DCT
3:13-cv-00628
Applications In Internet Time LLC v. Salesforce Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Applications in Internet Time, LLC (Nevada)
- Defendant: Salesforce.com, Inc. (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Robison, Belaustegui, Sharp & Low; Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP; Banys, P.C.
- Case Identification: 3:13-cv-00628, D. Nev., 11/08/2013
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the District of Nevada because Defendant has transacted business and committed acts of patent infringement within the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s Force.com cloud computing platform infringes patents related to metadata-driven systems for creating and managing business applications.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns software platforms that use metadata to define application logic and user interfaces, enabling rapid development and modification by non-programmers, which is a foundational concept for modern Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) offerings.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention any prior litigation, Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, or licensing history related to the patents-in-suit.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1998-12-18 | Earliest Priority Date ('482 and '111 Patents) |
| 2008-04-08 | U.S. Patent No. 7,356,482 Issues |
| 2013-07-09 | U.S. Patent No. 8,484,111 Issues |
| 2013-11-08 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.
U.S. Patent No. 7,356,482 - “Integrated Change Management Unit”
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section describes the problem of business software requiring constant and costly reprogramming by skilled programmers to adapt to frequent changes in regulations and business processes, creating delays and expense ('482 Patent, col. 8:3-9).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a four-layer architectural model (Business Content, Metadata, Java Data Management, and Change) where application features like data-entry forms and reports are defined by metadata rather than being hard-coded ('482 Patent, Fig. 1). This architecture allows the system to identify a change (e.g., a new regulation), update the metadata definitions, and thereby automatically modify the application’s functionality and user interface without rewriting the underlying software code ('482 Patent, col. 10:37-61).
- Technical Importance: The patented technology is aimed at enabling individuals with business knowledge, rather than just programmers, to develop and modify enterprise applications, thereby accelerating application deployment and reducing maintenance costs (Compl. ¶10).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims" without specifying which ones (Compl. ¶15). Independent claim 1 is representative of the system described.
- Claim 1 of the ’482 patent includes these essential elements:
- A server computer and one or more connected client computers.
- A "first layer" (business content) with information for a particular application.
- A "second layer" (metadata) with information about the user interface and functions common to various applications.
- A "third layer" (data management) that uses the first two layers to dynamically generate the application's user interface for a browser on a client computer.
- A "change management layer" for automatically detecting changes that affect an application.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims but makes broad allegations covering the patent generally (Compl. ¶20).
U.S. Patent No. 8,484,111 - “Integrated Change Management Unit”
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The '111 Patent addresses the same technical problem as its parent '482 Patent: the inefficiency and cost of traditional software development cycles when business or regulatory requirements change ('111 Patent, col. 9:5-14).
- The Patented Solution: The patent describes a server architecture with distinct "portions" that separate unique application data, common user interface metadata, a dynamic UI generation engine, and a change detection mechanism ('111 Patent, cl. 13). This modular structure allows for configuration-based updates, where changes to metadata automatically propagate to the end-user application without conventional programming ('111 Patent, col. 9:50-56).
- Technical Importance: As with the '482 Patent, this approach is intended to empower business users to manage enterprise software, making development more agile and responsive to business needs (Compl. ¶10).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims" without specification (Compl. ¶24). Independent claim 13 is representative of the system described.
- Claim 13 of the '111 patent includes these essential elements:
- A server accessible by a browser on a client device.
- A "first portion" of the server with information about unique aspects of an application.
- A "second portion" of the server with information about common user interface elements.
- A "third portion" of the server configured to dynamically generate the user interface based on the first two portions.
- A "fourth portion" of the server configured to automatically detect changes that affect the information in the first or second portion.
- The complaint’s allegations are broad and do not preclude the assertion of dependent claims (Compl. ¶24).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused instrumentality is Defendant's Force.com platform (Compl. ¶13).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint describes the Force.com platform as a "development environment for enterprise applications" that enables the deployment of cloud computing applications through "configuration-driven development" (Compl. ¶13).
- Its core architecture is described as "metadata-driven," relying on metadata to define both the base functionality of applications and any subsequent customizations (Compl. ¶13). The complaint alleges that the platform detects changes in this metadata to allow customers to "customize, update, and change user applications from the cloud" (Compl. ¶¶9-10).
- The platform is alleged to be the "backbone" for Defendant's primary software-as-a-service offerings, including Sales Cloud, Service Cloud, and Marketing Cloud (Compl. ¶14). The complaint positions Salesforce as "one of the leading providers of multi-tenant platform and application enterprise software" (Compl. ¶12).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
U.S. Patent No. 7,356,482 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A system for providing a dynamically generated application... comprising: a server computer; one or more client computers connected to the server computer over a computer network; | Defendant’s Force.com platform operates as a cloud-based service where customers (clients) access applications hosted on Defendant’s servers. | ¶¶12-14 | col. 12:1-7 |
| a first layer associated with the server computer containing information about the unique aspects of a particular application; | The Force.com platform relies on metadata that describes "application customizations." | ¶13 | col. 12:15-29 |
| a second layer associated with the server computer containing information about the user interface and functions common to a variety of applications... | The Force.com platform is alleged to have a "metadata-driven architecture" and relies on metadata "describing base functionality of applications." | ¶13 | col. 12:30-44 |
| a third layer... that retrieves the data in the first and second layers in order to generate the functionality and user interface elements of the application; | The Force.com platform is a development environment used to "deploy... cloud computing applications" that are accessed and used by customers. | ¶13 | col. 15:5-17 |
| a change management layer for automatically detecting changes that affect an application... | The complaint alleges that "Changes in metadata are detected by the platform" to enable customers to customize and update applications. | ¶13 | col. 16:18-26 |
| each client computer further comprising a browser application... wherein a user interface... is distributed to the browser application and dynamically generated... | The Force.com platform delivers cloud applications that are accessed and rendered via client web browsers. | ¶¶13-14 | col. 15:18-34 |
U.S. Patent No. 8,484,111 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 13) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A system, comprising: a server accessible by a browser executed on a client device... | Defendant’s Force.com platform operates as a server-based system providing cloud applications to users via web browsers. | ¶¶12-13 | col. 15:2-4 |
| the first portion of the server having information about unique aspects of a particular application... | The Force.com platform architecture uses metadata corresponding to "application customizations." | ¶13 | col. 9:56-62 |
| the second portion of the server having information about user interface elements and one or more functions common to various applications... | The platform's "metadata-driven architecture" uses metadata to describe "base functionality of applications." | ¶13 | col. 9:45-50 |
| the third portion of the server being configured to dynamically generate a functionality and a user interface for the particular application... | The Force.com platform is designed for "developing and deploying cloud computing applications" that are rendered for end users. | ¶13 | col. 9:41-45 |
| the fourth portion of the server being configured to automatically detect changes that affect the information in the first portion of the server or the information in the second portion of the server. | The platform is alleged to detect "Changes in metadata" to enable customer updates and customizations. | ¶13 | col. 9:36-41 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central issue may be the interpretation of the "change management layer for automatically detecting changes" ('482 Patent) and the "fourth portion... configured to automatically detect changes" ('111 Patent). The complaint alleges the accused platform "detects" changes in metadata made by users (Compl. ¶¶9-10), whereas the patent specifications describe a system using "intelligent agents" that "cruise the Web" to identify external regulatory changes ('482 Patent, col. 9:34-38). The litigation may explore whether a system that responds to user-initiated configuration changes meets this claim limitation.
- Technical Questions: The complaint relies on high-level, public-facing descriptions of the Force.com platform (Compl. ¶¶12-14). A key factual question will be whether the actual, underlying software architecture of the multi-tenant platform maps onto the distinct "layers" or "portions" recited in the patent claims, or if there are fundamental architectural differences.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "automatically detecting changes"
Context and Importance: This term is central to the "change management" aspect of the invention. Its construction will be critical in determining whether the accused platform, which allegedly detects user-initiated configuration changes, infringes claims that describe a system for detecting external changes (e.g., in regulations).
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The plain language of the claim does not specify the source of the change, only that it is "automatically" detected. This may be argued to cover any programmatic detection of a change in state, regardless of its origin.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly frames the invention in the context of responding to external regulatory and business changes discovered by "intelligent agents" that "cruise the Web" ('482 Patent, col. 9:34-38). This context may support a narrower construction limited to detecting changes that are external to the system itself.
The Term: "metadata layer" ('482 Patent) / "second portion of the server having information about user interface elements" ('111 Patent)
Context and Importance: The entire invention is based on a "metadata-driven" architecture. The definition of this term will determine whether Salesforce's use of metadata falls within the scope of the claims. Practitioners may focus on this term because the Defendant's platform is also described as "metadata-driven," making the precise technical meaning of the claimed "layer" or "portion" a key point of comparison.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the metadata layer as defining "data about every feature of the user interface including, without limitation, tools, worklists, data entry forms, reports, documents, processes, formulas, images, tables, views, columns, and other structures and functions" ('482 Patent, col. 9:42-49). This language suggests a broad, all-encompassing definition.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figures 3-5 and the accompanying text detail specific metadata tables (e.g., SIS VIEW, SIS MODULE, SIS WORKLIST) and their interrelationships ('482 Patent, col. 12:51-67). This detailed embodiment could be cited to support a narrower construction limited to a metadata architecture with these specific structural characteristics.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement of infringement, stating that Salesforce provides "documentation instructing, encouraging, and directing its clients, customers, and third parties on the use of the Force.com platform" (Compl. ¶16). It cites specific examples of such documentation, including a "Development Lifecycle Guide" and various whitepapers and guides available on its developer websites (Compl. ¶16, p. 5).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint does not use the term "willful." It does, however, allege that Salesforce has "actual knowledge of the '482 and '111 patents... through at least service of this complaint" and continues its allegedly infringing activities despite this knowledge (Compl. ¶18). This forms a basis for a claim of post-suit willful infringement. No allegations of pre-suit knowledge are made.
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the claim term "automatically detecting changes," which the patent specification links to "intelligent agents" finding external regulatory updates on the internet, be construed to cover a platform that detects and responds to internal configuration changes made by its users?
- A key technical question will be one of architectural correspondence: does the actual software architecture of the accused Force.com platform map onto the specific four-part "layer" or "portion" structure required by the asserted independent claims, or are there fundamental structural and operational differences between the patented invention and the accused system?
- A central evidentiary question will be one of functional operation: beyond high-level marketing descriptions, what evidence will show that the accused platform performs the claimed function of dynamically generating a user interface by retrieving data from distinct "business content" and "metadata" repositories as those concepts are defined and described in the patents?