DCT
4:17-cv-05933
Cellspin Soft Inc v. Fossil Group Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Cellspin Soft, Inc. (California)
- Defendant: Fossil Group, Inc. (Delaware) and Misfit Inc. (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Collins, Edmonds & Schlather, PLLC
- Case Identification: 4:17-cv-05933, N.D. Cal., 03/02/2018
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the Northern District of California because Defendants have regular and established places of business in the district, including Fossil retail stores and the California headquarters of Defendant Misfit, and because infringing activities are alleged to occur in the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s fitness tracking devices, mobile applications, and web services infringe patents related to automatically uploading data from a peripheral data capture device to a web service via a mobile device.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns methods for using a mobile device, such as a smartphone, to act as an intermediary bridge for transferring data from a non-internet-connected peripheral (e.g., a digital camera or fitness tracker) to online services.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that it is an Amended Complaint filed pursuant to a court order allowing amendments. It also notes that Defendants had previously filed motions challenging the patents under 35 U.S.C. § 101, and Plaintiff asserts the amended complaint addresses recent Federal Circuit precedent regarding such motions. The complaint alleges that Defendants had pre-suit notice of the patents via letters sent in June and August 2017, as well as notice from the original complaint filed in October 2017.
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 sent first notice letter to Defendant |
| 2017-08-31 | Plaintiff sent second notice letter to Defendant |
| 2017-08-29 | U.S. Patent No. 9,749,847 Issued |
| 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 publishing content from a digital data capture device (like a camera) to the internet as cumbersome, typically requiring an offline transfer to a personal computer (PC) via a cable or memory card before a manual upload to a website could occur (’794 Patent, col. 1:36-47). This process was seen as inconvenient and not conducive to "real time" sharing (Compl. ¶18).
- The Patented Solution: The invention provides a method where a mobile device (e.g., a smartphone) with a client application acts as an intermediary. The mobile device establishes a paired wireless connection (e.g., Bluetooth) with the data capture device, detects when new data is captured, automatically transfers that data to itself, and then publishes it to one or more websites (’794 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:4-29). This architecture shifts the "heavy lifting" of internet communication from the capture device to the more capable mobile device (Compl. ¶17).
- Technical Importance: The invention aimed to solve the problem of real-time data publishing from single-purpose capture devices that lacked their own internet connectivity, at a time when smartphone application ecosystems were nascent (Compl. ¶13).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2, 3, 4, 7, and 9 (Compl. ¶29).
- Independent Claim 1 requires a method with the following essential elements:
- providing a software module on a Bluetooth enabled data capture device and on a Bluetooth enabled mobile device;
- establishing a paired connection between the two devices;
- acquiring new data in the capture device;
- determining the existence of new data for transfer by the software on the capture device;
- sending a data signal from the capture device to the mobile device corresponding to the existence of new data, where the mobile device software listens for the signal;
- transferring the new data from the capture device to the mobile device;
- applying a user identifier to the new data for each destination web service;
- transferring the new data and user identifier to the web service(s);
- making the new data available at the web service(s), where the data corresponds to the user identifier.
U.S. Patent No. 8,892,752 - "Automatic Multimedia Upload for Publishing Data and Multimedia Content," Issued November 18, 2014
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: This patent, from the same family as the ’794 patent, addresses the same general problem of transferring data from a capture device to the internet via a mobile device, but adds a focus on security and the specific communication protocol for triggering the transfer (Compl. ¶38).
- The Patented Solution: The invention describes a method using a secure paired Bluetooth connection established with a cryptographic encryption key. The communication is initiated when the mobile device enables "event notification" on the capture device. The capture device then sends a notification when new data is ready, and the mobile device then receives the encrypted data and forwards it to a remote internet server using HTTP, along with a user identifier and destination address (’752 Patent, col. 12:1-40, Claim 1).
- Technical Importance: This approach adds a layer of security through encryption and introduces a specific "event notification" model, which can improve power efficiency over constant polling, a critical consideration for small, battery-powered peripherals (Compl. ¶20, ¶21.d-e).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, and 14 (Compl. ¶39).
- Independent Claim 1 requires a method with the following essential elements:
- establishing a secure paired Bluetooth connection between a capture device and a mobile device using an encryption key;
- acquiring new data in the capture device;
- receiving a message from the mobile device to enable event notification on the capture device;
- determining the existence of new data for transfer;
- sending an event notification to the mobile device, which is configured to listen for it;
- encrypting and transferring the new data to the mobile device;
- the mobile device obtaining the new data from the encrypted data and sending it with an attached user identifier, an HTTP method, and a destination web address to a remote internet server.
Multi-Patent Capsule
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 both the data capture device and a mobile application on a cellular phone. The system performs a similar function to the methods of the parent patents: the capture device acquires data, stores it, and sends an event notification with the data over a paired connection to the phone. The mobile application is configured to listen for the notification, receive the data, store it, and use HTTP to transfer it to a website over a cellular network (Compl. ¶48).
- Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2 and 3 are asserted (Compl. ¶49).
- Accused Features: The accused features are the systems comprising Fossil's Bluetooth-enabled fitness tracking devices (e.g., Misfit Vapor) in conjunction with the Fossil Q mobile applications, which together are alleged to perform the claimed functions (Compl. ¶49-50).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused instrumentalities are a wide range of Fossil's fitness tracking products, including the Misfit Vapor, Misfit Command, Misfit Phase, Misfit Shine 2, Misfit Ray, and others. The system also includes the "Fossil Q iOS Mobile Application" and "Fossil Q Android Mobile Application," as well as the web services at
www.fossil.com(Compl. ¶29, ¶39, ¶49).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges these products form a system for monitoring a user's biological and fitness metrics, such as heart rate and physical activity (Compl. ¶29). The fitness tracking devices are alleged to function as Bluetooth-enabled data capture devices. They connect to a user's mobile device running a Fossil Q application. This system allegedly acquires fitness data on the tracker, transfers it to the mobile application, and the application then uploads the data, tied to user account information, to Fossil's web services (Compl. ¶30, ¶40).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.
'794 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| establishing a paired connection between the Bluetooth enabled data capture device and the Bluetooth enabled mobile device; | Fossil fitness tracking devices establish a paired Bluetooth connection with a mobile device running a Fossil application. | ¶30 | col. 12:56-61 |
| acquiring new data in the Bluetooth enabled data capture device...after the paired connection is established; | Fossil devices acquire new tracking data such as heart rate and steps after establishing the paired connection. | ¶30 | col. 12:62-64 |
| determining the existence of new data for transfer, by the software module on the Bluetooth enabled data capture device; | The accused methods comprise determining the existence of new tracking data in the Fossil device. | ¶30 | col. 12:65-67 |
| transferring the new data from the Bluetooth enabled data capture device to the Bluetooth enabled mobile device automatically over the paired Bluetooth connection; | The new data is transferred from the Fossil device to the mobile device automatically over the paired connection. | ¶30 | col. 11:12-18 |
| applying, using the software module on the Bluetooth enabled mobile device, a user identifier to the new data for each destination web service; | The Fossil mobile applications apply account information identifying the user to the new data. | ¶30 | col. 11:21-24 |
| transferring the new data received...along with a user identifier to the one or more web services; | The mobile applications transfer the new data along with the user-identifying account information to the Fossil web service. | ¶30 | col. 11:25-29 |
| making available, at the one or more web services, the new data received from the Bluetooth enabled mobile device...wherein one or more portions of the new data correspond to a particular user identifier. | The Fossil web service receives and makes the new data available, where the data is tied to the user's account. | ¶30 | col. 11:36-42 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central question may be whether the standard data synchronization protocol used by the accused fitness trackers constitutes the specific method of "determining the existence of new data" and "sending a data signal" as claimed, or if the claim requires a more specific, non-conventional signaling process.
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges the system "automatically" transfers data. The degree of user interaction required to initiate a sync in the accused products versus the level of automation described in the patent (’794 Patent, col. 2:25-26, "automatically transferred") could become a point of dispute.
'752 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| establishing a secure paired Bluetooth connection...using an...encryption key; | The accused methods establish a secure paired Bluetooth connection between the Fossil device and a mobile device using a Bluetooth encryption key. | ¶40 | col. 12:50-55 |
| receiving a message from the mobile device...to enable event notification on Bluetooth enabled data capture device...; | The Fossil device is alleged to receive a message from the mobile device to enable event notifications corresponding to new data. | ¶40 | col. 12:65-67 |
| sending an event notification to the Bluetooth enabled mobile device...wherein the...mobile device is configured to listen for the event notification...; | The Fossil device sends an event notification to the mobile device, which is configured to listen for it. | ¶40 | col. 12:8-12 |
| transferring the encrypted data from the Bluetooth enabled data capture device to the Bluetooth enabled mobile device...; | Encrypted data is transferred from the Fossil device to the mobile device over the paired connection. | ¶40 | col. 12:15-20 |
| wherein the Bluetooth enabled mobile device...is configured to...send the obtained new data with...a user identifier, a hypertext transfer protocol method, and a destination web address to a remote internet server. | The mobile device sends the new data with account information, an HTTP operation, and a destination web address to the Fossil web server. | ¶40 | col. 12:28-40 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: The definition of "event notification" will be critical. Does the standard Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) advertising or GATT notification protocol used by modern wearables meet the specific requirements of the claimed "event notification" sequence, which includes the mobile device first sending a message to enable it?
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges the transfer of "encrypted data." The nature of the encryption will be a factual question: is it transport-level encryption inherent to the Bluetooth protocol, or a separate data-level encryption step as might be contemplated by the claim?
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
For the ’794 Patent:
- The Term: "user identifier"
- Context and Importance: This term is central to how the system links captured data to a specific user for publication. The infringement theory equates this to "account information" (Compl. ¶30). Practitioners may focus on this term because its scope will determine whether a general account token used by the Fossil system meets the claim requirement of applying an identifier "for each destination web service."
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification suggests the identifier can be part of a broader set of "user information," including "user-name, user-password, user-device-information, user settings, or user preferences" (’794 Patent, col. 12:40-44). This could support a reading that includes general account data.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim requires applying the identifier "for each destination web service," which could imply a unique or service-specific identifier is required, rather than a single, global account identifier used for Fossil's own service.
For the ’752 Patent:
- The Term: "event notification"
- Context and Importance: The infringement case for the ’752 patent hinges on the specific communication protocol between the tracker and the phone. The accused products likely use standard BLE protocols, and the key question will be whether those protocols map onto the claimed "event notification" steps.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent family describes the concept in general terms, such as a "file event listener" in the mobile application that "listens for the signal" from the capture device (’794 Patent, col. 4:65-5:1). This suggests any signal indicating new data could suffice.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Claim 1 of the ’752 patent requires a sequence: the mobile device first sends a message to enable event notification, and the capture device later sends the notification. This two-part, directed sequence might be construed as more specific than the passive advertising or standard subscription models common in BLE protocols.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges induced infringement for the ’752 and ’847 patents. The allegations are based on Fossil providing users with the devices, software, web servers, and instructions that allegedly encourage and enable infringement. It is also alleged that Fossil conditions the use of its web services on users performing the infringing method steps (Compl. ¶42, ¶52).
- Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged for all three patents. The complaint bases this on both pre-suit and post-suit knowledge, citing notice letters mailed on June 15, 2017 and August 31, 2017, as well as the filing of the original complaint on October 16, 2017, after which Fossil allegedly continued its infringing activities (Compl. ¶32-33, ¶43, ¶53).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
This case appears to center on the intersection of claim scope and the technical operation of modern wearable technology. The court will likely face two central questions:
- A core issue will be one of technical mapping: do the standard data synchronization protocols used in Fossil's Bluetooth-enabled fitness trackers (likely based on BLE GATT services) perform the specific, multi-step communication sequences—particularly the "event notification" process—recited in the asserted claims, or is there a fundamental mismatch in the commanded protocol?
- A key question of claim construction will follow: can the term "user identifier," which the patent requires to be applied "for each destination web service," be broadly construed to cover the single set of "account information" that the accused system allegedly applies for its own integrated web service?