DCT

2:17-cv-05755

Location Based Services LLC v. Garmin Intl Inc

Log In
Key Events
Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:17-cv-00133, E.D. Tex., 02/16/2017
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Eastern District of Texas because Defendant has transacted business and committed acts of patent infringement in the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s GPS navigation devices and mobile applications infringe seven patents related to map display systems, real-time traffic data integration, and image-based visual path generation.
  • Technical Context: The technology concerns digital navigation systems that incorporate dynamic data, such as traffic conditions or real-world imagery, to provide enhanced routing and visualization for users.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint does not allege any significant procedural events, such as prior litigation between the parties, Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, or licensing history related to the patents-in-suit. One of the asserted patents, U.S. Patent No. 7,860,648, notes on its face that it was the subject of an IPR proceeding (IPR2017-01965) which resulted in the cancellation of several asserted claims, an event that occurred after the filing of this complaint.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2005-02-25 Earliest Priority Date for ’073 and ’027 Patents
2005-04-30 Earliest Priority Date for ’033, ’610, ’648, ’996, and ’114 Patents
2009-04-21 U.S. Patent No. 7,522,996 Issues
2010-06-08 U.S. Patent No. 7,734,073 Issues
2010-12-28 U.S. Patent No. 7,860,648 Issues
2013-03-05 U.S. Patent No. 8,392,114 Issues
2014-07-01 U.S. Patent No. 8,768,610 Issues
2014-08-12 U.S. Patent No. 8,805,027 Issues
2015-12-15 U.S. Patent No. 9,214,033 Issues
2017-02-16 Complaint Filed

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 9,214,033 - "Map Display System and Method"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,214,033, “Map Display System and Method,” issued December 15, 2015 (Compl. ¶6).
  • The Invention Explained:
    • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the limitations of static digital maps by proposing systems and methods for providing a map display that is dynamic and context-aware (’996 Patent, col. 1:4-7).
    • The Patented Solution: The invention describes a method where a device receives a request for a map, determines a "status" for a location (e.g., traffic conditions), and generates a signal to indicate that status on the map. This status is based on "location interaction rules," which can be informed by data from external monitoring devices (’996 Patent, Abstract; ’996 Patent, col. 7:15-24). The '033 Patent claims are directed to applying this concept specifically to traffic conditions (’033 Patent, Claim 1).
    • Technical Importance: This approach allows navigation systems to provide real-time, actionable information, such as traffic congestion or road closures, moving beyond simple cartographic display to become dynamic guidance tools (’996 Patent, col. 10:25-34).
  • Key Claims at a Glance:
    • Independent claims 1 (method), 2 (system with instructions), and 3 (machine) are asserted (Compl. ¶36-38).
    • Independent Claim 1 includes the following essential elements:
      • receiving a request for a map illustrating one or more locations;
      • determining a status associated with at least one location on the map, where the status is based on traffic-related location interaction rules;
      • the status includes an indication of a traffic condition verifiable via monitoring devices;
      • generating a signal to indicate at least one route associated with the location(s), where the signal is based on the status.
    • The complaint also asserts numerous dependent claims (Compl. ¶35).

U.S. Patent No. 7,734,073 - "Image Mapping to Provide Visual Geographic Path"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,734,073, “Image Mapping to Provide Visual Geographic Path,” issued June 8, 2010 (Compl. ¶10-11).
  • The Invention Explained:
    • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the need for more intuitive and visually realistic navigation displays than traditional schematic maps provide (’073 Patent, col. 1:47-48; Abstract).
    • The Patented Solution: The invention describes a method where a display device transmits a request for a "mapped visual path" that includes at least two "input path parameters" (e.g., a location and a time parameter). In response, the device receives a path that includes at least two images of a predefined area, which are integrated with the path parameters and can be "stitched" together to create a continuous visual route (’073 Patent, Abstract; Claim 1). This allows for a "street-view" style of navigation.
    • Technical Importance: This technology enables photo-realistic, ground-level route visualization, which can make navigation more intuitive for drivers by showing them the actual environment they will be traversing (’073 Patent, col. 8:52-56).
  • Key Claims at a Glance:
    • Independent claims 1 (method) and 11 (computer program) are asserted (Compl. ¶68, ¶72).
    • Independent Claim 1 includes the following essential elements:
      • transmitting a request for a mapped visual path with at least two input path parameters (including a location parameter and a time parameter);
      • receiving from a processing device the mapped visual image path, which includes at least two images of a predefined area and is an integration of the images and the input path parameters;
      • displaying the mapped visual path, including the two images after a stitching operation is performed on them.
    • The complaint also asserts numerous dependent claims (Compl. ¶67).

U.S. Patent No. 8,768,610 - "Map Display System and Method"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,768,610, “Map Display System and Method,” issued July 1, 2014 (Compl. ¶14).
  • Technology Synopsis: The ’610 Patent describes a computer system for map display that includes a processor, memory, receiver, and a map display module. This module uses a data store of "interaction rules" (e.g., road type, speed limit) and a "status module" to determine and display the status of map locations based on these rules (’610 Patent, Abstract; Claim 1).
  • Asserted Claims: Claims 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7 (Compl. ¶80).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges that the Accused Instrumentalities determine traffic conditions based on traffic flow and posted speed limits, using a combination of traffic information and stored data to determine and highlight a route (Compl. ¶81-84).

U.S. Patent No. 7,860,648 - "Map Display System and Method"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,860,648, “Map Display System and Method,” issued December 28, 2010 (Compl. ¶18).
  • Technology Synopsis: The ’648 Patent describes a method for a display device to receive a map by transmitting a request that includes a user identifier. The device receives the map and interacts with monitoring devices to alter the map display as a function of "location interaction rules," such as average traffic speed (’648 Patent, Abstract; Claim 1).
  • Asserted Claims: Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, and 14 (Compl. ¶89).
  • Accused Features: The Garmin GPS Apps are accused of transmitting map data requests associated with a user’s iCloud or Google Play account and altering the map display to show colored lines indicating traffic conditions (Compl. ¶90, ¶96).

U.S. Patent No. 7,522,996 - "Map Display System and Method"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,522,996, “Map Display System and Method,” issued April 21, 2009 (Compl. ¶22).
  • Technology Synopsis: The ’996 Patent describes a method for providing map data by determining a location’s "status" based on "location interaction rules" (e.g., road closures, toll roads, traffic speed). The system then generates a signal to indicate this status on a map display, for example by showing an icon for a road closure or disallowing a route based on user settings like "avoid tolls" (’996 Patent, Abstract; Claim 1).
  • Asserted Claims: Claims 1, 2, 3, 12, 15, 16, and 17 (Compl. ¶103).
  • Accused Features: The Accused Instrumentalities are alleged to determine traffic status using speed limits and road closure information and to generate icons or disallow traversal of a road based on user settings (Compl. ¶104).

U.S. Patent No. 8,805,027 - "Image Mapping to Provide Visual Geographic Path"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,805,027, “Image Mapping to Provide Visual Geographic Path,” issued August 12, 2014 (Compl. ¶26).
  • Technology Synopsis: The ’027 Patent describes a method for receiving a "mapped visual path" by transmitting a request with input parameters (location, time) and receiving a path that integrates at least two images (e.g., street-view images). The invention includes displaying the path as a scrollable map (’027 Patent, Abstract; Claim 1).
  • Asserted Claims: Claims 1, 2, and 7 (Compl. ¶114).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges the accused apps receive requests with starting locations and route restrictions, obtain at least two street-view images, and display them in a scrollable map (Compl. ¶115, ¶117).

U.S. Patent No. 8,392,114 - "Map Display System and Method"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,392,114, “Map Display System and Method,” issued March 5, 2013 (Compl. ¶30).
  • Technology Synopsis: The ’114 Patent describes a method for a display device to receive a map by transmitting a request with a user identifier, receiving the map, and interacting with monitoring devices to alter the map display. The alteration is based on "location interaction rules" (e.g., speed limits, traffic conditions) as modified by "user interaction rules" (’114 Patent, Abstract; Claim 1).
  • Asserted Claims: Claims 1, 4, 6, and 7 (Compl. ¶121).
  • Accused Features: The Garmin GPS Apps are alleged to transmit map download requests associated with a user's cloud account and use traffic information from other Garmin devices to modify the map to reflect traffic speed relative to the maximum speed (Compl. ¶122).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The complaint identifies two categories of accused instrumentalities: a wide range of Garmin's physical GPS navigation devices (including the nüvi, DriveSmart, DriveLuxe, and DriveAssist lines) and Garmin's mobile navigation software for iOS and Android ("Garmin GPS Apps") (Compl. ¶35, ¶67).

Functionality and Market Context

The accused products are personal navigation devices and applications that provide users with digital maps, turn-by-turn directions, and real-time traffic information (Compl. ¶36, ¶104). The complaint alleges that these products receive traffic data from other Garmin devices and use this information to calculate routes, display traffic conditions (e.g., with colored lines), and suggest alternative routes to avoid delays (Compl. ¶36, ¶45). For the mobile apps, the complaint further alleges they integrate "google street view images" to create a visual path for navigation (Compl. ¶68).

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

U.S. Patent No. 9,214,033 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
receiving a request for the map, the map illustrating one or more locations The accused devices and apps receive user requests for maps and navigation. ¶36 col. 7:15-19
determining a status associated with at least one of the one or more locations on the map..., the status at least partially based on one or more traffic-related location interaction rules associated with the at least one of the one or more locations on the map... The devices determine traffic conditions, which are allegedly based on the "current traffic speed as compared to the normal speed of traffic." ¶36 col. 8:30-46
the status including at least an indication of at least one traffic condition verifiable via one or more monitoring devices The status allegedly includes traffic information received from other Garmin devices. ¶36 col. 10:25-34
generating a signal related to indicating at least one route associated with the at least one of the one or more locations on the map, the signal generated at least partially based on the status... The devices generate a signal that results in a colored line on the map indicating the route and its associated traffic conditions. ¶36 col. 6:45-50

Note: Patent citations for the '033 Patent refer to the specification of U.S. Patent No. 7,522,996, from which the '033 Patent claims priority and whose specification is incorporated by reference.

  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A potential dispute may arise over the definition of "traffic-related location interaction rules." The complaint provides a narrow example ("current traffic speed as compared to the normal speed"), but the defense may argue that Garmin's use of general traffic data does not meet the specific type of "rule-based" system described in the patent specification (Compl. ¶36; ’996 Patent, col. 8:30-46).
    • Technical Questions: The claim requires the status to be "verifiable via one or more monitoring devices." The complaint alleges these monitoring devices are "other Garmin devices" (Compl. ¶36). The case may require evidence demonstrating that the accused products actually receive and process data from a network of other specific Garmin devices, as opposed to a generic, aggregated traffic data feed.

U.S. Patent No. 7,734,073 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
transmitting a request for the mapped visual path, the request including at least two input path parameters associated with the mapped visual image path The Garmin GPS Apps transmit a request for directions that includes a start location, destination, and route preference. ¶68 col. 10:1-14
the transmitting including: transmitting a location parameter as one of the at least two input path parameters The request includes a destination or starting location. ¶68 col. 11:51-53
transmitting a time parameter as one of the at least two input path parameters The request includes a route preference setting, such as “fastest route.” ¶68 col. 11:51-53
receiving from a processing device the mapped visual image path, wherein the mapped visual path including at least two images of a predefined area identified by the at least two input path parameters... The app receives a mapped path that allegedly includes "google street view images." ¶68 col. 10:1-14
and displaying the mapped visual path, the mapped visual path including the at least two images after a stitching operation is performed on the at least two images The app displays the path with the street view images allegedly "'stitched' together along the mapped path." ¶68, ¶69 col. 8:52-56
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: The construction of "time parameter" will be critical. The complaint alleges that a "route preference setting such as ‘fastest route’" meets this limitation (Compl. ¶68). A dispute may arise as to whether a static preference qualifies as the "time parameter" contemplated by the patent, which could also be interpreted to mean a parameter related to the timing or periodicity of image updates.
    • Technical Questions: A central factual question is whether the Garmin GPS Apps actually use "google street view images" as the complaint alleges (Compl. ¶68). This allegation is a specific factual claim about the technical operation and data sources of the accused product that will require evidentiary support. A further question is whether the display of these images constitutes a "stitching operation" as claimed.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

For the ’033 Patent:

  • The Term: "traffic-related location interaction rules"
  • Context and Importance: This term is the core of the invention, defining the logic used to determine a location's "status." Its construction will determine whether Garmin's method of using aggregated traffic data (e.g., current vs. normal speed) infringes, or if a more specific, pre-defined rule set is required.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself is broad ("traffic-related"), potentially covering any rule that uses traffic data to affect a route. The specification discusses general "current conditions of locations on the map, such as traffic conditions" (’996 Patent, col. 10:25-27).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification provides more structured examples, such as rules for "unavailable, off limits, or whether the number of visits allowed has occurred," suggesting a system of discrete, pre-defined constraints rather than a simple analysis of continuous data like traffic flow (’996 Patent, col. 10:47-50).

For the ’073 Patent:

  • The Term: "mapped visual image path"
  • Context and Importance: This term defines the invention's output. The dispute will likely center on whether simply overlaying images on a map route is sufficient, or if the claim requires a more deeply integrated, "stitched" visual experience that creates a virtual path from the images themselves.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The summary describes the invention broadly as "integrating the one or more images and the one or more parameters into a map of the predefined area" (’073 Patent, col. 2:63-65), which might be read to cover various forms of image integration.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description and claims repeatedly emphasize the concept of a "visual path" created from images, including performing a "stitching operation" to combine them, suggesting a more advanced process than simple image placement (’073 Patent, Claim 1; col. 8:55-56). The complaint's specific allegation of using "google street view images" supports this narrower view of a continuous, stitched visual experience (Compl. ¶68).

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint does not contain specific factual allegations to support claims of induced or contributory infringement for any of the asserted patents. The counts of infringement are limited to direct infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) (Compl. ¶35, ¶67, ¶80, etc.). The prayer for relief includes a request for an injunction against inducement and contribution, but the body of the complaint does not lay a factual predicate for these claims (Compl. p. 31, ¶2).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint does not allege willful infringement. It makes no assertion of pre-suit knowledge of the patents-in-suit by the Defendant.

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

This multi-patent lawsuit will likely turn on two central issues that span the two distinct groups of asserted patents:

  • A core issue of definitional scope for the map display patents (’033, ’610, ’648, ’996, ’114): Will the term "location interaction rules," which the patent specification exemplifies with discrete constraints (e.g., time limits, visit counts), be construed broadly enough to cover the dynamic, real-time traffic-flow analysis (e.g., current speed vs. average speed) allegedly performed by Garmin’s navigation systems?
  • A key evidentiary and technical question for the image mapping patents (’073, ’027): Does the complaint provide evidence that Garmin's GPS Apps use "google street view images," as specifically alleged, and if so, does the integration of these images into a route map constitute the claimed "stitching operation" to form a "mapped visual image path"?