US Court of Appeals denies motion by Trading Technologies to increase number of patent cases
The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has made a move towards reducing the number of patent cases that Trading Technologies has been busy launching lately.
It is not a secret that Trading Technologies International has been busy contesting the decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) lately. Since the beginning of July 2017, Trading Technologies has launched six cases arguing against earlier decisions by PTAB over Trading Technologies’ patents. IBG LLC, Interactive Brokers LLC, TradeStation Group, Inc. and TradeStation Securities, Inc. are appellees in these cases.
Trading Technologies has even moved to increase the number of these patent cases by asking the the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to de-consolidate two of its patent cases.
As per the latest court filings, seen by FinanceFeeds, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has denied the motion, thus siding with appellees Interactive Brokers and TradeStation. In addition, the Court ordered that Appeal No. 2017-2257 shall be treated as an additional companion case such that all three cases shall be assigned to the same merits panel.
The latter case concerns the ‘056 patent, which describes “a user interface for an electronic trading system that allows a remote trader to view trends for an item, which assists the trader to anticipate demand for an item”. The patent covers a method of operation used by a computer for displaying transactional information and facilitating trading in a system where orders comprise a bid type or an offer type.
Another of the patents concerned is ‘999, which also describes a GUI for an electronic trading system that allows a remote trader to view trends for an item, which assists the trader to anticipate demand for an item. The method comprises displaying a plurality of bid indicators, each corresponding to at least one bid for a quantity of the item, each bid indicator at a location along a first scaled axis of prices corresponding to a price associated with the at least one bid.
The decision of the Court is barely surprising as de-consolidation is not a popular measure for the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
