DCT
2:22-cv-00046
Tiare Technology Inc v. Freddy's LLC
Key Events
Complaint
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Tiare Technology, Inc. (Delaware)
- Defendant: Freddy's, L.L.C. and Freddy's Holdings, Inc. (Kansas)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: The Davis Firm, PC
- Case Identification: 2:22-cv-00046, E.D. Tex., 02/09/2022
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Eastern District of Texas because Defendant operates multiple "regular and established places of business" (i.e., Freddy's restaurant locations) within the district and distributes its accused mobile application to customers there.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s mobile ordering application for its restaurant chain infringes three patents related to location-aware mobile ordering and service systems.
- Technical Context: The dispute centers on mobile commerce technology for the restaurant industry, a market segment that has seen significant growth in systems that use customer location to time order preparation and pickup.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that the asserted patent family underwent extensive examination at the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, including overcoming subject matter eligibility rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101, particularly after the Supreme Court's decision in Alice v. CLS Bank.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2002-09-23 | Patent Priority Date ('729, '414, '224 Patents) |
| 2014-03-25 | U.S. Patent No. 8,682,729 Issues |
| 2018-12-18 | U.S. Patent No. 10,157,414 Issues |
| 2021-12-07 | U.S. Patent No. 11,195,224 Issues |
| 2022-02-09 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 8,682,729 - "Patron Service System and Method," issued March 25, 2014
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent describes inefficiencies in service at large venues like resorts, where patrons are mobile and may have difficulty placing orders or receiving service. Conventional solutions, such as centrally-located kiosks or staff-operated handheld terminals, are described as inconvenient for patrons and inefficient for locating them for order delivery ('729 Patent, col. 1:40-col. 2:57; Compl. ¶¶ 31-33).
- The Patented Solution: The invention provides a system where patrons use a "wireless patron unit" (e.g., a mobile device) running a "venue specific application program" to place orders directly. A core feature of the solution is the system's ability to determine the current location of the patron's unit and to update that location as the patron moves, thereby facilitating timely order fulfillment and service delivery ('729 Patent, Abstract; col. 4:20-32).
- Technical Importance: The technology aimed to improve service efficiency by empowering patrons to place their own orders while integrating location tracking to solve the "last mile" problem of delivering goods and services to mobile customers within a large venue (Compl. ¶¶ 34-35).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶ 55). Its essential elements include:
- Providing a patron with a wireless patron unit having a venue specific application program.
- Connecting the wireless patron unit to a server.
- Entering a patron order for an item or service into the wireless patron unit.
- Determining a current location of the wireless patron unit.
- Updating a status of the patron order, and the current location of the wireless patron unit when the patron moves to a different location.
- Displaying the patron order on the display of the wireless patron unit.
U.S. Patent No. 10,157,414 - "Patron Service System and Method," issued December 18, 2018
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the same technical problem as the ’729 Patent: the difficulty of providing timely and efficient service to mobile patrons in large or distributed environments ('414 Patent, col. 1:22-col. 2:62).
- The Patented Solution: The invention, as claimed in this patent, details a computer-implemented method executed by one or more processors (e.g., a server system). The method involves providing a venue-specific application, authenticating the user, receiving initial location information, mapping that location to a venue-associated region, receiving an order, and then receiving and determining an updated location of the device at a later time ('414 Patent, Abstract; col. 26:8-17).
- Technical Importance: This claimed method focuses on the server-side logic of processing multiple location updates over time, a technical approach that enables functionality such as just-in-time order preparation based on a customer's proximity to a pickup location (Compl. ¶¶ 92, 94).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 8 (Compl. ¶ 75). Its essential elements include:
- Providing a venue-specific application to a mobile computing device.
- Communicating with the device to authenticate a user based on a security protocol.
- Receiving location information from the device.
- Determining a device location at a first time and mapping it to a venue-associated region.
- Receiving order information from the device.
- Receiving updated location information from the device.
- Determining an updated device location at a second time based on the updated location information.
Multi-Patent Capsule
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,195,224, "Patron Service System and Method," issued December 7, 2021.
- Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a system for locating electronic devices, comprising processors and data stores. The system provides a venue-specific application to multiple mobile devices, determines initial and updated locations for each, and, upon receiving order information from one device, sends data indicating its updated location to a computing system associated with the venue for display in a graphical user interface ('224 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶¶ 103, 113).
- Asserted Claims: Independent claim 10 is asserted (Compl. ¶ 96).
- Accused Features: The complaint accuses the ordering application and location-tracking functionality of the Freddy's mobile application system (Compl. ¶ 102).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The "Freddy's application," a mobile software application for the Freddy's restaurant chain, and the devices on which it operates (Compl. ¶ 14, fn. 1).
Functionality and Market Context
- The accused product is a mobile application that allows users to find restaurant locations, browse menus, customize and place orders, and submit payment (Compl. ¶ 48). A central accused feature is the application's use of the mobile device's location services. The complaint alleges this is used not only to find nearby stores but also to track a user's proximity to the store to time the preparation of their order, as stated in the app: "we will know when you are close so we can prompt you to check in to start making your order" (Compl. ¶¶ 50, 71). The complaint alleges the application is a "top Food & Drink" application on major app stores and is used to complete a significant number of mobile orders (Compl. ¶ 53).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'729 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| providing at least one patron with a wireless patron unit... that includes at least one venue specific application program... | Defendant provides the Freddy's application, which is specific to the Freddy's restaurant venue, for download onto patron-owned smartphones (Compl. ¶ 63, p. 18). | ¶63 | col. 3:1-16 |
| connecting the wireless patron unit to a server... | The Freddy's app connects the smartphone to a server via cellular or Wi-Fi networks to enable communication (Compl. ¶ 64). | ¶64 | col. 6:11-16 |
| entering a patron order for at least one item or service provided by the venue into the wireless patron unit | A user selects menu items within the Freddy's app to create and submit an order (Compl. ¶ 65, p. 18). | ¶65 | col. 4:29-32 |
| determining a current location of the wireless patron unit | The Freddy's app accesses the smartphone's location services to determine its current location for finding nearby stores (Compl. ¶ 66, p. 20). | ¶66 | col. 4:33-34 |
| updating a status of the patron order, and the current location of the wireless patron unit when the patron moves... | The app tracks the user's location to determine when they are in the vicinity of the store to time order preparation, as explained in an in-app message (Compl. ¶ 71, p. 21). | ¶71 | col. 4:58-62 |
| displaying the patron order on a display of the wireless patron unit | The app displays an order summary screen to the user after items have been selected (Compl. ¶ 73, p. 22). | ¶73 | col. 4:58-62 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A potential issue is whether a chain of individual fast-casual restaurants constitutes a "venue" as described in the patent, which often uses a "resort" with areas like a "beach" or "pool" as its primary example.
- Technical Questions: The infringement analysis may focus on whether the accused app's proximity detection function meets the limitation of "updating... the current location... when the patron moves to a different location." A question for the court could be whether a single proximity trigger is technically equivalent to the continuous or periodic location updating process described in the patent.
'414 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 8) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| providing, over a wireless communications channel... a venue-specific application to a mobile computing device | Defendant's servers provide the Freddy's-specific application for download to users' smartphones over wireless channels (Compl. ¶ 82, p. 24). | ¶82 | col. 25:56-59 |
| communicating... with the mobile computing device... to authenticate, based on a security protocol, a user... | The system authenticates a user via login and password and secures financial information for purchases (Compl. ¶¶ 84-85, p. 25). | ¶85 | col. 25:60-64 |
| receiving, by the one or more processors, location information from the mobile computing device | Defendant's servers receive location data from the user's device via the app to identify nearby stores (Compl. ¶ 86, p. 26). | ¶86 | col. 26:1-2 |
| determining... a location of the mobile computing device at a first time based on the location information | Defendant's servers process the received location data to determine the device's initial position (Compl. ¶ 88). | ¶88 | col. 26:3-5 |
| mapping, by the one or more processors, the location to a region that is associated with a venue | Defendant's servers use the device's location to identify and display the closest Freddy's restaurant locations (a venue) on a map (Compl. ¶ 89, p. 27). | ¶89 | col. 26:6-8 |
| receiving, from the mobile computing device, order information for the venue... | Defendant's servers receive the user's menu selections and order details from the app (Compl. ¶ 90, p. 27). | ¶90 | col. 26:9-12 |
| receiving, by the one or more processors, updated location information from the mobile computing device | Defendant's servers receive updated location information to determine when the user is approaching the store for order pickup (Compl. ¶¶ 91-92, p. 29). | ¶92 | col. 26:13-14 |
| determining... an updated location of the mobile computing device at a second time based on the updated location... | Defendant's servers process the updated location data to time the preparation of the user's order for freshness upon arrival (Compl. ¶ 94, p. 29). | ¶94 | col. 26:15-17 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: As with the ’729 Patent, the interpretation of "venue" and whether "mapping the location to a region" is met by simply identifying a nearby point-of-interest on a map may be points of dispute.
- Technical Questions: A central technical question may be how the "updated location information" is received and processed by the server. The analysis will likely scrutinize whether the accused system involves the server actively "determining" an updated location based on new data, or if the mobile device independently makes a proximity determination and sends a simple trigger to the server.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "venue"
- Context and Importance: This term is foundational to the asserted claims. Its construction will determine whether the patents' scope, which is described heavily in the context of single, large properties like resorts, can extend to a distributed chain of individual restaurant locations.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states that the system may be used in "various other venues including, but not limited to, stadiums, arenas, retail locations, zoos, transportation centers..." ('414 Patent, col. 4:4-10). The inclusion of "retail locations" may support an interpretation that covers commercial establishments like restaurants.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The background section consistently uses a "resort" as the exemplary environment, detailing problems specific to that context, such as patrons moving between "the beach, pool deck, or other resort location" ('414 Patent, col. 2:28-31). This focus could be used to argue for a more limited definition tied to large, contiguous properties.
The Term: "venue specific application program"
- Context and Importance: This term appears in the asserted claims of all three patents. The dispute may turn on whether a publicly available app for a national restaurant brand is "venue specific" in the manner contemplated by the patents.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The abstract describes providing an application "for downloading into a patron-owned wireless communication device," which aligns with the modern model of a brand-specific app distributed through an app store ('729 Patent, Abstract). The complaint argues the app is specific to the Freddy's venue, including both the chain and individual stores (Compl. ¶ 49).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification describes an implementation where a patron is provided with a "rugged mobile computer device" at the venue, which could suggest the application is specific to a particular location and its on-site hardware, rather than a general application for a national chain ('414 Patent, col. 4:20-23).
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement of infringement, stating that Defendant encourages infringement by providing the Freddy's application and instructing users to enable and use its features (e.g., location services) in a way that practices the patented methods (Compl. ¶¶ 59, 79, 100).
- Willful Infringement: The willfulness allegations are based on knowledge acquired from the filing of the complaint. The complaint alleges that Defendant has had "actual knowledge" of the asserted patents since "at least as early as the filing and service of this Complaint," and that any continued infringement would be willful (Compl. ¶¶ 60, 80, 101).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "venue," rooted in the patent's context of large, self-contained properties like resorts, be construed to cover a distributed network of individual fast-casual restaurants as alleged in the complaint?
- A key evidentiary question will be one of technical operation: does the accused application's "just-in-time" order preparation feature, which relies on proximity detection, perform the specific multi-step process of receiving and determining "updated locations" at a server as required by the claims, or does it represent a different technical mechanism?