In a suit initiated by Intellectual Ventures I and II (IV), a Virginia district judge has granted Capital One’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of two patents related to online transactions (7,603,382, 8,083,137). IV’s June 2013 complaint accused Capital One’s online banking and brokerage systems as well as the company’s credit card and ATM systems of infringing a total of five patents. During litigation, one of the patents-in-suit was dismissed without prejudice as result of a motion filed by Capital One (7,260,587), and two were voluntarily dismissed with prejudice by IV (6,182,894, 7,664,701). Capital One’s February 2014 motion for summary judgment was filed following claims construction and argued that ‘382 and ‘137, the remaining patents-in-suit, consist of unpatentable subject matter. In a memorandum opinion issued this week, Judge Anthony Trenga agreed, stating that neither patent met the machine-or-transformation test nor contains a patentable process as defined by the Supreme Court. Further, ‘382 was found to be indefinite because a number of terms were insufficiently narrow and insolubly ambiguous. Trial was set for April 28, 2014, but in light of Judge Trenga’s ruling of invalidity and dismissal of the case, all motions related to trial, including IV’s request for a separate trial on Capital One’s antitrust and patent misuse counterclaims, have been denied as moot.