DCT
2:22-cv-00387
Panther Innovations LLC v. Sony Corp
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Panther Innovations, LLC (Texas)
- Defendant: Sony Corporation (Japan); Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC (California); Sony Interactive Entertainment America, LLC (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: WILLIAMS SIMONS & LANDIS PLLC; THE STAFFORD DAVIS FIRM
- Case Identification: 2:22-cv-00387, E.D. Tex., 01/18/2023
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper based on Sony Corporation’s status as a foreign corporation and because the U.S.-based Sony entities have regular and established places of business in the district and have committed acts of infringement there.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s PlayStation 3 ecosystem, featuring SimulView technology, infringes patents related to methods and systems for displaying different full-screen content to two viewers simultaneously on a single display using specially configured glasses.
- Technical Context: The technology at issue addresses limitations of traditional split-screen multiplayer gaming by enabling each player to see a unique, full-screen perspective on the same television display.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that the inventor of the asserted patents engaged in correspondence with Sony regarding the technology as early as June 2012, asserting provisional rights under the published patent application that would later issue as the ’811 Patent. This pre-suit history is presented as evidence of Sony’s knowledge of the technology and patents.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2010-09-01 | ’811 and ’195 Patents Priority Date |
| 2010-12-31 | ’811 Patent Application Filed |
| 2011 | Accused Products (PlayStation 3D Display, SimulView Glasses) Launched |
| 2012-06-25 | First Alleged Notice Letter Sent to Sony |
| 2017-07-13 | ’195 Patent Application Filed |
| 2017-07-18 | ’811 Patent Issued |
| 2019-11-12 | ’195 Patent Issued |
| 2023-01-18 | Amended Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 9,712,811 - "Viewing of Different Full-Screen Television Content by Different Viewers at the Same Time Using Configured Glasses and a Related Display," Issued July 18, 2017
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section identifies the drawbacks of conventional solutions for multi-user, single-screen viewing, such as multi-player video games. In a typical split-screen setup, each user’s view is less than full-screen, and both users can see each other’s content, which is undesirable (’811 Patent, col. 1:40-59).
- The Patented Solution: The invention describes a method where a source device, like a game console, produces a multi-player split-screen output. This output is sent to a television that converts the single split-screen frame into two sequential, full-screen frames—one for each player. Each player wears configured glasses (e.g., active shutter glasses) that are synchronized with the television to block the frame intended for the other player, thereby ensuring each viewer sees only their own content in full-screen format (’811 Patent, Abstract; col. 3:26-35).
- Technical Importance: This approach provided a technical alternative to the compromised experience of traditional split-screen gaming, aiming to restore an immersive, full-screen view for each participant in a local multiplayer session.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶49).
- Claim 1 is a method claim comprising the following essential steps:
- producing a multi-player split screen output from a game console;
- converting the multi-player split screen output to two sequential full screen frames at the television;
- viewing a first of the two sequential full screen frames using a first pair of configured glasses that blocks a second of the two sequential full screen frames; and
- viewing the second of the two sequential full screen frames using a second pair of configured glasses that blocks the first of the two sequential full screen frames.
- The complaint alleges infringement of "one or more claims" and reserves the right to assert others (Compl. ¶50).
U.S. Patent No. 10,477,195 - "Viewing of Different Full-Screen Television Content by Different Viewers at the Same Time Using Configured Glasses and a Related Display," Issued November 12, 2019
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: As a continuation of the application leading to the ’811 Patent, the ’195 Patent addresses the same technical problem of providing distinct, full-screen views to multiple users on a single display (’195 Patent, col. 1:29-59).
- The Patented Solution: This patent claims a system, rather than a method, for achieving the same goal. It specifically claims a display device that receives a "frame packed split screen signal" where the signal has "double the vertical resolution or double the horizontal resolution" of the display's standard full-screen resolution. This higher-resolution input allows the two player-specific regions within the signal to each contain a full-resolution image, which can then be displayed sequentially without needing to be "upscaled" (’195 Patent, col. 3:40-48).
- Technical Importance: By claiming a system with specific signal resolution requirements, the invention aims to ensure a high-quality, full-resolution image for each viewer, avoiding the image degradation that can result from upscaling lower-resolution content.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶80).
- Claim 1 is a system claim comprising:
- a display device configured to receive a frame packed split screen signal containing two distinct player game contents in separate spatial regions;
- the signal having double the vertical or horizontal resolution of the display device's full-screen resolution, such that each spatial region is in the full-screen resolution;
- the display device configured to display the signal such that each player can view their respective content in full screen using a pair of glasses that blocks the other player's content;
- wherein the game content from the signal is "not upscaled to be viewable in full screen."
- The complaint alleges infringement of "one or more asserted claims" (Compl. ¶81).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The "Accused Products" are identified as the Sony PlayStation 3 (PS3) gaming console, the PlayStation 3D Display Device, and the TDG-SV5P SimulView Gaming Glasses (Compl. ¶45).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges that these products operate together to provide Sony’s "SimulView" feature, which is "specially designed to enhance dual gaming on the TV" (Compl. ¶46). This feature is marketed as an alternative to split-screen gaming, allowing two players to "experience your own big-screen view" (Compl. ¶46).
- A promotional image included in the complaint depicts two separate, full-screen player views originating from a single display, with two corresponding pairs of glasses, illustrating the technology's function (Compl. ¶44, p. 12).
- The complaint also includes a screenshot from a Sony support website that lists the requirements for using the SimulView feature, including a PS3, a PlayStation 3D display device, two pairs of SimulView glasses, and a game that supports the feature (Compl. ¶46, p. 13). These materials are alleged to instruct users on how to operate the system in an infringing manner.
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’811 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| producing a multi-player split screen output from a game console; | The PlayStation 3 gaming console produces a multi-player split screen output for compatible games. | ¶52 | col. 3:1-4 |
| converting the multi-player split screen output to two sequential full screen frames at the television; | The PlayStation 3D Display Device receives the split screen output and converts it into two sequential full-screen frames. | ¶53 | col. 3:26-28 |
| viewing a first of the two sequential full screen frames using a first pair of configured glasses that blocks a second of the two sequential full screen frames; | The system, using the PlayStation 3D Display Device and a first pair of TDG-SV5P SimulView Gaming Glasses, allows a first user to view the first frame while blocking the second. | ¶54 | col. 4:38-42 |
| and viewing the second of the two sequential full screen frames using a second pair of configured glasses that blocks the first of the two sequential full screen frames. | The system, using a second pair of TDG-SV5P SimulView Gaming Glasses, allows a second user to view the second frame while blocking the first. | ¶55 | col. 4:2-6 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Technical Question: The central factual question will be whether the PlayStation 3D Display Device performs the claimed step of "converting" the split-screen output into sequential full-screen frames in the manner described by the patent. The defense may argue for a different technical mechanism.
- Scope Question: For direct infringement of the method claim, Plaintiff alleges Sony's own "use and testing" infringes (Compl. ¶49). For infringement by customers, the analysis will turn to inducement, but a question for direct infringement is how the "viewing" step, an action performed by an end-user, is attributed to Sony.
’195 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a display device configured to receive a frame packed split screen signal that includes a first player game content in a first spatial region...and a second player game content in a second spatial region... | The PlayStation 3D Display Device is configured to receive a signal from the PS3 containing two distinct player views. | ¶83 | col. 3:16-18 |
| the frame packed split screen signal having double the vertical resolution or double the horizontal resolution of a full screen resolution of the display device... | The signal received by the PlayStation 3D Display Device allegedly has double the vertical or horizontal resolution of a standard full-screen signal. | ¶84 | col. 3:40-48 |
| the display device being further configured to display the frame packed split screen signal such that the first player game content is viewable in full screen by using a first pair of glasses that blocks the second player game content... | The PlayStation 3D Display Device and TDG-SV5P glasses are configured to display the signal so that each player sees only their own full-screen content. | ¶85 | col. 4:35-42 |
| wherein the first player game content and the second player game content...are not upscaled to be viewable in full screen. | Plaintiff alleges that because of the double-resolution signal, the game content is not upscaled to be displayed in full screen. | ¶37 | col. 3:46-48 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Technical Question: A key dispute will likely concern the precise technical characteristics of the video signal used in SimulView mode. The case may require expert testimony to determine if the signal qualifies as "frame packed" and possesses "double the... resolution" as claimed.
- Scope Question: The negative limitation "not upscaled" will be a focal point. The parties may dispute the definition of "upscaled" in this context and what evidence is required to prove or disprove that this process occurs.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
For the ’811 Patent:
- The Term: "converting the multi-player split screen output to two sequential full screen frames"
- Context and Importance: This term describes the core functional transformation of the invention. The infringement analysis for the method claim hinges on whether the accused television performs this specific step. Practitioners may focus on this term because Sony could argue its display uses a different, non-infringing process to achieve a similar result.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself is functional. A party could argue it covers any process that takes a split-screen input and generates sequential full-screen outputs, regardless of the intermediate steps.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification describes implementing this conversion by making the display "operate in a side-by-side, top-bottom, or frame packed 3D mode" (’811 Patent, col. 3:19-22). A party could argue the term should be limited to a conversion that leverages a pre-existing 3D display mode.
For the ’195 Patent:
- The Term: "frame packed split screen signal"
- Context and Importance: This term defines the specific type of input signal required by the claimed system. Its construction is critical because if the SimulView signal is not a "frame packed split screen signal," there can be no literal infringement.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification suggests "split screen" is a broad category that "may include such variants as top-bottom, frame-packed, or side-by-side" (’195 Patent, col. 1:65-col. 2:2), suggesting "frame packed" could be interpreted as one of several types of combined-frame formats.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: "Frame packed" is a term of art in video standards (e.g., HDMI 1.4). A party could argue the term should be construed according to its specific technical meaning at the time of the invention, which may be narrower than the general description in the specification.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) for both patents. The factual basis for this claim includes Sony’s alleged encouragement and instruction to customers on using the Accused Products in an infringing manner through "advertisement, technical material, instructional material, and otherwise" (Compl. ¶¶ 71, 92). The included screenshot of a Sony support article explaining how to use the "SimulView feature" is offered as direct evidence of such instructions (Compl. ¶46, p. 13).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges Sony’s infringement was willful. This allegation is primarily based on Sony's alleged pre-suit knowledge of the technology, stemming from correspondence with the patents' inventor that began in June 2012. The complaint states that these communications put Sony on notice of the published patent applications which contained claims "substantially identical" to the issued claims (Compl. ¶¶ 58-66, 88-89).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of evidentiary proof: Can Plaintiff produce technical evidence sufficient to demonstrate that the Accused Products, particularly the video signal generated between the PS3 and the PlayStation 3D Display, meet the specific limitations of the asserted claims, such as the "double the... resolution" and "not upscaled" requirements of the ’195 Patent?
- The case will also turn on claim construction: How the court defines key technical terms like "converting" and "frame packed split screen signal" will be critical. The outcome may depend on whether Sony’s specific implementation of its SimulView technology falls within the scope of these terms as construed by the court.
- Finally, a significant question for damages will be willfulness: The complaint presents detailed factual allegations of Sony's pre-suit knowledge of the patent applications dating back more than a decade before the lawsuit was filed. Should infringement be found, the court’s assessment of this extensive pre-suit history will be determinative of whether Sony’s conduct warrants an award of enhanced damages.