DCT

1:25-cv-00483

Adaptive Avenue Associates Inc v. eBay Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:25-cv-00483, D. Del., 04/21/2025
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the District of Delaware because Defendant eBay Inc. is incorporated in Delaware and therefore resides in the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s e-commerce website, specifically its "carousel ad" feature, infringes two patents related to systems and methods for creating and displaying automated, sequential presentations of web pages.
  • Technical Context: The technology at issue concerns the automated presentation of a sequence of web pages or web content, a feature now commonly used in e-commerce and digital advertising to display multiple products or promotions in a single interface element.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that U.S. Patent No. 7,428,707 is a continuation-in-part of the application that issued as U.S. Patent No. 7,171,629. It also references the prosecution history of the ’707 Patent, stating the Patent Examiner found it unconventional to "automatically compose a slideshow through the automatic extraction of web page details" from a desired web page.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2000-10-20 Earliest Priority Date for ’629 and ’707 Patents
2007-01-30 U.S. Patent No. 7,171,629 Issued
2008-09-23 U.S. Patent No. 7,428,707 Issued
c. 2015 Complaint alleges infringing uses "skyrocketed"
2019-04-01 Date of screenshots depicting Accused Instrumentality
2025-04-21 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 7,171,629, "Customizable Web Site Access System And Method Therefore" (Issued Jan. 30, 2007)

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section identifies the inefficiency and high cost associated with creating automated presentations of web page sequences, which often required reprogramming site content or installing special development tools. For users, navigating content was a tedious, manual process of clicking through individual pages or search results. (’629 Patent, col. 7:60-67; Compl. ¶11).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a server-based system that uses a "composer" component to create a "presentation"—defined by a list of URLs, a display sequence, and display durations—and a "performer" component to automatically display this presentation to a user as a slide show. This system is designed to operate from a host server, allowing a site owner to create a web tour or allowing a user to view a sequence of sites without installing client-side software. (’629 Patent, Abstract; Fig. 1).
  • Technical Importance: The technology sought to enhance user engagement and "visitor satisfaction" by replacing manual, "active visitor clicking" with an "adaptive presentation model" that could automatically guide users through relevant content. (’629 Patent, col. 13:30-40).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 11 (Compl. ¶45).
  • Essential Elements of Claim 11:
    • A method for customizing access to web sites, comprising:
    • Remotely invoking a "composer" operating on a host server;
    • Creating a presentation in the "composer" by:
      • Establishing a list of URLs;
      • Determining a display sequence for the list of URLs;
      • Determining a duration of display for the list of URLs;
    • Remotely invoking a "performer" operating on the host server to present the created presentation; and
    • Automatically locally displaying the presentation in a "slide show format" according to the list, sequence, and duration, where each URL comprises a slide.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert other claims.

U.S. Patent No. 7,428,707, "Customizable Web Site Access System And Method Therefore" (Issued Sep. 23, 2008)

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: As a continuation-in-part, the ’707 Patent addresses the same general problem of web navigation. It focuses more specifically on the challenge of creating the presentation, noting that prior art slideshows were typically composed manually. (Compl. ¶41, ¶42).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention described in the ’707 Patent is a system that can auto-compose a slide show presentation. It does this by "automatic extraction of web page details from a desired web page," such as by finding and using a plurality of hyperlinks within that page to generate the list of URLs for the presentation. (’707 Patent, Abstract; col. 8:20-31).
  • Technical Importance: This approach aimed to automate the creation of web tours by programmatically leveraging the existing link structure of a given webpage, thereby reducing the manual effort required to create a presentation. (Compl. ¶41).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claims 1 and 7 (Compl. ¶63). The analysis will focus on claim 7 as representative of the auto-composing method.
  • Essential Elements of Claim 7:
    • A computer-implemented method for auto-composing a web site, comprising:
    • Composing a presentation for a "desired web page" by creating a list of URLs, which comprises one or more of the following steps:
      • "Automatically extracting a plurality of hyperlinks from said desired web page";
      • Automatically extracting a presentation/rendition text file from the desired web page;
      • Automatically extracting a meta tag from the desired web page; and
    • "Automatically displaying said presentation", wherein the presentation is presented in order of the created list of URLs.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert other claims.

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The accused instrumentality is the website www.ebay.com, and specifically its use of features referred to as "carousel ads" that present rotating content to users. (Compl. ¶45, ¶48, ¶66).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint alleges that the eBay website displays customized "carousel ads" which automatically rotate through a series of web pages, such as product listings, without user intervention. (Compl. ¶48). The complaint provides a screenshot of the eBay homepage showing a "Deals Under $10" carousel banner. (Compl. p. 15). It further alleges that the underlying source code for these carousels contains lists of URLs corresponding to the different panels or slides in the presentation. (Compl. ¶50). Plaintiff alleges these carousel ads are an "industry standard" that can generate significantly higher click-through rates and lower costs-per-conversion than static advertisements. (Compl. ¶43).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

’629 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 11) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
remotely invoking a composer operating on a host server; A user's web browser, upon visiting www.ebay.com, invokes a component on eBay's host server that assembles the carousel presentation. ¶49 col. 9:11-14
creating a presentation in said composer, wherein said step of creating comprises the steps of: establishing a list of URLs in said composer; The composer on eBay's server establishes a list of URLs for the carousel panels, such as for the "Deals Under $10" and "Fashion" panels. The complaint provides a screenshot of the website's source code showing these URL lists. (Compl. p. 15). ¶50, ¶52 col. 10:7-10
determining a display sequence of said list of URLs in said composer; eBay's system determines the order in which the carousel panels are displayed. The complaint provides a visual sequence of the images from the carousel. (Compl. p. 17). ¶53 col. 10:40-44
determining a duration of display for said list of URLs in said composer; Each slide in the carousel is allegedly displayed for a predetermined duration before the next is displayed. ¶54 col. 10:30-34
remotely invoking a performer operating on said host server to present said created presentation; This allegedly occurs when a web user navigates to www.ebay.com, which invokes the performance of the web slide show. ¶55, ¶56 col. 9:30-33
automatically locally displaying the created presentation presented by said performer in a slide show format according to said list and said display sequence... The carousel ad presentation is automatically displayed to the user in a slide show format according to the pre-defined URL list and sequence. ¶57, ¶59 col. 14:4-12

’707 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 7) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
composing a presentation for a desired web page by creating a list of URLs, wherein said step of composing comprises automatically extracting a plurality of hyperlinks from the desired web page... The eBay system allegedly composes a presentation for the www.ebay.com page by creating a list of URLs. The complaint alleges the "plurality of hyperlinks" are the image URLs shown in the source code snippets provided. (Compl. p. 21). ¶68, ¶71, ¶72 col. 8:20-25
...wherein the plurality of hyperlinks provides the URLs; The extracted hyperlinks are alleged to provide the URLs for the carousel slide show. ¶71 col. 8:24-25
and automatically displaying said presentation, wherein the presentation is presented in order of the created list of URLs. The carousel presentation is automatically displayed to the user in the order of the created list. ¶73 col. 8:29-31
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A central question for both patents is whether the server-side architecture that generates eBay’s carousel ads can be mapped to the claimed "composer" and "performer" components, as those terms are described in the patent specifications.
    • Technical Questions: The infringement theory for the ’707 Patent will likely face scrutiny regarding the "automatically extracting... from the desired web page" limitation. The complaint alleges that the image URLs in the source code are the "plurality of hyperlinks" that are extracted. (Compl. ¶72). This raises the question of whether the accused system performs an active extraction from an existing webpage, or if it simply constructs a webpage that includes a pre-compiled list of URLs. Evidence of the latter could suggest a mismatch with the claim's requirement for an extraction step.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "composer"

  • Context and Importance: This term is foundational to the asserted claims of both patents. The viability of the infringement case depends on whether eBay's back-end system for generating carousel ads qualifies as a "composer".

  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent abstract describes the "composer" in broad functional terms as a "composing portion of the software program... used to create a presentation" that "includes a list of URLs for display, a desired sequence... and a duration." (’629 Patent, Abstract). This functional language may support an interpretation covering any server-side system that assembles these elements.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description and figures illustrate the "composer" with specific interactive features, such as a user interface for manual entry of URLs, setting preferences, and user registration. (’629 Patent, Fig. 2A, col. 9:46-54). A party could argue that "composer" should be limited to a system possessing these more specific, user-driven configuration capabilities, not just an automated ad-serving algorithm.

  • The Term: "automatically extracting a plurality of hyperlinks from the desired web page"

  • Context and Importance: This is the key distinguishing feature of the asserted method in the ’707 Patent. Infringement of claim 7 hinges on whether the accused eBay system performs this specific action. Practitioners may focus on this term because the complaint's evidence shows source code with embedded URLs, which may not align with a plain reading of "extracting from" a page.

  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A plaintiff could argue the term covers any automated process where the system identifies and uses hyperlinks associated with a "desired web page" (which could be an abstract concept on the server) to create a presentation, even if the "extraction" and page construction occur in the same overarching server-side process.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The plain language suggests a two-step sequence: first, a "desired web page" exists, and second, a process is run against that page to find and "extract" links. The patent's abstract distinguishes between extracting hyperlinks found within the desired web page and other sources like a text file or meta tag, reinforcing the idea of a distinct source from which data is pulled. (’707 Patent, Abstract). This could support an interpretation requiring a parsing or scanning step that may not be present in the accused system.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint does not plead counts for indirect or induced infringement.
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint does not allege willful infringement or plead facts related to pre-suit knowledge of the patents.

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

  • A core issue will be one of operational sequence: For the ’707 patent, does the accused eBay system perform a distinct step of "automatically extracting" hyperlinks from a webpage, as the claim language suggests, or does it merely construct a webpage that already contains a pre-assembled list of URLs, raising a question of a fundamental mismatch in technical operation?
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of component identity: Can the functional roles of the "composer" and "performer" as described in the patents be persuasively mapped onto the complex, distributed architecture of a modern e-commerce platform like eBay, or do the specific embodiments and interactive features described in the patent specifications impose limitations that the accused system does not meet?
  • A central dispute may concern claim scope: How will the court construe the term "composer"? Will it be defined broadly by its function of creating a presentation, or will it be narrowed to the specific interactive embodiments shown in the patent, such as those that allow a site owner to manually enter a list of websites and preferences?