DCT
8:25-cv-02471
Alpha Modus Corp v. Adroit Worldwide Media Inc
Key Events
Complaint
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Alpha Modus, Corp. (Florida)
- Defendant: Adroit Worldwide Media, Inc. (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Prince Lobel Tye LLP
- Case Identification: 8:25-cv-02471, C.D. Cal., 11/03/2025
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the Central District of California because the Defendant maintains its principal place of business within the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s suite of retail vision technologies infringes four patents related to in-store customer tracking, real-time inventory management, and dynamic marketing.
- Technical Context: The technology at issue involves using cameras, sensors, and displays in physical retail stores to gather and analyze customer and product data, aiming to replicate the data-driven personalization of e-commerce.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that Plaintiff has entered into several intellectual property licensing agreements outside of litigation concerning its patented technology, which may be relevant to future damages models. Plaintiff also alleges it maintains a public website listing its patent portfolio, which could be used to support allegations of pre-suit notice.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2013-07-19 | Priority Date for all Patents-in-Suit |
| 2014-07-18 | Filing Date of parent application No. 14/335,429 |
| 2019-07-11 | Filing Date of continuation application No. 16/509,343 |
| 2020-04-01 | Filing Date of application for the ’890 Patent |
| 2020-04-01 | Filing Date of application for the ’880 Patent |
| 2020-08-04 | Filing Date of application for the ’672 Patent |
| 2021-04-13 | U.S. Patent No. 10,977,672 Issues |
| 2021-06-22 | U.S. Patent No. 11,042,890 Issues |
| 2022-04-12 | U.S. Patent No. 11,301,880 Issues |
| 2024-04-30 | Filing Date of application for the ’121 Patent |
| 2025-07-08 | U.S. Patent No. 12,354,121 Issues |
| 2025-11-03 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 10,977,672 - “Method And System For Real-Time Inventory Management, Marketing, And Advertising In A Retail Store”
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section identifies the challenge faced by brick-and-mortar retailers in competing with online stores, specifically their inability to gather and act on consumer purchasing data in real-time before a sale is made. This lack of data hinders effective inventory management, marketing, and efforts to counter "showrooming," where customers examine products in-store but purchase them online (’672 Patent, col. 1:35-51).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a system for a retail store that uses image recognition and other monitoring devices to create a data-rich environment. As described, the system can identify products on a shelf, monitor inventory levels, gather real-time data about nearby customers (such as demographics), determine current pricing, and then generate and display a targeted promotion on a visual display located near the products (’672 Patent, Abstract; Fig. 1). The system aims to provide the "right message to the right customer at the right time" to influence purchasing decisions in a physical store (’672 Patent, col. 1:65-2:2).
- Technical Importance: This technology represents an effort to merge the analytical capabilities of e-commerce with the physical retail space, enabling dynamic adjustments to marketing and promotions based on immediate, in-store customer behavior (Compl. ¶24-25).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts infringement of at least Claim 1 (Compl. ¶75).
- Independent Claim 1 is a system claim comprising a server with instructions to:
- Identify, via image recognition, an inventory of retail products at a visual display location.
- Display information about those products on the visual display.
- Determine, in real-time, current pricing information for the products.
- Display the current pricing information on the visual display.
- Receive real-time data of a customer from information monitoring devices.
- Generate a promotion for one of the products for the customer based on behavioral analytics.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.
U.S. Patent No. 11,042,890 - “Method And System For Customer Assistance In A Retail Store”
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: Similar to the ’672 Patent, this patent addresses the need for brick-and-mortar retailers to adapt to consumer behavior influenced by digital technology by providing more targeted, real-time assistance and enhancing the shopping experience (Compl. ¶34).
- The Patented Solution: This invention claims a method for analyzing customer interactions with products to provide a real-time response. The method involves using monitoring devices to gather "object identification information" of a product a person is interested in, as well as "sentiment information" of the person concerning that product (’890 Patent, Claim 1). This data is analyzed in real-time to manage inventory and provide a response chosen from a specific group, including sending a communication to the person, engaging them via a display, alerting a store employee, providing marketing information, or issuing a coupon (’890 Patent, Abstract). The complaint includes an exemplary visual from the patent showing facial analysis to determine sentiment (Compl. p. 6, FIG. 2).
- Technical Importance: The method focuses on converting passive customer observation into active, immediate engagement, using analyzed interactions and sentiment to trigger a specific, automated response designed to assist the customer or encourage a purchase (Compl. ¶35).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts infringement of at least Claim 1 (Compl. ¶102).
- Independent Claim 1 is a method claim comprising the steps of:
- Using monitoring devices to gather information about a person, including (A) gathering object identification information of a product of interest and (B) gathering sentiment information of the person with respect to the product.
- Analyzing the gathered information in real time to manage inventory.
- Providing a response in real time based on the analysis, where the response is selected from a group of five specified actions (e.g., sending a communication, engaging on a display, providing a coupon).
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.
U.S. Patent No. 11,301,880 - “Method And System For Inventory Management In A Retail Store”
- Technology Synopsis: The patent claims a method for real-time inventory management. It uses video image devices to gather information about shoppers' interactions with products, such as picking items up or carrying them away, and analyzes this information to trigger real-time responses like sending a restock alert or an inventory check request to store personnel (’880 Patent, Abstract; Claim 1).
- Asserted Claims: At least Claim 1 (Compl. ¶127).
- Accused Features: The complaint alleges that Defendant's products, including its "super-wide-angle low light HD cameras," perform the claimed method by gathering product interaction information (e.g., when customers add or subtract an item from a digital cart) and object identification information to manage inventory and provide alerts (Compl. ¶123-126).
U.S. Patent No. 12,354,121 - “Method And System For Shopping In A Retail Store”
- Technology Synopsis: The patent claims a method for enabling a seamless, checkout-free shopping experience. The method involves using monitoring devices to identify a person, track their movement and "stops" within the store, identify products they interact with and retain, and maintain a real-time list of those retained products. Upon tracking the person to a point-of-sale area, the system interfaces with a payment system to process payment for the listed items and transmits a receipt (’121 Patent, Abstract; Claim 1).
- Asserted Claims: At least Claim 1 (Compl. ¶153).
- Accused Features: Defendant's "Frictionless Shopping" technology is accused of practicing the claimed method by assigning an ID to customers, tracking them "from camera to camera," determining product interactions to manage a digital cart, identifying shopper stops, and interfacing with a digital wallet for payment upon leaving the store (Compl. ¶149-152).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused instrumentalities are a collection of Defendant’s retail technology products, including its Frictionless cashierless checkout technology, Smart Shelf solutions, Automated Inventory Intelligence (Aii®) technology, User Portal management system software, FAE Frictionless Analytics Engine software, Facial Wallet technology, and retail data/demographics engine software (collectively, the "Accused Products") (Compl. ¶61).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges these products form an integrated system for physical retail environments built on "artificial intelligence, computer vision, machine learning and deep learning" (Compl. ¶60). Key accused functionalities include:
- Smart Shelves that use cameras and displays to track inventory, provide real-time pricing and promotions, and gather customer demographic data (Compl. ¶70-74).
- Automated Inventory Intelligence which uses cameras to "view and track virtually any product or UPC in a retail environment" to monitor stock levels (Compl. ¶72, ¶99).
- Frictionless Shopping that assigns a random ID to a customer upon entry and tracks them through the store, automatically detecting when products are taken to create a digital cart that is charged to a digital wallet upon exit (Compl. ¶149, ¶152).
- A Shopper Demographics Engine that uses cameras on displays to gather customer demographics without manual input (Compl. ¶74).
- The complaint asserts these technologies provide Defendant with substantial financial gains and competitive advantages in the retail market (Compl. ¶64).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’672 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| (A) identify, via image recognition, an inventory of one or more retail products physically located at the first visual display location... | AWM's Smart Shelf and Automated Inventory Intelligence products "utilize image recognition to identify an inventory of products physically located at the Smart Shelf." | ¶72 | col. 12:13-22 |
| (B) display, on the first visual display, information about one or more of the one or more retail products... | AWM's Smart Shelf displays product information which "appears directly beneath the products." | ¶73 | col. 13:1-12 |
| (C) determine, in real-time, current pricing information... | AWM's Smart Shelf product provides "real-time pricing information" for products located on the shelf. | ¶73 | col. 22:20-24 |
| (D) display, on the first visual display, the current pricing information... | AWM's Smart Shelf displays information that can "include SKU's, prices, and sales promotion." | ¶73 | col. 13:1-12 |
| (E) receive, using one or more information monitoring devices at the first visual display location, real-time data of a customer... | AWM's Shopper Demographics Engine uses "cameras on each display" to "gather customer demographics without requiring them to manually provide it," described as providing "real-time data." | ¶74 | col. 10:59-64 |
| (F) generate a promotion...for the customer based on behavioral analytics. | AWM's Smart Shelf provides product-specific advertising and a "prommotional state" that "triggers as shoppers get closer to the display." | ¶71 | col. 21:1-4 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: The infringement analysis may focus on whether the term "behavioral analytics" can be met by a system that allegedly generates a promotion based on a customer's physical proximity ("as shoppers get closer to the display") (Compl. ¶71). The question is whether simple proximity tracking constitutes "analytics" as contemplated by the patent.
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges AWM's "Shopper Demographics Engine provides real-time data of customers" (Compl. ¶74). A central question will be what specific "data" is gathered and whether it is sufficient to meet the claim limitation, particularly in the context of generating a promotion "based on" that data.
’890 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| (a)...using one or more information monitoring devices to gather information about a person... | AWM's Shopper Demographics Engine uses cameras on displays to "gather information about customers in a retail store." | ¶96 | col. 3:30-33 |
| (iii)(A) gathering object identification information of a product that the person is interested in... | AWM's Smart Shelf "automatically tracks product inventory for products stocked in the AWM Smart Shelf." AWM's Frictionless Shopping "determines when customers interact with products." | ¶97-98 | col. 12:13-17 |
| (iii)(B) gathering sentiment information of the person with respect to the product | AWM's Shopper Demographics Engine "gather[s] customer demographics without requiring them to manually provide it." The complaint also cites a visual from the patent depicting sentiment analysis (p. 6, FIG. 2). | ¶96 | col. 10:59-64 |
| (b) analyzing the information in real time...to manage inventory of the products... | AWM's Smart Shelf "is able to track the amount of inventory for products located in the shelf, and provide alert notifications when the quantity of such products falls below threshold values." | ¶99 | col. 8:54-9:2 |
| (c) providing a response in real time...selected from a group consisting of... (iv) providing marketing or advertising information... | AWM's Smart Shelf provides a "prommotional state" that "calls out each product on the shelves, allowing for product specific advertising" which "triggers as shoppers get closer to the display." | ¶101 | col. 9:1-8 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: A primary point of contention may be the scope of "sentiment information." The complaint alleges that AWM's system gathers "customer demographics" (Compl. ¶96). The infringement question will turn on whether gathering general demographics is equivalent to gathering "sentiment information," a term the patent specification links to determining emotional states like "happy, % sad, % angry" via image analysis (’890 Patent, col. 14:62-65).
- Technical Questions: What evidence does the complaint provide that the accused "Shopper Demographics Engine" actually performs the specific function of gathering "sentiment information," as distinct from general demographic data like age and gender?
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "behavioral analytics" (’672 Patent, Claim 1)
- Context and Importance: This term is the basis for the "generate a promotion" step, a core element of the claim. Its definition will determine what level of customer data processing is required to infringe. Practitioners may focus on this term because the complaint's allegation rests on a proximity trigger, raising the question of whether this meets the "analytics" requirement.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent does not provide a formal definition. A broad interpretation could argue that any analysis of behavior, including simple tracking of a customer's location and dwell time, constitutes "behavioral analytics." The patent discusses tracking "user attentiveness, how long the customer stays at the display...what direction the customer moves," which could support that observing basic actions is sufficient (’672 Patent, col. 14:26-31).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: A narrower reading might require more complex data processing, such as pattern recognition or analysis of multiple data points over time. The use of the word "analytics" suggests a process more involved than a simple, single-event trigger.
The Term: "sentiment information" (’890 Patent, Claim 1)
- Context and Importance: This is a required input for the claimed method; the system must gather both object identification and sentiment. The dispute will likely center on whether the accused system actually gathers this specific type of information. Practitioners may focus on this term because there appears to be a potential mismatch between the complaint's allegation of "gathering demographics" and the claim's requirement of gathering "sentiment."
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: Parties may argue that "sentiment" can be inferred from other data points, such as dwell time or general demographic profiles, without requiring explicit emotional analysis.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification provides a specific example of what constitutes sentiment information, stating that the "demographic intelligence module utilizes algorithms... to determine a person's gender, approximate age, and sentiment (such as based upon video images...)" (’890 Patent, col. 10:59-64). Figure 2, included in the complaint, explicitly shows outputs for "Anger," "Happy," and "Sad," strongly suggesting that "sentiment" refers to emotional states, not general demographics (Compl. p. 6, FIG. 2).
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges induced infringement for all four patents. The allegations are based on Defendant implementing and utilizing the Accused Products in its customers' retail stores and providing instructions, which allegedly encourages, directs, and aids its customers in performing the infringing methods or using the infringing systems (Compl. ¶87, ¶114, ¶139, ¶165).
- Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged for all patents. The complaint alleges, on information and belief, that Defendant "knew or was willfully blind" to the patented technology (Compl. ¶80, ¶107, ¶132, ¶158). For the inducement counts, knowledge is alleged to exist "at least as early as the filing of this Complaint" (Compl. ¶85, ¶112, ¶137, ¶163). Plaintiff also notes that it maintains a public website listing its patent portfolio, which may be intended to support a claim of pre-suit notice (Compl. ¶15).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "sentiment information," which the patent specification links to specific emotional states derived from image analysis, be construed to cover the general "customer demographics" allegedly gathered by the accused system?
- A second key question will be one of functional sufficiency: does an advertising system triggered by a shopper's physical proximity, as alleged in the complaint, perform the function of "behavioral analytics" as required by Claim 1 of the ’672 patent, or does that term require a more complex analysis of customer activity?
- Finally, a central evidentiary question will concern pre-suit knowledge: the willfulness allegations rest on claims that the defendant "knew or was willfully blind" to the patents. The case may turn on what factual evidence, beyond the existence of Plaintiff's public patent portfolio, can be presented to establish that Defendant had specific knowledge of the patents-in-suit prior to the lawsuit's filing.