General Patent Corp., a Suffern-based patent licensing and enforcement firm, said that its subsidiary Acticon Technologies LLC has settled a patent lawsuit against L-3 Communications Ilex Systems Inc., a California-based telecommunications company. Acticon’s federal lawsuit alleged that an L-3 product infringed on two of Acticon’s patents. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

Two weeks after MasterCard Inc. and Visa Inc. said that they would settle a lawsuit filed by Discover Financial Services, the companies announced that the total settlement cost will be $2.75 billion. The four-year-old lawsuit accused Visa and MasterCard of unfairly limiting competition in the credit card industry and hurting their smaller rival Discover.

The settlement was originally announced Oct. 14 shortly before the start of a scheduled trial in Manhattan federal court. The financial details were not released at that time.

Purchase-based MasterCard said that its share of the settlement will be $862.5 million. The company added that it will take an after-tax charge of $515.5 million in the third quarter related to the settlement.

Visa agreed to pay nearly $1.89 billion as its share of the settlement.

MasterCard General Counsel Noah J. Hanft said that MasterCard opted for a settlement “to avoid the uncertainty and distraction of a lengthy jury trial. This result, which is in no way an admission of liability, is in the best interest of our shareholders, our customers and our company.”

A federal judge dismissed a shareholder class action lawsuit against Optionable Inc., a Valhalla-based energy trading company whose problems last year included the collapse of its stock price, the loss of its largest customer and the resignation of a top executive with a criminal record.

The shareholder lawsuit alleged that Optionable executives made false and misleading statements about the company’s revenues, the quality of its brokerage services and other matters.

U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan of the Southern District of New York in Manhattan dismissed the suit on Monday after concluding that the case was deficient.

“Many of plaintiffs’ factual allegations are not based on an adequate source or are unsupported by the purported source,” the judge wrote in an opinion on Sept. 15.

The case was one of several class-action suits that investors filed against the company after Optionable’s biggest customer, Bank of Montreal, suspended trading through Optionable’s brokerage services in May 2007. That decision came after the Canadian bank reported a pretax loss of up to $406 million from trades in natural gas contracts. Suspension of Bank of Montreal’s business was a blow to Optionable because the client accounted for a major part of Optionable’s business.

Optionable got more bad publicity when it was disclosed that former Chief Executive Officer Kevin P. Cassidy had previously been in federal prison for tax evasion and credit card fraud.

As investors reacted to the setbacks, Optionable’s shares plunged 97 percent in a matter of months. The shares rose 4 cents yesterday to close at 8 cents.

Kahn Gauthier Swick, a law firm with offices in New Orleans and New York City, filed the suit on behalf of Optionable shareholders. Attorneys at the firm could not be reached for comment. A spokesman for Optionable also could not be reached for comment.

MBIA Insurance Corp. has filed a lawsuit alleging that it has suffered heavy losses because of reckless home mortgage lending practices by Residential Funding Co., a unit of GMAC.

Armonk-based MBIA seeks unspecified damages from Residential Funding in the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. MBIA, which issued guarantees on mortgage-backed securities, said it has been hurt by Residential Funding’s approval of mortgages to borrowers who couldn’t repay the loans.

“The risks inherent in the portfolios were significantly higher than what (Residential) represented to MBIA,” the lawsuit read.

Residential Funding could not be reached for comment.

It is the second time in the past two weeks that MBIA has filed suit against a mortgage lender. MBIA earlier sued Countrywide Financial Corp., alleging that lax lending standards and fraud by Countrywide contributed to thousands of home mortgages going into foreclosure during the housing bust.

Lax lending standards and fraud by the giant home lender Countrywide Financial Corp. contributed to thousands of home mortgages going into foreclosure during the housing bust, leading to major losses for bond insurer MBIA Inc., according to a lawsuit filed by MBIA.

MBIA alleges in the suit that its insurance unit incurred $459 million in costs related to the bad loans at Countrywide and that additional claims exceed several hundred million dollars.

MBIA seeks damages from Countrywide in the suit filed Tuesday at the New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan.

“MBIA has been substantially harmed by Countrywide’s misrepresentations concerning the quality of loans it made. … MBIA has stated repeatedly that it will vigorously pursue all claims for improper practices by originators while continuing to meet its obligations to policyholders,” Kevin Brown, MBIA’s director of corporate communications, said in an e-mail statement.

MBIA’s insurance unit provided guarantees on billions of dollars of trust obligations of Countrywide mortgage-backed securities, but would have not done business with Countrywide if it had known about the lax standards, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit alleged that Countrywide abandoned its guidelines for loan origination as it aggressively pushed to expand its market share during the housing boom of recent years.

Countrywide’s questionable practices included “knowingly lending to borrowers who could not afford to repay the loans, or who committed fraud in loan applications, or who otherwise did not satisfy the basic risk criteria for prudent and responsible lending that Countrywide claimed to use,” the suit reads.

A spokeswoman for Bank of America Corp., which bought Countrywide earlier this year, declined comment on the case.

Two of America’s biggest coffee brands are involved in a legal battle over the plastic containers in which they sell their products.

Procter & Gamble Co., which sells Folgers Coffee, has filed a patent lawsuit against rival Kraft Foods Inc., well known for its Maxwell House brand. Procter’s lawsuit alleges that new four-pound plastic containers for Maxwell House infringe on Procter & Gamble patents for Folgers. Procter said that it has been selling Folgers in plastic containers since 2003.

“Many innovations in this container are covered by P&G patents, which we believe Maxwell House has infringed,” said Steve Jemison, chief legal officer at Procter & Gamble. “We must protect our intellectual property.”

The lawsuit has interest in Westchester County because Kraft manages the Maxwell House brand in Tarrytown.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court in Cincinnati, seeks to stop Kraft from violating the patent and unspecfied monetary damages.

Kraft released an e-mail statement denying the allegations.

“We have not had a chance to review this lawsuit but Kraft does not infringe the valid patent rights of others,” Kraft said in the e-mail. “We will vigorously defend ourselves in this matter.”

Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc. confirmed today that its Pomona-based subsidiary, Barr Laboratories Inc., has challenged four patents held by Amgen Inc. for its Sensipar drug, used by dialysis patients to treat side-effects of the treatment.

Barr said it filed an Abbreviated New Drug Application with the Food and Drug Administration on March 10, the first date the agency could accept such an application for the kidney drug.

On Monday, Amgen, along with patent partners Brigham and Women’s Hospital Inc. and NPS Pharmaceuticals Inc., filed suit against Barr and Israeli drug-maker Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. for planning to sell generic Sensipar before the expiration of patent protection.

Sensipar recorded $377 million in U.S. sales during the 12 months ending May, Barr said.

Teva, the world’s largest generic-drug maker, is buying Montvale, N.J.-based Barr for $9 billion, the companies said jointly earlier this month.

Shares of Barr were down fractionally in noontime trading to $65.81 a share.