-
Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York v. Gen Digital Inc. DC CAFC
- 3:13-cv-00808
- E.D. Va.
- Judge: M Hannah Lauck
- Filed: 12/05/2013
- Closed: 09/30/2023
- Latest Docket Entry: 12/13/2023
- PACER
- Docket updated daily
1
Plaintiff
1
Defendant
0
Accused
Products
6
Patents-in-Suit
3,587
Days in
Litigation
-
Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York v. Gen Digital Inc. DC CAFC
- 3:13-cv-00808
- E.D. Va.
- Judge: M Hannah Lauck
- Filed: 12/05/2013
- Closed: 09/30/2023
- Latest Docket Entry: 12/13/2023
- PACER
- Docket updated daily
Market Sector
E-commerce and Software
Assigned Judge
Outcome Summary
- Patent Information
-
Validity & Enforceability
Claim # | Claim Text | Outcome |
---|---|---|
1 |
A method for classifying an executable attachment in an email received at an email processing application of a computer system comprising: a) filtering said executable attachment from said email; b) extracting a byte sequence feature from said
view more
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
2 |
The method as defined in claim 1, wherein extracting said byte sequence feature from said executable attachment comprises extracting static properties of said executable attachment.
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
3 |
The method as defined in claim 1, wherein extracting said byte sequence feature from said executable attachment comprises converting said executable attachment from binary format to hexadecimal format.
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
4 |
The method as defined in claim 1, wherein classifying said executable attachment comprises determining a probability that said executable attachment is a member of each class in a set of classes consisting of malicious and benign.
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
5 |
The method as defined in claim 1, further comprising updating the classification rule set based on executable attachments classified in said classifying.
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
16 |
A method for classifying an executable program comprising: a) training a classification rule set based on a predetermined set of known executable programs having a predetermined class and one or more byte sequence features by recording the number of
view more
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
17 |
The method as defined in claim 16, wherein extracting said byte sequence feature from said executable program comprises extracting static properties of said executable program.
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
18 |
The method as defined in claim 16, wherein determining the probability that the executable program is within each said predetermined class comprises determining the probability that the executable program is within said predetermined class in a set
view more
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
19 |
The method as defined in claim 16, wherein determining said probability that the executable program is within each said predetermined class comprises determining said probability that the executable program is within each said predetermined class
view more
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
20 |
The method as defined in claim 16, wherein determining said probability that the executable program is within each said predetermined class comprises determining said probability that the executable program is within each said predetermined class
view more
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
21 |
The method as defined in claim 16, wherein determining said probability that the executable program is within each said predetermined class comprises classifying said executable program as malicious if said probability that said executable program is
view more
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
22 |
The method as defined in claim 16, wherein determining said probability that the executable program is within each said predetermined class comprises classifying said executable program as benign if said probability that said executable program is
view more
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
23 |
The method as defined in claim 16, wherein determining said probability that the executable program is within each said predetermined class comprises classifying said executable program as borderline if a difference between said probability that said
view more
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
24 |
The method as defined in claim 16, which further comprises logging said class of said executable determined in said step c).
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
25 |
The method as defined in claim 24, wherein logging said class of said executable further comprising incrementing a count of said executable classified as borderline.
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
26 |
The method defined in claim 25, which further comprises, if said count of executable exceeds a predetermined threshold, providing a notification that said threshold has been exceeded.
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
27 |
The method as defined in claim 16, further comprising updating the classification rule set based on executable attachments classified in said determining.
|
Invalid (112)
Entry 151 |
-
Infringement
Gen Digital Inc.
- 2 Details
Accused Product | Patent # | Claim # | Outcome |
---|---|---|---|
NA | US 8,074,115 B2 |
2
|
Willful infringement
Entry 1342
|
NA | US 8,601,322 B2 |
2, 11, 27
|
Willful infringement
Entry 1342
|
NortonLifeLock Inc.
- 2 Details
Accused Product | Patent # | Claim # | Outcome |
---|---|---|---|
NA | US 8,074,115 B2 |
2
|
Willful infringement
Entry 1206Entry 1338 |
NA | US 8,601,322 B2 |
2, 11, 27
|
Willful infringement
Entry 1206Entry 1338 |
Symantec Corporation
- 4 Details
Accused Product | Patent # | Claim # | Outcome |
---|---|---|---|
MalHeur, Insight, SONAR, and MutantX systems employed in or with Norton Internet Security, Norton AntiVirus, Norton<n>360, Symantec Endpoint Protections, and Symantec Endpoint Protection Small Business Edition | US 7,448,084 B1 |
1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28
|
No infringement
Entry 151
|
MalHeur, Insight, SONAR, and MutantX systems employed in or with Norton Internet Security, Norton AntiVirus, Norton 360, Symantec Endpoint Protections, Symantec Endpoint Protection<n>Small Business Edition, and Symantec Mail Security | US 7,487,544 B2 |
6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43
|
No infringement
Entry 151
|
MalHeur, Insight, SONAR, and MutantX systems employed in or with Norton Internet Security, Norton AntiVirus, Norton<n>360, Symantec Endpoint Protections, and Symantec Endpoint Protection Small Business Edition | US 7,913,306 B2 |
1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8
|
No infringement
Entry 151
|
MalHeur, Insight, SONAR, and MutantX systems employed in or with Norton Internet Security, Norton AntiVirus, Norton 360, Symantec Endpoint Protections, Symantec Endpoint Protection<n>Small Business Edition, and Symantec Mail Security | US 7,979,907 B2 |
10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20
|
No infringement
Entry 151
|
-
Damages
Total Damages:
$481,293,090.00Other Costs:
$46,428,150.00Dockets:
- Reasonable Royalty: $185,112,727.00
- Enhanced Damages: $296,180,363.00
- Pre Judgment Interest: $46,428,150.00