mCom IP, LLC v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A.

mCom IP, LLC v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A. The Federal Circuit affirmed dismissal with prejudice of mCom's infringement complaint on claim 17 of the '508 patent. Issue preclusion from the court's same-day affirmance of claim 17's invalidity in the companion Florida appeal bars the claim, and independently the complaint did not plausibly allege infringement. The court also found no abuse of discretion in denying further leave to amend. An appellate affirmance of invalidity in a companion case can immediately preclude the patentee from asserting the claim elsewhere, and the court again held that a complaint must plead facts making each disputed claim element plausibly practiced, not merely cite public webpages. Affirmed. mCom asserted claim 17 (depending on claim 13) of the '508 patent, directed to a unified electronic banking system, against HSBC in S.D.N.Y. It appealed only as to claim 17. The S.D.N.Y. dismissal was a companion to a Florida case against another bank, where claim 17 was held invalid. Issue preclusion: the court affirmed claim 17's invalidity today in the companion appeal (mCom v. City National), and that judgment collaterally estops mCom from asserting claim 17 here. The court found no circumstance that prevents preclusion, and saw no material difference among Federal, Second, and Eleventh Circuit preclusion principles. Alternative ground: the complaint did not plausibly allege the 'real-time' elements in a single active session, because its cookie allegations described use across two separate customer visits. The complaint also did not plausibly allege the 'common point of control' element. Consistent menus across platforms do not support an inference of back-end control by HSBC, and mCom never explained why that inference should be drawn. Leave to amend was properly denied: mCom had already amended once after a warning that further leave was unlikely, and it did not specify what further amendments it would make. § 101 infringement claim preclusion non-precedential