Untitled case

This patent infringement litigation, Source Search Technologies, LLC v. LendingTree, LLC, Case No. 2:04-cv-04420, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, not the Southern District of New York as initially indicated. The plaintiff, Source Search Technologies, LLC (SST), is a patent assertion entity (PAE) that initiated the lawsuit. The primary defendant, LendingTree, LLC, is an operating company well-known for its online lending platform that connects consumers with multiple lenders. Other companies were also named as defendants in the suit, and Service Magic later joined LendingTree in a cross-appeal.

The core of the dispute revolved around LendingTree's online services, specifically its computerized procurement system. This system allows consumers to complete a single loan request form, which is then matched and transmitted to a network of lenders, who in turn can provide conditional loan offers. This functionality was accused of infringing U.S. Patent No. 5,758,328, titled "Computerized quotation system and method." The '328 patent broadly claims a computerized communication network designed to process requests for quotation for goods and/or services by broadcasting them to network members. Its key innovation lies in enabling buyers and vendors to interact without a rigid, centralized database, allowing vendors to send quotations directly to the buyer or via the system.

The procedural journey of the case saw SST filing suit on September 13, 2004, followed by LendingTree's counterclaim on November 10, 2004, seeking a declaration that the patent was invalid and unenforceable. After claim construction orders in late 2007, the court issued an opinion on July 9, 2008, granting LendingTree's motion that the asserted claims of the '328 patent were invalid for obviousness. However, the court also found that LendingTree infringed the asserted claims and that the claims were not invalid for indefiniteness. The case was subsequently closed on July 10, 2008. The mixed outcome at the district court level led to appeals, with SST appealing the invalidity finding, and LendingTree and Service Magic cross-appealing on the judgments of infringement and indefiniteness on August 22, 2008. This case is notable for its examination of business method patents in the context of early online marketplace platforms and highlights the complexities of patent validity and infringement for internet-based services.

The patent infringement litigation concerning U.S. Patent No. 5,758,328, initially misidentified as being in the New York Southern District Court, was actually filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey under case number 2:04-cv-04420. The plaintiff in the case was Source Search Technologies, LLC (SST), and the defendants included LendingTree, LLC, and other companies.

Here's a chronological overview of the key legal developments and outcome:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings (2004): Source Search Technologies, LLC (SST) filed suit against LendingTree, LLC and other companies on September 13, 2004, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,758,328.

• Trial and Verdict (January 2006): Following a trial, a jury returned a verdict finding infringement by Tree.com (an entity related to LendingTree) and awarded IMX (likely a predecessor or related entity of SST) $5.8 million in damages.

• Post-Trial Motions & Enhanced Damages (2006-2007): The court subsequently enhanced the damages award. By December 31, 2006, Tree.com's reserve for this litigation increased by $6.3 million to $12.1 million. In 2007, the court awarded IMX supplemental damages and pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, leading to the entry of a final judgment.

• Appeal to the Federal Circuit (2008-2009): Tree.com appealed this final judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On August 22, 2008, SST also appealed the court's finding of invalidity, while LendingTree and Service Magic (another defendant) cross-appealed on the judgments of infringement and indefiniteness. Opening briefs for the appeal were filed in January 2009, with oral arguments anticipated in the third quarter of 2009.

Information regarding specific claim construction (Markman) outcomes, detailed pre-trial motions of substance (beyond the implicit denial of dispositive motions by proceeding to trial), discovery milestones, and any parallel PTAB IPR/PGR proceedings on patent 5758328 is not available in the provided search results. The ultimate outcome of the Federal Circuit appeal is also not detailed in the current information.

Based on extensive web searches, there is no readily available public docket information or case details for a patent infringement case with the case number 2:04-cv-04420 in the New York Southern District Court specifically involving patent 5758328.

The case number 2:04-cv-04420 is consistently and predominantly associated in public records (including SEC filings) with the case Source Search Technologies, LLC v. LendingTree, LLC in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, where it involved U.S. Patent No. 5,758,328.

Another, distinct case, Marvin Garcia v. LendingTree, LLC, No. 08 Civ. 4551, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York but was voluntarily dismissed on July 28, 2008. This case number (08 Civ. 4551) does not match the one provided in the prompt.

Therefore, given the authoritative case metadata in the prompt specifying the New York Southern District Court for case number 2:04-cv-04420 and patent 5758328, the counsel of record for the plaintiff(s) cannot be identified from publicly available resources. The provided case number appears to be linked to a different jurisdiction for the patent in question.

I am unable to identify the specific counsel of record, their roles, firms, and office locations for the defendant(s) in case 2:04-cv-04420, which is listed as being in the New York Southern District Court.

My web searches consistently indicate that case number 2:04-cv-04420, involving U.S. Patent No. 5,758,328, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, with Source Search Technologies, LLC as the plaintiff and LendingTree, LLC and IAC/InterActiveCorp as defendants. While SEC filings from Tree.com, Inc. (which includes LendingTree, LLC after a spin-off from IAC/InterActiveCorp) discuss the litigation's history, including claim construction orders, summary judgment motions, and appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, they do not name the specific attorneys or law firms representing LendingTree, LLC or IAC/InterActiveCorp in this patent infringement case. The documents refer generally to "counsel" or "external tax advisors" in other contexts, but not for this specific patent litigation.

Without direct access to the docket entries (e.g., via PACER), which would explicitly list the appearing attorneys, I cannot provide the requested details about the defense counsel.