DCT

1:24-cv-11057

IoT Innovations LLC v. Savant Systems

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:24-cv-11057, D. Mass., 07/12/2024
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the District of Massachusetts because Defendant maintains regular and established places of business in the District, has committed acts of infringement there, and ships infringing products into the District.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s Savant Home Systems, a line of smart home automation and control products, infringes eight patents related to network data classification, multi-device data management, network security, and user interface technologies.
  • Technical Context: The technology at issue falls within the Internet of Things (IoT) and smart home automation sector, a market focused on integrating control of various home systems like lighting, security, and entertainment through a unified platform.
  • Key Procedural History: This filing is a First Amended Complaint. The complaint does not reference any prior litigation, inter partes review proceedings, or licensing history concerning the asserted patents.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2001-04-16 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 7,246,173
2002-03-26 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 7,593,428
2002-11-05 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 8,401,571
2002-11-27 Priority Date for U.S. Patent Nos. 7,474,667; 7,567,580; 8,085,796
2004-04-28 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 8,972,576
2005-05-02 Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. RE44,742
2007-07-17 U.S. Patent No. 7,246,173 Issued
2009-01-06 U.S. Patent No. 7,474,667 Issued
2009-07-28 U.S. Patent No. 7,567,580 Issued
2009-09-22 U.S. Patent No. 7,593,428 Issued
2011-12-27 U.S. Patent No. 8,085,796 Issued
2013-03-19 U.S. Patent No. 8,401,571 Issued
2014-02-04 U.S. Patent No. RE44,742 Issued
2015-03-03 U.S. Patent No. 8,972,576 Issued
2024-07-12 First Amended Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 7,246,173 - "Method And Apparatus For Classifying IP Data"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent describes a problem in packet-switched networks that use "source routing," where the sender specifies the path a data packet must take. In such cases, the destination address field in the packet header may temporarily contain the address of an intermediate router, not the final destination (Compl. ¶40; ’173 Patent, col. 3:66-4:3). This can cause network devices that rely on the final destination address to provide Quality of Service (QoS)—such as reserving bandwidth—to misclassify the packet and fail to provide the requested service (Compl. ¶41; ’173 Patent, col. 4:38-43).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a method for classifying data packets not by the potentially misleading destination address in the main IP header, but by an "entry in said header" that contains the true final destination (Compl. ¶¶1, 45). The specification clarifies this involves looking at the source routing information itself, such as the last address in the address list of an IPv6 routing header, to correctly classify the session and provide the desired QoS (Compl. ¶43; ’173 Patent, col. 4:51-56).
  • Technical Importance: This technology provided a method for ensuring reliable QoS for data streams using source routing protocols, a feature relevant to managing traffic in increasingly complex IP networks (Compl. ¶27).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claims 1, 13, and 17, along with some of their dependent claims (Compl. ¶45).
  • Independent Claim 1 (Method):
    • receiving said data at a first node, the data comprising a header comprising a list of at least one intermediate node to be visited on a way to the destination apparatus; and
    • classifying said data at said first node based on an entry in said header.

U.S. Patent No. 7,474,667 - "Multi-Path Gateway Communications Device"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: At the patent's priority date (November 2002), users often possessed multiple, disparate communication devices (e.g., PCs, wireless phones) with customized hardware and software (Compl. ¶85; ’667 Patent, col. 1:52-54). Manually sharing and synchronizing personal data across these devices was inefficient, as information updated on one device was not automatically updated on others, and data formats were often incompatible (Compl. ¶84; ’667 Patent, col. 1:60-2:8).
  • The Patented Solution: The patent describes a "personal digital gateway" that serves as a central interface for a user's various devices ('667 Patent, col. 2:55-59). The gateway accesses a "database of rule-based profiles" containing specific configuration and presentation parameters for each device (Compl. ¶99). When data is to be sent to a selected device, the gateway retrieves the corresponding profile, integrates the data with it, and communicates the newly formatted data and profile to the device, thereby automating the process of data sharing and configuration (Compl. ¶99; ’667 Patent, Claim 1).
  • Technical Importance: The invention proposed a centralized architecture for managing and synchronizing personalized data across an ecosystem of heterogeneous personal electronic devices, addressing a key challenge of the early mobile computing era (Compl. ¶89).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶¶99, 111).
  • Independent Claim 1 (Method):
    • receiving a selection of a communications device from a plurality of communications devices associated with a common user;
    • receiving the data associated with the selected communications device;
    • accessing a database of rule-based profiles comprising configuration and presentation parameters for the plurality of communications devices;
    • querying the database of rule-based profiles for the selected communications device;
    • retrieving a profile associated with the selected communications device;
    • integrating the data into the profile; and
    • communicating the integrated data and the profile to the selected communications device.

U.S. Patent No. 7,567,580 - "Edge Side Assembler"

Technology Synopsis

This patent relates to the personal digital gateway concept, focusing on a method performed by an "Edge Side Assembler." The method involves identifying data for a user, locating and retrieving remote data stored on a selected communications device, integrating the local and remote data, and formatting it for presentation (Compl. ¶120).

Asserted Claims

At least Claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶120).

Accused Features

The complaint alleges that the Accused Products perform the claimed method of identifying, locating, integrating, and formatting data for communication between devices in the Savant ecosystem (Compl. ¶120).

U.S. Patent No. 7,593,428 - "Apparatus, And Associated Method, For Forming, And Operating Upon, Multiple-Checksum-Protected Data Packet"

Technology Synopsis

This patent discloses a method for improving electronic communications by protecting different portions of a single data packet with separate checksums. This allows for more granular error detection and handling, as an error in one part of a packet does not necessarily require discarding the entire packet (Compl. ¶¶127, 129).

Asserted Claims

At least Claim 14 is asserted (Compl. ¶129).

Accused Features

The complaint alleges the Accused Products perform the claimed method of creating and processing data packets protected by multiple checksums (Compl. ¶129).

U.S. Patent No. 8,085,796 - "Establishing A Home Relationship Between A Wireless Device And A Server In A Wireless Network"

Technology Synopsis

This patent, related to the personal digital gateway technology, describes a method for managing data flow between devices. The method includes selecting a device, storing and retrieving profiles for it, interpreting data via a rule-based engine, processing it with an "edge side assembler," and sending the processed data and profile to the selected device (Compl. ¶138).

Asserted Claims

At least Claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶138).

Accused Features

The Accused Products are alleged to perform the claimed method of selecting devices, retrieving profiles, and processing data for communication within the Savant system (Compl. ¶138).

U.S. Patent No. 8,401,571 - "Mobile Electronic System"

Technology Synopsis

This patent describes an apparatus that processes data indicative of its physical "posture" (i.e., orientation and tilt) to select one of at least two different modes for presenting information to a user. This allows a device's user interface to adapt based on how it is being held or positioned (Compl. ¶¶160, 162).

Asserted Claims

At least Claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶162).

Accused Features

The Accused Products are alleged to comprise an apparatus that selects presentation modes based on the device's current posture (Compl. ¶162).

U.S. Patent No. 8,972,576 - "Establishing A Home Relationship Between A Wireless Device And A Server In A Wireless Network"

Technology Synopsis

This patent discloses a method for creating a persistent, trusted relationship between a mobile device and a network server. The process involves detecting an unrecognized device, notifying a network administrator, and receiving authorization from both the administrator and the device user to establish the relationship, after which no additional configuration is required for future connections (Compl. ¶¶184, 186).

Asserted Claims

At least Claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶186).

Accused Features

The Accused Products are alleged to perform the claimed multi-step authorization method for establishing a persistent relationship between a mobile device and a network server (Compl. ¶186).

U.S. Patent No. RE44,742 - "Dynamic Message Templates And Messaging Macros"

Technology Synopsis

This patent describes a method for template-based messaging where a message template with one or more "dynamic fields" is automatically populated with message context data. This streamlines message creation by pre-filling information relevant to the user's current activity or environment (Compl. ¶¶209, 211).

Asserted Claims

At least Claim 22 is asserted (Compl. ¶211).

Accused Features

The Accused Products are alleged to perform the claimed method of determining a message from a template and automatically populating a dynamic field with context data (Compl. ¶211).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The accused instrumentalities are marketed as Savant Home Systems and include the Savant Home Manager, Smart Host, Smart Locks, Smart Lighting, Smart Fixtures, Smart Keypads, Smart Home Apps (Savant App and Savant Pro App), Smart Remotes, and Savant Systems Server(s) (Compl. ¶18).

Functionality and Market Context

The Savant system is a home security and control platform that integrates various smart home functions, including "climate, lighting, entertainment, security and energy," into a single interface for the homeowner (Compl. Fig. 2). The system architecture relies on a central "Savant Host," which acts as a "communication hub" that enables the Savant App to communicate with and control both Savant-branded and supported third-party devices within the user's home (Compl. Fig. 3). The complaint alleges these products are advertised, sold, and distributed through Defendant's website and mobile application stores (Compl. ¶¶17-18).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint alleges infringement of each asserted patent and states that detailed evidence of use is provided in Exhibits A through H (Compl. ¶¶55, 111, 120, 129, 138, 162, 186, 211). As these exhibits were not attached to the complaint provided for analysis, a detailed claim-chart summary cannot be constructed. The narrative infringement theories are summarized below.

’173 Patent Infringement Allegations

The complaint alleges that the Accused Products perform the method of Claim 1 by receiving and classifying IP data in a packet-switched network, where the classification is based on an entry in a header that lists intermediate nodes (Compl. ¶55). The underlying theory appears to be that the networking functions inherent in the Accused Products' operation necessarily practice the claimed classification method to manage data traffic within the smart home system.

’667 Patent Infringement Allegations

The complaint alleges that the Accused Products perform the method of Claim 1 by allowing a user to select a communications device (e.g., a smart remote or a mobile phone running the app), accessing a database of rule-based profiles for that device, retrieving the specific profile, integrating data into it, and communicating the result to the device (Compl. ¶111). The narrative theory is that the Savant Host and its associated software function as the claimed "personal digital gateway" that manages data for the various connected devices based on their specific capabilities and configurations.

Identified Points of Contention

  • Evidentiary Questions: For all asserted patents, a central issue will be whether Plaintiff can produce technical evidence from discovery that maps the specific, internal operations of the Accused Products to the claimed steps. For the ’173 Patent, this raises the question of what proof exists that Savant’s products classify network packets based specifically on source routing information as opposed to other common classification criteria.
  • Scope Questions: For the ’667 Patent, a key dispute may concern whether the architecture of the Savant system falls within the scope of the claims. For example, does the Savant Host's method for managing device settings and data constitute "accessing a database of rule-based profiles" and "integrating the data into the profile" as those terms are understood in the context of the patent, or does it employ a fundamentally different technical approach?

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

For the ’173 Patent

  • The Term: "classifying said data ... based on an entry in said header" (Claim 1)
  • Context and Importance: This phrase is the core of the claimed method. The infringement analysis will likely depend on whether Defendant's products perform classification using the specific "entry" contemplated by the patent. Practitioners may focus on this term because its scope determines whether any classification based on header information infringes, or only classification based on the specific type of source routing entry described in the specification.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself uses the general term "an entry," which could be argued to encompass any data point within the header that contains the list of intermediate nodes (Compl. ¶45; ’173 Patent, col. 5:21-23).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly explains that the purpose of the invention is to solve a problem caused by source routing, and the solution is to base classification on the "final destination address" found within the source routing data ('173 Patent, col. 4:51-56). This may support an argument that "an entry" must be the final destination address.

For the ’667 Patent

  • The Term: "database of rule-based profiles" (Claim 1)
  • Context and Importance: This term defines the central data structure of the claimed system. The dispute may turn on whether the data and configuration files used by the Savant Host to manage connected devices meet the definition of a "database of rule-based profiles."
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim requires the profiles to comprise "configuration and presentation parameters," a broad description that could cover a wide range of data storage methods used to manage device settings (’667 Patent, Claim 1).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification describes the profiles as being associated with specific functional agents like "MyCommController," "MyCredentials," and "MyProfile" (’667 Patent, col. 8:45-53). This could support a narrower construction requiring a structured database organized around such specific, rule-driven agents, rather than just a collection of configuration files.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: Plaintiff alleges both induced and contributory infringement for all eight patents. Inducement is based on allegations that Defendant provides user guides, instructions, and technical support that instruct customers and installers on how to use the Accused Products in an infringing manner (e.g., Compl. ¶¶59-62). Contributory infringement is based on allegations that the Accused Products have special features specifically designed for infringing use with no substantial non-infringing purpose (e.g., Compl. ¶¶66-68).
  • Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged for U.S. Patent Nos. 7,246,173; 8,085,796; 8,401,571; 8,972,576; and RE44,742 (Compl. ¶230(d)). For the ’173 patent, the complaint alleges pre-suit willfulness based on a theory of "willful blindness" arising from a purported policy of not reviewing the patents of others (Compl. ¶70). For the remaining patents, knowledge is alleged to have occurred "at least as of the date when it was notified of the filing of this action," suggesting a basis for post-suit willful infringement (e.g., Compl. ¶141, ¶165).

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

  • A core issue will be one of evidentiary proof: given that the complaint's technical infringement allegations rely entirely on unprovided exhibits, the case will likely turn on whether information obtained through discovery reveals that the internal software and hardware architecture of the Savant Home Systems performs the specific, multi-step methods recited in the asserted claims.
  • A central legal question will be one of definitional scope: can claim terms rooted in the technological context of the early-to-mid 2000s—such as "database of rule-based profiles" (’667 Patent) and the method for establishing a "home relationship" (’576 Patent)—be construed to read on the technical architecture and device-pairing protocols of a modern, integrated IoT platform?
  • A further question will be one of technological equivalence: for patents covering specific network protocols or data handling methods (e.g., the QoS classification of the ’173 patent or the multi-checksum packets of the ’428 patent), the dispute will focus on whether the Accused Products achieve similar results using the same claimed technology or through alternative, non-infringing technical means.