DCT
1:19-cv-11276
Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Akamai Tech Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Uniloc 2017 LLC (Delaware)
- Defendant: Akamai Technologies, Inc. (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Prince Lobel Tye LLP
- Case Identification: 1:19-cv-11276, D. Mass., 06/07/2019
- Venue Allegations: Venue is asserted based on Defendant having a principal place of business in Cambridge, Massachusetts, which is within the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s Luna Control Center content delivery network (CDN) infringes patents related to the centralized management, configuration, and distribution of application programs on a network.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns methods for managing software in a client-server environment, allowing for user-specific configurations and access rights that can "roam" with a user across different devices, while also streamlining software deployment from a central administrator.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Defendant has been on notice of both asserted patents since at least May 16, 2017, due to service of a complaint in a prior lawsuit filed in the Eastern District of Texas, a fact that may be relevant to the allegations of willful infringement.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1998-12-14 | Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 6,324,578 |
| 1998-12-14 | Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 7,069,293 |
| 2001-11-27 | U.S. Patent No. 6324578 Issue Date |
| 2006-06-27 | U.S. Patent No. 7069293 Issue Date |
| 2017-05-16 | Alleged notice of patents via prior lawsuit |
| 2019-06-07 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 6,324,578 - “METHODS, SYSTEMS AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTS FOR MANAGEMENT OF CONFIGURABLE APPLICATION PROGRAMS ON A NETWORK” (Issued Nov. 27, 2001)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background describes the difficulty of managing application programs and user preferences in a distributed network environment where users may access the network from various client stations with different hardware (Compl., Ex. A, '578 Patent, col. 1:46-58). Maintaining a consistent and personalized user experience across these different access points presented a significant administrative challenge (Compl., Ex. A, '578 Patent, col. 1:24-34).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a client-server system that separates configurable preferences into two types: those set by an administrator (e.g., access rights) and those set by an end-user (e.g., display settings) (’578 Patent, Abstract). A server hosts the main application and distributes a lightweight "application launcher program" to clients. When a user initiates the application via the launcher, the server identifies the user, retrieves both the stored administrator and user preferences, and executes the application using that combined set of preferences, thereby providing a personalized experience regardless of the client station being used (’578 Patent, col. 4:6-20).
- Technical Importance: This approach sought to provide "roaming" user profiles and centralized control in complex enterprise networks before such features were widely standardized.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶17).
- Claim 1 includes the following essential elements:
- installing an application program with configurable preferences on a server;
- distributing an associated "application launcher program" to a client;
- obtaining a "user set" of preferences from an authorized user executing the launcher;
- obtaining an "administrator set" of preferences from an administrator; and
- executing the application program using both sets of preferences in response to a user request.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.
U.S. Patent No. 7,069,293 - “METHODS, SYSTEMS AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTS FOR DISTRIBUTION OF APPLICATION PROGRAMS TO A TARGET STATION ON A NETWORK” (Issued Jun. 27, 2006)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: As a divisional of the '578 Patent application, this patent addresses the same general problem space but focuses specifically on the challenges of distributing and deploying software from a central management server to multiple target servers or stations across a network ('293 Patent, col. 2:5-14).
- The Patented Solution: The invention describes a method for automated software distribution managed from a central server. The method involves specifying source and target directories, preparing a "file packet" that contains both the application program and a "segment configured to initiate registration operations," and then distributing this packet to the target server (’293 Patent, Abstract). This allows the target server to automatically install and register the new application, making it available for use by clients without manual intervention on the target machine (’293 Patent, col. 5:36-47).
- Technical Importance: The invention provided a framework for streamlining and automating software deployment in large-scale, centrally managed networks like corporate intranets or CDNs.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶27).
- Claim 1 includes the following essential elements:
- providing an application program to a network management server for distribution;
- specifying source and target directories for the distribution;
- preparing a "file packet" containing the program and a segment to initiate registration at the target;
- distributing the file packet to the target on-demand server to make the program available to a client user.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.
III. The Accused Instrumentality
- Product Identification: The accused instrumentality is Akamai’s Luna Control Center and its associated Content Delivery Network (CDN) software and architecture (Compl. ¶6, ¶17).
- Functionality and Market Context: The complaint describes the Luna Control Center as a portal that allows Akamai customers to manage and control their web content and applications (Compl. ¶9). Users log in through a web browser to access a dashboard which they can customize with a "library of widgets" to display relevant information (Compl. ¶11, ¶13). A screenshot of a customizable dashboard with various widgets is provided as evidence (Compl. ¶13). The complaint also alleges that an administrator can use a "User Admin API" to manage users, groups, and roles, including assigning custom roles and permissions (Compl. ¶15, ¶16). The underlying CDN architecture is depicted as an "Overlay Network" of central "Origin" servers and distributed "Edge Servers" used to deliver services to end users (Compl. ¶26).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'578 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| installing an application program having a plurality of configurable preferences and authorized users on a server coupled to a network | The Luna Control Center CDN software is stored on Akamai servers. | ¶14, ¶17 | col. 7:55-59 |
| distributing an application launcher program associated with the application program to a client | Akamai provides access to the Luna Control Center to clients via a web browser directed to control.akamai.com. | ¶14, ¶17 | col. 8:21-24 |
| obtaining a user set of the plurality of configurable preferences associated with one of the plurality of authorized users executing the application launcher program | Customers using the Luna Control Center can arrange and customize widgets to lay out a personal dashboard. | ¶11, ¶13, ¶17 | col. 8:56-60 |
| obtaining an administrator set of the plurality of configurable preferences from an administrator | An administrator can use the User Admin API to assign custom roles and settings to users. | ¶15, ¶16, ¶17 | col. 8:61-64 |
| executing the application program using the obtained user set and the obtained administrator set of configurable preferences responsive to a request from a user | The Luna Control Center executes using the user and administrator settings to deliver CDN management services. | ¶17 | col. 10:29-38 |
'293 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| providing an application program for distribution to a network server | Akamai provides its Luna Control Center software for distribution across its network. | ¶27 | col. 21:24-28 |
| specifying source and target directories for the program to be distributed | Akamai's "Overlay Network" uses central "Origin" servers (source) and "Edge Servers" (target) to distribute services. A diagram of this network is included in the complaint. | ¶26, ¶27 | col. 21:29-32 |
| preparing a file packet associated with the program including a segment configured to initiate registration operations for the application program at a target on-demand server | The complaint makes a conclusory allegation that the software and architecture allow for preparing such a file packet. | ¶27 | col. 21:33-38 |
| distributing the file packet to the target on-demand server to make the program available for use by a client user | Akamai uses on-demand servers, designated "AkamaiGHost," to host and distribute the Luna Control Center software. | ¶25, ¶27 | col. 21:39-43 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A primary question may be whether the patent terms, drafted in the context of 1990s client-server software, read on modern web-based services. For the '578 Patent, this raises the question of whether a web browser accessing a URL constitutes an "application launcher program" and whether the Luna Control Center itself is the "application program." For the '293 Patent, it raises the question of whether Akamai's internal software deployment mechanism can be characterized as distributing a "file packet" as claimed.
- Technical Questions: The infringement theory for the '293 Patent appears to be less detailed. A technical question will be what evidence demonstrates that Akamai's architecture prepares a "file packet" that includes a specific "segment configured to initiate registration." The complaint alleges this functionality exists but does not provide specific evidence comparable to the user-facing screenshots for the '578 patent allegations (Compl. ¶27).
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
Term ('578 Patent): "application launcher program"
- Context and Importance: The definition of this term is critical to determining whether accessing a web portal via a browser falls within the scope of the claims. The defense may argue a "launcher program" requires a distinct, distributed software application, whereas the Plaintiff may argue it covers the browser-based mechanism that initiates the service.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification explicitly contemplates a JAVA environment and the use of "applets" and a "web browser" to provide a user interface and "launch" an application by requesting a URL, which may support interpreting the term to cover modern web interfaces ('578 Patent, col. 8:5-20).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The overall patent context, including flowcharts, describes a process of distributing and installing program files, which could imply something more substantial than a transient browser session ('578 Patent, col. 4:50-54, FIG. 2).
Term ('293 Patent): "file packet"
- Context and Importance: Infringement of the '293 patent hinges on whether Akamai's software distribution process involves preparing and distributing a "file packet" as claimed. The term's construction will determine if Akamai's methods meet this limitation.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The term is not narrowly defined in the patent, which could support a construction that covers any bundle of software code and metadata transmitted for the purpose of installation, not necessarily a single archived file.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification references the Tivoli Management Environment, which utilized a specific "software distribution feature which may be used to transmit a file package," suggesting the term may be construed in light of such existing and understood distribution technologies of the time (’293 Patent, col. 2:10-14).
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges that Akamai actively induced infringement by "provid[ing] instructions with Luna Control Center" that guide customers to use the system in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶18).
- Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged based on Akamai's purported knowledge of the '578 and '293 patents since at least May 16, 2017, from a prior infringement lawsuit. The complaint alleges that Akamai's continued actions since receiving that notice constitute willful and intentional infringement (Compl. ¶20, ¶28).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
A central issue will be one of definitional scope: can the claim terms of the patents, which originate from the late-1990s client-server paradigm, be construed to encompass the architecture of a modern, web-based content delivery network? Specifically, does a user interacting with a web portal constitute executing an "application launcher program," and does Akamai's internal software deployment method utilize a "file packet" as that term would have been understood by one of skill in the art?
A key evidentiary question will be one of functional proof: for the '293 patent in particular, what evidence will be presented to show that Akamai's system performs the specific step of "preparing a file packet... including a segment configured to initiate registration"? While the complaint provides visual evidence for user-facing features, its allegations regarding the backend distribution architecture are more conclusory and will likely require significant discovery to substantiate.