DCT

2:22-cv-00483

Woodbury Wireless LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:22-cv-00483, E.D. Tex., 12/20/2022
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper based on Defendant's regular and established places of business within the Eastern District of Texas, commission of infringing acts within the district, and procurement of infringing 5G equipment from suppliers like Ericsson that maintain manufacturing facilities within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s 5G network, related services, and certain WiFi products infringe seven patents related to adaptive Multiple-Input Multiple-Output (MIMO) antenna systems.
  • Technical Context: The technology concerns methods for dynamically selecting combinations of antennas and communication channels to form optimal "MIMO physical sectors," a technique designed to enhance performance and reduce interference in complex wireless environments.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint does not reference any prior litigation, Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, or licensing history related to the patents-in-suit.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2006-02-28 Earliest Priority Date for all Patents-in-Suit
2016-11-15 U.S. Patent No. 9,496,930 Issues
2016-11-22 U.S. Patent No. 9,503,163 Issues
2017-02-28 U.S. Patent No. 9,584,197 Issues
2018-01-02 U.S. Patent No. 9,859,963 Issues
2019-02-19 U.S. Patent No. 10,211,895 Issues
2019-12-24 U.S. Patent No. 10,516,451 Issues
Mid-2020 Approximate timeframe of Samsung 5G RAN equipment supply deal with Verizon
2021-08-31 U.S. Patent No. 11,108,443 Issues
2022-12-20 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 9,496,930 - "Methods and Apparatus for Overlapping MIMO Physical Sectors"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,496,930, "Methods and Apparatus for Overlapping MIMO Physical Sectors," issued November 15, 2016.

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent family addresses the problem of performance degradation in wireless devices using conventional MIMO antennas due to changing sources of interference and environmental conditions (Compl. ¶¶ 13, 20; ’443 Patent, col. 1:36-39). These issues could lead to reduced signal-to-noise ratios, increased data errors, and lower transmission rates (Compl. ¶13).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a system where directional antennas are positioned so that their coverage areas, or "physical sectors," overlap (Compl. ¶14). This configuration allows a wireless device to dynamically select an optimal combination of these antennas to form a "MIMO physical sector" for communication. By selecting the sector that provides the best performance in the current conditions, the device can adapt to noise and environmental changes to maintain signal quality and throughput (Compl. ¶¶ 14, 17; ’443 Patent, col. 5:1-14).
  • Technical Importance: This adaptive sectoring approach was developed to enable wireless devices to maintain high performance and reliability in the face of unpredictable radio frequency interference, a foundational requirement for modern high-capacity networks (Compl. ¶19).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent Claim 1 (Compl. ¶31).
  • Essential elements of Claim 1 (a system claim) include:
    • A single wireless station configured for a packet-switched cellular network, comprising a first and second transmission point, each with MIMO capability, and third circuitry for communication between them.
    • The station is configured for the first and second transmission points to cooperate in a transmission to a MIMO-capable portable device.
    • Receiving first and second information from the portable device based on measurements.
    • Altering an aspect of the transmission based on the received information.
    • Transmitting data to the portable device.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.

U.S. Patent No. 9,503,163 - "Methods and Apparatus for Overlapping MIMO Physical Sectors"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,503,163, "Methods and Apparatus for Overlapping MIMO Physical Sectors," issued November 22, 2016.

The Invention Explained

  • This patent shares a common specification with the ’930 patent and addresses the same technical problem and solution, as described above (Compl. ¶¶ 13-15).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least Claim 2 (Compl. ¶40). Claim 2 depends from independent Claim 1.

  • Essential elements of Claim 1 (a method claim) include:

    • Providing access to a packet-switched network that includes first and second cooperating MIMO-capable system components.
    • Identifying information that is a function of interference in connection with a transmission to a portable device.
    • Altering at least one aspect of the transmission based on the identified information.
    • Transmitting data in connection with the transmission.

  • Claim 2 adds the limitation that the third circuitry includes at least one of a switch, a phased array, a controller, or a processor.

  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.
    The complaint asserts five additional patents from the same family. Below is a synopsis of each.

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,584,197, "Methods and Apparatus for Overlapping MIMO Physical Sectors," issued February 28, 2017.

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent relates to a system with first and second MIMO-capable wireless cell transmission points that cooperate to improve a transmission to a portable device by receiving feedback and altering the transmission in response.

  • Asserted Claims: At least Claim 1 (independent system claim) (Compl. ¶49).

  • Accused Features: Verizon's 5G Network and related WiFi products and services (Compl. ¶48).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,859,963, "Methods and Apparatus for Overlapping MIMO Physical Sectors," issued January 2, 2018.

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a system with first and second wireless parts having MIMO capability that can select a channel based on certain characteristics and initiate transmissions to portable devices.

  • Asserted Claims: At least Claim 1 (independent system claim) (Compl. ¶58).

  • Accused Features: Verizon's 5G Network and related WiFi products and services (Compl. ¶57).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,211,895, "MIMO Methods and Systems," issued February 19, 2019.

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a computer-implemented method for initiating simultaneous transmissions to first and second portable devices, receiving feedback, and altering the transmissions to reduce interference between them.

  • Asserted Claims: At least Claim 1 (independent method claim) (Compl. ¶67).

  • Accused Features: Verizon's 5G Network and related WiFi products and services (Compl. ¶66).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,516,451, "MIMO Methods," issued December 24, 2019.

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent covers a computer-implemented method for initiating transmissions to portable devices, receiving feedback based on measurements, altering transmissions to reduce interference, and transmitting data.

  • Asserted Claims: At least Claim 1 (independent method claim) (Compl. ¶76).

  • Accused Features: Verizon's 5G Network and related WiFi products and services (Compl. ¶75).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,108,443, "MIMO Methods and Systems," issued August 31, 2021.

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a method at a packet-switched cellular network involving two cooperating wireless cell transmission points that alter a transmission to a user device based on received feedback.

  • Asserted Claims: At least Claim 1 (independent method claim) (Compl. ¶85).

  • Accused Features: Verizon's 5G Network and related WiFi products and services (Compl. ¶84).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The complaint identifies the accused instrumentalities as the "Verizon 5G Network, Verizon's provision of related services and access to its 5G Network, and Verizon's WiFi products and services" (Compl. ¶30). Specific exemplary products named include the "Verizon Jetpack MiFi8800L, Verizon Orbic Speed Mobile Hotspot, [and] Verizon Internet Gateway – Business" (Compl. ¶30).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges that Verizon's 5G network utilizes equipment procured from manufacturers such as Ericsson and Samsung, including base stations and Radio Access Network (RAN) equipment (Compl. ¶¶ 9-10). The functionality accused of infringement is the network's alleged use of adaptive MIMO antenna techniques to manage signals, reduce interference, and achieve the high data speeds and reliability marketed as key benefits of 5G service (Compl. ¶¶ 14-15, 19). The complaint alleges these networks and associated devices implement the patented methods for creating and selecting optimal MIMO physical sectors to maintain performance (Compl. ¶¶ 17, 30-31).

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint references external claim chart exhibits (Exhibits H through N) for each asserted patent, but these exhibits were not filed with the complaint (Compl. ¶¶ 31, 40, 49, 58, 67, 76, 85). The narrative infringement theory is summarized below.

The complaint alleges that Verizon's 5G network and related products directly infringe the asserted claims by making, using, and selling systems that practice the patented methods (Compl. ¶¶ 30-31, 39-40). The core of the infringement theory appears to be that Verizon's 5G network, which is composed of numerous cooperating base stations ("transmission points"), communicates with user devices (e.g., mobile hotspots). This system allegedly receives feedback from the devices regarding signal quality and interference and, in response, "alters" its transmissions—for instance, by using different combinations of antennas or beamforming techniques—to improve performance, thereby practicing the central steps of the asserted claims (Compl. ¶¶ 14-17).

  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Evidentiary Questions: The complaint does not specify how the accused network architecture maps to the elements of the asserted claims. A central point of contention may be whether Plaintiff can produce evidence showing that Verizon's network performs the specific "altering" steps recited in the claims in response to specific "information" received from user devices, as opposed to employing generalized optimization techniques inherent to the 5G standard.
    • Scope Questions: The asserted claims use terms like "single wireless station" comprising multiple "transmission points" (’930 Patent, Claim 1). A potential dispute may arise over whether this term can be construed to cover a geographically distributed network of base stations as operated by Verizon, or if its meaning is limited to a more localized, co-located system as depicted in patent figures (e.g., ’443 Patent, Fig. 1).

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "single wireless station" (from '930 Patent, Claim 1)

  • Context and Importance: This term appears in the preamble of the asserted system claim. Its construction will be critical to determining whether the claimed system can read on a distributed cellular network with multiple cell sites or is limited to a single, co-located apparatus like an access point. Practitioners may focus on this term because Defendant will likely argue that its network, composed of many geographically separate stations, is not a "single" station.

  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The body of the claim describes the "single wireless station" as comprising first and second "transmission points" that cooperate, which may support a functional, system-level interpretation where the "station" is the coordinated network itself (Compl. ¶31).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figures in the patent family consistently depict a single central apparatus (e.g., "File Server" 10 or "Processor" 12) controlling a set of co-located antennas, which could support an argument that the "station" must be a single physical device or cell site (’443 Patent, Fig. 1, Fig. 11).

  • The Term: "altering at least one aspect of the...transmission" (from '930 Patent, Claim 1 and related method claims)

  • Context and Importance: This term is central to the claimed invention's adaptive functionality. The dispute will likely focus on whether routine 5G network operations like beam steering or power control constitute "altering" as claimed, or if the term requires a more specific act, such as switching between distinct, predefined sets of antennas to form a new "MIMO physical sector."

  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification suggests that a wireless device can "select different antennas to operate as a MIMO antenna, thereby selecting a different MIMO virtual sector to operate as a MIMO physical sector where the different MIMO physical sector provides increased performance" (’443 Patent, col. 5:9-14). This broad language could support various forms of adaptation.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description heavily emphasizes the concept of positioning antennas to form distinct "MIMO virtual sectors" and selecting among them based on performance criteria (’443 Patent, col. 3:39-62). Defendant may argue that "altering" is limited to this specific mode of selecting predefined sectors, rather than more generalized signal adjustments.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Willful Infringement: The complaint does not contain an explicit count for willful infringement. However, for each asserted patent, it alleges that "Verizon has had actual knowledge of the...patent at least as early as the date of service of this Complaint" (e.g., Compl. ¶32, 41, 50). This allegation appears to lay the groundwork for a claim of post-suit willfulness. The prayer for relief also requests a declaration that the case is "exceptional," which could lead to an award of enhanced damages and attorneys' fees (Compl., Prayer for Relief ¶C).

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

  • A core issue will be one of evidentiary sufficiency: Can the plaintiff move beyond high-level allegations and provide specific technical evidence demonstrating that Verizon's 5G network architecture and its operational logic map directly onto the specific elements of the asserted claims, particularly the steps of receiving feedback and "altering" transmissions in the manner claimed?
  • A key legal question will be one of definitional scope: Will claim terms like "single wireless station," which are illustrated in the patent with diagrams of co-located components, be construed broadly enough to encompass a modern, geographically distributed 5G network comprised of numerous cooperating but physically separate base stations? The outcome of this construction could be dispositive for infringement.