DCT
1:18-cv-01587
Location Based Services LLC v. Google LLC
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Location Based Services, LLC (Texas)
- Defendant: Google LLC (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Bayard, P.A.; Ni, Wang & Massand, PLLC
- Case Identification: 1:18-cv-01587, D. Del., 10/15/2018
- Venue Allegations: Venue is asserted based on Defendant Google LLC's incorporation in the State of Delaware.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s digital mapping products (Google Maps, Waze, Streetview) and associated hardware (Pixel smartphones) infringe five patents related to image-based path visualization and goal-oriented navigation.
- Technical Context: The technology relates to generating visual navigation paths using integrated real-world imagery, a core feature of modern digital mapping and augmented reality services.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention prior litigation, but it indicates the asserted patents are part of a larger family, which may suggest a common specification and prosecution history relevant to claim construction.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2005-01-31 | Patent Priority Date (U.S. 7,729,708) |
| 2005-02-25 | Patent Priority Date (U.S. 7,734,073; 8,107,691; 8,805,027; 9,286,729) |
| 2010-06-01 | Issue Date (U.S. Patent No. 7,729,708) |
| 2010-06-08 | Issue Date (U.S. Patent No. 7,734,073) |
| 2012-01-31 | Issue Date (U.S. Patent No. 8,107,691) |
| 2014-08-12 | Issue Date (U.S. Patent No. 8,805,027) |
| 2016-03-15 | Issue Date (U.S. Patent No. 9,286,729) |
| 2018-10-15 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 7,734,073 - "Image Mapping to Provide Visual Geographic Path," issued June 8, 2010
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the limitations of conventional mapping systems by proposing a method to generate a visual, image-based geographic path rather than a purely schematic one (’073 Patent, col. 1:62-2:4).
- The Patented Solution: The invention describes a method where a user's device transmits a request containing input parameters, such as location and time, to a processing device. In response, the device receives and displays a "mapped visual path" composed of integrated, and potentially stitched, real-world images that correspond to the requested path (’073 Patent, FIG. 4; col. 7:15-32).
- Technical Importance: This approach allows for a shift from abstract line-drawing maps to more intuitive, photo-realistic representations of a geographic route, enhancing a user's ability to preview or virtually explore a path (’073 Patent, col. 7:8-14).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claims 1 (a method) and 11 (a computer program product) (Compl. ¶¶15, 16, 21).
- Independent Claim 1 recites a method for a display device to receive a mapped visual path, with essential elements including:
- transmitting a request for the mapped visual path, where the request includes at least two input path parameters (one location, one time);
- receiving the mapped visual image path from a processing device, where the path includes at least two images of a predefined area and is an "integration" of the images and the parameters; and
- displaying the mapped visual path, which includes at least two images after a "stitching operation" has been performed.
- Independent Claim 11 recites a computer program product with instructions for performing a similar method, including instructions for displaying a "scrollable" mapped visual path.
- The complaint also asserts dependent claims 4, 5, 9, 10, 17, 21, and 22 (Compl. ¶15).
U.S. Patent No. 8,805,027 - "Image Mapping to Provide Visual Geographic Path," issued August 12, 2014
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: Like its related patents, the ’027 Patent addresses the need for generating image-based visual paths for navigation and exploration (’027 Patent, col. 1:55-59).
- The Patented Solution: The invention provides a method for requesting and displaying a "mapped visual path" that is "scrollable with respect to the predefined area." A distinguishing feature of the claims is the requirement that the received path includes "at least one image associated with at least one of a location or time" that was itself "associated with the request," suggesting a direct correlation between a specific point in the request and a specific image in the output (’027 Patent, col. 12:1-28).
- Technical Importance: This technology refines image-based mapping by enabling an interactive, scrollable visual experience where specific images are explicitly tied to points of interest or time along a requested route, potentially improving user interaction and comprehension (’027 Patent, Abstract).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claims 1 (a method) and 7 (a computer program product) (Compl. ¶¶27, 28, 30).
- Independent Claim 1 recites a method with essential elements including:
- transmitting a request for a mapped visual path with location and time parameters;
- receiving a mapped visual path that includes at least two images and is an integration of the images and parameters, specifically including "at least one image associated with at least one of a location or time" from the request; and
- displaying the mapped visual path, which is "scrollable with respect to the predefined area."
- Independent Claim 7 recites a non-transitory computer readable medium with instructions for performing the method of Claim 1.
- The complaint also asserts dependent claim 2 (Compl. ¶27).
U.S. Patent No. 9,286,729 - "Image Mapping to Provide Visual Geographic Path," issued March 15, 2016
- Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a system, comprising a processing device and computer-readable medium, configured to facilitate the receipt of a mapped visual path. The system is configured with circuitry for transmitting a request (including location, time, and user ID), receiving a path of integrated and stitched images, and displaying it (’729 Patent, col. 12:51-13:2).
- Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and numerous dependent claims (Compl. ¶33).
- Accused Features: The complaint alleges that the Google Pixel series smartphones are the infringing systems (Compl. ¶32).
U.S. Patent No. 7,729,708 - "Mapping and System for Interactive Mapping to Provide Goal-Oriented Instructions," issued June 1, 2010
- Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a method for directing mobile peer devices according to an itinerary with both individual and group goals. The system determines a route based on real-time location data from multiple peer devices and provides instructions to meet differing individual and group objectives, while also identifying itinerary alteration alternatives (’708 Patent, Abstract; col. 12:5-24).
- Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts independent claims 1 (computer program product) and 9 (method), along with numerous dependent claims (Compl. ¶53).
- Accused Features: The complaint alleges that the Waze and Waze Carpool applications infringe these claims by providing goal-oriented, real-time routing based on data from multiple users (Compl. ¶52, ¶54).
U.S. Patent No. 8,107,691 - "Image Mapping to Provide Visual Geographic Path," issued January 31, 2012
- Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a computer system for mapping a visual path that includes an "integration module." This module is configured to generate a visual path from images and to process an identifier associated with an object in an image, including "matching the object to a class of persons" and acting upon it accordingly (’691 Patent, col. 11:1-17).
- Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts independent claim 15 and dependent claims 16, 18, and 19 (Compl. ¶71).
- Accused Features: The complaint alleges that Google Streetview infringes these claims, presumably based on its functionality for generating visual paths and its potential processing of objects like faces or license plates within its imagery (Compl. ¶70, ¶72).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The complaint names several distinct products and services: Google Maps (for iOS, Android, and web), Google Pixel series smartphones, Waze and Waze Carpool (for iOS and Android), and Google Streetview (Compl. ¶¶14, 32, 52, 70).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges that these instrumentalities provide location-based mapping and navigation services. Specifically, it alleges that Google Maps and Pixel phones request, receive, and display visual paths composed of integrated and stitched images (Compl. ¶16). It further alleges that Waze provides real-time, goal-oriented routing instructions based on data from peer devices (Compl. ¶54), and that Streetview generates visual paths from integrated images and processes objects within those images (Compl. ¶72). The complaint does not provide specific details on the products' market positioning but identifies them as major, widely used Google services.
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.
U.S. 7,734,073 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| transmitting a request for the mapped visual path, the request including at least two input path parameters... | A user of an Accused Instrumentality (e.g., Google Maps) transmits a request for directions, which includes input parameters like a start and end location. | ¶16 | col. 11:46-53 |
| the transmitting including: transmitting a location parameter as one of at least two input path parameters; | The user's request includes a location, such as a destination address, which serves as a location parameter. | ¶16 | col. 11:65-12:1 |
| transmitting a time parameter as one of at least two input path parameters; | The complaint alleges this element is met by the transmission of the request, but does not specify what constitutes the "time parameter." | ¶16 | col. 12:20-23 |
| receiving from a processing device the mapped visual image path, wherein the mapped visual path including at least two images of a predefined area identified by at least two input path parameters, the mapped visual path being an integration of at least two images and at least two input path parameters; | The user's device receives from Google's servers a visual path (e.g., Street View imagery) that is composed of images corresponding to the requested route and is an integration of those images with the route parameters. | ¶16 | col. 12:2-9 |
| and displaying the mapped visual path, the mapped visual path including at least two images after a stitching operation is performed on at least two images. | The user's device displays the panoramic Street View imagery, which the complaint alleges is the result of a stitching operation. | ¶16 | col. 12:7-10 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: Does a standard route request in Google Maps constitute transmitting a "time parameter" as contemplated by the patent? The patent specification links the time parameter to a "periodicity for images" (’073 Patent, col. 12:20-23), which may present a factual dispute over whether the accused products transmit such a parameter.
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges that the received visual path is an "integration" of images and parameters and is the result of a "stitching operation" (Compl. ¶16). A technical question is whether Google's display of pre-compiled Street View imagery along a route constitutes the specific type of real-time integration and stitching process described in the patent.
U.S. 8,805,027 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| transmitting a request for a mapped visual path, the request including at least two input path parameters... including at least: transmitting a location parameter... and transmitting a time parameter... | A user of an Accused Instrumentality (e.g., Google Maps) transmits a request for directions that includes location and time parameters. | ¶28 | col. 12:1-12 |
| receiving a mapped visual path... including at least two images... the mapped visual path being an integration... including at least one image associated with at least one of a location or time... associated with the request for a mapped visual path; | The user's device receives from Google's servers a visual path where at least one displayed image is specifically associated with a location or time from the original request. | ¶28 | col. 12:13-24 |
| and displaying the mapped visual path, the mapped visual path being scrollable with respect to the predefined area. | The user's device displays the visual path (e.g., Street View) in a manner that allows the user to scroll through the imagery. | ¶29 | col. 12:25-28 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: What evidence demonstrates that the accused products receive a path that includes an image specifically "associated with" a location or time from the request itself, as required by the claim? The infringement analysis may turn on how tightly coupled the requested parameters and the resulting imagery must be.
- Technical Questions: Does the "scrolling" functionality in the accused products (e.g., advancing through Street View) operate "with respect to the predefined area" in the specific manner required by the claim, or is there a technical distinction in how the scrolling is implemented?
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "mapped visual path"
- Context and Importance: This term appears in the preamble and body of nearly every asserted independent claim and is foundational to the alleged invention. Its construction will determine whether the accused functionalities, such as displaying Street View imagery along a route, fall within the scope of the claims. Practitioners may focus on this term because its breadth is central to the entire dispute.
- Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes it generally as a "visual path through the predefined area" (’073 Patent, col. 8:32-33), which could support an argument that any visual representation of a route using images is covered.
- Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Specific embodiments emphasize a "stitched together display of images" and a "scrollable image path" created from multiple sources, including public and private cameras (’073 Patent, col. 7:24-52). This could support a narrower construction requiring a continuous, photo-realistic image stream, not merely static images overlaid on a map.
The Term: "integration of... images and... input path parameters"
- Context and Importance: This term defines the core technical process for creating the "mapped visual path". The infringement question will likely depend on whether Google's system of selecting and displaying pre-existing imagery constitutes the claimed "integration."
- Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: This could be interpreted broadly to mean any process where images are selected based on location parameters provided by a user.
- Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's flowcharts depict "Integrate Images and Parameters into Map of Area" as a distinct process step (’073 Patent, FIG. 3, element 330), suggesting a specific technical combination of the data elements rather than simple retrieval and display of images that match a coordinate.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges induced infringement, stating that Defendant provides instructions, advertisements, and support materials that encourage and instruct end-users to operate the Accused Instrumentalities in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶82). The complaint specifically cites Google's online support pages for Maps, Waze, and Pixel phones as evidence of these instructions (Compl. ¶84).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint asserts that Defendant has knowledge of the patents "since the filing of this complaint" and that its continued infringement constitutes willful infringement (Compl. ¶83, ¶85). This frames the willfulness allegation as being based on post-suit conduct.
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A central issue will be one of definitional scope: does the term "mapped visual path," described in the patents as an "integration" of images and parameters, read on Defendant's functionality of displaying pre-compiled panoramic imagery (e.g., Street View) along a calculated map route?
- An evidentiary question will be one of parameter matching: what evidence supports the allegation that a standard request for directions in the accused products inherently includes the specific "time parameter" required by the ’073 patent or the explicit image-to-location/time association required by the ’027 patent?
- For the claims asserted against Waze, a key question will be one of functional equivalence: does Waze's crowdsourced, real-time traffic routing constitute the claimed method of directing a "mobile peer device" to meet distinct "predetermined individual" and "group" goals as part of a shared "itinerary" as those terms are used in the ’708 patent?