Onscreen Dynamics, LLC v. Ean Holdings, LLC

Court

District Court, E.D. Texas (E.D. Tex.)
Official Court Website →

Assigned judge

Rodney Gilstrap · 8,688 cases in index

Docket number

2:24-cv-00251

Cause

35:271 Patent Infringement
35 U.S.C. § 271 — Patent infringement

Nature of suit

830 Patent
Infringement of a patented invention.

Jurisdiction

Federal Question

Jury demand

Both

Date filed

04/16/2024

Date terminated

09/11/2024

15,380 Patent cases in this court are indexed here.

Parties

• plaintiff · Onscreen Dynamics, LLC · 19 cases
• defendant · Ean Holdings, LLC · 21 cases

Part of a Larger Litigation Pattern

This is one of 22 Patent cases in our index naming EAN Holdings, LLC — a possible mass-tort or coordinated-litigation cluster.

About Patent Lawsuits

Patent lawsuits allege infringement of a patented invention — that another party made, used, or sold a protected technology without authorization. These cases are common in technology and pharmaceutical industries.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Onscreen Dynamics, LLC v. Ean Holdings, LLC?

Onscreen Dynamics, LLC v. Ean Holdings, LLC is a federal patent lawsuit filed on 04/16/2024 in the District Court, E.D. Texas. The case was terminated on 09/11/2024. Patent lawsuits allege infringement of a patented invention — that another party made, used, or sold a protected technology without authorization. These cases are common in technology and pharmaceutical industries.

What type of case is this?

It is classified as “Patent” under the federal nature-of-suit system. Patent lawsuits allege infringement of a patented invention — that another party made, used, or sold a protected technology without authorization. These cases are common in technology and pharmaceutical industries.

What court is the case in?

The case is in the District Court, E.D. Texas, docket number 2:24-cv-00251.

When was the case filed?

Onscreen Dynamics, LLC v. Ean Holdings, LLC was filed on 04/16/2024. It was terminated on 09/11/2024.

What law is the case brought under?

The docket lists the cause as 35 U.S.C. § 271 — Patent infringement.