DCT

8:18-cv-00035

Groupchatter LLC v. Agile Sports Tech Inc

Log In
Key Events
Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 8:18-cv-00035, D. Neb., 01/31/2018
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant is headquartered and does business in the District of Nebraska, and has committed the alleged acts of infringement within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s Hudl communication platform infringes five patents related to systems and methods for providing deterministic, acknowledged group messaging over wireless networks.
  • Technical Context: The technology addresses the management of group communications by enabling a central system to broadcast messages to a group and track acknowledgements and responses from individual members.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint does not allege any prior litigation, Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, or licensing history related to the asserted patents. The five patents-in-suit are all part of a single patent family.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2004-12-16 Earliest Priority Date for all Asserted Patents
2013-11-19 U.S. Patent No. 8,588,207 Issues
2015-04-21 U.S. Patent No. 9,014,659 Issues
2016-03-22 U.S. Patent No. 9,294,888 Issues
2017-04-04 U.S. Patent No. 9,615,239 Issues
2017-07-04 U.S. Patent No. 9,699,637 Issues
2018-01-31 Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 8,588,207 - "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR EFFICIENT AND DETERMINISTIC GROUP ALERTING," Issued November 19, 2013

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section describes communication failures during the September 11, 2001 attacks, where public safety networks became oversaturated and congested, and message originators like incident commanders lacked feedback on whether alerts were received by group members (’207 Patent, col. 1:25-41). Prior systems did not provide a network interface sufficient to support "acknowledged group messaging," creating delays and uncertainty in coordinating large groups (Compl. ¶22; ’207 Patent, col. 2:16-25).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention describes a client/server architecture for managing two-way group messaging over a wireless network (Compl. ¶13). A central memory device, or database, stores information on recipients, the groups they belong to, and their membership status (’207 Patent, FIG. 2; col. 3:5-24). A client can request a group message be sent; the system broadcasts it and then monitors for and stores acknowledgement data from individual mobile devices, creating a list of each member’s response status that can be provided to the originator (Compl. ¶30; ’207 Patent, col. 6:25-64).
  • Technical Importance: This approach provided a mechanism for "deterministic" communication, enabling a message sender to confirm not just delivery to a group, but to know precisely which individual members of that group received and responded to the message (Compl. ¶¶8, 28).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • Independent Claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶66).
  • Claim 1 is a method claim with the following essential elements:
    • Storing data in a memory device, including recipient identifiers, group identifiers, and group membership data.
    • Providing each recipient's mobile device with a subset of that data, including its own recipient identifier and the identifier of the group(s) it belongs to.
    • Wirelessly transmitting a group message to the mobile devices of recipients in a selected group.
    • Monitoring for responses to the group message from the group members.
    • Storing acknowledgement data in the memory device for each group member, with the data comprising a listing of each member and an indication of their response.
  • The complaint also asserts dependent claims 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, and 12 (Compl. ¶66).

U.S. Patent No. 9,014,659 - "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR EFFICIENT AND DETERMINISTIC GROUP ALERTING," Issued April 21, 2015

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the same problems as the ’207 Patent: the need for reliable, acknowledged group messaging systems, particularly for coordinating first responders where knowing the status of each group member is critical (’659 Patent, col. 1:15-2:64).
  • The Patented Solution: This patent also discloses a system for managing and tracking group messages. A key distinction in the asserted independent claim is the addition of a step where the system, after receiving and storing acknowledgement data from an initial message, then "determin[es] a type of message to send to at least one recipient based on the stored acknowledgement data" and transmits that new message (’659 Patent, col. 23:7-12). This suggests a more dynamic system that can tailor follow-up communications based on the responses—or lack thereof—to a prior message.
  • Technical Importance: This solution allows for more intelligent and efficient use of the network by enabling automated or targeted follow-up, such as sending reminders only to non-responsive members or sending confirmation messages only to those who have responded.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • Independent Claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶86).
  • Claim 1 is a method claim with the following essential elements:
    • Storing recipient, group, and membership data in a memory device.
    • Wirelessly transmitting an initial group message.
    • Monitoring for responses.
    • Storing acknowledgement data based on the responses.
    • Determining a type of message to send to at least one recipient based on the stored acknowledgement data.
    • Wirelessly transmitting that determined message to the at least one recipient.
  • The complaint also asserts dependent claims 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 17 (Compl. ¶86).

U.S. Patent No. 9,294,888 - "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR EFFICIENT AND DETERMINISTIC GROUP ALERTING," Issued March 22, 2016

Technology Synopsis

The ’888 Patent describes a system for deterministic group messaging where mobile devices are provided with a subset of group data. The claims focus on the system's ability to store detailed acknowledgement data indicating that a message was received, read, or that a reply was sent by the recipient (’888 Patent, col. 24:1-32).

Asserted Claims

Independent Claim 1 and dependent claims 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 (Compl. ¶120).

Accused Features

The complaint accuses Hudl's server infrastructure and mobile apps, which allegedly store recipient and group data and provide message status information, such as read receipts, to users (Compl. ¶¶124, 130, 136).

U.S. Patent No. 9,615,239 - "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR EFFICIENT AND DETERMINISTIC GROUP ALERTING," Issued April 4, 2017

Technology Synopsis

The ’239 Patent claims a deterministic group messaging system comprising a memory device to store group and recipient data and a control module (e.g., a server) programmed to transmit group messages, monitor for responses, and store acknowledgement data comprising a list of group members and their response status (’239 Patent, col. 24:1-49).

Asserted Claims

Independent Claim 1 and dependent claims 2 and 5 (Compl. ¶154).

Accused Features

The complaint accuses the Hudl system, including its servers ("control module") and user devices, of storing recipient identifiers with group addresses and providing acknowledgement responses (Compl. ¶¶159, 164). A screenshot shows how Hudl's interface displays "Group identifiers" and "Recipient identifiers corresponding to 'Athletes' group" (Compl. p. 26).

U.S. Patent No. 9,699,637 - "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR EFFICIENT AND DETERMINISTIC GROUP ALERTING," Issued July 4, 2017

Technology Synopsis

The ’637 Patent claims a method focused on the client-server interaction. The method involves a server receiving a communication request from a network client, transmitting group information (such as a count of members) back to the client, broadcasting the message to the group, and providing acknowledgement responses to the client (’637 Patent, col. 22:50-23:25).

Asserted Claims

Independent Claim 1 and dependent claims 2, 3, 5, 7, and 8 (Compl. ¶183).

Accused Features

The complaint accuses Hudl's functionality where a user's app (the "network client") initiates a message, and Hudl's servers provide feedback to that app, such as message alert status indicators and "Seen by" counts (Compl. ¶¶191, 193).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The "Hudl ecosystem," which comprises the Hudl server infrastructure and the Hudl software applications ("apps") that users install on mobile phones, tablets, and computers (Compl. ¶¶38, 59).

Functionality and Market Context

The Hudl platform enables users, primarily in the context of sports teams, to communicate in defined groups (e.g., "teammates," "coaches") (Compl. ¶¶51-52). Users can exchange messages, photos, and videos within these groups (Compl. ¶53). The complaint alleges that a key functionality is providing notifications and status updates, including a "Seen by" indicator that counts how many recipients have read a message and, for certain subscription levels, identifies who viewed it (Compl. ¶¶56, 58). A screenshot from Hudl's website explains this "Seen by" feature (Compl. p. 12). The platform operates over standard wireless networks like cellular and Wi-Fi to provide cross-platform communication (Compl. ¶48).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

8,588,207 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
storing data relating to recipients, groups and group members, in a memory device, the data comprising a recipient identifier for each of a plurality of recipients, one or more group identifiers corresponding to each of respective groups of recipients... and group membership data... Hudl servers store data relating to recipients, user-created groups, and group membership information, including recipient and group identifiers. ¶¶71, 90 col. 3:5-24
providing the mobile device corresponding to each of the plurality of recipients with at least a subset of the data stored in the memory device... When membership in a Hudl group changes, membership data on the Hudl server is updated along with affected users' mobile devices. ¶77 col. 2:56-64
wirelessly transmitting a group message to the mobile device corresponding to each recipient in a selected group of recipients... The Hudl system broadcasts group messages to members via wireless networks such as cellular or Wi-Fi. ¶74 col. 6:25-29
monitoring for responses to the group message from the group members Hudl tracks message status such as "Seen" and receives responses to group messages from users' mobile devices. ¶¶76, 102 col. 6:33-35
storing acknowledgement data in the memory device for each of the group members, the acknowledgement data comprising a listing of each of the group members and an indication of response for each of the group members... Hudl stores acknowledgement data for each group member, and the "Seen" Status displays which users have seen a message. ¶¶96-97 col. 6:36-42

9,014,659 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
storing data... in a memory device... a recipient identifier... a group identifier... and group membership data... Hudl servers store recipient identifiers for each group member, a group identifier for recipient groups, and information about group membership. ¶¶90, 105 col. 23:14-23
wirelessly transmitting a group message to the mobile device... Hudl transmits group messages wirelessly to mobile devices corresponding to each recipient in the selected group. ¶94 col. 23:24-29
monitoring for responses to the group message from the group members The Hudl system receives acknowledgement responses from group members via the wireless network used by a user's device. ¶100 col. 23:30-31
storing acknowledgement data in the memory device for each of the group members... Hudl stores acknowledgement data for each group member in memory, such as a "Seen" status. ¶96 col. 23:32-40
determining a type of message to send to at least one recipient based on the stored acknowledgement data Hudl sends messages to the system's network clients based on stored acknowledgement data. ¶98 col. 23:41-43
wirelessly transmitting the message to the at least one recipient The Hudl system broadcasts group messages, which would include the message determined in the prior step, to users via their wireless networks. ¶99 col. 23:44-46

Identified Points of Contention:

  • Scope Questions: A potential issue is whether a modern social media platform like Hudl, which uses features like "Seen by" indicators, falls within the scope of patents whose background and embodiments are heavily focused on coordinating emergency first responders using pager-like technology. The defense may argue that the context limits the scope of the claims.
  • Technical Questions: For the ’659 Patent, the complaint’s allegation for the "determining a type of message..." element is that Hudl "sends messages to the... network clients based on stored acknowledgement data" (Compl. ¶98). This raises the question of what evidence supports that Hudl's system actively determines a new message type based on prior acknowledgements, as opposed to passively relaying status updates. The complaint does not specify, for example, that Hudl sends automated reminder messages only to users who have not "seen" a prior message.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "acknowledgement data... comprising a listing of each of the group members and an indication of response for each" (from Claim 1 of the ’207 Patent)

    • Context and Importance: This term is central to the infringement analysis. The definition will determine whether a feature like Hudl's "Seen by" count or list of viewers meets this claim limitation. Practitioners may focus on whether this requires a comprehensive, static report for the entire group or if it can be met by a dynamic, partial list of responders.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification's objective is to provide feedback on "who has been alerted and how they have replied" (’207 Patent, col. 2:40-41). A list of users who have "seen" a message directly addresses this objective, suggesting "acknowledgement data" should be interpreted functionally to include such modern status indicators.
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim language requires a "listing of each of the group members," which could be interpreted to mean a complete roster of all members, including those who have not responded. A simple list of members who have viewed a message may not satisfy the "each" requirement.

  • The Term: "determining a type of message to send... based on the stored acknowledgement data" (from Claim 1 of the ’659 Patent)

    • Context and Importance: This term is the key distinguishing feature of the ’659 Patent's independent claim. The case may turn on whether Hudl's accused functionality performs an active "determination" or a more passive relay of information.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: Sending a status update (e.g., "Message Seen by User X") back to the originating client could be argued as "determining" and sending a specific "type of message" (a status message) based on the "acknowledgement data" (the read receipt from User X).
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim structure suggests a two-step messaging process: an initial broadcast followed by a second, different message whose content or target is determined by the responses to the first. This could imply a more complex logical operation than simply relaying a status notification, such as generating a reminder message or a summary report.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement on the basis that Defendant instructs and encourages users to utilize the group messaging features of the Hudl platform (Compl. ¶¶109, 144, 173, 209). It also alleges that the Hudl applications are "especially made or especially adapted for use in infringing" the patents, supporting a claim for contributory infringement (Compl. ¶¶78, 111, 146, 175, 211).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Hudl is "on notice" of the asserted patents and has "detailed knowledge about its specific conduct that GroupChatter contends infringes," which may form the basis for a willfulness claim (Compl. ¶¶110-112). The prayer for relief seeks enhanced damages (Compl. ¶219.d).

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

  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the claim term "acknowledgement data comprising a listing of each of the group members," which is rooted in the context of emergency response systems, be construed to cover the "Seen by" status indicators common in modern social messaging platforms?
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of functional operation: does the complaint provide sufficient factual support that the Hudl platform performs the active step of "determining a type of message to send... based on the stored acknowledgement data," as required by Claim 1 of the ’659 patent, or is there a technical mismatch between the accused product’s function and the claim's requirement?
  • A third central question will concern damages: given that the plaintiff is a non-practicing entity, the case will likely involve a battle of experts over the proper calculation of a reasonable royalty for the patented technology within the context of the accused multi-featured commercial platform.