DCT
2:22-cv-00492
Tiare Technology Inc v. Sonic Industries Services Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Tiare Technology, Inc. (Delaware)
- Defendant: Sonic Industries Services, Inc. (Oklahoma)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: The Davis Firm, PC
- Case Identification: 2:22-cv-00492, E.D. Tex., 12/23/2022
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant is registered to do business in Texas, has transacted business in the Eastern District, and operates regular and established places of business within the District.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s mobile ordering application infringes three patents related to systems and methods for providing services to patrons using wireless devices with location-tracking capabilities.
- Technical Context: The technology at issue involves integrating mobile ordering with location tracking on a patron's personal device to facilitate order fulfillment within a specific service environment, such as a restaurant or resort.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that Plaintiff has previously resolved patent disputes with other industry participants. It also details an extensive prosecution history for the asserted patent family, alleging that the claims were examined and allowed by the USPTO after consideration of patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and the Supreme Court's Alice framework, which may be a preemptive attempt to address potential eligibility challenges.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2002-09-23 | Earliest Priority Date for All Patents-in-Suit |
| 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 |
| 2022-12-23 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 8,682,729 - "Patron Service System and Method"
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,682,729, "Patron Service System and Method," issued March 25, 2014.
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The complaint, citing the patent family's specification, describes the drawbacks of conventional service systems in venues like resorts. These systems, such as "centrally-located kiosks" or staff-operated handheld terminals, were allegedly inefficient because they required patrons to leave their location to order or wait for staff, and they lacked a mechanism for staff to efficiently locate a mobile patron for delivery (Compl. ¶¶ 34-35; ’414 Patent, col. 2:21-57).
- The Patented Solution: The invention provides a system where a patron uses a wireless unit (e.g., a smartphone) with a venue-specific application. This unit connects to a server, allowing the patron to place an order directly and enabling the system to determine the patron's current location to facilitate service or delivery (’729 Patent, Abstract). The system architecture is depicted in Figure 1, showing portable patron and staff units communicating with a central unit and fulfillment centers (’414 Patent, Fig. 1).
- Technical Importance: The complaint alleges the invention provided a technical improvement by creating a new mobile-ordering architecture that tracks portable patron units via a venue-specific application, solving the location-tracking limitations of prior fixed-kiosk or staff-centric systems (Compl. ¶36).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶56).
- Essential elements of Claim 1 include:
- Providing a patron with a wireless patron unit (either venue-owned or a patron-owned device with a downloaded application).
- 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 on the unit when the patron moves.
- Displaying the patron order on the unit's display.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.
U.S. Patent No. 10,157,414 - "Patron Service System and Method"
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,157,414, "Patron Service System and Method," issued December 18, 2018.
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent's background section describes inefficiencies in service venues where patrons face difficulties ordering items like food and beverages, and staff face challenges in locating those patrons for delivery. It notes the limitations of both centrally-located kiosks and staff-operated point-of-sale (POS) devices (’414 Patent, col. 1:40-col. 2:57).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a computer-implemented method where one or more processors provide a "venue-specific application" to a mobile device over a wireless channel. The system authenticates the user, receives location information from the device, determines the device's location, maps it to a region associated with the venue, and receives order information. Crucially, it also receives updated location information to determine the device's location at a second, later time (’414 Patent, Abstract; col. 26:8-40).
- Technical Importance: The complaint asserts this technology provides an unconventional solution to tracking distributed mobile devices in real-time by integrating location-tracking technology into mobile computing devices and communicating location updates over wireless networks (Compl. ¶38).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 8 (Compl. ¶75).
- Essential elements of Claim 8 include:
- Providing a venue-specific application to a mobile computing device over a wireless channel.
- Communicating with the device to authenticate a user based on a security protocol.
- Receiving location information from the device.
- Determining a location of the device at a first time.
- Mapping the location to a region associated with a venue.
- Receiving order information from the device.
- Receiving updated location information from the device.
- Determining an updated location of the device at a second time based on the updated information.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.
U.S. Patent No. 11,195,224 - "Patron Service System and Method"
- 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. A computing system provides a venue-specific application to multiple mobile devices, receives location signals from them, and determines their first and second (updated) locations. Upon receiving an order from one device, the system sends data indicating that device's updated location to a separate computing system associated with the venue, for display in a graphical user interface (’224 Patent, Abstract; col. 25:55-col. 26:23).
Asserted Claims
At least independent claim 10 (Compl. ¶95).
Accused Features
The complaint accuses Defendant's system of infringing by providing its mobile application, receiving location information from users' devices, determining and updating those locations, receiving orders, and, in response, sending updated location data to a computing system associated with the Sonic venue for display (Compl. ¶¶ 102-111).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
The accused instrumentality is Defendant's mobile application, referred to as the "Accused Products" (Compl. ¶3 n.1).
Functionality and Market Context
The complaint alleges the accused application provides a mobile ordering solution that is "specifically configured for a venue (e.g., a Defendant store)" but can apply to multiple locations (Compl. ¶51). The application's functions include allowing a user to select a store, place an order, and pick it up (Compl. ¶18). To facilitate this, the application allegedly tracks the user's location to "find drive-ins around you" and to "allow you to check in when using SONIC® Pay or Order Ahead" (Compl. ¶52). A composite screenshot in the complaint shows the user interface for selecting a nearby store, customizing an order, and proceeding to checkout (Compl. p. 15). The complaint asserts that the app has been used to complete a significant amount of mobile orders, generating substantial revenue (Compl. ¶54).
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 ... by providing at least one venue specific application program to the at least one patron for downloading into a patron-owned wireless communication device | Defendant provides patrons with its mobile application for downloading onto their smartphones or tablets (Compl. ¶¶ 15, 65). | ¶65 | col. 16:32-40 |
| connecting the wireless patron unit to a server enabling communication between the wireless patron unit and the server | Defendant connects the patron's device to a server via the application, using a Wi-Fi or cellular connection (Compl. ¶66). | ¶66 | col. 18:66-col. 19:4 |
| entering a patron order for at least one item or service provided by the venue into the wireless patron unit | A user enters an order for an item from a store menu into the application on their smartphone or tablet (Compl. ¶67). A screenshot displays the user interface for selecting and adding menu items to an order (Compl. p. 19). | ¶67 | col. 17:29-32 |
| determining a current location of the wireless patron unit | Defendant determines the location of the user's device, for example, to find local stores (Compl. ¶¶ 68-69). | ¶68 | col. 21:56-62 |
| updating a status of the patron order, and the current location of the wireless patron unit when the patron moves to a different location | Defendant updates the order status (e.g., placed, in progress) and updates the device's location as the user moves, such as to determine proximity to the store (Compl. ¶¶ 70-72). | ¶¶70-72 | col. 22:18-21 |
| displaying the patron order on a display of the wireless patron unit | Defendant displays the patron's mobile order on the screen of the smartphone or tablet (Compl. ¶73). | ¶73 | col. 17:50-59 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central question may be whether Defendant’s network of individual franchise stores constitutes a "venue" as contemplated by the patent, which primarily describes a single, contiguous resort environment. The interpretation of "connecting the wireless patron unit to a server" may also be disputed, specifically whether a standard mobile app's communication with back-end servers over the internet meets the potential implication of a dedicated, venue-specific network.
- Technical Questions: It raises the question of whether the app's function to "find drive-ins around you" constitutes "determining a current location" in the manner required by the claim, which is linked in the patent to facilitating direct delivery of an order to a mobile patron within a defined area.
’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 provides its venue-specific mobile application to users over wireless channels like cellular or WiFi networks (Compl. ¶83). | ¶83 | col. 26:10-12 |
| communicating ... with the mobile computing device ... to authenticate, based on a security protocol, a user | Defendant's system communicates with the device to authenticate a user via login, password, and securing financial information (Compl. ¶¶ 85-86). | ¶¶85-86 | col. 22:32-38 |
| receiving, by the one or more processors, location information from the mobile computing device | Defendant's processors receive location information from the user's device through its location services (Compl. ¶87). | ¶87 | col. 26:19-20 |
| determining ... a location of the mobile computing device at a first time based on the location information | Based on the received information, Defendant determines the location of the smartphone or tablet (Compl. ¶89). | ¶89 | col. 26:21-23 |
| mapping ... the location to a region that is associated with a venue | Defendant maps the device's location to a region associated with a store or group of stores, such as nearby drive-ins (Compl. ¶90). | ¶90 | col. 26:24-25 |
| receiving, from the mobile computing device, order information for the venue | Defendant receives order information from the user's input into the venue-specific application (Compl. ¶91). | ¶91 | col. 26:26-28 |
| receiving ... updated location information from the mobile computing device | Defendant receives updated location information from the device, for example, to determine when it is in proximity to the store (Compl. ¶92). | ¶92 | col. 26:34-36 |
| determining ... an updated location of the mobile computing device at a second time based on the updated location information | Defendant determines updated locations of the device at multiple points in time, such as when the device approaches the store for pickup (Compl. ¶93). | ¶93 | col. 26:37-40 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: The construction of "mapping the location to a region that is associated with a venue" will be a key point of dispute. The complaint's theory suggests this is met by identifying nearby stores. An alternative reading of the patent, particularly Figure 10's depiction of a detailed pool map, could suggest the claim requires mapping a user to a specific sub-location within a single venue for service delivery, not merely identifying the closest of many independent venues.
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges the system determines updated locations "as the device approaches the site" (Compl. ¶93). A factual question will be what evidence supports that the accused system performs this specific type of continuous or proximity-based location updating, as opposed to a one-time location check upon arrival or "check-in."
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "venue-specific application"
Context and Importance: This limitation was added to the claims of the '414 and '224 patents during prosecution, allegedly to overcome a Section 101 (patent eligibility) rejection (Compl. ¶¶ 47-48). Its construction will therefore be central to both infringement and validity analyses. The dispute will likely center on whether a "venue" can encompass a national chain of restaurants or is limited to a single, localized establishment like the "resort" described in the specification.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states the system may be used in "various other venues including, but not limited to, stadiums, arenas, retail locations, zoos, transportation centers..." (’414 Patent, col. 4:5-8). This list of diverse and potentially sprawling locations may support an interpretation of "venue" that is not limited to a single, contiguous property.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The primary embodiment described throughout the detailed description is a "resort," with specific examples relating to a "pool, beach, spa, deck, lounge" (’414 Patent, col. 4:20-22). The patent's solution is consistently framed as solving the problem of locating a patron within such an environment for service delivery, which may support a narrower construction.
The Term: "mapping...the location to a region that is associated with a venue"
Context and Importance: This term from claim 8 of the ’414 Patent is critical to the infringement allegation. The complaint alleges this is met by identifying nearby stores. Practitioners may focus on this term because its interpretation determines whether a simple "find my nearest store" feature infringes, or if a more complex intra-venue coordinate mapping is required.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself is general. The term "region" is not explicitly limited, and "associated with" could be read broadly to mean "geographically close to."
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figure 10 of the patent depicts a detailed map of a pool area where individual patron units are shown as specific blocks (1004) in a grid relative to the pool (1010). This visual embodiment suggests "mapping to a region" entails plotting a device's coordinates onto a detailed map of a specific, defined venue, not just selecting the closest address from a list.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement of infringement against users of the mobile application. The basis for this allegation is Defendant's act of supplying the application through app stores and providing instructions and encouragement for users to use the app in its ordinary, allegedly infringing, manner (Compl. ¶¶ 60, 79, 99).
- Willful Infringement: Willfulness allegations are based on knowledge of the patents acquired "at least as early as the filing and service of this Complaint." The complaint alleges that any continued infringement after this notice is willful and deliberate (Compl. ¶¶ 61, 80, 100).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "venue," which is rooted in the patent's detailed description of a single resort environment and was added to secure patentability, be construed broadly enough to read on a distributed national chain of quick-service restaurants?
- A second key issue will be one of technical and functional scope: does the accused application's functionality of identifying the nearest store for order pickup and enabling a "check-in" perform the specific function of "mapping the location to a region" as described in the patent, which appears to contemplate a more granular, real-time tracking of a patron within a venue to facilitate mobile service delivery?
- Finally, the case may present a significant question of patent eligibility: despite surviving examination, will the claims, which are directed to managing service orders using mobile device location data, face a renewed challenge under 35 U.S.C. § 101 that the claimed subject matter is an abstract idea implemented with conventional technology?