Internet Media Interactive Corp v. Pier 1 Imports US Inc

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Internet Media Interactive Corp. (Delaware)
  • Defendant: Pier 1 Imports (U.S.), Inc. (Delaware)
  • Plaintiff’s Counsel: Haller Law PLLC
• Case Identification: 1:19-cv-01365, N.D. Ill., 02/25/2019
• Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper based on Defendant maintaining places of business in Illinois, being registered to do business in the state, and purposefully availing itself of the privilege of conducting business with residents of the judicial district.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s use of its website and social media accounts, in conjunction with third-party link-shortening services, infringes a patent related to a system for accessing internet locations via unique jump codes.
• Technical Context: The patent addresses a method for simplifying web navigation from the early internet era by replacing long, cumbersome URLs with short, easy-to-enter codes found in a published guide.
• Key Procedural History: The complaint references a prior claim construction order from a 2009 proceeding in the District of Delaware involving the same patent. This prior judicial interpretation of key claim terms may significantly influence the current litigation.

Case Timeline

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

U.S. Patent No. 6,049,835 - "System For Providing Easy Access To The World Wide Web Utilizing A Published List Of Preselected Internet Locations Together With Their Unique Multi-Digit Jump Codes," issued April 11, 2000

• The Invention Explained:

  • Problem Addressed: In the mid-1990s, navigating the World Wide Web was often difficult. Users had to type long, complex, and error-prone Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) to reach specific websites, and finding useful, high-quality sites was a challenge (’835 Patent, col. 4:56-65). The patent describes the process as a potentially "frustrating and information starving experience" (’835 Patent, col. 4:5-6).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a system to simplify web access. A user would consult a curated, published compilation—such as a printed book—of preselected websites (’835 Patent, col. 5:51-56). Each listed website is assigned a unique, simple "jump code." The user would navigate to a single, specialized "JumpCity" website, enter the code for their desired destination, and the system's software would automatically redirect the user's browser to the corresponding complex URL, bypassing the need for manual entry (’835 Patent, Abstract; col. 5:45-50).
  • Technical Importance: The system provided a curated and simplified "directory" for the web at a time before sophisticated search engines became the dominant mode of internet navigation, making the web more accessible to non-technical users (’835 Patent, col. 4:13-22).

• Key Claims at a Glance:

  • The complaint asserts independent method claim 11 (Compl. ¶13).
  • Claim 11 requires the following steps:
    • publishing a compilation of preselected Internet locations, with each location assigned a unique predetermined multi-digit jump code;
    • providing a predetermined Internet location that has means for capturing a jump code entered by a user;
    • a user accessing that predetermined location and entering the jump code;
    • receiving the entered jump code;
    • converting the jump code to a corresponding URL address; and
    • automatically accessing the desired Internet location using the converted URL address.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.

III. The Accused Instrumentality

• Product Identification: The accused instrumentality is a method involving Defendant's website (www.pier1.com), its Twitter account (@pier1), and its use of a third-party link shortening service, identified as Bitly (Compl. ¶¶ 6, 13.a).
• Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges that Defendant distributes advertisements and promotional information through its Twitter account (Compl. ¶¶ 6, 13.a). These advertisements allegedly contain links to Defendant's web properties. To create these links, Defendant is alleged to use Bitly, a service that converts a long URL into a shorter one containing a short, unique code (e.g., "bit.ly/267ApqR") (Compl. ¶13.b). When a user clicks this shortened link, the Bitly service automatically redirects the user's browser to the original, longer URL destination specified by the Defendant (Compl. ¶¶ 13.d-g).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint’s infringement theory relies on mapping the steps of Claim 11 onto a multi-party process involving the Defendant, the end-user, and the Bitly service, asserting that the Defendant is vicariously liable for the actions of the user and Bitly (Compl. ¶¶ 13.d, 13.e, 14).

’835 Patent Infringement Allegations

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Technical Questions: A primary question is whether the architecture of a modern, automated link-shortening service, where a user's single click initiates the entire process, can be mapped onto the patent's distinct, sequential steps of (1) navigating to a portal, (2) manually entering a code, and (3) being redirected.
  • Scope Questions: The analysis may turn on whether a dynamic, real-time Twitter feed constitutes a "published compilation" in the manner contemplated by the patent, which describes a curated book of reviewed websites (’835 Patent, col. 5:51-60). A further question is whether an alphanumeric string like "267ApqR" meets the definition of a "multi-digit jump code," particularly in light of the prior construction cited in the complaint.
  • Legal Questions: The infringement theory relies heavily on holding Defendant vicariously liable for the actions of both end-users and the third-party Bitly service. The viability of this theory under the Akamai standard will depend on evidence of Defendant's control over, or the conditioning of benefits upon, the actions of these other parties (Compl. ¶14).

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

1. The Term: "a unique predetermined multi-digit jump code"

• Context and Importance: The definition of this term is central, as it determines whether the unique string generated by a service like Bitly (e.g., "267ApqR") falls within the scope of the claim. Practitioners may focus on the apparent conflict between the prior construction cited by the plaintiff and the accused instrumentality. The complaint alleges a prior construction of this phrase to mean "a unique predetermined code consisting of more than one number," yet the example provided contains letters (Compl. ¶13.b).
• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent’s overall goal is to replace a complex URL with a simpler, unique identifier, suggesting the specific format (numeric vs. alphanumeric) may be less important than the function it performs.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly refers to the preferred embodiment as using a "four-digit jump code" (’835 Patent, col. 5:46, 5:61, 6:66), which may suggest that a numeric code was specifically contemplated by the inventor. The prior construction cited in the complaint explicitly states "consisting of more than one number" (Compl. ¶13.b).

2. The Term: "publishing a compilation of preselected Internet locations"

• Context and Importance: This term's construction will determine if a modern, dynamic social media feed like Twitter can be considered the type of "compilation" protected by the patent. The infringement case rests on mapping a Twitter feed to this limitation.
• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A Twitter feed is "published" in the sense that it is made publicly accessible, and it is a "compilation" in that it is a collection of links. The complaint cites a prior construction defining a similar phrase as "a publicly accessible collection of information" (Compl. ¶13.a).
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's detailed description focuses on a specific embodiment: a printed publication or book containing reviews of websites selected based on criteria like content, usefulness, and professional design (’835 Patent, col. 5:51-60; col. 6:26-55). This may support an argument that the term requires a more static, curated, and formally organized collection than a real-time feed.

VI. Other Allegations

• Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges direct infringement under a theory of vicarious liability for the actions of third parties (the user and Bitly), as articulated in Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc. (Compl. ¶14). The complaint alleges liability for the user's actions by stating Defendant conditions benefits (e.g., promotional offerings) on the user's click, and liability for Bitly's actions based on the existence of an agreement (Bitly's terms of service) between Defendant and Bitly (Compl. ¶¶ 13.d, 13.e).

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

1. A central issue will be one of claim construction and technical mapping: Does the alphanumeric string generated by the Bitly service (e.g., "267ApqR") satisfy the prior judicial construction of "multi-digit jump code" as a code "consisting of more than one number"? More broadly, can the automated, single-click process of a modern link shortener be persuasively mapped to the discrete, multi-step method described in the 1996-era patent claim?
2. The case will likely depend on a question of vicarious liability: Can the plaintiff provide sufficient evidence to establish that the defendant exercised the degree of direction or control over the actions of both end-users and the third-party Bitly service required to hold it directly liable for their combined performance of the claimed method steps under the Akamai framework?
3. A final key question will be one of definitional scope: Can the term "publishing a compilation", which in the patent's embodiment refers to a curated book of reviewed websites, be construed to cover a dynamic, real-time social media feed?