DCT
2:21-cv-00444
Communication Tech Inc v. Samsung Electronics America Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Communication Technologies, Inc. (Virginia)
- Defendant: Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (New York) and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Republic of Korea)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Zimmerman Law Group; Hoffberg & Associates; Capshaw DeRieux, LLP
- Case Identification: 2:21-cv-00444, E.D. Tex., 12/02/2021
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Eastern District of Texas because Samsung has engaged in acts of infringement and maintains a regular and established place of business in the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s Samsung Knox security solution, as implemented on its mobile and wearable devices, infringes a patent related to the programmable, automatic removal of sensitive data from a computing system following a set number of failed login attempts.
- Technical Context: The technology at issue concerns data security methods for sanitizing storage media, a critical function for protecting sensitive information on devices that may be lost, stolen, or decommissioned.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that in 2001, the U.S. Department of Defense recommended the Plaintiff’s commercial software, which allegedly embodied the patented technology. Subsequent to the complaint's filing, the patent-in-suit was the subject of an Inter Partes Review (IPR2022-01221), which concluded with a certificate issued on February 3, 2025, stating that all claims of the patent (1-26) are cancelled. This post-filing development raises a threshold question regarding the viability of the asserted claims.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2000-12-14 | U.S. Patent No. 6,725,444 Priority Date (Filing Date) |
| 2001-06-04 | Department of Defense memorandum recommends Plaintiff's software |
| 2004-04-20 | U.S. Patent No. 6,725,444 Issues |
| 2021-12-02 | Complaint Filed |
| 2022-06-30 | Inter Partes Review IPR2022-01221 Filed |
| 2025-02-03 | Inter Partes Review Certificate Issues Cancelling All Claims (1-26) |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 6,725,444 - "System and method for programmable removal of sensitive information from computing systems"
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent describes a security risk arising when a "hostile entity gains access to [a] computing system and, therefore, possibly access to sensitive information" (’444 Patent, col. 1:21-23). It notes that existing data removal systems lack flexibility, programmability, and the ability to automatically initiate a data purge without operator intervention ( Compl. ¶18; ’444 Patent, col. 1:38-54).
- The Patented Solution: The invention provides a method to program a computing system to automatically purge sensitive information based on pre-selected options. A user can define triggers, such as a specific number of unsuccessful login attempts, which cause the system to execute a "purge script file" to remove data (’444 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:11-17). The process is designed to be configurable, allowing a user to specify what data to delete (e.g., entire drives, specific files, file types) and under what conditions (’444 Patent, col. 5:26-52).
- Technical Importance: This technology provided a software-based method for data sanitization that could be automated, contrasting with contemporaneous physical methods like removing and shredding hard drives (Compl. ¶11, ¶13).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts infringement of claims 1-2, 5-8, 11, 16-17, and 20 (Compl. ¶30, ¶34, ¶40). Independent claim 1 is a representative method claim.
- Essential Elements of Independent Claim 1:
- selecting at least one information removal option including a number of unsuccessful logon attempts;
- generating a purge script file based on the selected option;
- initiating a purge of information automatically from a computing device when the selected number of unsuccessful logon attempts occurs, where the purge is performed by executing the purge script file; and
- the purge comprises deleting file and directory information from a File Allocation Table and overwriting the information in physical memory at least once.
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
Samsung mobile devices (e.g., Galaxy phones and tablets) and Tizen products that utilize the Samsung Knox mobile security solution and/or the Knox Tizen Wearable operating system (Compl. ¶24).
Functionality and Market Context
The complaint identifies the accused functionality as the feature within Samsung's Knox solution that allows an administrator to configure a device to automatically "erase (or 'wipe') data after a set number of unsuccessful attempts entering a passcode or password" (Compl. ¶24). This feature can be customized to set the "Maximum number of failed passcode attempts allowed" before a wipe is triggered (Compl. ¶27). The complaint alleges this functionality can perform a "complete" wipe of user space data or a "selective" wipe of a secure Knox container or specific application data (Compl. ¶26).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
U.S. Patent No. 6,725,444 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A method for programmable removal of information... comprising: selecting at least one information removal option including a number of unsuccessful logon attempts... | Samsung's Knox solution allows administrators to set a passcode policy that includes a "Maximum number of failed passcode attempts" to trigger a device wipe. | ¶27 | col. 10:1-12 |
| generating a purge script file based on the selected at least one information removal option; | The complaint alleges, "on information and belief," that the device wipe is accomplished by "generating an executable purge script file, based on the selected information removal option." | ¶27 | col. 2:13-17 |
| and initiating a purge of information automatically from at least one computing device... when the selected number of unsuccessful logon attempts... occurs, wherein the purge is performed by execution of the purge script file... | If a user exceeds the defined number of failed passcode attempts, the device is wiped via a factory reset or by making a Knox container inaccessible. This wipe is alleged to be an automatic "execution of a purge script file." | ¶28 | col. 4:9-15 |
| wherein the purge comprises deleting file and directory information in a File Allocation Table... and overwriting the information in physical memory at least once... | The complaint alleges, "on information and belief," that the factory reset purge "comprises deleting file and directory information in a file allocation table... and overwriting the information in physical memory at least once." | ¶28 | col. 10:13-22 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: The complaint's infringement theory hinges on equating a modern device "factory reset" with the patent's description of executing a "purge script file." A central question will be whether the integrated, OS-level wipe function in Android with Knox falls within the scope of the term "purge script file," which the patent’s specification illustrates as a discrete, text-based command file (’444 Patent, Fig. 7). The complaint includes a screenshot from the patent's specification showing a user interface option to "Purge on Account Lockout" after a set number of unsuccessful logins, directly illustrating this claimed concept (Compl. ¶20, p. 8).
- Technical Questions: A key factual dispute may arise over the complaint's "information and belief" allegations regarding the internal operation of the accused Knox feature. Specifically, what evidence will show that the Knox wipe functionality (1) generates a discrete, executable "script file" and (2) performs the claimed steps of deleting File Allocation Table information and overwriting physical memory at least once?
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term
"purge script file"
Context and Importance
This term is the central mechanism of the claimed invention. The infringement allegation rests on the contention that Samsung's Knox security solution generates and executes such a file. If the accused "factory reset" function operates through a different technical mechanism that is not a "purge script file," the infringement case may fail. Practitioners may focus on this term because the complaint's allegations regarding its presence in the accused product are made only "on information and belief" (Compl. ¶27, ¶28).
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent specification suggests some flexibility, stating the "executable file may use commands or be written in a language from any programming language" and equates "executable file," "purge file," and "purge script file" (’444 Patent, col. 5:14-25). This could support an argument that the term covers any set of executable instructions, not just a text-based script.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent consistently describes a process of first "generating" a file and then separately "initiating a purge... by execution of the purge script file" (’444 Patent, Abstract). The detailed embodiment shown in Figure 7 depicts a text file with specific commands like "Wipe=c:*.doc" and "DeleteScriptWhenDone=FALSE," which suggests a discrete, interpretable file of commands, potentially distinct from a compiled binary or an integrated operating system function.
VI. Other Allegations
Indirect Infringement
The complaint alleges inducement, stating Defendants are aware of the patent and that users' actions (entering incorrect passcodes) will cause infringement (Compl. ¶35-37). Contributory infringement is alleged on the basis that Samsung's devices with Knox are not staple articles of commerce and are "especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement" (Compl. ¶44).
Willful Infringement
The complaint does not plead specific facts showing pre-suit knowledge but alleges "on information and belief, Defendants were aware of the ’444 patent" (Compl. ¶36, ¶42). The prayer for relief requests a finding of willfulness (Compl. p. 16, ¶B).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A dispositive threshold issue is one of patent viability: given that an Inter Partes Review certificate has cancelled all claims of the ’444 Patent, what legal basis remains for the continuation of this infringement action?
- A core technical issue will be one of definitional scope: does the integrated "factory reset" function of the accused Samsung Knox security platform operate by "generating a purge script file" that is then executed, as required by the claims, or does it use a fundamentally different, non-infringing mechanism native to the operating system?
- A key evidentiary question will be one of technical proof: what evidence can Plaintiff produce to substantiate its "information and belief" allegations about the internal software architecture of the accused Knox solution, particularly regarding the generation of a script file and the specific data sanitization methods used during a wipe?