Validity, Inc. v. Project Bordeaux, Inc.
Infringement action filed 30 Mar 2023 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware and closed 22 Sep 2023, with US8719356B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: dismissed with prejudice.
Case record
- Patent involved
- US8719356B2
- Application no.
- US13/449153
- Case no.
- 1:23-cv-00365
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- D. Del.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Delaware
- Chief judge
- Sherry R. Fallon
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 30 Mar 2023 – 22 Sep 2023
- Duration
- 176 days
- Basis of termination
- Dismissed with Prejudice
- Products & marks
- Methods, systems, and computer readable media for monitoring deliverability of electronic mail based on subscriber and seed deliverability data
- 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
Methods, systems, and computer readable media for monitoring deliverability of electronic mail based on subscriber and seed deliverability data
A system monitor delivery of electronic mail based on subscriber and seed deliverability data. Seed deliverability data is received that includes information indicating a number of email messages associated with an email campaign that are delivered to a folder associated with one or more intended recipients of the email campaign based on a sampling of seed accounts. The seed accounts are not associated with actual recipients of the email campaign. Subscriber deliverability data is received that includes information indicating a number of email messages associated with the email campaign that are delivered to a folder associated with the one or more intended recipients of the email campaign based on one or more subscriber accounts. The seed accounts are associated with a subset of human recipients of the email campaign. One or more deliverability metrics are determined based on the seed deliverability data and the subscriber deliverability data.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 6 May 2014
- Est. expiry
- 22 Sep 2032
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- DILLINGHAM, JEREMY K. · NOCCHIERO, PETER J. · OAKE, CHRISTOPHER J. · JORDAN, SEAN E. · BILBREY, GEORGE MARVIN · ISAC, SHEELA
- Classification
- G06F15/16
- Prosecution counsel
- BLANK ROME LLP
- Examiner
- KATSIKIS, KOSTAS
Parties of record
Validity, Inc.
- Core tech
- G06F15/16
- Counsel
- Andrew Colin Mayo · Angelo J. Christopher · Jennifer Hayes · Peter Krusiewicz
- Firm
- Ashby & Geddes PC
Project Bordeaux, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Bindu Ann George Palapura · Daniel Huynh · David Ellis Moore · Kayla S. Hope · Rebecca K. Connolly
- Firm
- Potter, Anderson & Corroon LLP
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Andrew Colin Mayo | Validity, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Angelo J. Christopher | Validity, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Jennifer Hayes | Validity, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Peter Krusiewicz | Validity, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Bindu Ann George Palapura | Project Bordeaux, Inc. | Defendant |
| Daniel Huynh | Project Bordeaux, Inc. | Defendant |
| David Ellis Moore | Project Bordeaux, Inc. | Defendant |
| Kayla S. Hope | Project Bordeaux, Inc. | Defendant |
| Rebecca K. Connolly | Project Bordeaux, Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“The Memorandum Op[inion issued this same date,IT IS Ordered That Defendant motion to dismiss with Prejudice”
Case 1:23-cv-00365 · D. Del. · closed 22 September 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-00365?
1:23-cv-00365 is a patent infringement action brought by Validity, Inc. against Project Bordeaux, Inc., filed on 30 Mar 2023 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The case closed on 22 September 2023.
Which patent was asserted in 1:23-cv-00365?
US8719356B2 (“Methods, systems, and computer readable media for monitoring deliverability of electronic mail based on subscriber and seed deliverability data”), assigned to VALIDITY, INC., currently active. The record also lists Methods, systems, and computer readable media for monitoring deliverability of electronic mail based on subscriber and seed deliverability data.
How was case 1:23-cv-00365 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is dismissed with prejudice. The termination text reads: “The Memorandum Op[inion issued this same date,IT IS Ordered That Defendant motion to dismiss with Prejudice”
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 1:23-cv-00365 take?
176 calendar days, from filing on 30 Mar 2023 to closure on 22 September 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:23-cv-00365?
Chief Judge Sherry R. Fallon presided. Andrew Colin Mayo, Angelo J. Christopher, Jennifer Hayes and Peter Krusiewicz are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Validity. Bindu Ann George Palapura, Daniel Huynh, David Ellis Moore, Kayla S. Hope and Rebecca K. Connolly appear for defendant Project Bordeaux.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:23-cv-00365 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.