DCT

1:16-cv-00772

Alex Is Best LLC v. TCT Mobile Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:16-cv-00772, D. Del., 09/02/2016
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the District of Delaware because Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction there and have committed acts of patent infringement within the District.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ mobile devices, including smartphones and tablets, infringe seven patents related to integrated, internet-connected camera systems that automatically transmit, receive, and store image and video data.
  • Technical Context: The technology at issue concerns portable devices that seamlessly connect to a network to upload and download media, a foundational capability of the modern mobile device market.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention any prior litigation, Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, or licensing history related to the patents-in-suit. The patents were assigned to the Plaintiff by the inventors.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2005-07-26 Earliest Priority Date for all Patents-in-Suit
2009-12-15 U.S. Patent No. 7,633,524 Issues
2011-03-15 U.S. Patent No. 7,907,172 Issues
2012-03-13 U.S. Patent No. 8,134,600 Issues
2013-07-02 U.S. Patent No. 8,477,197 Issues
2013-11-12 U.S. Patent No. 8,581,991 Issues
2015-02-03 U.S. Patent No. 8,947,542 Issues
2015-11-24 U.S. Patent No. 9,197,806 Issues
2016-09-02 Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 7,633,524 - Integrated internet camera system

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent describes conventional camera systems as complex and expensive, requiring peripheral devices like a personal computer (PC) to transfer images to the internet for storage or sharing (’524 Patent, col. 1:25-33). These systems are described as bulky, not easily portable, and lacking simple, two-way communication for both sending and receiving images ('524 Patent, col. 1:44-53).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is an "integrated Internet camera system" comprising two main components: an "Internet direct camera" (IDC) and a "website archive and review center" (WSARC) ('524 Patent, Fig. 2). The IDC is a single, portable device that, upon power-up, can automatically connect to the internet, capture an image, and transmit it to a user account on the WSARC without needing a PC ('524 Patent, col. 2:54-62). The system is designed to automatically switch between different modes of communication (e.g., from Wi-Fi to cellular) if the primary mode becomes unavailable ('524 Patent, col. 3:30-38).
  • Technical Importance: This approach sought to simplify the process of capturing and sharing digital media by creating a dedicated, easy-to-use device that was always ready to connect to a network service, a conceptual forerunner to modern cloud-connected cameras and devices.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶26).
  • Claim 1 is a system claim with the following essential elements:
    • A "website archive and review center (WSARC)" for storing and managing images.
    • An "Internet direct camera (IDC)" for capturing an image.
    • The IDC automatically transmits the image to an account on the WSARC upon capture and receives stored images from the WSARC.
    • The IDC includes a display for showing the captured and received images.
    • The IDC automatically connects to the WSARC on power-up via a primary mode of communication.
    • The IDC automatically switches to another mode of communication if the primary mode is unavailable.
  • The complaint reserves the right to assert other claims (Compl. ¶36).

U.S. Patent No. 7,907,172 - Integrated internet camera system

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: As with the parent '524 Patent, this patent addresses the complexity and lack of portability of prior art camera systems that required an external PC to connect to the internet (’172 Patent, col. 1:22-43).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is an "Internet direct device" (IDC), claimed as a standalone apparatus rather than a complete system. The device itself contains an imaging system and a microprocessor configured to automatically connect to a "website archive and review center" (WSARC) on power-up to transmit and receive images ('172 Patent, Abstract). It also includes the capability to automatically switch communication modes (e.g., Wi-Fi to cellular) if the primary connection fails ('172 Patent, col. 3:28-36).
  • Technical Importance: This patent focuses on the architecture of the portable device itself, claiming the core functionalities of automated network connection, media transfer, and communication redundancy in a single apparatus.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶42).
  • Claim 1 is a device claim with the following essential elements:
    • An "Internet direct device" comprising an imaging system to capture a still or video image.
    • A microprocessor to transmit the captured image to, and receive a stored image from, an account on a WSARC.
    • The device automatically connects to the WSARC over the internet on power-up using a primary communication mode.
    • The device automatically switches to another communication mode if the primary mode becomes unavailable.
  • The complaint reserves the right to assert other claims (Compl. ¶50).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,134,600 - Internet direct device

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims an "Internet direct device" that communicates directly with another Internet direct device over a network, rather than with a central WSARC. The device captures and transmits images to another device, and also receives images from other devices, while featuring the family’s characteristic auto-connect and mode-switching capabilities (’600 Patent, Claim 1).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶56).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges that a "pre-installed application for video conferencing" on the accused devices infringes this patent by transmitting and receiving video images between devices (Compl. ¶59).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,477,197 - Internet direct device

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims an "Internet direct device" that transmits captured images to an account associated with a website. It is distinct for also claiming that the device can receive images from other Internet direct devices over the network, combining the concepts of cloud backup and peer-to-peer sharing (’197 Patent, Claim 1). It also includes the auto-connect and mode-switching features.
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶69).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses the "backup and synchronization feature of the Application" of infringing by transmitting images to a WSARC account (Compl. ¶72).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,581,991 - Integrated internet camera system and method

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a method of transmitting and receiving images. The method includes the steps of automatically connecting to a network on power-up, capturing images, transmitting them to a WSARC, receiving images from the WSARC, and automatically switching communication modes when the primary mode is unavailable (’991 Patent, Claim 1).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶82).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses the "backup and synchronization feature of the Application" of performing the infringing method steps (Compl. ¶86).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,947,542 - Integrated internet camera system and method

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a device that captures and transmits audio or video images to another Internet direct device and receives audio/video back from that other device. This patent is focused on peer-to-peer audio-visual communication, again with the auto-connect and mode-switching features (’542 Patent, Claim 1).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶95).
  • Accused Features: The complaint targets a "pre-installed Video Conferencing Application" for transmitting and receiving captured audio and video images between devices (Compl. ¶98).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 9,197,806 - Integrated internet camera system and method

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a method for operating a device that captures a combination of audio, still, or video images and transmits them to an account on a WSARC. It covers the familiar steps of automatic connection on power-up and automatic switching of communication modes (’806 Patent, Claim 1).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶108).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses the "backup and synchronization feature of the Application" of infringing by transmitting captured audio, still, or video images to a WSARC account (Compl. ¶111).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The complaint names a range of mobile devices, including the Alcatel AT&T Trek HD, Onetouch Idol Series, Onetouch Pixi Series, and others, collectively termed the "Accused Instrumentalities" (Compl. ¶19). The Alcatel OneTouch AT&T Trek ® HD 4G LTE Tablet is used as a representative example throughout the infringement counts (Compl. ¶25).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges the Accused Instrumentalities are "portable, Internet direct devices" that include front and rear-facing cameras, a microprocessor, a display, and communications hardware for connecting to the internet via multiple modes like Wi-Fi and cellular (Compl. ¶¶19-20). Their allegedly infringing functionality stems from pre-installed software ("the Application" or "Video Conferencing Application") that facilitates automated backup of photos and videos to a "WSARC" and enables video chatting between devices (Compl. ¶¶21, 59). The complaint observes that these devices are programmed to automatically connect to a network on power-up and to switch to a secondary connection (e.g., cellular) if a primary connection (e.g., Wi-Fi) becomes unavailable (Compl. ¶¶22, 34). No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

'524 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a website archive and review center (WSARC) for storing and managing images The online account to which users automatically upload images, which is accessible via an internet web page to manage the images. The complaint uses the patent’s term "WSARC" to describe this functionality. ¶27 col. 8:12-13
an Internet direct camera (IDC) for capturing an image, The Alcatel OneTouch AT&T Trek HD 4G LTE Tablet itself, which includes a 5MP main camera and 2MP front camera for capturing images. ¶¶25, 29 col. 8:14-15
automatically transmitting said image to an account associated with said IDC on said WSARC upon image capture and receiving stored image from said WSARC, The "backup and synchronization feature of the Application" is observed to transmit captured images to the WSARC and receive stored images from it. ¶30 col. 8:16-18
and comprising a display for displaying said captured image and said received image The accused tablet includes an 8" 1280x800 display. ¶31 col. 8:19-21
wherein said IDC automatically connects to said WSARC over an Internet connection on power-up using one of a plurality of available modes of connection, which is designated as a primary mode of communication, The tablet is observed to automatically connect to Wi-Fi on power-up. After a power cycle, the application is running and automatically connects to the WSARC. Wi-Fi is designated the primary mode over cellular to reduce data usage. ¶¶32-33 col. 8:22-26
and wherein said IDC automatically switches to another available mode of communication when said IDC detects that said primary mode of communication to said WSARC is unavailable. The tablet is observed to automatically switch to its cellular data connection when it detects that the Wi-Fi connection is unavailable. ¶34 col. 8:27-31
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Question: A central issue will be whether a generic, third-party cloud service (which is what "the Application" likely is) meets the definition of the patent’s "website archive and review center (WSARC)," which the specification describes as a component of a single, integrated camera system ('524 Patent, col. 2:5-10). The defense may argue that the accused general-purpose cloud services are distinct from the dedicated, purpose-built system contemplated by the patent.
    • Technical Question: The complaint does not identify the specific pre-installed software ("the Application") by name (Compl. ¶27). A key factual question for discovery will be identifying this software and determining whether its functionality matches the automatic transmission and reception features required by the claim.

'172 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
An Internet direct device comprising an imaging system to capture a still or video image; The accused tablet includes a 5MP main camera and 2MP front camera for capturing still and video images. ¶44 col. 8:10-11
and a microprocessor to transmit said captured still or video image to an account... on a website archive and review center (WSARC) upon image capture, and receive still or video image from said WSARC; The accused tablet includes a Qualcomm Snapdragon 400 processor, which is used with a backup and synchronization application to transmit captured images to, and receive stored images from, an account on a WSARC. ¶45 col. 8:11-15
and wherein the Internet direct device automatically connects to said WSARC over an Internet connection on power-up using one of a plurality of available modes of connection... The accused tablet is observed to automatically connect to Wi-Fi on power-up. Upon inspection after a power-cycle, the application is running, meaning the device automatically connects to the WSARC. ¶¶46-47 col. 8:15-20
and wherein the Internet direct device automatically switches to another available mode of communication when the Internet direct device detects that said primary mode... is unavailable. The accused tablet is observed to automatically switch to its cellular data connection when it detects that the Wi-Fi connection is unavailable. ¶48 col. 8:20-24
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Question: Does a general-purpose mobile device like a tablet, which functions as a portable computer, qualify as the claimed "Internet direct device"? The defense may argue that the patent's description of a "single, portable standalone apparatus... without requiring the use of an external controlling apparatus such as a personal computer" ('172 Patent, col. 2:25-30) points to a more specialized, purpose-built camera, not a general-purpose computing device.
    • Technical Question: As with the '524 patent, the infringement theory relies on the unidentified "Application" (Compl. ¶45). The analysis will depend on establishing that this specific software, in combination with the device hardware, performs every claimed step.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "website archive and review center (WSARC)"

    • Context and Importance: This term is the central server-side component of the claimed invention. Its definition is critical because the infringement theory depends on mapping this term to the generic cloud services allegedly used by the accused devices. Practitioners may focus on this term to determine if the patent covers any internet-based storage or only the specific, integrated system described in the specification.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself is functional, defining the WSARC as being "for storing and managing images" ('524 Patent, col. 8:12-13), which could arguably read on any cloud storage provider.
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly describes the WSARC as a component of a single, "integrated Internet camera system" ('524 Patent, col. 2:5-6) and links it to an "IICS operator" ('524 Patent, col. 2:8-10), suggesting a dedicated, proprietary service rather than a generic, third-party one. The abstract also frames the WSARC as an integral part of the "system."

  • The Term: "Internet direct camera (IDC)"

    • Context and Importance: This term defines the client-side device. The case may turn on whether a modern, multi-function smartphone or tablet constitutes an "IDC."
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claims define the IDC by its functions: capturing images, transmitting/receiving them, and connecting to a network ('524 Patent, cl. 1). This functional language could be argued to cover any device performing these functions.
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The background section distinguishes the invention from prior art that requires a PC ('524 Patent, col. 1:33-43). The summary describes the invention as a "single, portable standalone apparatus (i.e., an embedded system), without requiring the use of an external controlling apparatus such as a personal computer" ('524 Patent, col. 2:26-30). A court could find that a smartphone, which is itself a powerful personal computer, is not the "embedded system" a person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood the patent to mean.

  • The Term: "automatically connects ... on power-up"

    • Context and Importance: This term is key to the "ease of use" feature of the invention. The parties may dispute what "power-up" means in the context of a modern mobile device (e.g., a cold boot vs. waking from sleep) and what level of user configuration is permissible for the connection to be "automatic."
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The term itself is not explicitly defined, leaving it open to a plain and ordinary meaning that could encompass connecting after any action that makes the device operational.
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification emphasizes the simplicity of the system, where a user can "begin recording/storing/archiving of the images on the WSARC by simply powering their IDC" ('524 Patent, col. 2:9-11). This may suggest a connection that requires no user interaction beyond the initial power-on, potentially excluding connections that rely on user-installed apps or logins. The complaint alleges this occurs after a "power-cycle" (Compl. ¶33).

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint does not provide sufficient detail for analysis of indirect infringement. The infringement counts expressly allege "direct infringement" under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) (e.g., Compl. ¶35).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint does not allege that Defendants had pre- or post-suit knowledge of the patents-in-suit, nor does it plead facts that would typically support a claim for willful infringement.

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

  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "website archive and review center (WSARC)," described in the patents as an integral part of a dedicated system, be construed to cover general-purpose, third-party cloud applications (e.g., Google Photos, iCloud, Dropbox) that users may install on the accused general-purpose mobile devices?
  • A related and critical question is one of technological identity: does an off-the-shelf smartphone or tablet—a powerful, general-purpose computer—constitute the specific "Internet direct camera" described as a standalone, embedded system designed to operate without a separate PC, or is there a fundamental mismatch between the accused products and the device contemplated by the patent?
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of specificity: can the plaintiff meet its burden of proof by relying on vague references to "the Application" and "the Video Conferencing Application," or will discovery be required to identify the precise software that allegedly performs the claimed methods and establish that its operation satisfies every limitation of the asserted claims?