DCT
3:15-cv-05007
Conversant Wireless Licensing SARL v. Apple Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. (Luxembourg)
- Defendant: Apple Inc. (California)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Bunsow, De Mory, Smith & Allison LLP; Ward & Smith Law Firm
- Case Identification: 6:14-cv-751, E.D. Tex., 07/24/2015
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged based on Apple committing acts of infringement and its products being used, offered for sale, sold, and purchased within the Eastern District of Texas.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s iPhone, iPad, and iPod product lines infringe six patents related to mobile device user interfaces, messaging, location-based services, and audio processing.
- Technical Context: The technologies at issue cover a range of features central to the modern smartphone experience, including user interface navigation, lock screen notifications, ideogram-based text input, location services, and voice call quality.
- Key Procedural History: This First Amended Complaint follows an original complaint filed on September 10, 2014, and the service of infringement contentions on March 6, 2015. Subsequent to this filing, Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings were initiated against five of the six patents-in-suit, resulting in the cancellation of numerous claims, including what are likely the lead independent claims of U.S. Patents 8,713,476; 8,498,671; 8,434,020; 7,693,552; and 7,072,667. The IPR outcomes significantly narrow the potential scope of the asserted patents.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1995-09-13 | Earliest Priority Date for ’823 Patent |
| 1999-05-25 | Issue Date for U.S. Patent 5,907,823 |
| 2001-07-27 | Earliest Priority Date for ’020 and ’476 Patents |
| 2001-12-19 | Earliest Priority Date for ’671 Patent |
| 2001-12-31 | Earliest Priority Date for ’667 Patent |
| 2004-06-25 | Earliest Priority Date for ’552 Patent |
| 2006-07-04 | Issue Date for U.S. Patent 7,072,667 |
| 2010-04-06 | Issue Date for U.S. Patent 7,693,552 |
| 2013-04-30 | Issue Date for U.S. Patent 8,434,020 |
| 2013-07-30 | Issue Date for U.S. Patent 8,498,671 |
| 2014-04-29 | Issue Date for U.S. Patent 8,713,476 |
| 2014-09-10 | Original Complaint Filed against Apple |
| 2015-03-06 | Plaintiff Serves Infringement Contentions on Apple |
| 2015-07-24 | First Amended Complaint Filed |
| 2018-02-12 | IPR Certificate Issued for ’671 Patent (Claims 1, 3-5, 7-12, 15-16 Cancelled) |
| 2018-02-15 | IPR Certificate Issued for ’552 Patent (Claims 1-3, 5, 9, 11-13, 15, 19, 22 Cancelled) |
| 2019-12-30 | IPR Certificate Issued for ’020 Patent (Claims 1, 2, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 16 Cancelled) |
| 2020-06-05 | IPR Certificate Issued for ’476 Patent (Claims 1, 4, 7-9, 20, 28, 29 Cancelled) |
| 2021-02-09 | IPR Certificate Issued for ’667 Patent (Claims 12-15 Cancelled) |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 8,713,476 - Computing Device With Improved User Interface For Applications, Issued April 29, 2014
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent describes the difficulty for users of small-screen computing devices to navigate efficiently to access data or functions, often requiring them to "progressively drill down (sometimes through 3 or more layers) to complete the required task" (’476 Patent, col. 1:35-39; Compl. ¶17).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes an "application summary window" that provides a "snap-shot" view of an application's common functions or data (’476 Patent, col. 2:25-30). This summary window can be accessed directly from a main menu listing applications, allowing a user to view key information or select a function without having to fully open and navigate within the application itself (’476 Patent, Abstract). The complaint alleges this allows users to "more quickly and efficiently access data of interest" (Compl. ¶17).
- Technical Importance: This approach aimed to reduce the number of user actions required to perform common tasks on devices with limited screen real estate, thereby simplifying navigation (’476 Patent, col. 2:50-54).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts "one or more claims" of the ’476 patent without specifying them (Compl. ¶20). Independent claim 1 is representative of the core invention.
- Independent Claim 1 (Cancelled by IPR) requires:
- A computing device with a display screen configured to display a menu listing applications.
- An application summary that can be reached directly from the menu.
- The summary displays a limited list of data offered within an application.
- Data in the list is selectable to launch the application and enable the data to be seen.
- The summary is displayed while the application is in an "un-launched state."
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.
U.S. Patent No. 8,498,671 - Mobile Telephone Device With User-Selectable Content Displayed And Updated During Idle Time, Issued July 30, 2013
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent notes that a mobile device's "idle screen" (the default screen when not in active use) is conventionally underutilized, typically showing only network operator names or basic alerts (’671 Patent, col. 1:29-35). The complaint adds that accessing richer information required a "multi-stage navigation process" (Compl. ¶28).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a mobile device that displays user-defined, updated information on its idle screen (’671 Patent, Abstract). The user can select the kind of information (e.g., news, financial data) and the source (e.g., a specific internet portal), which is then supplied from a "remote information resource" and displayed on the idle screen, making it "instantly accessible" (’671 Patent, col. 3:1-7, 3:25-30).
- Technical Importance: This technology leverages the idle screen to provide at-a-glance, personalized, and dynamic content, enhancing the utility of the device when not in a call or specific application (’671 Patent, col. 3:31-35).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts "one or more claims" of the ’671 patent without specification (Compl. ¶31). Independent claim 1 is representative.
- Independent Claim 1 (Cancelled by IPR) requires:
- A mobile communication device adapted to receive and display information from a remote information resource.
- The device enables an end-user to select the remote resource before entering an idle screen state.
- The device enables the end-user to customize the idle screen to display the information per their preferences.
- The information is for display on the idle screen and is updated while in the idle screen state.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.
U.S. Patent No. 8,434,020 - Computing Device With Improved User Interface For Applications, Issued April 30, 2013
Technology Synopsis
Sharing a specification with the ’476 patent, the ’020 patent focuses on providing access to an application's functions (e.g., "reply" to a message) via a summary window, rather than just its data. This is intended to allow a user to initiate an action from the summary view while the application remains in an unlaunched state (Compl. ¶39).
Asserted Claims
"one or more claims" (Compl. ¶42). Independent claim 1 was later cancelled by IPR.
Accused Features
The iOS operating system, which allegedly "enables functionalities claimed in the '020 patent" (Compl. ¶40).
U.S. Patent No. 7,693,552 - Text Messaging Device, Issued April 6, 2010
Technology Synopsis
The patent is directed to creating text messages in ideogram-based languages (e.g., Chinese, Japanese) using a conventional phonetic keypad. To resolve ambiguity where multiple ideograms share a pronunciation, the invention provides "further information" in the language of interest to help the user select the correct ideogram from a list of candidates (Compl. ¶50).
Asserted Claims
"one or more claims" (Compl. ¶53). Independent claim 1 was later cancelled by IPR.
Accused Features
Apple's iOS international keyboards for ideogram-based languages, which present suggested characters for a phonetic input and allow the user to select the desired one (Compl. ¶¶51, 55).
U.S. Patent No. 7,072,667 - Location Information Service For A Cellular Telecommunications Network, Issued July 4, 2006
Technology Synopsis
The patent describes a method for using cellular location-based services on a mobile device "without pre-registration for the services by a user." The invention aims to allow greater access to and sharing of location information between mobile device users without a mandatory pre-registration procedure (Compl. ¶61).
Asserted Claims
"one or more claims" (Compl. ¶64). Independent claims 1 and 12 were asserted in parallel litigation and claim 12 was later cancelled by IPR.
Accused Features
The iOS operating system and Maps application, which allegedly provide location-based services without requiring user pre-registration (Compl. ¶¶62, 66).
U.S. Patent No. 5,907,823 - Method And Circuit Arrangement For Adjusting The Level Or Dynamic Range Of An Audio Signal, Issued May 25, 1999
Technology Synopsis
This patent discloses noise-reduction technology for improving voice call intelligibility. It adjusts the audio signal's level and dynamic range based on three distinct inputs: the level of the desired speech signal, the noise level coming from the far-end (transmitting) device, and the ambient acoustic noise at the near-end (receiving) device (Compl. ¶72).
Asserted Claims
"one or more claims" (Compl. ¶75).
Accused Features
Noise-reduction and cancellation technologies in Apple's iPhones, which allegedly adjust audio in response to background noise (Compl. ¶¶73, 77).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
A wide range of Apple's mobile devices, including numerous generations of the iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch (Compl. ¶¶13-14).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint targets core functionalities of Apple's iOS operating system. For the ’476 and ’020 patents, the accused functionality is the system for displaying "application summaries" that allow users to view data and access functions without fully launching the associated application (Compl. ¶¶17, 39). This is exemplified by the "Notification Center," which the complaint alleges can be accessed from any screen, including the Lock screen, by swiping down (Compl. ¶22, fn. 7; ¶44, fn. 13). An online user manual cited in the complaint describes how alerts can appear on the Lock screen, allowing a user to "Respond to an alert without leaving your current app" (Compl. ¶22, fn. 7).
- For the ’671 patent, the accused functionality is the display of user-selectable and updated information on the device's idle screen (Compl. ¶28). The complaint points to iOS features that allow users to configure what notifications and information appear in the "Today" view and on the lock screen (Compl. ¶33, fn. 10). The complaint cites an Apple support page describing the "Notification Center," which "collects your notifications in one place, so you can review them whenever you're ready" (Compl. ¶33, fn. 10).
- The complaint alleges these products are marketed, sold, and distributed throughout the United States and within the district via Apple's website, retail stores, and third-party distributors (Compl. ¶15).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’476 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A computing device comprising a display screen... configured to display... a menu listing one or more applications... | Apple's devices running iOS display a home screen with icons for various applications such as Messages, Contacts, and Calendar (Compl. ¶18). | ¶18 | col. 1:20-24 |
| and... an application summary that can be reached directly from the menu... | The iOS "Notification Center" is alleged to be an application summary that is accessible from the home screen or lock screen by swiping down, displaying data from unlaunched applications (Compl. ¶17, ¶22). | ¶17, ¶22, fn. 8 | col. 2:25-30 |
| wherein the application summary displays a limited list of data offered within the one or more applications... | The complaint alleges that a user can access an application summary to view data, such as the content of a new message, without launching the application (Compl. ¶17). | ¶17 | col. 2:25-28 |
| ...and wherein the application summary is displayed while the one or more applications are in an un-launched state. | The complaint alleges that data is accessible from an application summary "while an application remains in an unlaunched state" (Compl. ¶17). | ¶17 | col. 4:20-22 |
’671 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A mobile communication device... adapted to receive and display the information from a remote information resource... | Apple's devices receive and display information from outside sources, such as notifications for email, calendar invitations, and government alerts (Compl. ¶28, ¶33). | ¶28, ¶33 | col. 3:1-7 |
| ...adapted to enable the end-user to... customize the idle screen to display the information according to the end-user's specified preferences... | The complaint alleges users can "define and control information displayed on an idle screen" by using iOS settings to choose what information appears in the "Today" tab and which apps can display notifications on the lock screen (Compl. ¶33, fn. 10). | ¶33, fn. 10 | col. 3:1-4 |
| ...the information is for display on an idle screen of the mobile communication device... | The complaint alleges that user-defined information is displayed on the idle screen (Compl. ¶28). It cites Apple's user guides stating that "Alerts can also appear on the Lock screen" and allowing users to "view a notification from the Lock screen" (Compl. ¶22, fn. 7; ¶33, fn. 10). | ¶28, ¶33, fn. 10 | col. 1:29-32 |
| ...and the information is updated while the mobile communication device is in the idle screen state. | The complaint alleges the "user-defined information is updated for the user" on the idle screen (Compl. ¶28). | ¶28 | col. 3:6-7 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: A recurring question for the user interface patents (’476, ’671, ’020) will be whether terms defined in the context of early 2000s technology, such as "idle screen" and "un-launched state," can be construed to cover the features of a modern, multitasking operating system like iOS. For example, does an application with background processes generating notifications qualify as being in an "un-launched state" as required by the ’476 patent?
- Technical Questions: For the ’823 patent, a key technical question will be whether Apple's noise cancellation performs the specific three-part analysis required by the claims (measuring far-end signal, far-end noise, and near-end ambient noise) or if it uses a different, more general noise reduction algorithm. The complaint's allegation that third-party chips perform the infringement may complicate discovery and proof (Compl. ¶73).
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
For the ’476 Patent
- The Term: "un-launched state"
- Context and Importance: The infringement theory for the ’476 patent depends on the accused "application summary" being displayed while the relevant application is in an "un-launched state." Practitioners may focus on this term because its definition is critical to distinguishing the invention from prior art multitasking systems and to determining if Apple's background-process-driven notifications meet this limitation.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent does not explicitly define the term, which may support giving it a plain and ordinary meaning. The specification contrasts this state with having to "start/open the required application" and then navigate within it, suggesting "un-launched" could mean not being the foreground, user-facing application (’476 Patent, col. 1:40-42).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: An opponent could argue the term implies the application process is not running at all, not even in the background. The description of saving the user from "navigating to the required application, opening it up" could be read to imply a state before the application is invoked in any capacity (’476 Patent, col. 2:35-38).
For the ’671 Patent
- The Term: "idle screen"
- Context and Importance: The infringement allegation for the ’671 patent is centered on displaying user-selected content on the "idle screen." The accused feature is Apple's lock screen and Notification Center. The construction of "idle screen" will determine if these modern UI elements fall within the scope of the claims.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent defines "idle screen" as "the default screen displayed when the mobile telephone device is switched on and therefore capable of receiving a voice call" and "when the user is not navigating to a particular function, nor actively using a particular application" (’671 Patent, col. 1:29-35). This functional definition could be argued to encompass the modern lock screen.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent also contrasts the inventive idle screen with prior art screens that display only the "name of the network operator and alerting messages" (’671 Patent, col. 3:20-22). An opponent could argue this limits the term to the simple, largely non-interactive home screens of older phones, and that the feature-rich, interactive iOS lock screen is a different entity.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: For each patent, the complaint alleges Apple induces infringement by its end-users. The allegations are based on Apple (i) enabling the functionality, (ii) providing instructions in user manuals and online support documents that allegedly teach the infringing use, and (iii) advertising the claimed features (e.g., Compl. ¶¶22, 33, 44, 55, 66, 77).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint does not use the word "willful" but alleges facts that could support such a claim. For each patent, it asserts that Apple has had direct knowledge of the patents and the infringement allegations since the filing of the original complaint on September 10, 2014, and of specific infringement contentions since March 6, 2015. The complaint further alleges that despite this knowledge, Apple "continues to engage in the activities" that encourage infringement, thereby "specifically intend[ing]" for third parties to infringe (e.g., Compl. ¶¶24, 35, 46, 57, 68, 79).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A central issue for the user interface patents will be one of technological translation: can claim terms like "un-launched state" and "idle screen," which were defined in the context of early-2000s mobile operating systems, be construed to read on the fundamentally different architecture of a modern, multitasking OS? The outcome will depend on whether the court views these terms through a narrow, structural lens or a broader, functional one.
- A dispositive threshold question will be the impact of the subsequent IPR proceedings. Given that numerous claims across five of the six asserted patents—including the representative independent claims—were cancelled after the filing of this complaint, the continued viability of most of the infringement counts as pleaded is in serious doubt. The resolution of the case likely depends on whether any asserted dependent claims survived IPR and could be proven to be infringed.
- For any surviving claims, a key evidentiary question will be one of intent for induced infringement: can Plaintiff show that Apple's general user guides and marketing materials for broad features like "Notifications" or "international keyboards" demonstrate the specific intent to encourage infringement of the particular limitations recited in the patent claims, or are these instructions for legitimate, non-infringing uses?