DCT
1:17-cv-01275
Visual Effect Innovations LLC v. LG Corp
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Visual Effect Innovations, LLC (Texas)
- Defendant: LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC
- Case Identification: 1:17-cv-01275, D. Del., 09/06/2017
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the District of Delaware because Defendant is a resident of Delaware, maintains a regular and established place of business in the district, and has committed acts of infringement there.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s televisions, monitors, and laser projectors infringe three patents related to methods of generating and displaying modified video frames to create visual effects, such as the appearance of continuous three-dimensional motion.
- Technical Context: The technology at issue involves digital video processing techniques that manipulate sequences of 2D image frames to create optical illusions for the viewer, a field relevant to the consumer electronics market for advanced display technologies like 4K and 3D televisions.
- 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.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2001-01-23 | Earliest Priority Date ('444, '874, '902 Patents) |
| 2006-04-18 | U.S. Patent No. 7,030,902 Issues |
| 2017-07-04 | U.S. Patent No. 9,699,444 Issues |
| 2017-07-25 | U.S. Patent No. 9,716,874 Issues |
| 2017-09-06 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 9,699,444 - "Faster state transitioning for continuous adjustable 3Deeps filter spectacles using multi-layered variable tint materials" (Issued: 07/04/2017)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent specification, which incorporates the disclosure of U.S. Patent No. 7,030,902, describes the challenge of creating an appearance of continuous, seamless movement using only a finite number of pictures, such as two substantially similar images. (’444 Patent, col. 4:36-52). Traditional film and animation require a long series of non-repetitive pictures to depict motion. (’444 Patent, col. 4:2-10).
- The Patented Solution: The asserted claims describe an apparatus, such as a television or monitor, that solves this problem through a specific video processing method. The apparatus obtains an image frame, generates a "modified" version of it (e.g., by expanding or reshaping it), and also generates a separate "bridge frame," described as a solid color frame. (’444 Patent, Claim 1). By serially displaying the modified image frame and the bridge frame, the apparatus can create an illusion of motion. (’444 Patent, col. 4:43-52). The specification refers to this general technique as "Eternalism." (’444 Patent, col. 4:53-56).
- Technical Importance: This technique provides a method for generating visual effects from standard 2D video streams without requiring specialized 3D source material or complex multi-camera recording setups. (’444 Patent, col. 4:36-42).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claims 1 and 26 (Compl. ¶14, ¶21).
- Independent Claim 1 recites an apparatus with a storage and a processor, where the processor is adapted to:
- Obtain a first image frame from a video stream.
- Generate a modified image frame by performing at least one of several enumerated actions (e.g., expanding, shrinking, removing a portion of the frame).
- Generate a bridge frame, wherein the bridge frame is a solid color and is different from the first and modified image frames.
- Display the modified image frame.
- Display the bridge frame.
- The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims.
U.S. Patent No. 9,716,874 - "Continuous adjustable 3Deeps Filter Spectacles for optimized 3Deeps stereoscopic viewing, control method and means therefor, and system and method of generating and displaying a modified video" (Issued: 07/25/2017)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: Like the ’444 Patent, this patent addresses the technical problem of originating "visual illusions of figures and spaces in continuous movement" using a finite number of pictures from a 2D source video. (’874 Patent, col. 4:47-52).
- The Patented Solution: The asserted claim describes a method for generating and displaying modified video that creates visual effects through a different technique. After obtaining an initial image frame and generating a "modified" version (e.g., by expansion), the method generates a first and then a second "altered" image frame. Each altered frame is constructed to include "non-overlapping portions," where one portion is derived from the modified frame and another portion is explicitly not part of either the original or modified frames. (’874 Patent, Claim 1). This process of generating frames with distinct, non-overlapping sections creates the perception of motion. The complaint provides a series of annotated screenshots from a slow-motion video showing how a scanning backlight can create frames with partially illuminated sections, which it alleges correspond to these non-overlapping portions (Compl. pp. 32-35).
- Technical Importance: The claimed method offers a specific digital processing algorithm to create dynamic visual effects from standard 2D video, providing an alternative to the "bridge frame" insertion method. (’874 Patent, Claim 1).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶44).
- Independent Claim 1 recites a method comprising the steps of:
- Acquiring a source video with a sequence of image frames.
- Obtaining a first image frame from the source video.
- Generating a modified image frame by expanding, removing a portion of, or stitching the first image frame.
- Generating a first altered image frame that includes first and second non-overlapping portions.
- Generating a second altered image frame that includes third and fourth non-overlapping portions.
- The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims.
Multi-Patent Capsule
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,030,902, "Eternalism, a method for creating an appearance of sustained three-dimensional motion-direction of unlimited duration, using a finite number of pictures," issued April 18, 2006.
- Technology Synopsis: This patent, which provides the technological basis for the later-issued ’444 and ’874 patents, discloses a method called "Eternalism" for creating an illusion of continuous motion from a limited set of images. The method involves selecting at least two visually similar "image pictures" and a dissimilar "bridging picture" (e.g., a solid black frame), arranging them in a sequence, and repeating that sequence multiple times to create the perception of sustained movement. (Compl. ¶58; ’902 Patent, Abstract).
- Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶60).
- Accused Features: The complaint accuses the LG Hecto laser projector, alleging that its sequential color projection system selects visually similar images (red, green, and blue frames) and a dissimilar bridging picture (a solid black frame) and displays them in a repeating sequence, thereby practicing the claimed method (Compl. ¶62-66). The complaint provides slow-motion video frames purporting to show this sequence (Compl. p. 38).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The complaint accuses LG televisions (e.g., LG 65UH8500, LG LM9600/LM960V), LG monitors (e.g., LG 38UC99-W), and LG laser projectors (e.g., LG HECTO) (Compl. ¶14, ¶21, ¶31, ¶44, ¶60).
Functionality and Market Context
- The accused products are consumer display devices. The complaint alleges that specific features within these products perform the patented methods of video processing.
- For the ’444 Patent, the accused functionalities include the "4K Upscaler" in TVs and "Super+ Resolution" in monitors for expanding image frames (Compl. ¶17, ¶25). For generating a "bridge frame," the complaint points to "Local Dimming" in TVs and "1ms Motion Blur Reduction" (a black frame insertion technology) in monitors (Compl. ¶18, ¶27). An illustrative diagram in the complaint depicts how "1ms Motion Blur Reduction" inserts a "solid black bridge frame" between image frames (Compl. p. 16).
- For the ’874 Patent, the accused functionality is the "Backlight Scanning" technology used in the "TruMotion 240Hz" feature of certain LG TVs, which is alleged to generate "altered image frames with first and second non-overlapping portions" (Compl. ¶48).
- The complaint alleges these features are integral to the marketing and function of LG's high-definition display products.
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
U.S. Patent No. 9,699,444 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| an apparatus comprising: a storage adapted to: store one or more image frames; | The LG 65UH8500 TV uses a System on a Chip (SoC) that includes storage capable of storing image frames. | ¶15 | col. 4:39-42 |
| and a processor adapted to: obtain a first image frame from a first video stream; | The TV's SoC and quad-core CPU obtain video frames from input sources such as HDMI, USB, or a cable box. | ¶16 | col. 5:26-28 |
| generate a modified image frame by performing at least one of expanding the first image frame... | The TV's "4K Upscaler" feature expands the input image frame to match the screen's higher native resolution, creating a modified image frame. | ¶17 | col. 3:19-21 |
| generate a bridge frame, wherein the bridge frame is a solid color... | The TV's "Local Dimming" feature generates a backlight that the complaint alleges is a bridge frame. | ¶18 | col. 4:45-48 |
| display the modified image frame; and display the bridge frame. | The TV allegedly displays a blended image created by combining the upscaled image on the LCD layer with the backlight from the Local Dimming feature. | ¶20 | col. 4:43-52 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central question for the court will be whether the accused "Local Dimming" feature in LG TVs, which the complaint itself describes as generating a "non-solid color backlight" (Compl. ¶18), can satisfy the explicit "bridge frame is a solid color" limitation of asserted claim 1. This raises a potential contradiction within the plaintiff's infringement theory as applied to the televisions.
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges that the upscaled image frame and the "bridge frame" from the local dimming backlight are "blending" to generate a single displayed image (Compl. ¶20). This raises the question of whether this blending process meets the claim requirements to "display the modified image frame" and "display the bridge frame," which may be interpreted to require sequential display rather than simultaneous blending.
U.S. Patent No. 9,716,874 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| acquiring a source video comprising a sequence of image frames; | The LG LM9600/LM960V TV acquires a source video from one of its video inputs, such as an HDMI input from a computer or cable box. | ¶45 | col. 4:36-39 |
| obtaining a first image frame based on a selected one of the image frames of the source video; | When the video source is a cable box, the TV obtains an image frame in 720p or 1080i resolution from the source video. | ¶46 | col. 4:43-46 |
| generating a modified image frame by performing one of: (i) expanding the first image frame; | The TV's "Resolution Upscaler" expands the received image frame to a modified image frame matching the screen's 3,840 x 2,160 resolution. | ¶47 | col. 3:19-21 |
| generating a first altered image frame that includes first and second non-overlapping portions... | The TV's "Backlight Scanning" technology, part of the TruMotion 240Hz feature, is alleged to generate altered image frames with non-overlapping portions. | ¶48 | col. 5:20-25 |
| generating a second altered image frame that includes third and fourth non-overlapping portions... | The "Backlight Scanning" technology is alleged to generate a second, different altered image frame in sequence with the first. | ¶50 | col. 5:20-25 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A primary issue will be whether manipulating a backlight behind an otherwise unchanged LCD panel, as is done in "Backlight Scanning," constitutes "generating" an "altered image frame" as required by the claim. The analysis may turn on whether "generating a frame" requires the creation of new pixel data or if it can be construed to include modifying the perception of an existing frame through controlled illumination.
- Technical Questions: What evidence does the complaint provide that the partially lit regions created by backlight scanning meet the complex limitations of "non-overlapping portions" in the claim, which require specific relationships between the altered frame, the modified frame, and the first image frame? The annotated screenshots on pages 34 and 35 of the complaint attempt to map these claim elements to the visual evidence (Compl. pp. 34-35).
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
Analysis of Terms in the ’444 Patent
- The Term: "bridge frame"
- Context and Importance: The definition of this term is critical to the infringement theory, particularly against the LG TVs. If "bridge frame" is construed to require a distinct, standalone frame of a single uniform color that is displayed sequentially, the plaintiff's theory based on a "blended," "non-solid color" local dimming backlight may face significant challenges.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification suggests the "bridge-picture may simply be a timed unlit-screen pause" ('444 Patent, col. 4:50-52), which could support an argument that it need not be a conventional, data-defined video frame but can be an interval of manipulated light or darkness.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim language itself explicitly requires the bridge frame to be a "solid color." The specification reinforces this by describing the bridging picture as "preferably a solid black or other solid-colored picture" ('444 Patent, col. 4:45-48) and a "neutral or black frame" (col. 4:59-61).
Analysis of Terms in the ’874 Patent
- The Term: "generating a... frame that includes... non-overlapping portions"
- Context and Importance: This term is central to the infringement allegation against the "Backlight Scanning" technology. Practitioners may focus on this term because the dispute will likely concern whether modifying the illumination of a pre-existing image on an LCD panel constitutes "generating" a new frame with the claimed characteristics.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent’s overall purpose is to create "visual illusions" ('874 Patent, col. 4:47-48). This context may support an interpretation where "generating a frame" includes any technical process that results in the viewer perceiving a frame with the claimed properties, even if accomplished through illumination rather than pixel data manipulation.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim recites a sequence of steps: "acquiring," "obtaining," and "generating" frames. This sequence suggests a process of creating or modifying the image data itself, which may support a narrower construction that excludes mere manipulation of a backlight.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint includes conclusory allegations of direct and indirect infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), (b), and (c) for all three patents-in-suit (Compl. ¶39, ¶55, ¶68). It does not, however, plead specific facts to support the knowledge and intent elements required for claims of induced or contributory infringement.
- Willful Infringement: The complaint does not contain an explicit allegation of willful infringement.
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- Definitional Scope: A core issue for the '444 patent will be one of definitional scope: can the term "bridge frame," which is explicitly claimed as being a "solid color," be construed to cover the accused LG TVs' "Local Dimming" feature, which the complaint alleges creates a "non-solid color" backlight?
- Functional Operation: A key evidentiary question for the '874 patent will be one of functional operation: does modifying the illumination of an image via "Backlight Scanning" constitute "generating" a new "altered image frame" with specific "non-overlapping portions" as required by the claim, or is there a fundamental mismatch between manipulating a backlight and generating a frame of pixel data?
- Evidentiary Sufficiency: For the '902 patent, a central question will be evidentiary: do the sequential red, green, blue, and black displays inherent in the accused laser projector's operation function as the claimed series of "visually similar" and "dissimilar" pictures repeated to create an "appearance of continuous movement," or are they merely the fundamental components of standard frame-by-frame video projection?