DCT
1:25-cv-00271
Cisco Systems Inc v. Intelligent Protection Management Corp
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Cisco Systems, Inc. and Cisco Technology, Inc. (California)
- Defendant: Intelligent Protection Management Corp. (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A.
- Case Identification: 1:25-cv-00271, D. Del., 03/07/2025
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the District of Delaware because Defendant is a Delaware corporation, is registered to do business in the district, maintains a regular and established place of business there, and allegedly commits acts of infringement in the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s ManyCam live streaming and virtual camera software infringes patents related to methods for compositing multiple video streams and for enabling user control over video conference layouts.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns advanced video processing techniques for video conferencing, a critical feature area in a market characterized by intense competition for user engagement and professional functionality.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Defendant, then operating as Paltalk, Inc., acquired the accused ManyCam software in 2022. In January 2025, Paltalk acquired Newtek Technology Solutions, Inc. and began operating as Intelligent Protection Management Corp. (IPM). Plaintiff alleges it sent a letter to Defendant on March 5, 2025, providing notice of the asserted patents, two days prior to filing this complaint. This pre-suit notice is the stated basis for the willfulness allegation.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2009-05-26 | Priority Date for ’293 Patent |
| 2011-07-29 | Priority Date for ’708 Patent |
| 2014-09-09 | Issue Date for U.S. Patent No. 8,830,293 |
| 2015-01-27 | Issue Date for U.S. Patent No. 8,941,708 |
| 2022 | Paltalk acquires ManyCam from Visicom Media Inc. |
| 2023 | Paltalk develops enterprise version of ManyCam |
| 2025-01 | Paltalk acquires Newtek Technology Solutions and becomes IPM |
| 2025-03-05 | Plaintiff sends notice letter to Defendant regarding infringement |
| 2025-03-07 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 8,830,293 - "Video superposition for continuous presence"
Issued September 9, 2014
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the challenge of displaying numerous participants in a video conference on a limited-size screen, noting that traditional "Hollywood Squares" layouts reduce individual participant size and create an unnatural viewing experience (’293 Patent, col. 1:14-28).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a method to combine two or more video streams to create a more "life-like" composite image. This is achieved by taking a first video stream, separating the "subject image" (e.g., the person) from its background, and then superimposing that subject image onto the video frame of a second video stream, thereby creating an illusion that the participants are in the same room or in a layered "stadium seating" arrangement (’293 Patent, col. 2:3-29; col. 5:20-30).
- Technical Importance: The technology sought to create a more immersive "telepresence" experience by moving beyond simple tiled video layouts and compositing participants into a single, cohesive scene (’293 Patent, col. 1:45-49).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶28).
- Essential elements of claim 1 include:
- Receiving at least first and second real-time video streams, each containing a subject image and a background image.
- Combining the subject images from the streams into a combined frame, which involves:
- Scaling and repositioning the video frames of the first stream.
- Removing the background image from this first stream to create "background separated video frames."
- Superimposing these background-separated frames onto the video frames of the second video stream.
- Supplying the resulting combined video stream to a display.
- The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims, including dependent claims (Compl. ¶29).
U.S. Patent No. 8,941,708 - "Method, computer-readable storage medium, and apparatus for modifying the layout used by a video composing unit to generate a composite video signal"
Issued January 27, 2015
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent identifies a lack of flexibility and a "cumbersome user experience" in traditional video conferencing systems, where control over video layouts is limited and often requires navigating complex on-screen menus with a keypad (’708 Patent, col. 2:31-41).
- The Patented Solution: The invention describes a user-friendly control method where a graphical object, such as a slider, is provided on a display. This object can be moved by the user along an "axis." The axis is divided into different intervals, with each interval being associated with a predefined video layout. By moving the object from one interval to another, the user can seamlessly transition between different layouts, such as from a full-screen "focus" view to a multi-participant "overview" (’708 Patent, col. 2:9-17; col. 4:1-16).
- Technical Importance: This approach provided an intuitive, direct-manipulation interface for managing complex video compositions, a departure from menu-driven controls (’708 Patent, col. 2:52-57).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶37).
- Essential elements of claim 1 include:
- Providing, on a display, an object configured to be moved by a user along an axis.
- Associating a plurality of predefined layouts with respective intervals along that axis.
- Detecting a user action on the object that indicates a position on the axis.
- Composing a composite video signal using the predefined layout that is associated with the interval in which the user's indicated position lies.
- The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims, including dependent claims (Compl. ¶38).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
The accused products and services are the ManyCam software and services, and software or services that integrate ManyCam (Compl. ¶20).
Functionality and Market Context
ManyCam is described as a live streaming and virtual camera software that allows users to deliver professional live videos for use in streaming platforms and video conferencing applications (Compl. ¶9). Its features include the ability to use multiple camera feeds, backgrounds, and effects (Compl. ¶9). The complaint specifically highlights its "Virtual Backgrounds" and "Picture-in-Picture Layers" features (Compl. ¶23). A screenshot provided in the complaint shows that the "Picture-in-Picture Layers" feature allows users to "[c]reate any layout you need" and use "[l]ayout presets with split-screen options" (Compl. p. 6). ManyCam is marketed as being compatible with major video conferencing platforms, including Plaintiff's WebEx (Compl. ¶22).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
The complaint states that infringement allegations for the ’293 and ’708 patents are detailed in Exhibits 3 and 4, respectively; however, these exhibits were not filed with the complaint (Compl. ¶30, ¶39). The analysis below is based on the narrative allegations in the complaint.
’293 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| receiving at least first and second real-time video streams, each ... comprising a subject image and a background image | ManyCam receives multiple video sources, such as from webcams or mobile cameras. | ¶22, ¶30 | col. 2:4-7 |
| scaling the video frames of the first video stream and repositioning | The "Picture-in-Picture Layers" feature is alleged to include "Resizable layers with rounded corners" and "Transform tools for all layers and sources." | ¶23, ¶30 | col. 7:13-21 |
| removing the background image in the first sequence of scaled video frames | The "Virtual Backgrounds" feature allegedly allows users to "remove or replace your background with the flip of a switch." | ¶23, ¶30 | col. 8:9-13 |
| superimposing the first background separated video frames onto corresponding ones of the video frames of the second video stream to produce combined video frames | The "Picture-in-Picture Layers" feature allegedly allows users to create a layout by combining multiple video sources, as depicted in a screenshot showing a layered video effect. | ¶23, ¶30 | col. 8:53-65 |
’708 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| providing, on a display, an object configured to be moved by a user along an axis | The ManyCam interface provides selectable options, such as the "Media switcher between scenes and various sources," which function as the claimed object and axis. | ¶22, ¶39 | col. 4:30-36 |
| associating a plurality of predefined layouts for plurality of video conference streams with respective intervals along the axis | ManyCam offers "[l]ayout presets with split-screen options" that allegedly correspond to the claimed predefined layouts associated with intervals. | ¶23, ¶39 | col. 5:46-54 |
| detecting a user action on the object indicating a position on the axis | The software allegedly detects when a user selects a scene, source, or layout preset. | ¶22, ¶23, ¶39 | col. 6:31-34 |
| composing, in response to the detecting of the user action, a composite video signal using a layout ... associated with an interval | Upon user selection of a layout preset, ManyCam allegedly composes the video output according to that preset. | ¶23, ¶39 | col. 6:45-52 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Technical Questions (’293 Patent): A central question may be whether ManyCam’s "Virtual Backgrounds" feature, which can replace a background with a static image or video, performs the specific function of "removing the background image" from a first video stream and "superimposing" the subject onto the background of a second video stream as required by the claim. The claim language suggests a dynamic composition of two live streams, which may differ from a simple background replacement function. The visual evidence in the complaint shows a user's background being replaced, but not necessarily being superimposed onto another live video stream (Compl. p. 6).
- Scope Questions (’708 Patent): The infringement analysis for the ’708 patent may turn on the construction of "object configured to be moved by a user along an axis." The complaint appears to allege that clicking on discrete buttons or presets in the ManyCam interface meets this limitation. This raises the question of whether a series of selectable, non-contiguous UI elements can be construed as an "axis" and whether clicking them constitutes "mov[ing] an object" in the manner contemplated by the patent.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
Term (’293 Patent): "superimposing the first background separated video frames onto corresponding ones of the video frames of the second video stream"
- Context and Importance: This term is critical as it defines the specific method of video combination. The dispute may center on whether this requires layering a foreground subject from a first live stream over a second live stream, or if it can read on compositing a subject with a generic or pre-selected virtual background.
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent’s overall objective is to create a "more life-like manner that is more natural and pleasing to view" by creating an "illusion" of participants being in the same room (’293 Patent, col. 2:26-30). This purpose-driven language could support an interpretation that covers various techniques for achieving that visual effect.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The explicit claim language "onto... the video frames of the second video stream" suggests a direct relationship between two specific streams, not a subject and a generic background. The patent’s figures and description of combining frames (e.g., FIG. 5G, col. 8:53-65) depict one set of participants being layered directly in front of the background belonging to another set of participants, which may support a narrower construction.
Term (’708 Patent): "an object configured to be moved by a user along an axis"
- Context and Importance: This term defines the core user interface mechanism of the invention. The viability of the infringement claim will depend heavily on whether ManyCam’s UI for selecting layouts falls within the scope of this term. Practitioners may focus on this term because it appears to be a primary point of divergence between the patent's description and the accused product's functionality as alleged.
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states that the "axis need not be a line nor be continuous" and "may be an arc, a circle, and/or discontinuous" (’708 Patent, col. 4:3-4). This language may be used to argue that a set of discrete, selectable layout presets constitutes a "discontinuous axis."
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification consistently uses a "track bar or slider" as the primary example, describing how a user can "drag the thumb in one of two directions" (’708 Patent, col. 5:34-39). The visual depiction in Figure 2 is a linear slider. This could support a narrower construction requiring a control that allows for continuous or quasi-continuous movement, rather than discrete clicks.
VI. Other Allegations
Indirect Infringement
The complaint alleges both induced and contributory infringement for each patent (Compl. ¶31-33, ¶40-42). The allegations are based on claims that Defendant "understands, intends, and encourages" its customers to use ManyCam in an infringing way and that the software is not a staple article of commerce and is especially made for use in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶32-33, ¶41-42).
Willful Infringement
The complaint alleges that Defendant’s infringement has been and continues to be willful (Compl. ¶34, ¶43). The factual basis for this allegation is the pre-suit notice letter Plaintiff allegedly sent to Defendant on March 5, 2025, which purportedly provided knowledge of the asserted patents and the ongoing infringement (Compl. ¶25-26).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A central issue will be one of claim scope and construction: Can the ’708 Patent’s limitation of an "object configured to be moved by a user along an axis," which the patent primarily exemplifies as a graphical slider, be permissibly construed to encompass the selection of discrete layout presets or media sources in the accused ManyCam interface?
- A key evidentiary and technical question will be whether the accused ManyCam software’s "Virtual Backgrounds" feature performs the specific, multi-step method recited in claim 1 of the ’293 Patent—namely, removing the background from a first live video stream and superimposing the resulting subject onto a second live video stream—or if it performs a technically distinct function.
- The case will also present a question of willfulness based on timing: Given that the complaint was filed only two days after Plaintiff allegedly provided notice of infringement, a key factual inquiry will be whether Defendant’s conduct, particularly in the post-notice period, rises to the level of objective recklessness required to support enhanced damages.