms are viable — and targeted — infringement theories.
Ready to Strengthen Your Patent Strategy?
Join 18,000+ IP professionals using PatSnap Eureka to conduct prior art searches, draft patents, and analyse competitive landscapes with AI-powered precision.
References
- PACER — Case No. 1:22-cv-00912
- USPTO Patent Center — Patent Specifications
- Cornell Legal Information Institute — Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)
- PatSnap — IP Intelligence Solutions for Law Firms
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. All case information is drawn from publicly available court records. For platform capabilities, visit PatSnap.