Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 13 OCTOBER 2006

Emergis Electronic Payment Systems Patent Narrowly Construed

For more than a year, Emergis Inc. has been seeking royalties and bringing lawsuits alleging infringement of its U.S. Patent No. 6,044,362. In an important ruling in Emergis Technologies, Inc. v. Cable One, Inc. (D. Kan.), a federal district court in Kansas has defined – and limited – the scope of Emergis's patent.

United StatesIntellectual Property
Michael Lindsay
Michael Lindsay
Devan Padmanabhan
Devan Padmanabhan
Bart Torvik
Bart Torvik
J. Vitt
J. Vitt

For more than a year, Emergis Inc. has been seeking royalties and bringing lawsuits alleging infringement of its U.S. Patent No. 6,044,362. In an important ruling in Emergis Technologies, Inc. v. Cable One, Inc. (D. Kan.), a federal district court in Kansas has defined – and limited – the scope of Emergis's patent. The '362 Patent relates generally to a system for electronic presentment and payment of invoices. Emergis has filed sixteen {?} lawsuits across the country claiming infringement of the '362 Patent and has sent numerous letters offering licenses.

One important aspect of the '362 Patent is its requirement that a customer send payment instructions "directly" to an invoicer. Emergis had proposed a broad construction of that requirement, arguing that even systems in which the invoicer uses a third-party service provider fall within the scope of the claim. In the Kansas case, Emergis argued that the "directly" requirement should be interpreted to mean that "the customer

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from