DCT

2:18-cv-00127

Corydoras Tech LLC v. ZTE Corp

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:18-cv-00127, E.D. Tex., 04/02/2018
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper for ZTE USA, a New Jersey corporation, because it has committed acts of infringement and maintains a regular and established place of business (a call center) in the district. For ZTE Corporation, a foreign corporation, venue is alleged to be proper in any judicial district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s mobile phones infringe seven patents related to a range of common smartphone features, including the use of front-facing cameras for a "mirror" view, GPS location display, customized ringtones, voice dialing, and call blocking.
  • Technical Context: The patents-in-suit claim various combinations of foundational software features that have become standard in the smartphone market.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention any prior litigation, inter partes review proceedings, or licensing history related to the patents-in-suit. The asserted patents are all part of a single family stemming from a 2001 provisional application, indicating a continuing prosecution strategy to cover various aspects of a core "communication device" concept.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2001-10-18 Earliest Priority Date for all Patents-in-Suit
2010-08-17 U.S. Patent No. 7,778,664 Issued
2011-05-17 U.S. Patent No. 7,945,236 Issued
2011-05-17 U.S. Patent No. 7,945,287 Issued
2011-08-09 U.S. Patent No. 7,996,037 Issued
2011-09-20 U.S. Patent No. 8,024,009 Issued
2014-05-20 U.S. Patent No. 8,731,540 Issued
2015-11-24 U.S. Patent No. 9,197,741 Issued
2018-04-02 Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 7,778,664 - Communication Device

  • Issued: August 17, 2010

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section discusses prior art related to using a mobile phone display as a physical mirror but notes that this art does not disclose a device that uses its camera to implement a "digital mirror mode" where the retrieved image is displayed in an inverted manner. (’664 Patent, col. 1:20-36).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a multi-function communication device that can operate in several modes, including a "digital mirror mode." In this mode, the device uses its camera to capture an image and displays it in an "inverted manner," thereby mimicking the function of a conventional mirror for the user. (’664 Patent, col. 1:45-48, Abstract). The device architecture, shown in Figure 1, combines this functionality with other modes such as voice communication, a video phone, and call blocking. (’664 Patent, Fig. 1).
  • Technical Importance: This approach addresses a key user-experience challenge for front-facing cameras by creating an intuitive "self-view" that aligns with user expectations of a mirror, a feature that became integral to video calling and "selfie" photography.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 3, 6-10, and 15-18 (Compl. ¶56).
  • Independent Claim 1 requires:
    • A communication device with a microphone, speaker, display, input device, 1st camera, 2nd camera, and antenna.
    • A "multiple mode implementor" that implements a voice communication mode, a digital mirror mode, a video phone mode, and a call blocking mode.
    • Performing voice communication using the microphone and speaker.
    • Inputting visual data via the camera, converting it to "inverted visual data," and outputting it from the display when in the digital mirror mode.
    • Performing audiovisual communication when in the video phone mode.
    • Not implementing communication for an incoming call if the caller's identification is on a "call blocking list" when in the call blocking mode.

U.S. Patent No. 7,945,236 - Communication Device

  • Issued: May 17, 2011

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: Similar to the ’664 Patent, this patent aims to consolidate multiple functions into a single communication device, addressing the limitations of prior art devices that offered fewer integrated features. (’236 Patent, col. 1:20-36).
  • The Patented Solution: This invention adds a location-aware capability to the multi-function device. The solution is a communication device with a "multiple function implementor" that integrates a digital mirror mode with a "GPS function," wherein the device's "current geographic location...is indicated on said display" when the GPS function is implemented. (’236 Patent, Abstract; col. 33:2-11).
  • Technical Importance: The patent combines two features—a user-facing mirror display and GPS location awareness—that are foundational to a wide array of modern location-based and augmented reality applications on mobile devices.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2-3, 5, 8-11, and 16-18 (Compl. ¶69).
  • Independent Claim 1 requires:
    • A communication device with a microphone, speaker, display, input device, 1st camera, 2nd camera, and antenna.
    • A "multiple function implementor" that implements a voice communication mode, a digital mirror mode, and a GPS function.
    • Performing voice communication.
    • Inputting visual data via the 1st camera, inverting it, and displaying it when in the digital mirror mode.
    • Indicating the device's current geographic location on the display when the GPS function is implemented.

U.S. Patent No. 7,945,287 - Communication Device

  • Issued: May 17, 2011 (Compl. ¶77)
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a communication device that, in addition to a digital mirror mode, includes a function for associating a specific sound with a specific incoming phone call based on user input (’287 Patent, Abstract). This is commonly known as a custom ringtone feature.
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 and various dependent claims (Compl. ¶82).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses the phones' capability to associate a preloaded ringtone with an incoming call based on user input (Compl. ¶81).

U.S. Patent No. 7,996,037 - Communication Device

  • Issued: August 9, 2011 (Compl. ¶90)
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent covers a communication device that implements a voice dialing mode, where a phone call is initiated using audio data retrieved from the microphone (’037 Patent, Abstract). This functionality is integrated with a digital mirror mode.
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 and various dependent claims (Compl. ¶95).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses the phones' capability to initiate a phone call in response to a voice command (Compl. ¶94).

U.S. Patent No. 8,024,009 - Communication Device

  • Issued: September 20, 2011 (Compl. ¶103)
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a communication device with an "answer rejecting mode" that prevents a connection with an unwanted caller (’009 Patent, Abstract). This feature is commonly referred to as call blocking.
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 and various dependent claims (Compl. ¶108).
  • Accused Features: The complaint identifies the accused functionality as the "All calls to voicemail" and "call blocking" features in the accused phones (Compl. ¶107).

U.S. Patent No. 8,731,540 - Communication Device

  • Issued: May 20, 2014 (Compl. ¶116)
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a communication device that integrates an email function with the voice communication and digital mirror modes (’540 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 and various dependent claims (Compl. ¶121).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses the phones' capability to author an email based on user input and wirelessly transmit it to a recipient (Compl. ¶120).

U.S. Patent No. 9,197,741 - Communication Device

  • Issued: November 24, 2015 (Compl. ¶129)
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a communication device with a "digital mirror implementer" and an "incoming communication ID implementer," which provides specific performance corresponding to an incoming communication (’741 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claims 1 and 3, and various dependent claims (Compl. ¶136).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges infringement based on the phones' ability to display a mirror image, transmit video, have a second camera, and associate a specific ringtone with a specific phone number (Compl. ¶132-135).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The complaint identifies the accused products as "Accused Phones," providing examples such as ZTE's Axon series, Grand X Series, Sonata 3, Maven series, Prestige series, and Blade series phones, as well as "all reasonably similar phones of ZTE" (Compl. ¶31).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges the Accused Phones are wireless mobile communication devices that incorporate a range of features corresponding to the asserted patents (Compl. ¶4, ¶10). These features include a front-facing camera capable of displaying a "mirror image" or "selfie photo mirror," a second rear-facing camera, voice and audiovisual communication capabilities, GPS location display, customizable ringtones, voice dialing, call blocking/voicemail diversion, and email functionality (Compl. ¶30, ¶31, ¶40, ¶42, ¶45, ¶47-49). The complaint alleges these devices are supplied and sold in the United States (Compl. ¶4). No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

'664 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a 1st camera, a 2nd camera Accused Phones have a "front camera" and a second camera with a lens on the side opposite the display. ¶39, ¶40 col. 33:38-39
a multiple mode implementor...implements a...digital mirror mode Accused Phones are capable of displaying a mirror image from the front camera. ¶28, ¶55 col. 33:43-45
visual data is input via said camera, said visual data is converted to an inverted visual data...and said inverted visual data is output from said display Accused Phones display a mirror image of an object in view of the front camera, and some have a setting to save it as such. ¶42, ¶55 col. 33:47-51
a multiple mode implementor...implements a...call blocking mode Accused Phones include the capability to block an incoming call, such as through "call blocking" or "All calls to voicemail." ¶45 col. 33:43-46
when...the identification of the caller...is determined to be included in a call blocking list, communication between the caller and said communication device is not implemented... Enabling "call blocking" or "All calls to voicemail" prevents an incoming caller from conducting a voice communication. ¶46 col. 34:16-22
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Technical Questions: The complaint alleges the display of a mirror image (Compl. ¶55). The claim, however, requires a specific process where visual data is "converted to an inverted visual data" (’664 Patent, col. 33:48-49). A central technical question will be what evidence exists that the accused devices perform this specific data conversion step, rather than simply achieving a mirror-like display through other means.
    • Scope Questions: Claim 1 requires that in the "call blocking mode," communication is "not implemented" (’664 Patent, col. 34:21-22). The complaint alleges that the "All calls to voicemail" feature meets this limitation (Compl. ¶45). This raises the question of whether diverting a call to a messaging service constitutes "not implement[ing]" communication, as the caller is still able to communicate a message to the user.

'236 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a multiple function implementor...implements...a digital mirror mode Accused Phones are capable of displaying a mirror image from the front camera. ¶67 col. 33:5-6
said 1st visual data is inverted, and said 1st visual data which is inverted is output from said display... Accused Phones are capable of displaying a mirror image of an object in the view of the front camera. ¶67 col. 33:7-9
a multiple function implementor...implements...a GPS function Accused Phones are capable of displaying their geographic location, based at least in part on GPS data. ¶68 col. 33:5-6
the current geographic location of said communication device is indicated on said display when said GPS function is implemented. Each Accused Phone is capable of displaying its geographic location on its display. ¶47, ¶68 col. 33:9-11
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Technical Questions: A key question is whether the Accused Phones' general capability to show location on a map meets the claim limitation of indicating location "when said GPS function is implemented" (’236 Patent, col. 33:10-11). This may require determining if the patent contemplates a distinct, user-selectable "GPS mode" or if any use of GPS data for location display suffices.
    • Scope Questions: The claim requires a single "multiple function implementor" that performs voice communication, digital mirror, and GPS functions. The dispute may focus on whether the accused devices, which likely use separate software applications for these tasks, contain a single, integrated "implementor" structure that falls within the scope of the claim.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "inverted visual data" (from ’664 Patent, Claim 1)
  • Context and Importance: This term is the technological core of the "digital mirror mode." Its construction will determine whether the claim covers any process that results in a mirror-like image or is limited to a specific data manipulation technique. Practitioners may focus on this term because the complaint describes the functional outcome (a displayed mirror image) rather than the specific technical process of data inversion alleged to achieve it (Compl. ¶55).
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the purpose as "producing a 'mirror image' on LCD 201," suggesting that the end result is what matters (’664 Patent, col. 19:8-10). This could support a functional interpretation where any process that achieves a horizontally flipped display meets the limitation.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification discloses a specific embodiment where the CPU "reads the video data stored in area 267 from right to left as described in FIG. 44e thereby producing a 'mirror image'" (’664 Patent, col. 19:6-10). This disclosure of a specific "right-to-left" data reading method from a memory buffer could be used to argue for a narrower construction limited to this or a structurally similar process.
  • The Term: "GPS function" (from ’236 Patent, Claim 1)
  • Context and Importance: The scope of this term is critical to determining infringement. A narrow interpretation could limit the claim to dedicated navigation applications, while a broad one could cover any feature using GPS data. The complaint's general allegation that the phones are "capable of displaying its geographic location" (Compl. ¶68) makes the precise scope of this "function" a central issue.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself is broad, requiring only that the location is indicated "when said GPS function is implemented" (’236 Patent, col. 33:10-11). This phrasing could be argued to cover any instance where a GPS-enabled feature is active.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description section titled "<>" describes complex functionalities, such as tracking another device or automatically activating a silent mode based on movement, which rely on GPS data (’236 Patent, col. 11:15–col. 13:4). This context might support a narrower interpretation where the "GPS function" refers to these specific, sophisticated systems rather than a simple location display.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: For each of the seven asserted patents, the plaintiff alleges induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). The complaint alleges that ZTE provides "User Manuals and User Guides" that instruct consumers on how to use the Accused Phones in an infringing manner, and that ZTE does so with the specific intent to cause infringement (e.g., Compl. ¶59, ¶61, ¶72, ¶74).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint does not use the word "willful." However, for each count, it alleges that ZTE has induced infringement "knowingly and, at least from the time of receipt of the Complaint, has done so with knowledge that such activity encourages consumers of its Accused Phones to directly infringe" the asserted patents (e.g., Compl. ¶61, ¶74). This allegation of post-suit knowledge of the patents and ongoing infringing conduct may form the basis for a claim for enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284.

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

  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can common smartphone features like displaying a "selfie" view, showing a user's location on a map, or diverting a call to voicemail be construed to meet the specific claim limitations of an "inverted visual data" conversion process, a "GPS function," and a "call blocking mode" where communication is "not implemented"?
  • A second key question will be one of structural equivalence: do the software architectures of the accused ZTE phones, which likely rely on distinct applications for different tasks, embody the "multiple mode implementor" or "multiple function implementor" required by the claims, or is there a fundamental disconnect between the patents' vision of a single, integrated implementor and the reality of the accused products?
  • Finally, a central evidentiary question will be one of technical proof: can the plaintiff substantiate its broad, functional allegations with technical evidence showing that the accused devices actually perform the specific steps and processes recited in the claims, particularly regarding the data "conversion" for the mirror mode and the implementation of distinct "functions" or "modes"?