The complaint

The case is Cedar Lane Technologies Inc. v. Axos Invest LLC, No. 1:26-cv-01179 (D. Del.), a five-page patent complaint filed September 21, 2026, ECF No. 1. Cedar Lane filed a complaint on the same patent the same day in No. 1:26-cv-01178 and filed others on it on September 30, 2026 in Nos. 1:26-cv-01260 and 1:26-cv-01261.

What the patent covers

U.S. Patent 8,577,782, titled Trading With Conditional Offers for Semi-Anonymous Participants, issued November 5, 2013, from an application filed April 8, 2010. Claim 1 covers a method that associates a trading entity with an identifier, acquires the trade history tied to that identifier, and receives an offer to buy or sell from a liquidity provider based on a profile, built from that history, showing whether the entity's trades would generate a profit. The offer is made only to that trading entity and is processed through an exchange for items with a bid/offer spread, using processors implemented at least partly in hardware. The complaint incorporates claim charts in Exhibit 2 comparing exemplary claims to exemplary Axos products. (Compl. paras. 8 to 17; U.S. Patent 8,577,782 claim 1.)

What the lawsuit alleges

Cedar Lane, a Canadian corporation, alleges it is the assignee of all right, title, and interest in the '782 Patent. Count I alleges that Axos directly infringes by making, using, selling, offering, or importing the exemplary products in the charts and by having employees test and use them, and alleges, on information and belief, that other infringing devices have been sold. It alleges induced infringement at least since service of the complaint and charts. Cedar Lane asks for a judgment that the patent is valid and enforceable, a finding of direct and indirect infringement, damages under 35 U.S.C. 284 with interest, and a finding that the case is exceptional under 35 U.S.C. 285, and it demands a jury. (Compl. paras. 10 to 19; prayer.)

The answer

The docket shows Axos's answer and counterclaim filed October 29, 2026 (ECF No. 11), followed by a Rule 7.1 disclosure statement and pro hac vice filings.

What to watch next

Watch for Cedar Lane's response to the counterclaim and for a scheduling order.