Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

LevelUp Credited with Non-Infringement

By Jinnie Reed on July 21, 2014
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

When LevelUp was sued for patent infringement by an individual plaintiff, Jack Barron (“Barron”), it scored an aggressive win in part because of a finding that its mobile app was akin to an electronic credit card.  According to the court’s order, LevelUp is the creator of an app, “that allows users to pay for goods and services by scanning a two-dimensional bar code.”   “Merchants can install a LevelUp scanner which can read the two dimensional LevelUp barcode either from a display on the customer’s mobile phone or from a printed card.”

The patent in suit asserted by Barron was U.S. Patent No. 7,499,873 entitled, “Communication Through a Financial Services Network.”  The ’873 patent claimed methods for communicating a message from a sender to a recipient in possession of a unique identifier.  Each claim of the ’873 patent requires that a message be delivered to a recipient at a, “transaction terminal.”

LevelUp asserted that summary judgment of non-infringement should be granted because the LevelUp application does not communicate messages to users at a, “transaction terminal.”  On July 7, 2014, Judge Hillman granted LevelUp’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement.

The court agreed with LevelUp’s construction of “transaction terminal” to mean, “a device that communicates financial transaction information for authorization via a secure financial network.”  Plaintiff Barron did not offer its own claim construction but instead argued that a variety of devices can be used as a transaction terminal.

Based on the construction, the court found that the, “users cell phone as used in the LevelUp service does not function as a transaction terminal.”  The Court concluded instead that, “the cell phone in the LevelUp is used to display a bar code” and the phone, “acts merely as a proxy for a credit card; it is an electronic version of a printed card carrying a user’s identifying information.”   In addition, “[t]he user’s phone never connects to a financial network or communicates transaction information.”

Photo of Jinnie Reed Jinnie Reed

Jinnie Reed is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the Intellectual Property Group. Jinnie focuses her practice on patent litigation related to information technology and electronics.

Before joining Proskauer, Jinnie served as a judicial intern for the Honorable Judge…

Jinnie Reed is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the Intellectual Property Group. Jinnie focuses her practice on patent litigation related to information technology and electronics.

Before joining Proskauer, Jinnie served as a judicial intern for the Honorable Judge Debra Freeman in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York City, and acted as a student prosecutor for the Suffolk County District Attorney’s office in the Dorchester Division of the Boston Municipal Court.

Read more about Jinnie ReedEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Intellectual Property
  • Blog:
    New England IP Blog
  • Organization:
    Proskauer Rose LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo