DCT
1:17-cv-00135
Genuine Enabling Technology LLC v. Sony Corp Sony Interacti
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Genuine Enabling Technology LLC (Delaware)
- Defendant: Sony Corporation (Japan) and Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, LLP
- Case Identification: 1:17-cv-00135, D. Del., 02/08/2017
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the District of Delaware because Defendants conduct business in the state, purposefully direct sales into the state, and maintain a registered agent for service of process there.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s PlayStation 3 and 4 console systems and associated DualShock controllers infringe a patent related to combining a primary user input data stream with a secondary input signal into a single data stream for transmission over a common communication link.
- Technical Context: The technology addresses the efficient use of computer communication ports by enabling a single peripheral device to transmit multiple types of data (e.g., button presses and motion sensor data) over one connection, a key feature in modern wireless controllers.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention any prior litigation, licensing history, or administrative proceedings related to the patent-in-suit. The allegation of knowledge for willfulness is based on the date of service of the complaint.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1998-06-20 | U.S. Patent No. 6,219,730 Priority Date |
| 2001-04-17 | U.S. Patent No. 6,219,730 Issued |
| 2017-02-08 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 6,219,730 - "Method and Apparatus for Producing a Combined Data Stream and Recovering Therefrom the Respective User Input Stream and at Least One Additional Input Signal"
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent's background section describes the problem of limited computer resources, such as I/O ports and interrupt request (IRQ) services, and the cumbersome configuration required when using multiple peripheral devices like a mouse and a separate sound card, which can lead to hardware conflicts (’730 Patent, col. 1:12-29).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a single apparatus that acts as a standard user-input device (UID) while also processing a second, independent input signal (e.g., an audio signal or another data stream). The core of the invention is a "framer" that synchronizes and encodes both the UID data and the secondary input data into a single, combined data stream that can be transmitted to a computer over one communication link, thereby conserving computer resources (’730 Patent, col. 4:4-16; Fig. 2A).
- Technical Importance: This approach enabled the development of multi-functional peripherals that could operate through a single port (wired or wireless) without requiring separate I/O cards or drivers, simplifying hardware setup and reducing potential system conflicts (’730 Patent, col. 2:51-61).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 16.
- Independent Claim 16 requires:
- An apparatus linked to a computer by a communication link, functioning as a user input device and additionally receiving at least one input signal
- a user input device producing a user input stream
- an input port receiving at least one input signal
- a converter receiving the at least one input signal for producing an input stream
- a framer synchronizing the user input stream with the input stream and encoding the same into a combined data stream transferable by the communication link
- The complaint also asserts dependent claims 21-25. (Compl. ¶22).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
The Sony PlayStation® 3 and 4 console systems and the Sony DualShock® 3 and 4 controllers (Compl. ¶4). The infringement analysis focuses on the DualShock® 3 controller as a representative example (Compl. ¶23).
Functionality and Market Context
The complaint describes the DualShock® 3 as a user input device that communicates with a PlayStation® 3 console via a Bluetooth link (Compl. ¶24). Its allegedly infringing functionality involves combining the "user input stream" from its buttons with an "input signal" from one or more accelerometers. This combined data is then transmitted to the console. The complaint alleges these products are sold through established distribution channels in the United States (Compl. ¶14).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
The complaint presents its infringement theory for the Sony DualShock® 3 controller in a two-column claim chart format (Compl. ¶24).
'730 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 16) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| An apparatus linked to a computer by a communication link, functioning as a user input device and additionally receiving at least one input signal | The Sony DualShock® 3 controller is a user input device that communicates with a PlayStation® 3 console via a Bluetooth communication link | ¶24 | col. 14:55-58 |
| a user input device producing a user input stream | The buttons and associated components on the Sony DualShock® 3 controller produce a user input stream | ¶24 | col. 14:59 |
| an input port receiving at least one input signal | The Sony DualShock® 3 controller includes a Bluetooth micro-controller that receives at least one input signal from one or more accelerometers (e.g., the KXSC4 accelerometer) | ¶24 | col. 14:60 |
| a converter receiving the at least one input signal for producing an input stream | The input signal from the accelerometer... is converted into an input stream by a converter (e.g., an analog-to-digital converter) in the Sony DualShock® 3 controller | ¶24 | col. 14:61 |
| a framer synchronizing the user input stream with the input stream and encoding the same into a combined data stream transferable by the communication link | The Bluetooth micro-controller synchronizes the user input stream with the input stream and encodes them into a combined data stream that is transferable... via a Bluetooth communication link | ¶24 | col. 14:62-64 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central dispute may arise over the proper construction of "framer." The complaint alleges the "Bluetooth micro-controller" performs this function. The defense may argue that the term "framer" as used in the patent requires the specific logic for interleaving data streams disclosed in the specification (e.g., using parity bits), which may differ from the standard packetization method used in the Bluetooth protocol (’730 Patent, col. 6:41-59).
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges that the Bluetooth micro-controller both "receives" the accelerometer signal (acting as the "input port") and "synchronizes" the streams (acting as the "framer"). A technical question is whether these are distinct functions performed by separate or logically divisible structures as may be required by the claim, or if a single, integrated function of the micro-controller is being mapped to multiple claim elements.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "framer"
Context and Importance: This term is the central functional element of the invention, responsible for combining the two data streams. Its construction will be critical, as it will determine whether a general-purpose component like a "Bluetooth micro-controller" that operates according to a standard protocol can be said to perform the specific function of the claimed "framer."
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language is purely functional: "a framer synchronizing the user input stream with the input stream and encoding the same..." (’730 Patent, col. 14:62-64). This language could support an interpretation that covers any component that achieves this result, regardless of implementation.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification discloses a specific logic design for the framer (Fig. 4A) and describes a detailed method of synchronizing and encoding the data streams by inserting UI data into the parity-error bit location of the main data stream's frame (’730 Patent, col. 6:41-59). This detailed embodiment may be used to argue for a narrower definition tied to this specific implementation.
The Term: "synchronizing"
Context and Importance: The meaning of "synchronizing" will be pivotal. The dispute will likely center on whether the term covers the general time-division multiplexing common in protocols like Bluetooth, or if it requires the specific, bit-level timing relationship between the two streams as disclosed in the patent's preferred embodiment.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: One could argue "synchronizing" simply means coordinating the streams for transfer over the same link, a broad functional goal of the invention (’730 Patent, col. 2:23-29).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description explains that the framer "relies on the signal of line TXD to maintain the synchronization" and uses one stream to re-synchronize a clock generator for the other, implying a master-slave timing relationship rather than independent packetization (’730 Patent, col. 5:20-28; Fig. 4B).
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges induced infringement, stating that Sony encourages its customers and end users to directly infringe. The basis for this allegation is Sony's creation and dissemination of "promotional and marketing materials, instructional manuals, product manuals and other technical materials" that instruct on the use of the accused products (Compl. ¶29).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Defendants had knowledge of the ’730 patent "since at least as early as the service of Plaintiff’s Complaint" (Compl. ¶17). The claims for an exceptional case and enhanced damages appear to be predicated on post-suit conduct (Compl. ¶¶26, 31, 38).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of claim construction: can the term "framer," which is described in the patent with a specific logic-level implementation for embedding one data stream within another, be construed to cover the packetization and multiplexing functions of a standard Bluetooth micro-controller?
- A key evidentiary question will be one of technical operation: does the accused controller’s process for handling button and accelerometer data meet the specific "synchronizing" limitation of Claim 16, or is there a fundamental mismatch between the general multiplexing of the accused device and the bit-level encoding taught in the patent?
- The viability of the indirect and willful infringement claims will likely depend on whether the Plaintiff can develop evidence of pre-suit knowledge or particularly egregious post-suit conduct, as the complaint currently only alleges knowledge as of the date of service.