FB pixel

iProov brings counter-suit against FaceTec in biometric liveness IP dispute

iProov brings counter-suit against FaceTec in biometric liveness IP dispute
 

A counter-suit has been filed by iProov against FaceTec, refuting the claims made against it by the latter and alleging a breach of its ’548 patent, titled ‘Online Pseudonym Verification and Identity Validation.’

FaceTec filed suit against iProov alleging the British company wilfully infringed its biometrics patents, and improperly used the FaceTec Spoof Bounty Program to discover liveness detection trade secrets.

The ‘548 patent covers iProov’s remote identity verification technology, which combines remote document scans with face biometrics and spoof detection.

The countersuit, filed in a Nevada federal court, denies FaceTec’s allegations. Some are denied on grounds that iProov “is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations,” while other claims are do “not state any allegations to which a response is required,” according to iProov’s interpretation. This is the case for claims around the alleged violation of FaceTec’s patent for a ‘Facial Recognition Authentication System Including Path Parameters,’ and for allegations around the Spoof Bounty Program.

The allegations made by FaceTec include two infringements, a breach of contract and ‘intentional interference with contractual relations.’ iProov responds with a dozen different defenses.

The allegations fail to state a claim, iProov contends, the two patents mentioned have not been infringed, and both are invalid anyway, according to the court filing seen by Biometric Update. The other defenses refer to limitation of damages, the contractual relation between the two companies, an alleged breach of contract by FaceTec, the statute of limitations, failure to mitigate damages, and ‘the doctrine of waiver.’

iProov makes five counter-claims, alleging infringement of its ‘548 patent, non-infringement of FaceTec’s two patents of the same name (‘606 and ‘471), and the invalidity of those two patents.

A trial by jury has been requested by iProov.

Article Topics

 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   | 

Latest Biometrics News

 

BorderAge promises 100% anonymous age assurance with hand gesture modality

Imagine a magician who waves their hands not to conjure a white rabbit, but to provide age assurance without collecting…

 

euCONSENT’s tokenized age verification set for PoC at upcoming age assurance summit

The European Union has its own ideas about how age assurance should be carried out for restricted online services, and…

 

Humanity Protocol launches Humanity Foundation ahead of ‘big moves’

Humanity Protocol, one of the emergent contenders in the market for proof of personhood (PoP), has announced the launch of…

 

J.P. Morgan adds 2 biometric authentication terminals to payments ecosystem

J.P. Morgan Payments (JPM) has announced the release of two new proprietary biometric payments terminals for retail, restaurant and entertainment…

 

Prove acquires reusable digital ID verification firm Portabl

A post on Prove’s blog says the acquisition of digital ID startup Portabl “will enable Prove to enhance its industry-leading…

 

Socure: Nation-state fraud ramping up in 2025

Socure, a leading digital identity verification platform, believes 2025 will be the breakout year for digital identity verification in the…

Comments

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Most Viewed This Week

Featured Company

Biometrics Insight, Opinion

Digital ID In-Depth

Biometrics White Papers

Biometrics Events