Book a demo

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

Try now
VoltStar Technologies v. Premier Accessory Group | Patent Lawsuit 2:23-cv-00051

VoltStar Technologies, Inc. v. Premier Accessory Group, LLC

2:23-cv-00051 D.N.J. Closed US9024581B2
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 5 Jan 2023 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey and closed 30 May 2023, with US9024581B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case dismissed.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Patent involved
US9024581B2
Application no.
US12/124515
Case no.
2:23-cv-00051
Verdict cause
Infringement action
Court
D.N.J.
Court level
District Court
Case region
New Jersey
Chief judge
None recorded
Trial level
First instance
Filed – Closed
5 Jan 2023 – 30 May 2023
Duration
145 days
Basis of termination
Case Dismissed
Products & marks
Charger plug with improved package
Validity challenges
None recorded
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 2:23-cv-00051, United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. 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
US9024581B2 Inactive App. US12/124515

Charger plug with improved package

A reduced plug-size charger plug for power conversion is disclosed utilizing a pair of blades that are slidably mounted into a charger housing, obviating the need for insertion molding. To promote and maintain electrical contact while minimizing package size and charger plug cost, a pair of spring contacts are provided for electrically connecting the blades with internal circuitry.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
5 May 2015
Est. expiry
23 Oct 2030
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
H02J7/00H01R13/24H01R31/06
Examiner
MURALIDAR, RICHARD V
US9024581B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US9024581B2 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

AttorneyForRole
Eliezer LekhtVoltStar Technologies, Inc.Plaintiff
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

“It appearing to the Court that the above case has been pending for more than 90 days without any proceeding having taken therein and no objection having been entered at a call of the calendar; It is this 30TH day of May, 2023; ORDERED that the above case be and the same hereby is dismissed accordance with L. Civ. R. 41.1 without prejudice and without costs to either party”

Case 2:23-cv-00051 · D.N.J. · closed 30 May 2023
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 2:23-cv-00051?

2:23-cv-00051 is a patent infringement action brought by VoltStar Technologies, Inc. against Premier Accessory Group, LLC, filed on 5 Jan 2023 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The case closed on 30 May 2023.

Which patent was asserted in 2:23-cv-00051?

US9024581B2 (“Charger plug with improved package”), assigned to VOLTSTAR TECHNOLOGIES, INC., currently inactive. The record also lists Charger plug with improved package.

How was case 2:23-cv-00051 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is case dismissed. The termination text reads: “It appearing to the Court that the above case has been pending for more than 90 days without any proceeding having taken therein and no objection having been entered at a call of the calendar; It is this 30TH day of May, 2023; ORDERED that the above case be and the same hereby is dismissed accordance with L. Civ. R. 41.1 without prejudice and without costs to either party”

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 2:23-cv-00051 take?

145 calendar days, from filing on 5 Jan 2023 to closure on 30 May 2023.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:23-cv-00051?

Eliezer Lekht is recorded as counsel for plaintiff VoltStar Technologies.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 2:23-cv-00051 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:23-cv-00051 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.