DCT
5:24-cv-01210
Tomas v. Manifold Cloud Services Ltd
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Alexander Tomas (Georgia)
- Defendant: Manifold Cloud Services LTD d/b/a measureQuick (Ohio)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Thompson Hine LLP
- Case Identification: 5:24-cv-01210, N.D. Ohio, 07/17/2024
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the Northern District of Ohio because the defendant's principal place of business is located within the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s software for HVAC diagnostics, specifically the "A.C. System Vitals Report" feature, infringes a patent related to systems for aggregating and graphically displaying diagnostic data for mechanical system tuning.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns software-based tools that process sensor data from HVAC systems and present it in a simplified, visual format to assist technicians with diagnosis and maintenance.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff provided Defendant with notice of the patent and its alleged infringement on March 16, 2023, and April 6, 2023. It further alleges that Defendant modified its user interface to include the accused infringing features shortly after the Plaintiff’s public disclosure of the invention via a Kickstarter campaign in April 2022.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2021-12-22 | Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 11,549,711 |
| 2022-04-01 | Alleged public disclosure of invention via Kickstarter campaign (approx. date) |
| 2022-06-01 | Alleged launch of accused "A.C. System Vitals Report" (approx. date) |
| 2023-01-10 | U.S. Patent No. 11,549,711 Issued |
| 2023-03-16 | First pre-suit notice of infringement allegedly sent to Defendant |
| 2023-04-06 | Second pre-suit notice of infringement allegedly sent to Defendant |
| 2024-07-17 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,549,711, "System for Aggregation and Prioritization of Diagnostic Data for the Purpose of Mechanical System Tuning," issued January 10, 2023.
U.S. Patent No. 11,549,711 - System for Aggregation and Prioritization of Diagnostic Data for the Purpose of Mechanical System Tuning
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent's background section describes that diagnosing and correcting issues in complex mechanical systems like HVAC units relies heavily on the skill and experience of the technician, a process that can be "incomplete and imperfect" when a technician is rushed or lacks experience (’711 Patent, col. 2:29-39).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a system that automates and simplifies this diagnostic process. It collects performance data from sensors on an HVAC unit, processes it, and displays it to a user through a "visual tuner" ('711 Patent, col. 2:56-65). This tuner, depicted as a graphical dial or slider, uses color-coding (e.g., green for ideal, red for problematic) to intuitively show whether a component's performance is within its expected operational range, replacing the need to interpret traditional, complex gauges ('711 Patent, FIG. 7; col. 3:31-37).
- Technical Importance: The described technical approach aims to allow a technician to "quickly identify whether the system is operating within its preferred range without requiring the technician to recall the ideal operating conditions" ('711 Patent, col. 3:9-16).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent method claim 6 (Compl. ¶15).
- The core elements of independent claim 6 include:
- Separating HVAC equipment performance data into a plurality of component data sets.
- Sorting manufacturer data sets based on the component data sets, where the manufacturer data includes preferred operational data.
- Correlating a specific component data set with a specific manufacturer data set.
- Generating a "visual tuner" based on this correlation, where the tuner includes a range bounded by minimum and maximum values and a color-coded background.
- Displaying the visual tuner to indicate if the component's performance value falls within the preferred range of the manufacturer data.
- The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims ('711 Patent, col. 11:1-65; col. 12:1-65) during litigation (Compl. ¶14).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused instrumentality is Defendant's "A.C. System Vitals Report," also referred to as the "Vitals Report" and "Pro Report," which is a feature within its measureQuick software application (Compl. ¶11, ¶19).
Functionality and Market Context
- The Vitals Report is alleged to be a diagnostic tool for HVAC technicians that displays various performance metrics such as "Superheat," "Subcooling," and "Temperature Split" (Compl. p. 12). The complaint includes a screenshot from the accused Vitals Report, showing graphical sliders with color-coding that compare a measured value against a "Normal" range. (Compl. p. 11, Image 1a). The report organizes these metrics into categories including "Refrigerant Charge," "Heat Transfer," and "Air Distribution & Filtration" (Compl. p. 12).
- The complaint alleges that the Vitals Report is a premium feature, offered on a "$5 per customer site annual subscription basis," and that it serves as a "primary driver for revenue" for the Defendant (Compl. ¶19, p. 8).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
U.S. Patent No. 11,549,711 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 6) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a. separating heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment performance data into a plurality of component data sets... | The Vitals Report allegedly separates HVAC data into component categories such as "Refrigerant Charge," "Heat Transfer," and "Air Distribution & Filtration." | ¶16, p. 12 | col. 9:37-43 |
| b. sorting a plurality of manufacturer data sets to separate the plurality of manufacturer data sets based on the plurality of component data sets...wherein each...includes preferred manufacturer data for the respective component; | The Vitals Report allegedly sorts data by comparing measured values to "preferred manufacturer data," which is presented as the "Normal" range in parentheses for each metric. | ¶16, p. 12-13 | col. 6:48-52 |
| c. correlating a specific component data set...with a specific manufacturer data set... | The Vitals Report allegedly performs this correlation by displaying the measured performance value alongside the "Normal" range for that specific component. | ¶16, p. 13 | col. 7:3-5 |
| d. generating a visual tuner based on the correlation...wherein the generated visual tuner includes: i. a range bounded by a minimum value...and a maximum value... ii. a color-coded background... | The Vitals Report allegedly generates a graphical slider for each metric, with the "Normal" range defining the bounds and a color-coded background (green, yellow, red) to indicate performance status. | ¶16, p. 14 | col. 3:17-21 |
| e. controlling a display device to display the generated visual tuner, wherein the displayed visual tuner indicates whether the value of the performance...lies within the preferred range... | The Vitals Report is displayed on a screen, and the position of an indicator on the colored slider, along with an icon, allegedly shows whether the performance is within the "Normal" range. | ¶16, p. 15 | col. 3:9-12 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central dispute may arise over the meaning of "manufacturer data." The defense could argue that the "Normal" ranges used in the accused product are based on general industry standards rather than data from a specific equipment manufacturer, and thus do not meet the claim limitation as written. The patent specification's mention of using "common practice industry values" ('711 Patent, col. 6:59-62) raises the question of whether this alternative is encompassed by the claim term itself.
- Technical Questions: The complaint's theory relies on the Vitals Report performing the claimed steps in the required order. Discovery will be needed to determine if the accused software's underlying process architecture first "separates" equipment data into component sets and then "sorts" manufacturer data sets based on those component sets, as required by the claim language.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "visual tuner"
Context and Importance: This term appears to be the central inventive concept. Its construction will be critical, as the infringement analysis depends on whether the accused Vitals Report's graphical interface constitutes a "visual tuner."
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification suggests the term is not limited to a single form, stating that other methods of displaying the tuner graphic are anticipated, such as "a bar chart, a full circle, or other visual indications" ('711 Patent, col. 3:41-43).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The primary embodiment described and depicted is a semi-circular, color-coded dial that resembles a gauge ('711 Patent, FIG. 7; col. 3:31-37). A party could argue that the term should be construed more narrowly in light of this specific disclosure.
The Term: "manufacturer data"
Context and Importance: The claim requires correlating measured data with "manufacturer data." The viability of the infringement claim may depend on whether the target values used in the accused Vitals Report meet this definition. Practitioners may focus on this term because it appears to be a clear point of potential non-infringement.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states that as an "alternative to the use of manufacturer data, the system can use other sources to populate the data...such as common practice industry values" ('711 Patent, col. 6:58-62). Plaintiff may argue this supports construing "manufacturer data" to include such industry standards.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim explicitly recites "manufacturer data," not a broader term like "preferred operational data." A party could argue that the specification's discussion of an "alternative" explicitly distinguishes industry values from "manufacturer data," and because the claim uses the narrower term, it should be given its plain and ordinary meaning, limited to data sourced from an equipment manufacturer.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint includes a count for induced infringement, alleging that Defendant knew of the '711 Patent and, by selling and promoting the Vitals Report, intended for its customers (e.g., HVAC technicians) to use the product in a way that directly infringes the patent's method claims (Compl. ¶22, ¶24).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement based on Defendant’s alleged knowledge of the patent since at least March 2023 from pre-suit notice letters (Compl. ¶17). It further alleges that Defendant's continued infringement after receiving notice was "deliberate and malicious" (Compl. ¶17). The prayer for relief seeks enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. §284 (Compl. ¶D).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of claim construction: can the term "manufacturer data", as used in claim 6, be interpreted to cover the "common practice industry values" that the accused product allegedly uses for its "Normal" operational ranges, or is the term limited to data sourced directly from the specific HVAC equipment's original manufacturer?
- A second key issue will be one of factual evidence and timing: the complaint juxtaposes Defendant’s user interface before and after Plaintiff’s public disclosure of the invention. This raises a central factual question regarding whether the accused Vitals Report was independently developed or was created with knowledge of and influence from the patented concepts, a determination that could be significant for the analyses of infringement and willfulness.