DCT

4:17-cv-05928

Cellspin Soft Inc v. Fitbit LLC

Log In
Key Events
Amended Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 4:17-cv-05928, N.D. Cal., 03/02/2018
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the Northern District of California because Defendant Fitbit, Inc. maintains its headquarters and a regular and established place of business in San Francisco.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s fitness tracking devices, mobile application, and web services infringe patents related to a two-device architecture for automatically uploading data from a capture device to a web service via a paired mobile device.
  • Technical Context: The technology concerns the seamless synchronization of data from peripheral devices (like wearables) to the internet by using a smartphone as an intermediary bridge, a foundational process for the modern connected-device ecosystem.
  • Key Procedural History: Plaintiff filed this Amended Complaint following a court order and recent Federal Circuit decisions concerning patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, while § 101 motions were pending. The complaint also alleges that Defendant had pre-suit notice of the patents via letters sent in June and August 2017, forming the basis for willfulness allegations.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2007-12-28 Priority Date for ’794, ’752, and ’847 Patents
2014-05-27 U.S. Patent No. 8,738,794 Issued
2014-11-18 U.S. Patent No. 8,892,752 Issued
2017-06-15 Plaintiff sends first pre-suit notification letter to Defendant
2017-08-29 U.S. Patent No. 9,749,847 Issued
2017-08-31 Plaintiff sends second pre-suit notification letter to Defendant
2017-10-16 Original Complaint Filed
2018-03-02 Amended Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 8,738,794, "Automatic Multimedia Upload for Publishing Data and Multimedia Content" (Issued May 27, 2014)

  • The Invention Explained:

    • Problem Addressed: The patent describes the process of transferring data (e.g., a digital photo) from a capture device to the internet as cumbersome, typically requiring a physical connection (e.g., USB cable) to a computer for manual upload (Compl. ¶¶ 9, 11; ’794 Patent, col. 1:38-47). This process is described as inconvenient, time-consuming, and inefficient for publishing data in "real time" (Compl. ¶15; ’794 Patent, col. 1:37-38).
    • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a two-device system where a data capture device (e.g., a digital camera) establishes a paired wireless connection (e.g., Bluetooth) with a mobile device. An application on the mobile device detects new data on the capture device, automatically transfers it, and then uses the mobile device's internet connection to publish the data to a web service (Compl. ¶15; ’794 Patent, Abstract). This architecture offloads the power-intensive tasks of internet communication to the mobile device, conserving the battery life of the capture device (Compl. ¶17).
    • Technical Importance: The technology aimed to bridge non-internet-capable peripheral devices with web services by leveraging the connectivity of a mobile phone, automating a previously manual and tethered process (Compl. ¶18.b).

  • Key Claims at a Glance:

    • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2, 3, 4, 7, and 9 (Compl. ¶26).
    • Independent Claim 1 (Method) requires:
      • Providing software modules on a Bluetooth enabled data capture device and a Bluetooth enabled mobile device.
      • Establishing a paired connection between the two devices.
      • Acquiring new data in the capture device after the pairing.
      • Detecting and signaling the new data for transfer, which includes the capture device sending a data signal to the mobile device.
      • Transferring the new data automatically from the capture device to the mobile device.
      • At the mobile device, receiving the new data.
      • Applying a user identifier to the new data.
      • Transferring the new data and user identifier to a web service.
      • Making the new data available at the web service.

U.S. Patent No. 8,892,752, "Automatic Multimedia Upload for Publishing Data and Multimedia Content" (Issued Nov. 18, 2014)

  • The Invention Explained:

    • Problem Addressed: As with the related patents, the invention addresses inefficient data transfer from a capture device. It further contemplates the need for secure and power-efficient communication protocols between the paired devices (Compl. ¶18.d-e).
    • The Patented Solution: This patent describes a method that begins by establishing a secure paired Bluetooth connection using a cryptographic encryption key. The method uses an event-notification model: the capture device receives a message to enable event notifications, and when new data exists, it sends a notification that the mobile device is configured to "listen for." The captured data is then encrypted and transferred to the mobile device, which subsequently attaches a user identifier and uses a protocol like HTTP to send it to a remote server ('752 Patent, Abstract; col. 12:1-33).
    • Technical Importance: The invention refines the data transfer process by introducing explicit security features (encryption) and a specific, potentially more power-efficient "event notification" and "listening" communication model over continuous polling (Compl. ¶18.e).

  • Key Claims at a Glance:

    • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, and 14 (Compl. ¶36).
    • Independent Claim 1 (Method) requires:
      • At the capture device:
        • Establishing a secure paired Bluetooth connection with a mobile device using an encryption key.
        • Acquiring new data.
        • Receiving a message from the mobile device to enable event notification.
        • Determining the existence of new data and sending an event notification to the mobile device.
        • Encrypting the new data and transferring it to the mobile device.
      • The claim also specifies that the mobile device is configured to listen for the event notification and subsequently sends the obtained data with a user identifier, an action setting (e.g., HTTP), and a web address to a remote server.

U.S. Patent No. 9,749,847, "Automatic Multimedia Upload for Publishing Data and Multimedia Content" (Issued Aug. 29, 2017) (Multi-Patent Capsule)

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,749,847, "Automatic Multimedia Upload for Publishing Data and Multimedia Content", Issued August 29, 2017.
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a system comprising a Bluetooth enabled data capture device and a mobile application on a cellular phone. The capture device is configured to acquire data, store it, and send an event notification with the data to the paired phone. The mobile application is configured to listen for the event, receive and store the data, and then use HTTP to transfer the data with user information to a website over a cellular network ('847 Patent, col. 11:13-12:5).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts at least claims 1, 2, and 3 (Compl. ¶46).
  • Accused Features: The accused features are the systems comprising Fitbit’s Bluetooth enabled fitness trackers (as the "data capture device") in conjunction with the Fitbit Mobile application (as the "mobile application") running on a cellular phone (Compl. ¶¶ 46-47).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The accused instrumentalities are Defendant’s fitness tracking devices (including but not limited to Fitbit Charge 2, Surge, One, Blaze, Flex, Ionic, etc.), the accompanying Fitbit Mobile software application for iOS and Android, and the "www.fitbit.com" web services (Compl. ¶¶ 26, 36, 46).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges that the Fitbit devices are designed to monitor a user's biological and fitness information, such as heart rate and physical activity (Compl. ¶26). These devices are alleged to support Bluetooth protocols to establish a connection with a mobile device (e.g., a cell phone) running the Fitbit Mobile application. This connection is used to transfer the captured fitness data from the Fitbit device to the mobile device, which then transfers the data to Fitbit's web services for user access and review (Compl. ¶¶ 27, 37, 47). The complaint characterizes the products as "smart watches, wearables, [and] fitness bands" (Compl. ¶26). No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

'794 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a method for acquiring and transferring data from a Bluetooth enabled data capture device to one or more web services via a Bluetooth enabled mobile device... Fitbit practices methods for acquiring and transferring data from its Bluetooth enabled data capture devices (fitness trackers) to its web services via Bluetooth enabled mobile devices (e.g., cell phones) (Compl. ¶26). ¶26 col. 11:47-51
establishing a paired connection between the Bluetooth enabled data capture device and the Bluetooth enabled mobile device; Fitbit devices support Bluetooth protocols, including Bluetooth 4.0, which enables a connection between the Fitbit device and a mobile device after establishing a paired connection (Compl. ¶¶ 27, 10). ¶¶27, 10 col. 4:1-20
acquiring new data in the Bluetooth enabled data capture device, wherein new data is data acquired after the paired connection is established; The accused methods comprise acquiring new tracking data, such as heart rate and steps, in the Fitbit device after a paired connection is established with the mobile device (Compl. ¶27). ¶27 col. 4:21-24
detecting and signaling the new data for transfer to the Bluetooth enabled mobile device... The accused methods comprise... determining the existence of new tracking data... in the FitBit device (Compl. ¶27). The complaint does not specify the mechanism of signaling. ¶27 col. 4:63-5:1
transferring the new data from the Bluetooth enabled data capture device to the Bluetooth enabled mobile device automatically over the paired Bluetooth connection... The accused methods include transferring the new data from the Fitbit device to the mobile device automatically over the paired connection (Compl. ¶27). ¶27 col. 4:35-39
applying, using the software module on the Bluetooth enabled mobile device, a user identifier to the new data... Fitbit applications transfer the new data along with account information identifying the user, which is tied to the new data (Compl. p. 11, ¶27). p. 11, ¶27 col. 12:20-24
transferring the new data received... along with a user identifier to the one or more web services...; and making available, at the one or more web services, the new data received... Fitbit applications transfer the new data and associated account information to the Fitbit web service, which receives and makes the new data available (Compl. p. 11, ¶27). p. 11, ¶27 col. 12:25-34

'752 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A method for transferring data from a Bluetooth enabled data capture device to a remote internet server via a Bluetooth enabled mobile device comprising: performing at the Bluetooth enabled data capture device: establishing a secure paired Bluetooth connection... using a cryptographic encryption key; The accused methods comprise establishing a secure paired Bluetooth connection between the Fitbit device and the mobile device using a Bluetooth encryption key (Compl. ¶37). The devices support Bluetooth 4.0, which enables a secure connection (Compl. ¶37). ¶37 col. 11:51-57
receiving a message from the Bluetooth enabled mobile device... to enable event notification...; The accused methods include the Fitbit device receiving a message from the mobile device over the paired connection to enable event notifications which correspond to new data on the Fitbit device (Compl. ¶37). ¶37 col. 11:61-12:3
sending an event notification to the Bluetooth enabled mobile device... wherein the Bluetooth enabled mobile device is configured to listen for the event notification...; The Fitbit device sends an event notification to the mobile device corresponding to the existence of new data for transfer, and the mobile device is configured to listen for this notification (Compl. ¶37). ¶37 col. 12:4-13
transferring the encrypted data from the Bluetooth enabled data capture device to the Bluetooth enabled mobile device... Encrypted data is transferred from the Fitbit device to the mobile device over the paired connection (Compl. ¶37). ¶37 col. 12:17-21
wherein the Bluetooth enabled mobile device... sends the obtained new data with an attached user identifier, a hypertext transfer protocol method, and a destination web address to a remote internet server. The mobile device sends the obtained new data along with account information, a hypertext transfer protocol operation, and a destination web address to the Fitbit web server (Compl. ¶37). ¶37 col. 12:22-33
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A potential area of dispute may be whether the term "data capture device", described in the patent specification primarily with examples like digital cameras (’794 Patent, col. 1:39-40), can be properly construed to cover a modern wearable fitness tracker that performs both data capture and some level of data processing.
    • Technical Questions: The infringement allegations for the '752 patent hinge on a specific "event notification" and "listening" architecture (Compl. ¶37). A key factual question will be whether the Fitbit system operates using this specific claimed protocol, as opposed to a different method like the mobile application periodically "polling" the capture device for new data, which is a distinct embodiment described in the patents ('794 Patent, col. 4:30-34). The complaint alleges the "event notification" model, but the evidence for this specific technical implementation will be critical.
    • Divided Infringement: The asserted claims describe steps performed by the capture device, the mobile device, and the web service. Since the user owns and operates the mobile device, a central legal question will be whether Fitbit can be held liable for direct infringement by "practicing" all steps of the method, or if liability depends on a theory of indirect infringement where Fitbit is alleged to instruct or encourage its users to complete the infringing method (Compl. ¶¶ 28, 39, 49).

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "data capture device" (’794 Patent, Claim 1)

    • Context and Importance: This term's scope is fundamental to the entire case. Its construction will determine whether the patents, which use digital cameras as a primary example, apply to the accused Fitbit wearable fitness trackers. Practitioners may focus on this term because Defendant will likely argue for a narrow construction limited to the patent's original context to design around the claims.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent specification refers to a "digital data capture device" and lists examples including "a digital camera, a video camera, or other digital modular camera systems, or other digital data capturing systems" (’794 Patent, col. 3:36-39). Plaintiff may argue that "other digital data capturing systems" is catch-all language intended to cover any device whose function is to capture digital data.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's background and detailed description are heavily focused on the specific use case of transferring images and video from cameras (’794 Patent, col. 1:39-40, FIG. 5). Defendant may argue that this context limits the scope of the term to devices whose primary purpose is capturing media, not multifunctional fitness trackers that also process and analyze data.

  • The Term: "automatically" (’794 Patent, Claim 1)

    • Context and Importance: The degree of automation is a core inventive concept distinguished from prior art "manual" processes. Whether the accused Fitbit sync process is "automatic" under the correct construction of the term will be a key infringement question. The user's role, such as needing to open the app to initiate a sync, could be a pivotal fact.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent contrasts the invention with a user who "would then manually upload the image onto a website" (’794 Patent, col. 1:45-46). This suggests "automatically" means the data transfer from the capture device to the web service occurs without requiring discrete user commands for each step of the process after initial setup.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification also describes timer settings like "wait-X-minutes-user-input-cancel" where the system waits for user action or cancellation (’794 Patent, col. 5:40-49). Defendant could argue this shows that the invention contemplates, and "automatically" does not preclude, user interaction, raising questions about how automated the process must be to infringe.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges that Fitbit induces infringement by providing its devices, software, web servers, and instructions that actively encourage and enable users to perform the patented methods. It further alleges that the direct infringement by users occurs under Fitbit's direction and control, as use of the Fitbit application is conditioned upon performance of the claimed steps (Compl. ¶¶ 28, 39, 49).
  • Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged based on Fitbit’s purported knowledge of the patents. The complaint states that Fitbit received notice of its infringement of the ’794 and ’752 patents via letters dated June 15, 2017, and August 31, 2017, and notice of the '847 patent via the August 31, 2017 letter. Plaintiff contends that any infringing activity after these dates constitutes willful, deliberate, and egregious misconduct (Compl. ¶¶ 29-31, 40-41, 50-51).

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

  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "data capture device," rooted in the patents’ 2007-era examples of digital cameras, be construed to encompass the accused multi-functional wearable fitness trackers? The outcome of this claim construction dispute may significantly shape the infringement analysis.
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of technical mechanism: does the communication protocol between the accused Fitbit devices and the Fitbit mobile app function via the specific "event notification" and "listening" architecture required by claims in patents like the '752 patent, or does it use a different, non-infringing method such as periodic polling?
  • The case will also likely turn on the doctrine of divided infringement: as the claimed methods involve actions by both Fitbit-provided components and the user's mobile device, the court will need to analyze whether Fitbit's role constitutes direct infringement through sufficient direction or control over the entire system, or if liability rests on a theory of inducing its customers to infringe.