DCT

4:22-cv-07515

AlmondNet Inc v. Samsung Electronics Co Ltd

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 6:21-cv-00891, W.D. Tex., 09/27/2021
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper based on Defendant Samsung Electronics America, Inc. being registered to do business in Texas and maintaining regular and established places of business in the Western District of Texas. For the foreign defendants, venue is asserted as being proper in any district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s advertising platform infringes nine patents related to internet and network-based advertising systems and methods.
  • Technical Context: The technology concerns methods for targeting advertisements to users based on user profile data, online behavior, and television viewing habits.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff attempted to engage Defendant in licensing negotiations as early as 2013. It also alleges that two notice letters specifically identifying several of the asserted patents were sent to AdGear, a Samsung entity, in July and October of 2019. These pre-suit communications form the primary basis for the allegations of willful infringement.

Case Timeline

Date Event
1999-12-13 Priority Date for U.S. Patent Nos. 7,979,307 and 8,244,582
2006-06-16 Priority Date for U.S. Patent Nos. 8,200,822, 8,671,139, and 8,959,146
2007-04-17 Priority Date for U.S. Patent Nos. 8,677,398 and 10,715,878
2007-12-31 Priority Date for U.S. Patent Nos. 8,566,164 and 10,321,198
2011-07-12 U.S. Patent No. 7,979,307 Issued
2012-06-12 U.S. Patent No. 8,200,822 Issued
2012-08-14 U.S. Patent No. 8,244,582 Issued
2013-01-01 (on or about) Plaintiff has conversations with Defendant regarding its patented ad targeting platform
2013-10-22 U.S. Patent No. 8,566,164 Issued
2014-03-11 U.S. Patent No. 8,671,139 Issued
2014-03-18 U.S. Patent No. 8,677,398 Issued
2015-02-17 U.S. Patent No. 8,959,146 Issued
2019-06-11 U.S. Patent No. 10,321,198 Issued
2019-07-24 Plaintiff sends first notice letter to Defendant AdGear
2019-10-25 Plaintiff sends second notice letter to Defendant AdGear
2020-07-14 U.S. Patent No. 10,715,878 Issued
2021-09-27 Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 7,979,307 - Method and Stored Program for Accumulating Descriptive Profile Data Along with Source Information for Use in Targeting Third-Party Advertisements, Issued July 12, 2011

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent background describes a need for a way to value and manage discrete "attributes of information" (e.g., a user's age, interests, or purchase history) for commercial purposes, such as targeted advertising, without being limited to selling entire databases or records (’307 Patent, col. 1:15-22, col. 2:58-66).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a "descriptive-profile mercantile method" where a user can provide a "partial profile" to a system that maintains a databank of other partial profiles. The system then searches its databank and facilitates a transaction where either the user acquires new profile attributes from the databank, or the databank acquires new attributes from the user, creating a brokerage for individual pieces of user data (’307 Patent, col. 3:20-41; Fig. 2).
  • Technical Importance: This approach provides a method for creating a market for discrete user data attributes, allowing for more granular and economically efficient targeting of advertisements compared to methods that rely on the sale of entire user lists or databases (’307 Patent, col. 2:5-8).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶21).
  • Essential Elements of Claim 1:
    • An automated method of collecting profiles of Internet-using entities.
    • Electronically receiving at a computer system a partial profile of an entity from a third-party website.
    • The receiving is achieved by an automatic electronic URL redirection from a portion of the website's page.
    • Automatically adding the received partial profile to a maintained profile believed to be related to the same entity.
    • Automatically generating and storing an electronic record of which third party contributed which profile attributes.
    • The maintained profile includes data used in targeting third-party advertisements to the user computer.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.

U.S. Patent No. 8,200,822 - Media Properties Selection Method and System Based on Expected Profit from Profile-Based Ad Delivery, Issued June 12, 2012

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent background discusses the inefficiency of behavioral targeting systems where a targeting company may buy ad space on a second media property to show an ad to a user profiled on a first media property, without knowing if the cost of that ad space will be covered by the expected revenue (’822 Patent, col. 5:1-12). Media properties have varying prices and profiles have different values to advertisers, creating a risk of financial loss on any given ad placement.
  • The Patented Solution: The invention provides a system that calculates the "expected profit" from an ad delivery based on a user's profile. It does so by deducting the price of ad space at a given media property from the expected revenue generated from an ad correlated with that user's profile. If the calculated profit is positive, the system arranges for the user to be "tagged" so that the profitable ad can be delivered on the selected media property (’822 Patent, Abstract; col. 6:11-26).
  • Technical Importance: This system introduces a real-time profit calculation into the ad selection process, allowing behavioral targeting companies to avoid unprofitable ad placements and select media properties that are most likely to yield a positive return on investment for a given user profile (’822 Patent, col. 6:1-10).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶31).
  • Essential Elements of Claim 1:
    • A method of directing electronic advertisements.
    • For each of a multitude of electronic visitors to a first media property, responsive to receiving information about at least one profile attribute, automatically authorizing a third-party second media property to allow display of an advertisement to the visitor.
    • The authorization is subject to a visitor-specific condition that a price charged by the second media property is less than a profile-attribute-dependent price an advertiser is willing to pay.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.

U.S. Patent No. 8,244,582 - Method and Stored Program for Accumulating Descriptive Profile Data Along with Source Information for Use in Targeting Third-Party Advertisements, Issued August 14, 2012

Technology Synopsis

This patent is in the same family as the ’307 Patent and addresses a similar problem of creating a market for discrete user data attributes. It claims a computer-implemented method where a system receives a partial profile from a user, searches a databank, and contracts with the user to either incorporate the user's profile data into the databank or transmit data from the databank to the user (’582 Patent, Abstract).

Asserted Claims

The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶42).

Accused Features

The complaint alleges that "Samsung's advertising platform" infringes this patent (Compl. ¶37).

U.S. Patent No. 8,566,164 - Targeted Online Advertisements Based on Viewing or Interacting with Television Advertisements, Issued October 22, 2013

Technology Synopsis

This patent describes a method for targeting online ads based on television ad viewing. The system associates a user's online access identifier (e.g., an IP address) with their set-top box identifier based on information derived from their television viewing behavior. This association then allows for the delivery of online ads targeted to that user based on the TV ads they have seen (’164 Patent, Abstract).

Asserted Claims

The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶52).

Accused Features

The complaint alleges that "Samsung's advertising platform" infringes this patent (Compl. ¶47).

U.S. Patent No. 8,671,139 - Media Properties Selection Method and System Based on Expected Profit from Profile-Based Ad Delivery, Issued March 11, 2014

Technology Synopsis

This patent is in the same family as the ’822 Patent and addresses the same problem of selecting media properties for ad placement based on profitability. It claims a method where a computer system directs an ad to a second media property based on a visitor's profile from a first media property, subject to a condition that the price charged by the second property is less than the advertiser is willing to pay for that profile (’139 Patent, Claim 1).

Asserted Claims

The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶63).

Accused Features

The complaint alleges that "Samsung's advertising platform" infringes this patent (Compl. ¶58).

U.S. Patent No. 8,677,398 - Systems and Methods for Taking Action with Respect to One Network-Connected Device Based on Activity on Another Device Connected to the Same Network, Issued March 18, 2014

Technology Synopsis

This patent describes a method for taking an action on one device (e.g., a TV set-top box) based on activity on another device (e.g., a computer) when both are connected to the same local network. The system electronically associates the two devices, often based on a common IP address, and then uses profile data from the first device to trigger an action (like delivering a targeted ad) on the second device (’398 Patent, Abstract).

Asserted Claims

The complaint asserts independent claim 13 (Compl. ¶74).

Accused Features

The complaint alleges that "Samsung's advertising platform" infringes this patent (Compl. ¶69).

U.S. Patent No. 10,321,198 - Systems and Methods for Dealing with Online Activity Based on Delivery of a Television Advertisement, Issued June 11, 2019

Technology Synopsis

This patent, related to the '164 patent, describes a system where online activity is tracked or an online ad is delivered based on user behavior related to a television ad. The system associates a user's set-top box identifier with their online access identifier. Information collected about the user's interaction with a TV ad is then used to target or track subsequent online activity (’198 Patent, Abstract).

Asserted Claims

The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶85).

Accused Features

The complaint alleges that "Samsung's advertising platform" infringes this patent (Compl. ¶80).

U.S. Patent No. 8,959,146 - Media Properties Selection Method and System Based on Expected Profit from Profile-Based Ad Delivery, Issued February 17, 2015

Technology Synopsis

This patent is in the same family as the ’822 and ’139 patents and addresses the selection of media properties for ad placement based on profitability. It claims a system that calculates expected profit from an ad placement and, if the profit is positive, arranges for the visitor to be tagged for ad delivery on the selected media property (’146 Patent, Abstract).

Asserted Claims

The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶96).

Accused Features

The complaint alleges that "Samsung's advertising platform" infringes this patent (Compl. ¶91).

U.S. Patent No. 10,715,878 - Targeted Television Advertisements Based on Online Behavior, Issued July 14, 2020

Technology Synopsis

This patent, related to the '398 patent, describes targeting television ads based on a user's online behavior. The system electronically associates a user's online access IP address with their television set-top box IP address. Profile information derived from the user's online activity is then used to select and deliver a targeted advertisement to their set-top box (’878 Patent, Abstract).

Asserted Claims

The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶107).

Accused Features

The complaint alleges that "Samsung's advertising platform" infringes this patent (Compl. ¶102).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The complaint identifies the accused products and services as "Samsung's advertising platform" (Compl. ¶16). This includes technology from AdGear Technologies Inc., which the complaint identifies as a Samsung entity (Compl. ¶5, ¶11).

Functionality and Market Context

The complaint does not provide specific technical details about the functionality of the accused advertising platform. It generally alleges the platform is used for "unlawful infringement" of patents related to "internet / network based advertising systems and methods" (Compl. ¶1). No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint states that claim charts comparing the asserted claims to a "representative Accused Product" are attached as exhibits and incorporated by reference (e.g., Compl. ¶21, ¶31). These exhibits were not provided. The complaint offers no narrative description of its infringement theory beyond the conclusory allegation that the Accused Products "satisfy all claim limitations" of the asserted patents. Therefore, a detailed claim chart summary cannot be constructed from the complaint's text.

  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Evidentiary Questions: A primary issue will be whether Plaintiff can produce evidence demonstrating that "Samsung's advertising platform" performs each step of the asserted method claims. For example, regarding the ’307 Patent, a key question will be what evidence shows that the platform receives a "partial profile" via "URL redirection" from third-party sites and then adds it to a "maintained profile" as the claim requires.
    • Scope Questions: For the ’822 Patent, a central question may be one of scope: does Defendant's advertising platform perform a calculation of "anticipated profit" by comparing advertiser bids against media property costs, as contemplated by the patent, or does it use a different mechanism for ad selection that falls outside the claim language?

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • For the ’307 Patent:

    • The Term: "automatic electronic URL redirection"
    • Context and Importance: This term appears central to how the accused system is alleged to acquire profile data from third-party websites. Practitioners may focus on this term because the mechanism of data transfer is a critical limitation of the claim, and its construction will determine whether various modern data-sharing protocols (e.g., API calls, server-to-server transfers) meet this limitation.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification does not appear to provide an explicit, limiting definition, which may suggest the term should be given its plain and ordinary meaning to one of skill in the art at the time.
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent focuses on a web-based visitor model where a "visitor's page" is redirected to a server (’307 Patent, col. 3:57-65). This context could support a narrower definition limited to browser-based redirection events, potentially excluding other forms of electronic data transfer.

  • For the ’822 Patent:

    • The Term: a "condition for display of the advertisement that a price charged by the second media property is less than a profile-attribute-dependent price that an advertiser is willing to pay"
    • Context and Importance: This phrase constitutes the core decision-making logic of the claimed invention. Its construction will be dispositive of infringement. The dispute may turn on whether Defendant's platform performs this specific comparison or uses an alternative logic for placing ads.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent describes this as a calculation of "expected profit" (’822 Patent, Abstract). This could support an interpretation that covers any system that makes a profitability assessment, even if not framed in the exact terms of the claim.
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim language recites a specific comparison: price charged < advertiser willing to pay. The detailed description repeatedly frames the invention in terms of a "price cap" derived from expected revenue minus costs, which must be compared against the price of media (’822 Patent, col. 7:22-34). This may support a narrow construction requiring an explicit comparison of these two specific values.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges induced infringement, stating that Samsung encourages and instructs customers and end users "through user manuals and online instruction materials on its website" to use the Accused Products in infringing ways (Compl. ¶19, ¶29). It also alleges contributory infringement, stating the components of the Accused Products are "especially made or especially adapted for use in infringement of the patent" and are not staple articles of commerce (Compl. ¶20, ¶30).
  • Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged based on Defendant's alleged pre-suit knowledge of the patents and infringement. The complaint cites "conversations with Samsung regarding AlmondNet’s platform" as early as 2013 and specific notice letters sent to AdGear in July and October 2019 that identified several of the Asserted Patents (Compl. ¶10, ¶11, ¶18, ¶28).

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

  • A core issue will be one of evidentiary proof: given the complaint's reliance on non-public exhibits, a central question is what evidence Plaintiff will present to demonstrate that the internal operations of Samsung's advertising platform practice the specific, multi-step methods recited in the asserted claims, particularly those related to data acquisition and profit calculation.
  • The case may also turn on a question of technical implementation: for patents involving cross-device targeting (e.g., the ’164 and ’398 patents), a key question will be how the complaint alleges Samsung's platform technically achieves the "association" between a user's online identifiers and their television-related identifiers, and whether that mechanism aligns with the methods disclosed and claimed in the patents.