DCT

1:20-cv-00197

Early Warning Services LLC v. Aliaswire Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:20-cv-00197, D. Del., 02/10/2020
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper as Defendant Aliaswire, Inc. is a Delaware corporation and therefore resides in the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff Early Warning Services seeks a declaratory judgment that its Zelle Network® does not infringe five of Defendant Aliaswire's patents related to secure authentication and payment systems.
  • Technical Context: The technology at issue involves systems and methods for conducting secure financial transactions by authenticating users with aliases, such as telephone numbers or email addresses, to facilitate payments.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint states that in November 2019, Defendant Aliaswire sued several of Plaintiff EWS's customers—financial institutions that use the Zelle Network®—for patent infringement in the Western District of Texas. EWS states it has received demands for indemnification from its customers and is defending them in the Texas litigation. The complaint also notes that Aliaswire sent EWS a direct settlement and license demand, which EWS rejected.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2001-07-06 Earliest Patent Priority Date for all Patents-in-Suit
2013-01-01 U.S. Patent No. 8,346,659 Issues
2017-06-20 U.S. Patent No. 9,684,899 Issues
2017-09-19 U.S. Patent No. 9,767,455 Issues
2018-11-13 U.S. Patent No. 10,127,550 Issues
2019-11-01 Aliaswire sues EWS customers in W.D. Texas (approximate date)
2019-11-18 EWS receives indemnification demand from customer BB&T
2019-12-19 EWS receives indemnification demand from customer FNBCT
2019-12-30 EWS responds to indemnification demands from BB&T and FNBCT
2019-11-05 U.S. Patent No. 10,467,621 Issues
2020-01-23 Aliaswire sends settlement and license demand to EWS
2020-02-10 EWS rejects Aliaswire's demand
2020-02-10 Complaint for Declaratory Judgment filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 8,346,659 - Secure Authentication and Payment System

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,346,659, Secure Authentication and Payment System, issued January 1, 2013.
  • The Invention Explained:
    • Problem Addressed: The patent's background section describes the security risks and high costs associated with "Authentication When Not Present" (AWNP) transactions, such as those conducted over the phone or internet, where traditional identity verification methods are difficult to apply, leading to fraud and "charge back" losses for merchants ( Compl. Ex. A, ’659 Patent, col. 1:16-2:4).
    • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a system that leverages the existing public telephone network to conduct secure transactions. A central "Facilitator" authenticates a user (an "initiator") based on their unique telephone number (via Caller ID) and a secondary identifier like a PIN. This allows the Facilitator to securely process transactions, such as paying a bill or transferring funds to a "target" entity, without relying on specialized hardware or the less secure public internet ( Compl. Ex. A, ’659 Patent, Abstract; col. 5:11-37).
    • Technical Importance: The described approach sought to provide a secure and universally accessible payment method by using the robust and trusted infrastructure of the telephone system at a time when public confidence in internet security for financial transactions was still developing ( Compl. Ex. A, ’659 Patent, col. 3:6-23).
  • Key Claims at a Glance:
    • The complaint notes that Aliaswire asserted independent claims 1 and 31 in the underlying Texas litigation (Compl. ¶12).
    • Essential elements of independent claim 31 include:
      • sending a message to a target from a server... wherein the message provides instructions for the target to access the server to receive payment for a first transaction;
      • receiving an alias, a transaction identifier, and a target financial account information at a server;
      • authenticating by matching the received alias and transaction identifier with a stored alias and transaction identifier in a database;
      • providing instructions by the server to transfer a payment amount from an originator financial account to a target financial account.

U.S. Patent No. 9,684,899 - Secure Authentication and Payment System

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,684,899, Secure Authentication and Payment System, issued June 20, 2017.
  • The Invention Explained:
    • Problem Addressed: As part of the same patent family, the ’899 Patent addresses the same fundamental problem of enabling secure AWNP commercial transactions while minimizing fraud and the need for specialized hardware (Compl. Ex. B, ’899 Patent, col. 1:16-2:4).
    • The Patented Solution: This patent focuses on a server-side method where the server sends a message to a client device using a previously assigned alias. The message contains instructions for a "target" to access the server to receive a payment, and it includes a transaction identifier. The server then receives a responsive message from the client device containing the alias and transaction identifier and authenticates it against a stored database to complete the transaction (Compl. Ex. B, ’899 Patent, Abstract; col. 6:49-67).
    • Technical Importance: This method provides a framework for initiating and authenticating a payment transaction through a message-based system where an alias serves as the key link between the parties and the transaction details stored on a central server (Compl. Ex. B, ’899 Patent, col. 5:11-37).
  • Key Claims at a Glance:
    • The complaint's declaratory judgment count asserts non-infringement of at least claim 1 (Compl. ¶54).
    • Essential elements of independent claim 10 include:
      • sending a message to a client device using an alias previously assigned by the server and stored in a database;
      • wherein the message provides instructions for a target to access the server to receive a payment amount for a transaction;
      • and the message includes a transaction identifier generated for the transaction;
      • receiving from the client device, one or more messages including at least an alias and the transaction identifier;
      • authenticating the one or more messages from the client device by searching for the previously stored alias and transaction identifier.

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 9,767,455 - Secure Authentication and Payment System

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,767,455, Secure Authentication and Payment System, issued September 19, 2017.
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a method for conducting a transaction by receiving, at a server, messages from a client device that include a resource identifier, a telephone identifier, and an alias. The server authenticates the message by matching the alias and telephone identifier with stored information and then authorizes the transfer of a resource (Compl. Ex. C, ’455 Patent, Abstract; col. 28:49-67).
  • Asserted Claims: At least claim 1 (Compl. ¶55).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges the Zelle Network® is the accused instrumentality (Compl. ¶55).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 10,127,550 - Secure Authentication and Payment System

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,127,550, Secure Authentication and Payment System, issued November 13, 2018.
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent discloses a server-based system that sends a message with an alias and transaction identifier to a client device, providing instructions for a target to access the server. The server authenticates a responsive message by searching a database for the stored alias and transaction identifier to verify a match before initiating a payment transfer (Compl. Ex. D, ’550 Patent, Abstract; col. 28:56-29:28).
  • Asserted Claims: At least claim 1 (Compl. ¶56).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges the Zelle Network® is the accused instrumentality (Compl. ¶56).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 10,467,621 - Secure Authentication and Payment System

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,467,621, Secure Authentication and Payment System, issued November 5, 2019.
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a method where a server receives messages from an originator device containing an originator alias and a target alias. The server authenticates these aliases against a database, identifies associated payment destination identifiers for each, and facilitates the transfer of resources between them (Compl. Ex. E, ’621 Patent, Abstract; col. 27:60-28:20).
  • Asserted Claims: At least claim 1 (Compl. ¶57).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges the Zelle Network® is the accused instrumentality (Compl. ¶57).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The Zelle Network® ("Zelle") (Compl. ¶7).
  • Functionality and Market Context:
    • The complaint describes Zelle as a financial services network that enables customers of member banks to transfer funds to customers of other banks using a nationwide digital payments network (Compl. ¶11).
    • To initiate a transaction, a user enrolls and provides a U.S. mobile number or email address, which serves as a "token" or alias for their bank account (Compl. p. 5). The sender then uses the recipient's email address or phone number to direct the payment (Compl. ¶17, p. 6). A diagram included in the complaint shows the data flow within the "Zelle Risk Service," which involves authentication, identity, and decision services (Compl. ¶17, p. 6).
    • The complaint alleges that Zelle provides member financial institutions with information necessary to facilitate money transfers but that Zelle "neither transfers, moves nor initiates the transfer or movement of money" itself (Compl. p. 15). Zelle is positioned as a major peer-to-peer payment network integrated directly into the mobile banking applications of numerous U.S. banks (Compl. ¶¶11, 13).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

U.S. Patent No. 8,346,659 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 31) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
sending a message to a target from a server... wherein the message provides instructions for the target to access the server to receive payment... Zelle sends notifications (e.g., email or text messages) to a recipient informing them that a payment has been sent or is available. ¶17 col. 6:49-54
receiving an alias, a transaction identifier, and a target financial account information at a server The Zelle system receives a recipient's phone number or email address (the alias) from a sender to initiate a transaction. ¶17 col. 6:55-58
authenticating by matching the received alias and transaction identifier with a stored alias and a stored transaction identifier stored in a database... Zelle's "Alias Directory" maintains a relationship between customer account numbers and their email/mobile number aliases to verify and route payments. ¶17 col. 6:59-62
providing instructions by the server to transfer a payment amount from an originator financial account to a target financial account... The Zelle network sends messages to member financial institutions with information necessary to facilitate the funds transfer between the originator and target bank accounts. ¶17 col. 6:63-67
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Functional Questions: A central dispute appears to be whether the information Zelle provides to its member banks constitutes "instructions to transfer the payment amount," as required by the claim. The complaint alleges that Zelle does not provide such instructions but instead provides routing information, with the actual transfer being handled by the banks (Compl. ¶53). This raises the question of what level of technical specificity and command authority is required to meet the "providing instructions" limitation.

U.S. Patent No. 9,684,899 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 10) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
sending a message to a client device using an alias previously assigned by the server and stored in a database The Zelle system sends notifications to a recipient's device (e.g., smartphone) using their phone number or email (the alias) which is stored in the Zelle Alias Directory. ¶17 col. 28:56-59
wherein the message provides instructions for a target to access the server to receive a payment amount for a transaction... The notification message informs the recipient of a pending payment and may include a link or prompt for the user to log into their banking application to accept or enroll to receive the funds. ¶17 col. 28:60-63
authenticating the one or more messages from the client device by searching for the previously stored alias and the generated transaction identifier... When a user acts on the notification (e.g., by logging in), the Zelle system authenticates the user's alias against its directory to facilitate the transaction. ¶17 col. 29:3-9
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: The complaint alleges that Zelle does not send a message that "provides instructions for a target to access the server to receive a payment amount" (Compl. ¶54). The dispute may turn on whether a notification informing a user of a payment and prompting them to log into their own bank's separate application constitutes "instructions to access the server" as contemplated by the patent.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "alias"

  • Context and Importance: This term is foundational to all asserted patents. Its construction will determine whether the email addresses and mobile phone numbers used as "tokens" in the IP-based Zelle Network fall within the scope of a term defined in patents heavily rooted in the public telephone network, where "alias" is often discussed in the context of Caller ID and telephone numbers. Practitioners may focus on this term because the patents' specifications repeatedly tie the invention to the telephone network, which may support a narrower construction than what Aliaswire appears to assert.

  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The ’621 Patent defines an "originator alias and a target alias" without explicitly limiting them to telephone numbers, which may suggest the term covers any unique identifier linked to an account (Compl. Ex. E, ’621 Patent, col. 27:62-63).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specifications frequently use "telephone number" and "Caller ID" as the primary examples of the unique identifier that enables the invention, suggesting the "alias" is intrinsically tied to the telephone system's infrastructure (Compl. Ex. A, ’659 Patent, col. 3:31-34; col. 7:41-44).

  • The Term: "providing instructions to transfer" ('659 Patent) / "message provides instructions... to access the server" ('899 Patent)

  • Context and Importance: This phrase is at the heart of the functional dispute. The case may hinge on whether Zelle's role as a directory and messaging service that provides routing information to banks is legally equivalent to a system that directly "provides instructions" to execute a financial transfer.

  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patents describe a "Facilitator" that processes transactions "by debiting and crediting various accounts or providing the required information for others to do so" (Compl. Ex. A, ’659 Patent, col. 5:52-55). This language could be read to cover a system that provides the necessary information for others (i.e., banks) to complete the transfer.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent flowcharts and descriptions often depict the "Facilitator" as a single, active entity that "completes the transaction" and "notifies the merchant of payment" (Compl. Ex. A, ’659 Patent, Fig. 3, steps 535-540). This may support a narrower view where the claimed server must itself perform or command the transfer, not merely enable it by passing information.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint seeks a declaratory judgment of no contributory infringement (Compl. p. 18). It describes Aliaswire's allegations that EWS's provision of the Zelle Network® to its customer banks meets the requirements for contributory infringement because Zelle is used to commit direct infringement by bank customers, constitutes a material part of the invention, and is not a staple article of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use (Compl. ¶¶19, 31, 41). EWS's central defense is that because there is no direct infringement by users of Zelle, EWS cannot be liable for contributory infringement (Compl. ¶¶52-57).

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

  • A central issue will be one of functional operation: Does the Zelle Network's messaging system, which EWS characterizes as an information directory to facilitate routing between banks, perform the active step of "providing instructions to transfer" funds as required by the claims, or does it operate at a fundamentally different technical level than the claimed invention?
  • A key question of claim scope will be whether the term "alias," as described in patents grounded in the architecture of the public telephone network, can be construed broadly enough to read on the email addresses and phone numbers used as identifiers in the distinct technological environment of a modern, IP-based payment network.
  • The determination of contributory infringement will likely depend entirely on the outcome of the direct infringement analysis. If the court finds that the operation of the Zelle Network by end-users and banks does not directly infringe the asserted claims, the contributory infringement allegation against EWS may not be sustainable.