A notable entity within the foreign exchange sector is currently involved in a patent infringement lawsuit initiated by another prominent firm. Recently, a letter was submitted to the District Court in New Jersey, seeking permission to serve a subpoena aimed at obtaining testimony from a witness believed to hold critical information regarding a prior art system known as PrimeTrade FX.
In matters concerning patent infringement, a typical defense strategy is to argue for the invalidation of a patent on the basis that the claimed invention lacks novelty or is obvious by referencing earlier artworks. Patent law outlines various types of prior art that can serve to invalidate a patent, which includes previously issued patents, published documents, as well as products or systems that were either publicly used or disclosed before the priority date of the contested patent.
The lawsuit against this particular entity was filed on May 11, 2020, significantly long after the earliest priority date of the patents in question — established on March 8, 2001 — and even more than 13 years following the issuance of the initial patent in this pair. Emphasizing their defense, the firm contends that the patents are indeed invalid based on prior art, notably citing PrimeTrade FX, a system commercialized by Credit Suisse and asserted to have been publicly known and utilized over 24 years ago.
To substantiate their case, legal representatives for the firm have pursued related documentary evidence and conducted depositions from Credit Suisse, aiming to glean necessary information about the PrimeTrade FX system. However, they encountered obstacles; due to the time elapsed since then and subsequent corporate changes at Credit Suisse, only a limited number of relevant documents were produced. These documents primarily highlighted aspects meant for clients and provided overarching descriptions of the system’s architecture. Despite ongoing efforts to identify individuals who were directly involved in the development of PrimeTrade FX, the firm learned that most individuals connected with the product were no longer employed at Credit Suisse.
In light of these difficulties, the firm sought alternatives, scouring press releases and online resources for potential witnesses who might have experience with PrimeTrade while at Credit Suisse prior to the significant date of March 2001. They have identified a particular individual, Ken Ford, who resides in New Jersey and is believed to possess valuable knowledge about the PrimeTrade FX product. The firm asserts that Ford’s testimonial would be of significant relevance to their defense strategy regarding the invalidation of the patents they are contesting.
Contextually, this case revolves around the electronic trading of foreign currencies. The complaints include allegations of infringement on two specific patents: U.S. Patent No. 7,146,336 and U.S. Patent No. 8,392,311. The patents, which are interconnected—wherein the second is regarded as a child of the first—generally pertain to using computer networks for currency trading. They specifically address methodologies for aggregating rates from various financial institutions, determining market exchange rates, and executing trades based on predefined criteria set by traders.
The first patent is known to encompass system claims that detail various servers and engines that ostensibly participate in executing trades. Conversely, the second patent consists of method claims that outline actions performed by both a trading system server and a trading client system to facilitate trade execution.
In summary, the entity is actively working to solidify its defense against the patent infringement claims by seeking further evidence related to the PrimeTrade FX prior art, which is central to its argument for the invalidation of the contested patents. As these proceedings continue, the focus remains on gathering pertinent testimony and documentation to substantiate their position within this intricate legal landscape.