Triumvirate Systems, LLC v. Rue Gilt Groupe, Inc.
Infringement action filed 16 Oct 2023 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and closed 1 Dec 2023, with US8005747B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: voluntary dismissal.
Case record
- Patent involved
- US8005747B2
- Application no.
- US11/806802
- Case no.
- 1:23-cv-09080
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- S.D.N.Y.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- New York
- Chief judge
- Lewis J. Liman
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 16 Oct 2023 – 1 Dec 2023
- Duration
- 46 days
- Basis of termination
- Voluntary dismissal
- Products & marks
- Online electronic commerce site RueLaLa.com
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
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
Method and apparatus for generating a sale offer over an electronic network system
A method and apparatus are disclosed for communicating sale offers through an electronic network system. The method includes inputting a sale offer parameter for randomly generating at least one sale offer to purchase a product or service on the electronic network system at an offer price substantially less than a current value of the offered product or service in a competitive marketplace. The method further includes randomly displaying, through the electronic network system, the at least one sale offer at the offer price to a buyer in communication with the electronic network system at an unexpected period of time; and withdrawing the display of the randomly generated sale offer in response to an absence of an indication of acceptance of the randomly generated sale offer by the buyer within a predetermined period of time after displaying the randomly generated sale offer.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 23 Aug 2011
- Earliest priority
- 30 Jun 1999
- Est. expiry
- 13 Jul 2023
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- FORLAI, LUIGI
- Classification
- G06Q40/00G06Q30/00
- Prosecution counsel
- FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER
- Examiner
- SUBRAMANIAN, NARAYANSWAMY
Parties of record
Triumvirate Systems, LLC
- Core tech
- G06Q40/00G06Q30/00
- Counsel
- Howard L. Wernow
- Firm
- Sand, Sebolt & Wernow Co., LPA
Rue Gilt Groupe, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Jeremy Richardson
- Firm
- Smith, Gambrell & Russell LLP
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Howard L. Wernow | Triumvirate Systems, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Jeremy Richardson | Rue Gilt Groupe, Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Now comes Plaintiff Triumvirate Systems LLC, by and through its counsel, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i), hereby voluntarily dismisses all of the claims asserted against Defendant Rue Gilt Groupe, Inc. in the within action WITHOUT PREJUDICE, with each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. Rue Gilt Groupe, Inc. has not served an answer or a motion for summary judgment.”
Case 1:23-cv-09080 · S.D.N.Y. · closed 1 December 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 1:23-cv-09080?
1:23-cv-09080 is a patent infringement action brought by Triumvirate Systems, LLC against Rue Gilt Groupe, Inc., filed on 16 Oct 2023 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The case closed on 1 December 2023.
Which patent was asserted in 1:23-cv-09080?
US8005747B2 (“Method and apparatus for generating a sale offer over an electronic network system”), assigned to TRIUMVIRATE SYSTEMS LLC, currently inactive. The record also lists Online electronic commerce site RueLaLa.com.
How was case 1:23-cv-09080 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is voluntary dismissal. The termination text reads: “Now comes Plaintiff Triumvirate Systems LLC, by and through its counsel, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i), hereby voluntarily dismisses all of the claims asserted against Defendant Rue Gilt Groupe, Inc. in the within action WITHOUT PREJUDICE, with each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. Rue Gilt Groupe, Inc. has not served an answer or a motion for summary judgment.”
What does dismissal without prejudice mean?
A dismissal without prejudice ends this action but leaves the claims alive — the plaintiff may file them again later, subject to the limitation period.
How long did case 1:23-cv-09080 take?
46 calendar days, from filing on 16 Oct 2023 to closure on 1 December 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:23-cv-09080?
Chief Judge Lewis J. Liman presided. Howard L. Wernow is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Triumvirate Systems. Jeremy Richardson appears for defendant Rue Gilt Groupe.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:23-cv-09080 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.