DCT

2:22-cv-00474

Cobblestone Wireless LLC v. AT&T Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:22-cv-00474, E.D. Tex., 12/15/2022
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because AT&T resides in the district, has committed acts of infringement there, and maintains a regular and established place of business within the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s 5G network infrastructure and 5G-capable cellular devices infringe four patents related to wireless communication techniques, including signal focusing, network handoffs, resource allocation, and beam shaping.
  • Technical Context: The patents address methods for improving the efficiency, reliability, and performance of wireless networks, particularly in managing complex signal environments and diverse user demands created by modern standards like 5G.
  • Key Procedural History: No prior litigation, post-grant proceedings, or licensing history is mentioned in the complaint.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2010-04-29 Earliest Priority Date (’888 Patent)
2010-08-24 Earliest Priority Date (’196 Patent)
2011-01-28 Earliest Priority Date (’347 Patent)
2013-10-08 Issue Date (U.S. Patent No. 8,554,196)
2014-08-01 Earliest Priority Date (’361 Patent)
2014-11-18 Issue Date (U.S. Patent No. 8,891,347)
2015-07-28 Issue Date (U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888)
2019-07-30 Issue Date (U.S. Patent No. 10,368,361)
2020-10-01 Approximate Launch of Accused iPhone 12
2022-03-31 Date of AT&T subscriber data cited in complaint
2022-12-15 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 8,891,347 - "User-Focusing Technique for Wireless Communication Systems," issued November 18, 2014 (’347 Patent)

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: Conventional wireless communication systems perform channel equalization at the receiver to correct for signal distortions caused by signals traveling along multiple paths. This approach requires the receiver (e.g., a mobile handset) to have significant computational resources. (’347 Patent, col. 1:24-42).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a "user-focusing" technique where the equalization burden is shifted from the receiver to the transmitter (e.g., a base station). The receiver first performs a channel estimation to determine the parameters (e.g., delay, direction of arrival) of the various signal paths and sends this information to the transmitter. The transmitter then "pre-distorts" its subsequent transmissions, adjusting the phase and timing for each path so that the signals arrive at the receiver simultaneously and combine constructively, effectively focusing the signal's energy at the user's location. (’347 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:1-10; col. 7:48-col. 8:3).
  • Technical Importance: This approach could allow for the design of less complex, lower-power receivers while improving signal quality and reducing interference, as transmit power is not wasted on regions where no signal path to the user exists. (’347 Patent, col. 3:60-64).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1. (Compl. ¶20).
  • Independent Claim 1 requires:
    • A method for wireless communication between a transmitter and receiver via multiple propagation paths.
    • Transmitting a first signal from the transmitter to the receiver.
    • Receiving the first signal at the receiver.
    • Performing a channel estimation on the first signal to obtain path parameter information.
    • Sending the channel estimation from the receiver to the transmitter.
    • Predistorting a second signal at the transmitter in the time, frequency, and spatial domains based on the channel estimation.
    • Transmitting the predistorted second signal from the transmitter to the receiver.
    • Receiving the predistorted signal at the receiver.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for the ’347 Patent.

U.S. Patent No. 9,094,888 - "Wireless Device Handoff Between Wireless Networks," issued July 28, 2015 (’888 Patent)

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: In complex environments with heterogeneous wireless networks (e.g., different technologies, overlapping coverage) and active beamforming, a wireless device's connectivity can be transient. Constantly changing coverage sectors mean a device might detect a network at one moment and lose it the next, complicating the process of handing a device from one network to another. (’888 Patent, col. 1:13-33).
  • The Patented Solution: The patent describes a method for coordinating handoffs between a first and second wireless network. The first network receives coverage information for a device, determines the device is capable of being covered by the second network (even if not currently covered), and transmits a handoff request to the second network. The system facilitates a managed handoff by allowing networks to anticipate and prepare for a device's transition based on historical or potential coverage, rather than just current connectivity. (’888 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:37-49).
  • Technical Importance: This method provides a mechanism for more robust and reliable handoffs in dynamic, multi-technology network environments, improving service continuity for mobile users.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 9. (Compl. ¶28).
  • Independent Claim 9 requires:
    • A method at a first wireless network for a mobile wireless device handoff between a second wireless network and the first wireless network.
    • Receiving a handoff request from the second network, based on a determination that the device is not currently covered by the first network but is capable of being covered.
    • Adapting one or more beams of an antenna array to facilitate coverage of the device by the first network.
    • Transmitting a confirmation to the second network to indicate acceptance of the handoff request.
    • The device is then handed off from the second network to the first.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for the ’888 Patent.

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 10,368,361 - "Adaptive Communication Resource Allocation in a Wireless Network," issued July 30, 2019 (’361 Patent)

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses the problem of inefficient spectrum use when wireless traffic is asymmetric (e.g., more download traffic than upload). (’361 Patent, col. 3:23-29). The solution is a system for dynamically allocating frequency resources for either uplink or downlink use based on the quality of the resource and current traffic demands, using a combination of dedicated uplink/downlink pools and a "shared resource pool" for flexible assignment. (’361 Patent, Abstract; col. 1:37-59).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 10. (Compl. ¶36).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses AT&T's cellular base stations that support 3GPP NG-RAN (Next-Generation Radio Access Network) and directional Supplementary Uplink (SUL) functionality. (Compl. ¶36).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 8,554,196 - "Network Coverage By Cycling Through Beam Shape Coverage Configurations," issued October 8, 2013 (’196 Patent)

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses power efficiency for devices in a network serving a mix of users. Some users require continuous, high-power service ("continuous use devices"), while others only need intermittent updates ("interval use devices"). (’196 Patent, col. 3:45-53). The solution involves cycling between a narrow, high-power beam focused on the continuous use device(s) and a wide, lower-power beam that provides general coverage, allowing interval use devices to defer data updates until the wide beam is active. (’196 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 23. (Compl. ¶44).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses AT&T's cellular handsets (e.g., iPhones and Samsung Galaxies) that support "wifi-only automatic updates." (Compl. ¶44).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The accused instrumentalities are AT&T's cellular network and the devices operating on it, specifically: (1) cellular base stations that support 3GPP 5G NR beamforming, handover between 4G LTE and 5G NR networks, and directional Supplementary Uplink (SUL) functionality; and (2) cellular handsets sold by AT&T, including various models of the Apple iPhone and Samsung Galaxy, that support 5G NR beamforming and Wi-Fi-only automatic updates. (Compl. ¶¶20, 28, 36, 44).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges that these network components and devices work together to provide AT&T's nationwide 4G/5G wireless service. The accused functionality relates to core network operations, including how signals are transmitted and focused (beamforming), how users are seamlessly transferred between network technologies (handoff), how network resources are managed (resource allocation), and how coverage is maintained efficiently. The complaint supports allegations of venue with a screenshot of an AT&T wireless coverage map for Marshall, Texas. (Compl. p. 4). The commercial importance of the accused services is underscored by the allegation that AT&T had more than 196 million subscribers as of March 31, 2022. (Compl. ¶15).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint references claim chart exhibits that are not provided. The narrative infringement theories are summarized below.

’347 Patent Infringement Allegations
The complaint alleges that AT&T's 5G network infrastructure and the 5G-capable handsets it sells directly infringe at least claim 1 of the ’347 Patent. (Compl. ¶20). The infringement theory suggests that the accused 3GPP 5G NR beamforming functionality meets the claim limitations for the patented "user-focusing" technique. This implies an assertion that the accused handsets perform channel measurements and report them to AT&T's base stations, which in turn use this information to pre-distort their transmissions to focus signal energy at the specific location of the handset, thereby aligning signals arriving via multiple paths as required by the claims. (Compl. ¶¶20, 23).

’888 Patent Infringement Allegations
The complaint alleges that AT&T's cellular base stations, which support handovers between 4G LTE and 5G NR networks, directly infringe at least claim 9 of the ’888 Patent. (Compl. ¶28). The narrative suggests that when a user device moves between the coverage areas of these different technologies, the AT&T network components function as the claimed "first" and "second" wireless networks. The network elements allegedly communicate to determine if a handoff is possible, adapt their coverage beams to facilitate the transition, and execute the handoff as claimed. (Compl. ¶¶28, 31).

  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: For the ’888 Patent, a central question may be whether two different radio access technologies (e.g., 4G LTE and 5G NR) operated by a single carrier constitute a "first wireless network" and a "second wireless network" as those terms are used in the patent. For the ’196 Patent, a question is whether the accused feature of "wifi-only automatic updates" on a handset is technically relevant to the patent's claims, which describe a base station cycling between wide and narrow cellular beams.
    • Technical Questions: For the ’347 Patent, the dispute may focus on whether the signal manipulation in 3GPP 5G NR beamforming constitutes the specific "predistorting" recited in the claims, which requires creating and combining signal replicas to align phases at the receiver, or if it is a different, more conventional form of beam steering.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "predistorting a second signal" (’347 Patent, Claim 1)

    • Context and Importance: This term is the core of the invention claimed in the ’347 Patent. Its construction will determine whether standard 5G beamforming falls within the claim scope. Practitioners may focus on this term because the infringement case depends on equating the accused "beamforming" with the claimed "predistorting."
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the goal as enabling the system to "send the signals directly to the location of the receiver," which could be argued to encompass modern beamforming. (’347 Patent, col. 3:55-58). The summary states the transmitter is configured to "predistort a second signal according to the channel estimation," which could be read broadly. (’347 Patent, col. 2:6-8).
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description provides a specific mathematical implementation, explaining that "a M×N replica of the transmitted signal is created" and that the "combined signal x(f) is calculated by summing up the M×N signal replica." (’347 Patent, col. 9:27-44). This suggests a more complex process than simply directing a beam.

  • The Term: "a first wireless network" and "a second wireless network" (’888 Patent, Claim 9)

    • Context and Importance: The infringement theory for the ’888 Patent hinges on applying these terms to 4G LTE and 5G NR technologies operated by the same carrier. The viability of this theory depends on whether these two technologies can be considered distinct "networks."
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent's background discusses challenges in "heterogeneous wireless networks," which could be interpreted to include different technologies like 4G and 5G. (’888 Patent, col. 1:18-19). The specification also refers to different "types of wireless network technologies." (’888 Patent, col. 3:40-41).
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claims and specification repeatedly refer to handoffs between networks, which may suggest administratively or physically separate systems, such as those operated by different service providers, rather than different technology layers within a single provider's integrated system. (’888 Patent, col. 2:37-49).

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: For all four patents, the complaint alleges induced infringement. This is based on the allegation that AT&T provides user manuals and other online instructional materials that "actively encourage and instruct their customers and end users" to use the accused products and services in ways that directly infringe the patents. (Compl. ¶¶21, 29, 37, 45).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint pleads willfulness based on knowledge of the patents obtained "Through at least the filing and service of this Complaint." This suggests an allegation of post-suit, rather than pre-suit, willful infringement. (Compl. ¶¶21, 29, 37, 45).

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

  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: Can two radio technologies (4G LTE and 5G NR) operated by a single carrier be construed as distinct "first" and "second" wireless networks as required by the ’888 Patent, or does the patent contemplate handoffs between separate service providers?
  • A key technical question will be one of functional equivalence: Does the accused 5G NR beamforming technology perform the specific, multi-step "predistorting" process taught by the ’347 Patent—which involves creating and summing signal replicas—or does it employ a technically distinct method of beam steering that falls outside the claim scope?
  • An evidentiary question will concern the relevance of the accused feature for the ’196 Patent: Can Plaintiff establish a technical nexus between the accused functionality of "wifi-only automatic updates" in a handset and the patent's claimed method of a cellular base station cycling between different cellular beam shapes?