Webcon Vectors, LLC v. Pexip, Inc.
Infringement action filed 11 Mar 2026 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware and closed 18 Jun 2026, with 2 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: dismissed with prejudice.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US10681218B2US11290428B2
- Case no.
- 1:26-cv-00259
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- D. Del.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Delaware
- Chief judge
- Jennifer L. Hall
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 11 Mar 2026 – 18 Jun 2026
- Duration
- 99 days
- Basis of termination
- Dismissed with Prejudice
- Products & marks
- Telecommunication method and system for simplifying communication such as conference calls
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
Telecommunication method and system for simplifying communication such as conference calls
A method of simplifying electronic communications between a plurality of users by communication implementation and management. Each user has an electronic identifier, which may be of a type, such as a website address, domain, LinkedIn address, etc. Each identifier is unique to each user. The methods disclosed facilitate communication amalgamation between otherwise disparate electronic platforms. In one embodiment, different conference calling platforms may be amalgamated with simultaneous call out to users. In other embodiments, a conference calling platforms may be amalgamated with an electronic communication platform which is not a conference calling platform to render the latter effectively operational as the former in a unified manner.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 9 Jun 2020
- Est. expiry
- 13 May 2037
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- WARRICK, PETER · CAIRNS, PAUL · FILLO, BRIAN
- Classification
- H04M3/56H04M3/42
- Examiner
- HOMAYOUNMEHR, FARID
Telecommunication method and system for simplifying communication such as conference calls
A method of simplifying electronic communications between a plurality of users by communication implementation and management. Each user has an electronic identifier, which may be of a type, such as a website address, domain, LinkedIn address, etc. Each identifier is unique to each user. The electronic identifier can be changed at any time prior to contact enabling privacy and the method may be effected on a singular telecommunications platform (SIP) or mixed platform (SIP and PSTN) or other voice or text medium for cost efficiency. The system renders communication between users passive and allows for simultaneous and instantaneous communication while maintaining anonymity of the identifiers used.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 29 Mar 2022
- Earliest priority
- 18 May 2016
- Est. expiry
- 6 Aug 2037
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- CAIRNS, PAUL · FILLO, BRIAN · WARRICK, PETER
- Classification
- H04L29/06H04M3/42H04L65/403H04L12/18H04L65/1069G06F21/62H04L65/10H04M3/56
- Examiner
- SARKER, SANCHIT K
Parties of record
Webcon Vectors, LLC
- Core tech
- H04M3/56H04M3/42H04L29/06H04L65/403
- Counsel
- Brian E. Lutness
- Firm
- Silverman, McDonald & Friedman
Pexip, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Robert C. Mattson · Virginia Lynch
- Firm
- Shaw Keller LLP
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Brian E. Lutness | Webcon Vectors, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Robert C. Mattson | Pexip, Inc. | Defendant |
| Virginia Lynch | Pexip, Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the parties hereby stipulate to dismiss this action with prejudice. Each party shall bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.”
Case 1:26-cv-00259 · D. Del. · closed 18 June 2026
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 1:26-cv-00259?
1:26-cv-00259 is a patent infringement action brought by Webcon Vectors, LLC against Pexip, Inc., filed on 11 Mar 2026 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The case closed on 18 June 2026.
Which patents were asserted in 1:26-cv-00259?
US10681218B2 (“Telecommunication method and system for simplifying communication such as conference calls”), assigned to WEBCON VECTORS LLC, currently active; US11290428B2 (“Telecommunication method and system for simplifying communication such as conference calls”), assigned to WEBCON VECTORS LLC, currently active. The record also lists Telecommunication method and system for simplifying communication such as conference calls.
How was case 1:26-cv-00259 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is dismissed with prejudice. The termination text reads: “Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the parties hereby stipulate to dismiss this action with prejudice. Each party shall bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.”
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 1:26-cv-00259 take?
99 calendar days, from filing on 11 Mar 2026 to closure on 18 June 2026.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:26-cv-00259?
Chief Judge Jennifer L. Hall presided. Brian E. Lutness is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Webcon Vectors. Robert C. Mattson and Virginia Lynch appear for defendant Pexip.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:26-cv-00259 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.