DCT

4:25-cv-04166

Intellectros LLC v. Deere & Co

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:

  • Case Identification: 4:25-cv-04166, C.D. Ill., 09/23/2025

  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper based on Defendant maintaining a place of business in Moline, Illinois, within the district, and committing alleged acts of infringement there.

  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s private 5G wireless networks, implemented in its manufacturing facilities, infringe three patents related to frequency reuse, location-based beamforming, and radio link failure handling in wireless communication systems.

  • Technical Context: The case centers on advanced wireless networking technologies, specifically private 5G networks, which are increasingly critical for industrial automation, enabling high-bandwidth, low-latency connectivity for machinery and logistics.

  • Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Defendant was notified of the patents-in-suit and its alleged infringement via a letter with claim charts dated April 30, 2025, followed by another communication on May 16, 2025, which forms the basis for the willfulness allegation.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2008-07-22 ’563 Patent Priority Date
2013-01-18 ’839 Patent Priority Date
2013-12-26 ’797 Patent Priority Date
2015-05-19 ’563 Patent Issue Date
2017-09-05 ’797 Patent Issue Date
2017-10-17 ’839 Patent Issue Date
2020 Alleged start of Defendant's private 5G implementation
2025-04-30 Plaintiff's initial notice letter to Defendant
2025-05-16 Plaintiff's follow-up communication to Defendant
2025-09-23 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 9,036,563 - “Method for Achieving Frequency Reuse in Wireless Communications Systems,” issued May 19, 2015

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent describes the challenge of co-channel interference that arises when multiple devices in a dense, high-frequency wireless network attempt to reuse the same frequency channel to increase overall system capacity (’563 Patent, col. 1:44-54).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a method where a central "coordinating device" manages frequency reuse. It gathers "path quality information" from various pairs of communicating devices and uses this data to determine which communication links can operate concurrently ("co-exist") without causing unacceptable interference, based on a predefined rule such as a signal-to-interference ratio (SIR) threshold (’563 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:7-14). The coordinating device then creates a "concurrent access table" and sends scheduling information to the devices, allowing multiple, non-interfering transmissions on the same channel at the same time (’563 Patent, col. 4:45-50).
  • Technical Importance: This method of spatial multiplexing allows for more efficient use of limited radio spectrum, a critical factor for enabling high-data-rate applications in environments with many wireless devices, such as an automated factory (’563 Patent, col. 1:48-51).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶11).
  • The essential elements of independent claim 1 are:
    • Obtaining a first path quality information for a first pair of communications devices.
    • Obtaining a second path quality information for a second pair of communications devices.
    • Determining, by a coordinating device, multiple co-existing communications paths based on the first and second path quality information in accordance with a first predetermined rule.
    • Sending channel resource allocation information to the first and second pairs of devices to use the co-existing paths to communicate concurrently over the same channel.
    • Wherein each path is established by beamforming using directional antennas to form multiple directional beam patterns.
    • Wherein the beamforming involves adjusting a receiving beam pattern of a non-coordinating device according to a second predetermined rule.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.

U.S. Patent No. 9,755,797 - “Localization - Based Beamforming Scheme for Systems with Multiple Antennas,” issued September 5, 2017

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent notes that traditional 3D positioning using Observed Time Difference of Arrival (OTDOA) requires signals from four distinct base stations, with one often needing to be at a significantly different height to ensure accuracy, which adds cost and complexity to network deployment (’797 Patent, col. 1:11-21).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention provides a method for 3D positioning using only three base stations. It leverages the multi-antenna array on the serving base station to transmit beamformed Positioning Reference Signals (PRSs). By analyzing the characteristics of these incoming directional signals across multiple Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiplexing (OFDM) symbols, the user equipment (UE) can estimate its own elevation angle relative to the serving base station (’797 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:34-44). This calculated elevation angle effectively provides the third dimension of location information, replacing the need for a fourth base station.
  • Technical Importance: The technology aims to reduce the infrastructure cost and deployment complexity of providing accurate 3D location services in cellular networks, which is fundamental for applications ranging from emergency services to asset tracking in industrial environments (’797 Patent, col. 1:21-24).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶20).
  • The essential elements of independent claim 1, a method performed at a UE, are:
    • Receiving PRSs from multiple base stations, where the PRS from the serving base station is applied with distinct beamforming vectors for multiple OFDM symbols.
    • Estimating line-of-sight (LOS) paths and corresponding indexes for Time of Arrival (TOA) and Time Difference of Arrival (TDOA) measurements.
    • Estimating an elevation angle of the UE based on the estimated LOS paths of the PRS from the serving base station, using multiple LOS path measurements corresponding to the multiple OFDM symbols in one subframe.
    • Determining whether the UE knows the positions of the base stations.
    • Calculating a UE position based on the TDOA measurements and the estimated elevation angle when the base station positions are known.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.

U.S. Patent No. 9,794,839 - “Mechanism for Radio Link Monitoring and Radio Link Failure Handling in Small Cell Networks,” issued October 17, 2017

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses radio link failures (RLF) in "dual connectivity" scenarios where a device is simultaneously connected to an "anchor" base station (for control) and a "drift" base station (for data) (’839 Patent, Abstract). The invention provides a method for handling a failure of the link to the anchor base station by having the user device detect the failure, de-associate its connection with the anchor, and send an RLF indication to the still-connected drift station, enabling a faster and more robust connection recovery (’839 Patent, col. 9:48-61).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶30).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges that Deere's 5G network, operating under the 5G standard's Multi-Radio Dual Connectivity (MR-DC) protocols, infringes. Specifically, it alleges that upon detecting an RLF on the Master Cell Group (MCG), the accused user equipment sends an MCGFailureInformation message to the secondary node via the Secondary Cell Group (SCG) to manage the failure, as described in the patent (Compl. ¶34).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The Accused Instrumentality is Defendant’s private 5G network implemented in its factories, including the factory in East Moline, Illinois, and the associated products and services that use this network (Compl. ¶¶11, 20, 30).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint alleges that Defendant’s private 5G network is used to support advanced manufacturing and logistics operations, including controlling over 100 automated guided vehicles, using computer vision for quality control, and wirelessly measuring torque levels on power tools (Compl. p. 4, 23, 41).
  • The system is alleged to comply with the 5G standard, which includes functionalities such as Multi-User MIMO (MU-MIMO) for concurrent transmissions, beamforming to create directional signals, and standardized procedures for device positioning (e.g., DL-TDOA and DL-AoD) and handling radio link failures in dual connectivity modes (Compl. ¶¶14, 21, 31-34).
  • The complaint quotes Defendant’s CTO stating that its private 5G architecture will "stand the test of time," suggesting a strategic, long-term investment in this technology for its operational efficiency (Compl. p. 4, 22, 41).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

’563 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
obtaining a first path quality information ... for each unidirectional transmission between a first pair of communications devices The system obtains a first beam measurement report for a first User Equipment (UE) and a first gNodeB (gNB) pair. ¶12 col. 5:19-25
obtaining a second path quality information ... for each unidirectional transmission between a second pair of communications devices The system obtains a second beam measurement report for a second UE and the first gNB. ¶13 col. 5:19-25
determining multiple co-existing communications paths based on the first and the second path quality information in accordance with a first predetermined rule by a coordinating device A 5G-NR core network device analyzes the measurement reports and determines co-existing paths with optimal signal powers and minimized interference to enable MU-MIMO operation. ¶14 col. 6:45-56
sending channel resource allocation information ... to use corresponding co-existing communications paths such that the first pair and the second pair ... communicate over the communications channel during a period of time concurrently The system sends allocation information to the devices to enable concurrent communication over the channel using MU-MIMO. ¶15 col. 5:1-6
wherein each communication path is established by beamforming using directional antennas to form multiple directional beam patterns Each path is established by beamforming, which creates directional beams to maximize gain toward the desired user and minimize leakage toward others. The complaint includes a diagram illustrating beam relations in DL MU-MIMO (Compl. p. 13, Fig. 10). ¶15 col. 7:22-31
wherein the beamforming involves adjusting a receiving beam pattern ... according to a second predetermined rule The system adjusts beam patterns based on tracking and refinement using SSB-RSRP (Synchronization Signal Block-Reference Signal Received Power) values. ¶15 col. 7:22-31

Identified Points of Contention

  • Scope Questions: A potential dispute may arise over whether the "coordinating device" recited in the claim, described in the patent in the context of a wireless personal area network (WPAN), can be read to cover the "5G-NR core network device" alleged in the complaint.
  • Technical Questions: The analysis may turn on whether the standard MU-MIMO scheduling algorithms used in 5G networks perform the specific step of determining "co-existing" paths "in accordance with a first predetermined rule" (e.g., an explicit SIR threshold comparison) as required by the claim, or if they manage interference through a functionally different process.

’797 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
receiving a plurality of positioning reference signals (PRSs) from a plurality of base stations ... wherein the UE receives a PRS transmission from a serving base station applied with distinct beamforming vectors for multiple OFDM symbols using multiple antennas The UE receives PRSs from multiple transmission points (TPs), where the PRS from a serving base station uses distinct beamforming vectors. ¶21 col. 9:57-64
estimating a plurality of line-of-sight (LOS) paths and corresponding indexes of the PRSs for time of arrival (TOA) and time difference of arrival (TDOA) measurements The UE estimates LOS paths from DL-PRS resources to perform TOA and TDOA measurements. ¶22 col. 10:9-15
estimating an elevation angle of the UE based on the estimated LOS paths of the PRS from the serving base station, wherein the UE estimates the elevation angle based on multiple LOS path measurements that correspond to the multiple OFDM symbols in one subframe The UE estimates its elevation angle based on multiple LOS path measurements from the serving base station's PRS. The complaint includes a diagram illustrating beamforming used for positioning measurements (Compl. p. 27). ¶23 col. 10:16-22
determining whether the UE knows the plurality of base station positions The UE may receive the geographical coordinates of the TPs/base stations from a Location Management Function (LMF), thereby knowing their positions. ¶24 col. 10:23-25
calculating a UE position based on the TOA/TDOA measurements and the elevation angle when the UE knows the plurality of base stations positions When the UE knows the base station coordinates, it calculates its position using both DL-TDOA (from TOA/TDOA measurements) and DL-AoD (from elevation angle measurement) positioning methods. ¶25 col. 10:26-30

Identified Points of Contention

  • Technical Questions: A key question will be whether the accused 5G positioning system actually calculates a UE position by combining TDOA measurements with an elevation angle derived specifically from beamformed PRS signals, as the claim requires. The complaint cites standards supporting both DL-TDOA and DL-AoD as separate methods, raising the question of whether they are used in the specific combination claimed.
  • Scope Questions: The claim requires estimating the elevation angle "based on multiple LOS path measurements that correspond to the multiple OFDM symbols in one subframe." The case may depend on evidence showing that the accused devices perform this specific multi-symbol estimation, rather than a different, standardized method for determining angle of departure.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

For the ’563 Patent

  • The Term: "co-existing communications paths"
  • Context and Importance: This term is central to the infringement theory. The dispute will likely focus on whether this term covers any set of paths that a 5G system schedules for simultaneous use via MU-MIMO, or if it requires a more specific, affirmative determination of compatibility against a "predetermined rule" as described in the patent.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claims themselves do not specify the nature of the "predetermined rule," which may support an interpretation that any system rule for enabling concurrent communication qualifies.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification suggests a specific process where interference is assessed and compared against a threshold to determine co-existence, stating that "two communications paths are determined to be co-existing when the path quality information of both ... exceeds a predetermined threshold" (’563 Patent, col. 6:49-53).

For the ’797 Patent

  • The Term: "estimating an elevation angle of the UE based on the estimated LOS paths of the PRS from the serving base station"
  • Context and Importance: This term captures the core novelty claim of replacing a fourth base station with information derived from beamforming. The infringement question will turn on whether the accused system's method of determining an angle of departure is functionally the same as the patent's method of "estimating an elevation angle" based on the characteristics of the "LOS paths" of the beamformed PRS.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself is broad. An argument could be made that any angle estimation that relies on signals that have an LOS component infringes.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification describes a specific technical process for this estimation, involving analyzing the channel impulse response (CIR), applying "channel tap zeroing," and using an expectation-maximization algorithm to solve for the angle (’797 Patent, col. 7:1-8; col. 8:15-28). This may support a narrower construction limited to this or a similar methodology.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement based on Defendant's alleged pre-suit knowledge of the patents-in-suit. This knowledge is alleged to have been established by a letter and accompanying claim charts sent to Defendant's patent counsel on April 30, 2025, with a follow-up on May 16, 2025 (Compl. ¶35).

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

  • Standard Compliance vs. Patented Method: A central issue across all three patents will be whether Deere's implementation of the 5G standard necessarily practices the specific methods recited in the claims. The complaint relies heavily on technical standards documents, and the case may turn on whether the standard mandates the infringing configuration or merely permits it as one of several non-infringing design choices.
  • Functional Equivalence in Operation: A key evidentiary question for the ’563 Patent will be one of functional equivalence: does the standard MU-MIMO scheduling process, designed to manage interference generally, perform the same function in the same way as the patent’s specific method of affirmatively determining "co-existing" paths against a "predetermined rule"?
  • Combination of Techniques: For the ’797 Patent, a core issue will be one of methodological combination: does the accused system actually calculate a 3D position by combining TDOA measurements with an elevation angle derived from beamformed PRSs, as claimed, or does it utilize other standardized 3D positioning methods that do not rely on this specific combination of inputs?