DCT

2:16-cv-00728

Uniloc USA Inc v. Facebook Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:16-cv-00728, E.D. Tex., 07/05/2016
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Eastern District of Texas because Facebook is deemed to reside in the district, has committed alleged acts of infringement there, and has purposely transacted business in the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s Facebook Messenger application and associated server infrastructure infringe five U.S. patents related to instant voice messaging over Voice over IP (VoIP) networks.
  • Technical Context: The patents address systems and methods for sending recorded voice messages with the speed and convenience of text-based instant messaging, a key feature in modern digital communication platforms.
  • Key Procedural History: The patents-in-suit are part of a family derived from a 2003 application. After the filing of this complaint, the asserted patents were subject to inter partes review (IPR) and/or ex parte reexamination proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Public records from those proceedings, attached to the patent documents provided, indicate that many of the specific claims asserted in this complaint have been cancelled. This raises a threshold question regarding the viability of the infringement counts as originally pleaded.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2003-12-18 Priority Date for all Patents-in-Suit
2009-05-19 U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890 Issues
2012-06-12 U.S. Patent No. 8,199,747 Issues
2012-08-14 U.S. Patent No. 8,243,723 Issues
2014-05-13 U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622 Issues
2015-03-31 U.S. Patent No. 8,995,433 Issues
2016-07-05 Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622 - “System and Method for Instant VoIP Messaging”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,724,622, titled “System and Method for Instant VoIP Messaging,” issued on May 13, 2014.

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent’s shared specification describes conventional voice messaging as cumbersome, requiring users to dial, wait for a connection, and navigate menus, while noting that contemporaneous text-based instant messaging lacked the nuance of voice communication (’890 Patent, col. 2:14-21). The background identifies a need for a system that provides "instant VoIP messaging over an IP network" with support for legacy telephone systems (’890 Patent, col. 2:36-42).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention describes a client-server architecture for instant voice messaging. A user on a client device selects one or more recipients, generates a voice message, and transmits it over a packet-switched network to a server (’890 Patent, Abstract). The server then delivers the message to available recipients for immediate playback or temporarily stores it for recipients who are offline, analogous to the functionality of an instant text-messaging system (’890 Patent, col. 8:23-29). The system is depicted in Figure 2, which illustrates client devices (206, 208) communicating with a local server (202) over an IP network (204) (’890 Patent, FIG. 2).
  • Technical Importance: This technology aimed to merge the immediacy and presence-awareness features of text-based instant messaging with the expressiveness of voice communication, streamlining asynchronous conversations over IP networks (’890 Patent, col. 2:22-35).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least claims 3, 4, 6-8, 10-19, 21-23, and 38-39 (Compl. ¶23). The independent claims from which these asserted claims depend are claims 1 and 30.
  • Independent Claim 1 requires a system for instant voice messaging with four main components:
    • a network interface connected to a packet-switched network
    • a messaging system for communicating with client systems
    • a communication platform system that maintains connection information for each client system
    • a user database with records for users, including a user name, a password, and a contact list
  • Independent Claim 30 requires an instant voice messaging application with two main components:
    • a client platform system for generating an instant voice message
    • a messaging system for transmitting the instant voice message over a packet-switched network
  • The complaint states Uniloc reserves the right to pursue additional infringing software or devices (Compl. ¶29).

U.S. Patent No. 8,995,433 - “System and Method for Instant VoIP Messaging”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,995,433, titled “System and Method for Instant VoIP Messaging,” issued on March 31, 2015.

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: As a continuation of the same application family, this patent addresses the same technical problems as the ’622 Patent, namely the inefficiency of traditional voicemail and the need for a more immediate, voice-based messaging solution over IP networks (’890 Patent, col. 2:14-21).
  • The Patented Solution: The ’433 Patent claims a similar client-server system but focuses on the specific management of the voice messages themselves. The claims require a "message database" where messages are stored with a "unique identifier," and a "file manager" that services user requests to record, delete, or retrieve messages from that database (’433 Patent, col. 24:1-25). This highlights the data management and storage architecture of the system, as depicted in the client-side architecture of Figure 3, which shows a file manager (308) interacting with a message database (310) (’890 Patent, FIG. 3).
  • Technical Importance: By specifying a structured approach with unique identifiers and a file manager, the invention provides for a more robust and scalable method of managing stored voice messages in an asynchronous communication system (’890 Patent, col. 12:26-34).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least claims 1-5, 7-12, 14-17, and 25-27 (Compl. ¶34). The independent claims in this set are 1, 7, 14, and 25.
  • Independent Claim 1 requires a system for instant voice messaging with four main components:
    • a client device for selecting recipients and generating a message
    • a server for receiving the message from the client and delivering it to recipients
    • a message database that stores instant voice messages with a unique identifier for each
    • a file manager configured to service requests from a user to record, delete, or retrieve messages

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,535,890, titled "SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INSTANT VOIP MESSAGING," issued May 19, 2009 (Compl. ¶43).
  • Technology Synopsis: As the parent patent in the family, the '890 Patent establishes the foundational client-server architecture for instant voice messaging. The system enables a client to select recipients, generate a voice message, and transmit it via a server over a packet-switched network for immediate delivery or temporary storage if a recipient is unavailable (’890 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: 1-6, 9, 14-15, 17-20, 23, 28-29, 31-34, 37, 40-43, 46, 51-54, 57, 62-65 and 68-69 (Compl. ¶45).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses Messenger's instant voice messaging functionality, specifically alleging that "instant messages are temporarily stored if an intended message recipient is unavailable and thereafter delivered once the intend recipient becomes available" (Compl. ¶45).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,199,747

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,199,747, titled "SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INSTANT VOIP MESSAGING," issued June 12, 2012 (Compl. ¶54).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a method for instant voice messaging focusing on the creation and handling of the message file itself. The claimed method involves generating an audio file for the voice message, attaching one or more other files to it, transmitting the files to recipients, and temporarily storing the message if a recipient is unavailable (’747 Patent, col. 24:1-18).
  • Asserted Claims: 1-3 and 12-14 (Compl. ¶56).
  • Accused Features: The complaint targets the functionality of generating an audio file for a voice message, attaching other files, and transmitting them, including the temporary storage and later delivery for unavailable recipients (Compl. ¶56).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,243,723

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,243,723, titled "SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR INSTANT VOIP MESSAGING," issued August 14, 2012 (Compl. ¶65).
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a method focused on managing recipient presence within the instant voice messaging system. The claimed method includes monitoring and displaying the availability of recipients' nodes, recording a message, and temporarily storing it for unavailable recipients until they become available for delivery (’723 Patent, col. 24:1-19).
  • Asserted Claims: 1-3 (Compl. ¶67).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses Messenger's features for monitoring and displaying recipient availability, recording messages, and temporarily storing them for later delivery to unavailable recipients (Compl. ¶67).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The accused instrumentality is Facebook’s "Messenger application for/on mobile and/or desktop devices" and the "associated Facebook servers" that support its functionality (Compl. ¶23).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint alleges that the Messenger application performs instant voice messaging over Wi-Fi and the Internet (Compl. ¶23). It provides functionality for a user to record a voice message and send it to other users (Compl. ¶13, ¶15). The complaint includes a screenshot from Messenger’s help documentation showing different icons used to indicate when a message is sending, sent, delivered, and read, which relates to monitoring recipient status (Compl. ¶21). Another visual depicts Messenger's user interface for searching for and selecting a recipient from a contact list (Compl. ¶16). A screenshot of the voice message interface shows a recording button and a timeline for the recorded audio, illustrating the generation of a voice message (Compl. ¶15). The complaint broadly alleges that Facebook makes, uses, sells, and imports the Messenger application (Compl. ¶23).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

8,724,622 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a network interface connected to a packet-switched network The Facebook Messenger application and associated servers connect to and communicate over the Internet and Wi-Fi, which are packet-switched networks. ¶23 col. 13:38-42
a messaging system for communicating with a plurality of instant voice message client systems The overall client-server architecture of the Messenger system, which facilitates the transmission of voice messages between user devices. ¶23 col. 13:58-62
a communication platform system maintaining connection information for each of the plurality of instant voice message client systems, the connection information indicating whether there is a current connection to each of the plurality of instant voice message client systems The Facebook server infrastructure that monitors and displays user status, such as "Active now" indicators or the delivery and read receipts for messages. A screenshot in the complaint describes icons for "sent," "delivered," and "read" statuses (Compl. ¶21). ¶23 col. 13:42-45
a user database storing user records identifying users of the plurality of instant voice message client systems, wherein each of the user records includes a user name, a password and a list of other users selected by a user The database of Facebook user accounts, which includes user identification information, credentials for authentication, and friend/contact lists. The complaint includes a screenshot showing a user searching for a contact named "Jake" (Compl. ¶16). ¶23 col. 13:46-57

8,995,433 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a client device configured to select one or more recipients for an instant voice message and generate the instant voice message A mobile or desktop device running the Facebook Messenger application, which allows a user to select a contact and record a voice message. A screenshot shows the interface for recording a voice message to send to a contact named "Lisa Benet" (Compl. ¶15). ¶34 col. 11:51-54
a server configured to receive the instant voice message from the client device and deliver the instant voice message to the one or more recipients over a packet-switched network The associated Facebook servers that receive the recorded voice message from the sender's device and transmit it over the internet to the recipient's device. ¶34 col. 11:55-61
a message database configured to store a plurality of instant voice messages, wherein a unique identifier is associated with each of the plurality of instant voice messages Facebook's server-side storage system where voice messages are allegedly stored, each associated with a unique identifier. ¶34 col. 12:26-29
a file manager configured to service one or more requests from a user to perform at least one of recording, deleting or retrieving one or more of the plurality of instant voice messages from the message database, the one or more requests originating at the client device The functionality within Facebook's system that allegedly allows users to record, retrieve (listen to), and delete voice messages. The complaint explicitly alleges "a file manager stores, retrieves and/or deletes the messages in response to the users request" (Compl. ¶34). ¶34 col. 12:29-34
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A primary question may be whether the architecture described in the patents, which depicts a self-contained "IVM system" with a local server, can be read to cover the highly distributed, global, cloud-based infrastructure of Facebook Messenger. Further, it raises the question of whether the patent's focus on systems with legacy PSTN support is relevant to the accused all-IP Messenger system.
    • Technical Questions: The complaint makes conclusory allegations regarding Facebook's server-side architecture, such as the existence of a "file manager" and "communication platform system" that function as claimed. A key point of contention may be whether discovery reveals that Facebook's back-end systems, which handle billions of messages, actually operate using the specific structures and methods required by the claims, or if there is a fundamental mismatch in technical operation.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "a list of... potential recipients" (’622 Patent, claim 1) / "displays a list of one or more... recipients" (’890 Patent, col. 8:46-48)

    • Context and Importance: The concept of presenting a user with a list of available contacts is central to the "instant" nature of the invention, which is modeled on early instant messaging platforms. The construction of this term is critical because the infringement theory depends on mapping it to Facebook Messenger's contact list. Practitioners may focus on whether this term requires the list to be limited to only currently available users, or if a general contact list with availability indicators suffices.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the user selecting "one or more persons to whom the message will be sent," which does not inherently require pre-filtering for availability (’890 Patent, col. 2:31-32).
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent’s background draws a direct analogy to instant text-messaging servers that present "a list of persons who are currently 'online' and ready to receive text messages" (’890 Patent, col. 2:28-30). This language could support an argument that the claimed "list" must be one of actively available recipients, not a comprehensive directory that merely indicates status.

  • The Term: "file manager" (’433 Patent, claim 1)

    • Context and Importance: The infringement allegation for the ’433 Patent hinges on the accused system having a "file manager" that stores, retrieves, and deletes messages (Compl. ¶34). The definition and location of this component will be central to the dispute.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification provides a functional description, stating the file manager "services requests from the user to record, delete or retrieve messages to/from the message database" (’890 Patent, col. 12:29-31). This could be interpreted as any software module that performs these functions, regardless of its specific implementation or location.
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's primary embodiment diagram depicting this element (Figure 3) places the "File Manager" (308) as a component of the client platform (302), not the server (’890 Patent, FIG. 3). An argument could be made that the claimed "file manager" must be a client-side component, whereas the complaint alleges this functionality resides on Facebook's servers (Compl. ¶34).

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges both induced and contributory infringement for all five patents. Inducement is based on Facebook providing the Messenger application to its customers along with instructions via its websites (e.g., www.messenger.com) (Compl. ¶25). Contributory infringement is based on the allegation that the Messenger application is a material part of the claimed inventions and not a staple article of commerce with substantial non-infringing uses (Compl. ¶26-27).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint does not allege pre-suit knowledge. It asserts that Facebook will have been on notice of the patents "since, at the latest, the service of this complaint," establishing a basis for alleging willful infringement for any post-filing conduct (Compl. ¶28).

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

  • A threshold issue will be one of claim viability: Given that post-filing administrative proceedings appear to have resulted in the cancellation of many, if not all, of the claims asserted in the original complaint, the central question for the court will be to determine which, if any, of the asserted claims remain valid and enforceable against the defendant.
  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: For any surviving claims, the case may turn on whether claim terms rooted in the context of early 2000s VoIP and IM systems (e.g., "a list of... potential recipients" implying online status) can be construed to cover the features of a modern, massively-scaled social messaging application that displays comprehensive contact lists with presence indicators.
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of architectural mapping: The complaint’s infringement theories rely on mapping specific, block-diagram components from the patents (e.g., "file manager," "communication platform system") onto the complex, distributed, and non-public architecture of Facebook's servers. The case will likely depend on whether discovery produces evidence of a direct functional and structural correspondence or reveals a fundamental mismatch in technical design and operation.