DCT

1:17-cv-01734

Sprint Communications Co LP v. Charter Communications Inc

Log In
Key Events
Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:17-cv-01734, D. Del., 12/01/2017
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper as each defendant entity is incorporated in the State of Delaware and therefore resides in the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s broadband and packet-based telephony services infringe a portfolio of thirteen patents related to Voice-over-Packet (VoP) technology.
  • Technical Context: The patents address foundational methods for interfacing traditional circuit-switched telephone networks (PSTN) with modern packet-based data networks to efficiently route voice calls.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint highlights a long and successful history of enforcing this patent portfolio against other major telecommunications companies. This includes a 2007 jury verdict against Vonage, resulting in an $80 million license, and a March 2017 jury verdict finding that Time Warner Cable (a company subsequently acquired by Charter) willfully infringed five of the patents, resulting in a $139.8 million damages award. Multiple other lawsuits against industry players have resulted in settlements and licensing agreements.

Case Timeline

Date Event
1994-05-05 Earliest Priority Date for multiple asserted patents
1996-11-22 Earliest Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 6,330,224
2001-10-02 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 6,298,064
2001-12-11 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 6,330,224
2002-01-29 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 6,343,084
2002-09-17 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 6,452,932
2002-10-08 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 6,463,052
2002-10-29 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 6,473,429
2003-10-14 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 6,633,561
2004-02-24 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 6,697,340
2007-10-23 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 7,286,561
2008-01-29 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 7,324,534
2008-02-05 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 7,327,728
2009-03-17 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 7,505,454
2010-04-06 Issue Date: U.S. Patent No. 7,693,131
2014-04-01 Date from which Plaintiff alleges Defendant had knowledge of patents
2015-03-01 Charter subsidiary allegedly acquires Bright House
2016-05-18 Charter completes merger with Time Warner Cable Inc.
2017-12-01 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 6,343,084 - “Broadband Telecommunications System”

  • Issued: January 29, 2002

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the technical challenge of interfacing legacy, circuit-switched Public Switched Telephone Networks (PSTN) with more efficient packet-based networks, such as Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) networks (Compl. ¶¶13-15). Traditional ATM cross-connect systems were not designed to establish connections on a dynamic, call-by-call basis, and full-featured ATM switches capable of this task were highly complex and expensive (’084) Patent, col. 1:24-61).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a system where a logically separate "signaling processor" receives and processes the call setup signaling (e.g., from the PSTN) ('084 Patent, col. 2:10-21). This processor selects a pre-provisioned virtual connection through the packet network and generates new signaling that it transmits to an "ATM interworking multiplexer" ('084 Patent, col. 2:21-27; Fig. 1). The multiplexer, acting on these instructions, then converts the user's voice information into ATM cells and transmits them over the selected virtual connection, effectively enabling call-by-call switching without requiring an expensive, intelligent ATM switch (’084 Patent, col. 2:27-34).
  • Technical Importance: This approach allowed telecommunications providers to leverage the cost and bandwidth efficiencies of packet networks for voice traffic without undertaking a complete and cost-prohibitive overhaul of their existing PSTN infrastructure (Compl. ¶16).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶47).
  • Claim 1 breaks down into the following essential method steps:
    • Receiving set-up signaling for a call into a processing system.
    • Processing the signaling in the processing system to select a broadband connection.
    • Generating a message identifying the broadband connection.
    • Transmitting the message from the processing system.
    • Receiving the message and a user communication for the call into an interworking unit.
    • In the interworking unit, converting the user communication into an asynchronous communication.
    • Transferring the asynchronous communication from the interworking unit over the broadband connection in response to the message.

U.S. Patent No. 6,633,561 - “Method, System and Apparatus for Telecommunications Control”

  • Issued: October 14, 2003

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: This patent, part of the same family, addresses the same core problem of efficiently and economically bridging the PSTN and packet-based networks for voice calls (Compl. ¶¶13-15). It focuses on the architecture of a centralized "call/connection manager" that acts as the "brains of the network" to orchestrate call routing over a packet-based system (’561) Patent, col. 5:50-57).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention describes a method where a call control processing system, external to the switches themselves, processes call signaling to select network characteristics (such as connections) and then signals the network elements based on those selections (’561 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:4-13). This externalizes the call-processing intelligence from the switching hardware, allowing for more flexible and efficient network control and enabling the use of less complex, less expensive switching components (’561 Patent, col. 1:50-2:8).
  • Technical Importance: This architecture decoupled call control intelligence from the physical switching hardware, a key innovation that increased competition and reduced costs in the telecommunications industry by allowing network operators to use equipment from various vendors rather than being locked into proprietary, monolithic switch platforms (Compl. ¶16).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶50).
  • Claim 1 breaks down into the following essential method steps:
    • Receiving signaling for a call into a control system that is external to a plurality of switches.
    • Processing the signaling in the control system to select one of the switches and a port on the selected switch.
    • Generating a first message indicating the selected switch and port.
    • Transferring the first message from the control system to the selected switch.
    • Receiving a user communication for the call into a second one of the switches.
    • In response to a second message from the control system, transferring the user communication from the second switch to the selected port on the selected switch.

U.S. Patent No. 6,463,052 - “Method, System and Apparatus for Telecommunications Control”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,463,052, issued October 8, 2002 (Compl. ¶25).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent discloses a system where a control processor external to network switches receives and processes signaling for calls. The processor selects network characteristics and signals network elements to establish the communication path, separating the call control logic from the physical switching fabric (Compl. ¶¶15-16; '052 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶53).
  • Accused Features: Charter's broadband and/or packet-based telephony products and services are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶53).

U.S. Patent No. 6,452,932 - “Method, System and Apparatus for Telecommunications Control”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,452,932, issued September 17, 2002 (Compl. ¶26).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a method for controlling telecommunications where signaling is processed externally to the network switches. The external processor selects network elements and signals them to establish a communication path, allowing for flexible routing over a combination of broadband and narrowband infrastructure (Compl. ¶¶15-16; '932 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶56).
  • Accused Features: Charter's broadband and/or packet-based telephony products and services are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶56).

U.S. Patent No. 6,473,429 - “Broadband Telecommunications System”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,473,429, issued October 29, 2002 (Compl. ¶27).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent discloses a system for providing virtual connections through an ATM interworking multiplexer on a call-by-call basis. A separate signaling processor receives call signaling, selects a virtual connection, and generates new signaling to instruct the multiplexer how to convert and transmit user information as ATM cells over the selected connection ('429 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶59).
  • Accused Features: Charter's broadband and/or packet-based telephony products and services are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶59).

U.S. Patent No. 6,298,064 - “Broadband Telecommunications System”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,298,064, issued October 2, 2001 (Compl. ¶28).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a method for providing virtual connections where a signaling processor selects the connection for a call and generates signaling to identify the selection. An interworking multiplexer receives this signaling and converts user information into ATM cells for transmission over the selected virtual connection, enabling call-by-call switching on an ATM fabric ('064 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶62).
  • Accused Features: Charter's broadband and/or packet-based telephony products and services are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶62).

U.S. Patent No. 6,330,224 - “System and Method for Providing Enhanced Services for a Telecommunication Call”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,330,224, issued December 11, 2001 (Compl. ¶29).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent focuses on providing enhanced services (e.g., voice messaging, interactive applications) for calls transported through an asynchronous transfer mode system. A signaling processor determines a connection to a service platform, and an interworking unit converts and routes the user communications to that platform for processing ('224 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶65).
  • Accused Features: Charter's broadband and/or packet-based telephony products and services capable of providing enhanced services are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶65).

U.S. Patent No. 6,697,340 - “System and Method for Providing Enhanced Services for a Telecommunication Call”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,697,340, issued February 24, 2004 (Compl. ¶30).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent, similar to the '224 patent, describes a system for routing calls to a service platform to provide enhanced services. It involves a signaling processor selecting a connection to the service platform and an interworking unit dynamically converting and transporting user communications to that platform in real time ('340 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 11 (Compl. ¶68).
  • Accused Features: Charter's broadband and/or packet-based telephony products and services capable of providing enhanced services are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶68).

U.S. Patent No. 7,286,561 - “Method System and Apparatus for Telecommunications Control”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,286,561, issued October 23, 2007 (Compl. ¶31).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent discloses a method where signaling is processed externally to a switch to control communications. The external processor selects network characteristics based on the signaling and then signals the network elements, separating call control logic from the switching hardware ('561 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 11 (Compl. ¶71).
  • Accused Features: Charter's broadband and/or packet-based telephony products and services are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶71).

U.S. Patent No. 7,505,454 - “Method, System and Apparatus for Telecommunications Control”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,505,454, issued March 17, 2009 (Compl. ¶32).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a system where an external processor processes signaling to control network switches. The system allows for flexible routing and selection of network elements and connections before the switches themselves apply the signaling, centralizing control intelligence ('454 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶74).
  • Accused Features: Charter's broadband and/or packet-based telephony products and services are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶74).

U.S. Patent No. 7,327,728 - “Broadband Telecommunications System”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,327,728, issued February 5, 2008 (Compl. ¶33).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent discloses a system where a signaling processor receives call signaling and selects a virtual connection through an ATM multiplexer. The processor signals the multiplexer, which converts user information into ATM cells for transport over the selected connection, enabling call-by-call switching ('728 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶77).
  • Accused Features: Charter's broadband and/or packet-based telephony products and services are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶77).

U.S. Patent No. 7,324,534 - “Broadband Telecommunications System Interface”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,324,534, issued January 29, 2008 (Compl. ¶34).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a system for interfacing a GR-303 system (a standard for connecting remote digital terminals to a local switch) with a broadband ATM system. The system processes signaling from both systems to select and interwork connections between them, effectively bridging legacy local loop equipment with a modern broadband backbone ('534 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶80).
  • Accused Features: Charter's broadband and/or packet-based telephony products and services are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶80).

U.S. Patent No. 7,693,131 - “Telecommunications System to Provide Analog Telephony Communications Over a Packet Connection”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,693,131, issued April 6, 2010 (Compl. ¶35).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a system where a service node processes telephony signaling received in a packet format from a user device to select a PSTN connection. An interworking unit then receives control messages and exchanges the telephony communications between the user device (in packet format) and the selected PSTN connection ('131 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶83).
  • Accused Features: Charter's broadband and/or packet-based telephony products and services are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶83).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The accused products and services include Spectrum Voice, Spectrum Business Voice, Phone, Business Phone, and related legacy and telephony services offered by Charter and its acquired company, Bright House (Compl. ¶45).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint alleges these services use packet-based technology, including the PacketCable standard, to transmit voice and data over a packet communication system that is connected to the PSTN (Compl. ¶45). This functionality allegedly relies on a "processing system that processes signaling to select network characteristics and signals network elements based on the selections," which mirrors the architecture described in the patents-in-suit (Compl. ¶45). Charter is identified as the second-largest cable operator in the United States, providing services to over 26 million customers (Compl. ¶37).
  • No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint does not provide a claim chart or sufficient technical detail to construct one. The infringement allegations are pleaded at a high level. For each patent, the complaint asserts that Charter's packet-based telephony services practice the method of at least one independent claim because they are capable of and do place or receive calls that originate on or terminate on a non-packet network like the PSTN (Compl. ¶¶47, 50, 53, 56, 59, 62, 65, 68, 71, 74, 77, 80, 83). The core of the infringement theory is that by providing VoP services that interface with the PSTN, Charter's network architecture necessarily performs the steps of receiving call signaling, processing it to select a path through the packet network, and instructing network elements to convert and transmit the voice data along that path.

  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A central issue may be whether the components of Charter's network architecture map onto the claimed elements. For example, do Charter's systems utilize a "processing system" or "control system" that is "external to" or logically separate from the "interworking unit" or "switches" that handle the user data, as recited in various claims? The dispute may focus on the degree of integration between call control and data handling functions in the accused systems.
    • Technical Questions: The analysis will likely require evidence on the specific operation of Charter's call management and media gateway components. A key question is whether Charter’s system "generates a message identifying the... connection" and transmits it from a control element to a separate data-handling element, or if call routing decisions are implemented in a more integrated fashion that may not read on the claim language.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "processing system" (from '084 Patent, claim 1) and "control system that is external to a plurality of switches" (from '561 Patent, claim 1).
  • Context and Importance: These terms are central to the patents' claimed point of novelty: the separation of call control intelligence from the underlying switching hardware. The viability of Sprint's infringement case may depend on whether Charter's VoP architecture embodies this specific separation. Practitioners may focus on whether "external to" requires physical separateness or if logical separation on a common hardware platform suffices, and how that distinction applies to the accused architecture.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the processing system in functional terms as any platform that can "receive and process signaling to select virtual connections, and then generate and transmit signaling to identify the selections" (’084 Patent, col. 4:26-29). This language could support a construction that covers any component or group of components that performs these functions, regardless of its specific hardware implementation or location.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figures in the patents consistently depict the "signaling processing system" or "call/connection manager" as a distinct block separate from the "mux" or "switches" that handle the user communication path (’084 Patent, Fig. 1; ’561 Patent, Fig. 3). Language describing the invention as "extracting the intelligence of expensive and complicated legacy switches and placed this intelligence on functionally separate computer platforms" could be used to argue for a narrower construction requiring functional, if not physical, separation (Compl. ¶16).

VI. Other Allegations

  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Charter had knowledge of the asserted patents and their infringement since "at least April 2014" due to third-party subpoenas served on Bright House (which Charter later acquired) in connection with Sprint's prior litigation against other cable companies (Compl. ¶41). It further alleges Charter gained knowledge through its due diligence related to its merger with Time Warner Cable, a company that a jury found to have willfully infringed several of the same patents (Compl. ¶¶22, 41). The complaint alleges that Charter continued its infringing conduct despite an "objectively high likelihood" of infringement (Compl. ¶42).

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

  • A core issue will be one of architectural equivalence: Does the technical architecture of Charter's Spectrum Voice and related services, particularly the relationship between its call management servers and media gateways, map onto the specific, functionally separated "processing system" and "interworking unit" elements required by the asserted claims? The case may turn on whether Charter's system is fundamentally the same as the patented invention or represents a non-infringing alternative design.
  • A second central question will be that of willfulness and damages. Given Sprint's extensive and highly successful prior enforcement of this patent portfolio against the largest players in the VoP industry—including a finding of willfulness and a $139.8 million verdict against Time Warner Cable, a company Charter now owns—a key focus for the court will be whether Charter's alleged infringement was willful and, consequently, whether damages should be enhanced.