DCT
1:17-cv-00480
Anuwave LLC v. First Bank Of Highland Park
Key Events
Complaint
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Anuwave LLC (Texas)
- Defendant: First Bank of Highland Park (Illinois)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Ferraiuoli LLC; Andreou & Casson, Ltd.
- Case Identification: 1:17-cv-00480, N.D. Ill., 01/20/2017
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Northern District of Illinois because Defendant conducts business in the district, offers the accused services to consumers there, and the alleged infringing acts occur within the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s mobile text banking service infringes a patent related to methods for enabling application-like communication using a standard SMS channel.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns providing interactive, menu-driven services on mobile phones through the SMS system, a method particularly relevant before the widespread availability of affordable mobile data plans and modern smartphone applications.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention any prior litigation, Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, or licensing history related to the patent-in-suit.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2006-08-03 | ’862 Patent Priority Date |
| 2012-10-23 | ’862 Patent Issue Date |
| 2017-01-20 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 8,295,862 - Method and system to enable communication through SMS communication channel
- Issued: October 23, 2012
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent identifies the "tedious process" for users of early mobile phones who had to remember and manually type specific command strings to access services via SMS, especially on keypads not designed for extensive typing ('862 Patent, col. 1:29-43). At the time, more advanced IP-based communication channels like WAP or GPRS were often costly or unavailable on many networks ('862 Patent, col. 1:49-54).
- The Patented Solution: The invention describes a "network aware application" (NWA) residing on a user's mobile device (the "terminal station") that provides a richer, menu-based user interface for interacting with SMS-based services ('862 Patent, Abstract). This application intercepts messages, presents users with menus and options, converts their selections into the required SMS command syntax, sends the command, receives the SMS response, and then renders that response in a user-friendly format on the display, effectively creating an app-like experience over the basic SMS channel ('862 Patent, col. 2:4-27). This process is illustrated in the flowchart of Figure 1 ('862 Patent, Fig. 1).
- Technical Importance: The technology aimed to bridge the gap between basic SMS functionality and a more sophisticated application experience, without requiring the user or the network to support more advanced data protocols ('862 Patent, col. 1:55-57).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint specifically alleges infringement of at least independent claim 7 ('Compl. ¶26).
- Independent Claim 7 Elements:
- listing all services at a terminal station that are available with an SMS gateway according to meta information available at the terminal station;
- upon selecting a service, a network aware application configured to allow a user to type in a desired parameter;
- upon user entering the desired parameter, submitting a request to the SMS gateway; and
- the SMS gateway responding back with a response,
- wherein the desired parameter is not listed at the terminal station.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert other claims, but it broadly alleges infringement of the patent ('Compl. ¶24).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- Defendant’s "Mobile Banking" system, referred to as the "Accused Instrumentality" (Compl. ¶16).
Functionality and Market Context
- The Accused Instrumentality is a text banking service that allows Defendant's customers to access account information using text commands sent to a specific SMS short code (99588) (Compl. ¶¶16, 19). The complaint alleges that when a user signs up for the service, a list of available services and their corresponding commands is shown (Compl. ¶17). As an example of its functionality, a user can text the command "ATM" followed by a zip code to the short code to receive a response with the locations of nearby ATMs (Compl. ¶18). The complaint's descriptions of the accused website showing available text banking commands, such as when a user signs up for the service, provide a visual reference for the system's operation (Compl. ¶17).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’862 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 7) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| listing all services at a terminal station that are available with an SMS gateway according to meta information available at the terminal station | The complaint alleges that when a user signs up for text banking, "all available services and their corresponding commands are shown," and that the SMS gateway lists services based on the user's registered accounts and preferences. | ¶17 | col. 2:50-54 |
| upon selecting a service, a network aware application configured to allow a user to type in a desired parameter | The complaint alleges that a user can select the service of finding an ATM by "entering the corresponding 'ATM' command followed by any Zip Code (i.e. a desired parameter)." | ¶18 | col. 5:20-26 |
| upon user entering the desired parameter, submitting a request to the SMS gateway | It is alleged that the user submits a request "by sending a text message to 99588," which is identified as a Common Short Code that routes messages to the SMS messaging server. | ¶19 | col. 4:45-50 |
| the SMS gateway responding back with a response | The complaint states that in response to a request for ATM locations, "the requested ATM locations are displayed on the user's mobile device." | ¶20 | col. 2:17-27 |
| wherein the desired parameter is not listed at the terminal station | The complaint alleges that the zip code, entered by the user along with the "ATM" command, "is not listed at the terminal station, but rather the Zip Code is provided by the user." | ¶21 | col. 8:7-8 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central issue may be the definition of a "network aware application." The patent specification describes this as an application on the user's device, potentially an "embedded client," that intercepts messages and builds a user interface ('862 Patent, col. 2:10-12, col. 3:30-32). The complaint, however, describes the user interacting with the bank's system via a standard SMS client. This raises the question of whether the combination of a user's standard SMS client and the bank's server-side system constitutes the claimed "network aware application."
- Technical Questions: The claim requires "listing all services at a terminal station...according to meta information available at the terminal station." The complaint alleges that services are shown to a user "when a user of a mobile phone signs up for text banking" (Compl. ¶17), which may occur on a website rather than on the terminal station itself. This raises the question of whether a list of commands provided on a website during a one-time setup process meets the claim limitation of a listing occurring "at the terminal station" using information "available at the terminal station."
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "network aware application"
- Context and Importance: This term appears to be the core of the invention. Its construction will be critical to determining infringement. If it is construed to require a specific software client installed on the user's device (as distinct from a standard, pre-installed SMS messaging app), the infringement case may face significant challenges, as the complaint does not allege the presence of such a specialized client.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The term is not explicitly defined with a precise boundary, which might allow for an argument that any system of software components (client and server) working together to provide the service is a "network aware application."
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly refers to the "network aware application" as being "on a mobile device" ('862 Patent, Abstract), an "embedded client" ('862 Patent, col. 2:12), and as something that is "bundled with a meta information of available SMS based services" ('862 Patent, col. 2:46-48). This language suggests the "application" is a distinct piece of software resident on the "terminal station" itself.
The Term: "listing all services at a terminal station"
- Context and Importance: This term's construction is key to the first step of the claimed method. The infringement theory relies on the list of text commands provided by the bank qualifying as this "listing." Practitioners may focus on this term because the complaint alleges the list is shown "when a user...signs up for text banking" (Compl. ¶17), which could be interpreted as happening on a separate device (e.g., a PC) or at a different time than the actual use of the service.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: One could argue that once the user is aware of the services (e.g., from viewing them on a website), that list is conceptually "at" their terminal station for future use.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's figures and description imply an interactive, on-device experience, where an application on the terminal station actively "displays" a list of services for immediate selection, as shown in Figure 5A ('862 Patent, Fig. 5A, element 501). This supports a reading that requires the listing to be an active, on-device software function, not a static list viewed elsewhere.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint does not contain specific counts for indirect infringement (inducement or contributory infringement). It alleges only direct infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271 (Compl. ¶24).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Defendant had knowledge of its infringement "at least as of the service of the present complaint" (Compl. ¶25). This allegation, if proven, would only support a finding of post-filing willfulness, as it does not assert any pre-suit knowledge on the part of the Defendant. The prayer for relief requests enhanced damages (Compl. p. 7, ¶e).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "network aware application", which the patent specification describes as an "embedded client" on a mobile device, be construed to cover the accused system, which appears to combine a standard SMS client on a user's phone with Defendant's remote server-side processing?
- A key evidentiary question will be one of locational and functional requirements: does providing a list of text commands on a website during a sign-up process satisfy the claim limitation of "listing all services at a terminal station...according to meta information available at the terminal station," or does the claim require an active, on-device application to perform this listing function?
- The viability of the infringement claim will likely depend on whether the court adopts a broad, functional interpretation of the claim terms or a narrower one grounded in the specific software architecture described in the patent's specification and figures.