PatentVAED2:23-cv-00097

Security First Innovations, LLC v. Google LLC

Get an email the moment anything new is filed on this docket.

Summary

Security First Innovations sues Google for infringing its patent technology.

Summary generated by AI from public docket data. Verify against the original filing before relying on it.

Coverage vs reality meter

Coverage vs realityNo signal

Counsel of record

For the plaintiff
For the defendant
Court
VAED
Docket no.
2:23-cv-00097
Nature of suit
Patent
Filed
2023-03-10
Last filing
2025-05-23

Cause

35:281 Patent Infringement

Entities in this case

Parties

Security First Innovations, LLC (plaintiff) Google LLC (defendant)

Docket entries

  1. 2023-11-30

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. 138 MOTION to Seal (jhie, )

  2. 2023-11-22

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. 127 MOTION to Seal Certain Documents in Connection with Motion to Compel (jhie, )

  3. 2023-10-18

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. 119 Joint MOTION to Amend/Correct the Rule 16(b) Scheduling Order (jhie, )

  4. 2023-10-11

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. 116 MOTION for Leave to File Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Response to Notice of Supplemental Authority and Memorandum in Support (jhie, )

  5. 2023-10-04

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. 113 MOTION for Leave to File Unopposed Motion for Leave for Google LLC to File Response to Notice of Additional Information and Memorandum in Support (jhie, )

  6. 2023-09-28

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. 102 MOTION to Seal Exhibits 1 and 2 re Plaintiff's Notice of Supplemental Information Regarding Google's Knowledge of the Asserted Patents (jhie, )

  7. 2023-09-22

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. 82 MOTION to Exclude Defendant's Response to Interrogatory No. 2 (jhie, )

  8. 2023-09-18

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. 85 MOTION to Seal (jhie, )

  9. 2023-09-14

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. 92 Joint MOTION for Protective Order (jhie, )

  10. 2023-09-05

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge: Robert J. Krask. 81 Unopposed Motion For Extension Of Time For Google LLC To File Opposition to Motion For Leave To File An Amended Complaint (jhie, )

  11. 2023-09-01

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. 78 Consent MOTION for Entry of Order regarding Electronically Stored Information (jhie, )

  12. 2023-07-24

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. 55 Joint MOTION for Interim Protective Order (jhie, )

  13. 2023-07-18

    Notice of Correction re 50 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Alan John Heinrich and Certification of Local Counsel William Rueger Poynter Filing fee $ 75, receipt number AVAEDC-9029573. The motion does not contain the signature of the applicant. Local counsel should file a corrected motion that includes the written signature of the applicant. Counsel should not pay a second fee. (tlev, )

  14. 2023-07-18

    Scheduling Conference - Rule 16b held on 7/18/2023. (ptom, )

  15. 2023-05-12

    MOTIONS REFERRED to Magistrate Judge: Krask. 39 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time for Plaintiff to File its Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (mrees)

  16. 2023-05-01

    Refer for 16(b) (dbra, )

  17. 2023-04-13

    Case Reassigned to District Judge Jamar K. Walker. District Judge Elizabeth W. Hanes no longer assigned to the case. (afar)

  18. 2023-03-30

    MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. 19 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 1 Complaint (jhie, )

  19. 2023-03-14

    Case transferred in from Alexandria Division. Case Number 1:23cv329. (afar)

  20. 2023-03-14

    Notice of Correction re 6 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Jordan Nafekh, 7 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Erick Roger Franklund and 5 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Jonathan Michael Lindsay and Certification of Local Counsel Charles B. Molster, III. The motions do not contain the signatures of the applicants. Local counsel should file corrected motions that include the written signatures of the applicants. Counsel should not pay the fees a second time. (tlev, )

Docket history from CourtListener/RECAP — most recent first.

ShareShare on XLinkedIn
View on CourtListener →Open in feed →Last updated 2026-05-19