DCT
2:19-cv-00161
GREE Inc v. Supercell Oy
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: GREE, Inc. (Japan)
- Defendant: Supercell Oy (Finland)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Gillam & Smith, LLP; Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
- Case Identification: 2:19-cv-00161, E.D. Tex., 05/13/2019
- Venue Allegations: Venue is asserted on the basis that Defendant is a foreign corporation not resident in the United States, and alternatively, that Defendant has established minimum contacts with the state of Texas.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s "Clash of Clans" and "Boom Beach" mobile games infringe two U.S. patents related to systems and methods for providing advisory information to players in city-building simulation games.
- Technical Context: The technology at issue falls within the mobile gaming industry, specifically concerning user interface and game progression mechanics designed to guide players and maintain engagement in open-ended simulation games.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint is a First Amended Complaint. The two patents-in-suit share a common specification and originate from the same priority application, suggesting a related prosecution strategy. The complaint alleges Defendant had knowledge of the patents, forming the basis for willfulness allegations.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2013-01-31 | Earliest Priority Date for '262 and '318 Patents |
| 2019-05-07 | U.S. Patent No. 10,279,262 Issues |
| 2019-05-13 | First Amended Complaint Filed |
| 2019-05-14 | U.S. Patent No. 10,286,318 Issues |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 10,279,262, "Communication System, Method for Controlling Communication System, and Program," Issued May 7, 2019
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent describes a problem in conventional city-building simulation games where a user has "numerous options, and the game has no final objective," which can lead to the user not knowing "what action to take next" to develop their city ('262 Patent, col. 1:40-45). Existing in-game notifications, such as for an earthquake, are described as not contributing to the game's objective of city development ('262 Patent, col. 1:46-50).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a communication system where a central server analyzes a "variety of parameters indicating a status of a space" for a user (e.g., player level, number of existing facilities) ('262 Patent, col. 1:63-65). Based on this analysis, the server generates and transmits "advisory information" that suggests a "next action" for the user to take, such as building a specific new facility, thereby guiding the user's gameplay and contributing to the development of their virtual space ('262 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:1-5).
- Technical Importance: The technology aims to solve a computer-specific problem by providing real-time, parameter-driven advice to prevent player uncertainty in complex, open-ended games ('262 Patent, col. 1:54-58).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶26).
- Essential elements of claim 1 include:
- A server with a communication unit, a memory, and a controller.
- The controller is configured to make a determination of a facility that has not been arranged in a user's virtual space.
- This determination occurs prior to the user selecting the facility and is based on parameters including the "level of the first virtual space" and the "number of facilities already arranged."
- The controller generates "advisory information" encouraging the user to arrange the facility as a next action.
- The server transmits this advisory information to the user's terminal for display on a screen.
- The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims (Compl. ¶24).
U.S. Patent No. 10,286,318, "Communication System, Method for Controlling Communication System, and Program," Issued May 14, 2019
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: As the '318 Patent shares a common specification with the '262 Patent, it addresses the same problem of user indecision in open-ended city-building games (Compl. ¶12; '318 Patent, col. 1:40-45).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a server-based system that identifies an uninstalled object for a user based on "at least two numerical parameters" related to the user's virtual space ('318 Patent, Claim 1). The system then transmits information about this identified object to the user's terminal ('318 Patent, Abstract; Claim 1).
- Technical Importance: The technology provides an improvement to computer-implemented games by using numerical parameters to guide user actions, which the patent asserts was not a routine or conventional feature at the time of invention (Compl. ¶16).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶40).
- Essential elements of claim 1 include:
- A server with a communication unit, a memory, and a controller.
- The memory stores a "plurality of numerical parameters" related to the user's virtual space.
- The controller is configured to "identify, based on at least two numerical parameters... an object which has not been installed."
- The server transmits information related to the identified object to the user's terminal.
- The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims (Compl. ¶24).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
- Product Identification: The accused instrumentalities are the "Clash of Clans" and "Boom Beach" mobile games developed by Defendant Supercell (Compl. ¶1).
- Functionality and Market Context:
- "Clash of Clans" and "Boom Beach" are described as games where users build collections of structures in a virtual space, such as a "Home Village" (Compl. ¶18, ¶29). The games operate on mobile devices and communicate with remote servers controlled by Supercell, which store user data and game-state parameters (Compl. ¶19-20).
- The complaint alleges that the accused games include a feature that suggests objects for players to build or upgrade next (Compl. ¶34). This suggestion system is alleged to operate based on game parameters such as the player's "town hall" level, the number and type of objects already built, and the quantity of in-game resources like "gold," "elixir," and "gems" (Compl. ¶29-30, ¶43-44).
- A screenshot provided in the complaint shows the in-game interface for "Clash of Clans," displaying various user parameters such as resource quantities and the Town Hall level (Compl. p.8, Figure 1).
- The complaint alleges the games have "millions of registered users worldwide" (Compl. ¶21).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'262 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A server comprising: [a] a communication unit..., [b] a memory..., and [c] a controller... | Supercell operates servers with software ("communication unit"), memory storing game parameters, and a controller to manage the game. | ¶27-30 | col. 3:46-49 |
| ...configured to make a determination of a facility which has not been arranged... prior to selection... and made based on... a level of the first virtual space and a number of facilities already arranged in the first virtual space, | The server identifies objects available for arrangement based on parameters including the user's Town Hall level and the number of existing objects. This determination happens before the user selects an object to build. A screenshot shows a "Note!" prompting the user to build specific buildings (Compl. p.9, Figure 2). | ¶30 | col. 5:20-30 |
| generate advisory information related to the facility, the advisory information encouraging the first user to arrange the facility as a next action... | The server generates recommendations for facilities to build, allegedly encouraging the user to take a next action. This is illustrated with color signaling and explicit suggestions. | ¶32 | col. 5:20-24 |
| transmit the generated advisory information... to a first communication terminal... and cause a first screen including the... advisory information to be displayed... | The server transmits the advisory suggestions to the user's device, where they are displayed on the screen. | ¶33 | col. 5:31-39 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central question may be whether the accused games' display of available upgrades constitutes "advisory information encouraging the first user to arrange the facility as a next action," as claimed. A court may need to decide if simply presenting a filtered list of prerequisite-met options is legally equivalent to the patent's more active-sounding "advice" intended to solve the problem of a user "not know[ing] what to do."
- Technical Questions: What evidence demonstrates that the accused server performs a "determination" based on the claimed parameters, as opposed to a more conventional filtering of a master list of buildable items? The nature and timing of the server's logic will be a key factual issue.
'318 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A server comprising: [a] a communication unit..., [b] a memory configured to store a plurality of numerical parameters..., and [c] a controller... | Supercell operates servers with software to communicate, memory to store numerical game parameters (e.g., Town Hall level, resource counts), and a controller. | ¶41-44 | col. 3:41-44 |
| ...configured to identify, based on at least two numerical parameters... an object which has not been installed in the first virtual space, | The server controller allegedly identifies objects that are not yet installed but available for installation based on at least two numerical parameters, such as the Town Hall level and the number of existing objects of a certain type. | ¶44 | col. 2:16-22 |
| and transmit information related to the identified object to a first communication terminal of the first user. | The server transmits this information to the user's device for display. A screenshot shows a "Buildings & Traps" menu displaying available items and their costs, with some items grayed out (Compl. p.15, Figure 4). | ¶45 | col. 2:2-5 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: The definition of "identify" will be critical. Does presenting a menu of all buildable items that meet certain prerequisites (e.g., "Buildings & Traps" menu) constitute "identifying" an object in the manner required by the claim, or does the claim require a more specific selection or recommendation?
- Technical Questions: Does the accused system's logic for populating the build menu rise to the level of the claimed invention? The analysis may focus on whether the system is merely a conventional game state filter or if it performs a distinct, non-obvious "identification" process as contemplated by the patent's description of its solution.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
- "advisory information" ('262 Patent, Claim 1)
- Context and Importance: This term is at the heart of the '262 Patent's invention. Its construction will determine whether a wide range of in-game suggestions are covered or if the claim is limited to a specific type of guidance. Practitioners may focus on this term because its scope dictates whether presenting a list of available upgrades is sufficient for infringement.
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states the server transmits "advisory information suggesting a next action for the space" ('262 Patent, col. 2:2-4), which could be argued to cover any in-game prompt about what to do next.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification describes a more specific process where the "advice selection unit" may determine an indicator with the "lowest score" and select information to help "raise the score" ('262 Patent, col. 5:25-30). This suggests the "advisory information" is the output of a specific analytical or scoring process, not just a generic suggestion.
- "identify... an object" ('318 Patent, Claim 1)
- Context and Importance: The meaning of "identify" is central to the infringement analysis for the '318 Patent. Whether this requires singling out a specific object for the user, or if it can mean generating a list of many possible objects, will be a key point of dispute.
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The plain meaning of "identify" could be argued to include determining which items from a larger set meet certain criteria, which would cover the generation of a filtered list.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's solution is aimed at preventing "a situation in which the user does not know what to do" ('318 Patent, col. 1:56-58). An argument could be made that merely presenting a large menu of options (as shown in Compl. p.15, Figure 4) does not solve this problem and that "identify" must therefore mean selecting a more specific, targeted object or small set of objects for the user's attention.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement to infringe for both patents. The allegations are based on Defendant providing instructions on its support websites and creating promotional videos on platforms like YouTube that allegedly encourage users to use the accused games in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶¶ 35, 47).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement for both patents. For the '262 Patent, willfulness is based on alleged knowledge since at least the filing date of the original complaint (Compl. ¶38). For the '318 Patent, willfulness is based on alleged knowledge since at least the filing of the First Amended Complaint (Compl. ¶50).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "advisory information" ('262 Patent) and the act of "identifying an object" ('318 Patent) be construed to cover the accused games' functionality of presenting menus of available buildings and upgrades that are filtered based on game-state prerequisites? The outcome may depend on whether the court views this as a conventional user interface element or as the specific, problem-solving invention described in the patents.
- A key evidentiary question will be one of functional equivalence: does the accused system's logic for suggesting upgrades perform the specific functions required by the claims—such as a "determination" to provide "encouragement" ('262 Patent) or an "identification" based on at least two parameters ('318 Patent)—or is there a fundamental mismatch in technical operation between the accused products and the patented inventions?