During August of 2011, US District Court Judge Stanley Chester granted the plaintiff's motion for entry of default judgment on the count of patent infringement. The plaintiff's requested an award of attorneys fees, however this request was denied. The case was remanded to Magistrate Judge Shipp for a hearing on damages.
On January 21st, LottoTron, Inc. filed a complaint against eleven Costa Rican entities alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,921,865 entitled “Computerized Lottery Wagering System.” As previously reported, LottoTron has asserted infringement of the same patent against other entities over the past few years. The Complaint, filed in the District of New Jersey, does not specifically identify which claims were infringed, but alleges that the operation of “interactive gaming websites directly infringes the claims of the ‘865 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. §271(a).” The Complaint further alleges that the Costa Rican entities have “also induced and contributed to the infringement of the claims of the ‘865 patent by others.”
The patent has two independent claims (claims 1 and 8) and fifteen dependent claims. Claim 1 is directed towards a wagering system and claim 8 is directed towards a method of automatically accepting different wagering formats. The two independent claims are reproduced below.
1. A wagering system for automatically accepting wagers comprising:
a) communications means for receiving communications from subscribers, said communications means including computer means and a wireless link;
b) message means connected to said communications means for receiving the incoming communications routed from said communication means and for providing a series of messages requesting subscriber information particular to one of the plurality of wagering formats; and
c) computer means having storage means connected to said message means for receiving and storing said subscriber wagering information, and assigning a reference number to a wager.
8. Method for automatically accepting a plurality of different wagering formats over a computer system, comprising:The case is LottoTron, Inc. v. SBG Online Casino et. al.,Case 2:10-cv-00337-SRC –MAS, 2:10-cv-0337 (D.N.J. filed January 21, 2010). We will continue to follow this case and the related cases.
receiving incoming communications from prospective wagerers and routing each of said communications according to which one of said plurality of different wagering formats is requested by a subscriber;
providing a series of messages requesting subscriber wagering information particular to one or more of said plurality of wagering formats;
requesting identification information from said prospective wagerers; and
requesting said prospective wagerers to enter a wager.