DCT
2:23-cv-00412
Tiare Technology Inc v. Chili's Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Tiare Technology, Inc. (Delaware)
- Defendant: Chili's, Inc. (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: The Davis Firm, PC
- Case Identification: 2:23-cv-00412, E.D. Tex., 09/14/2023
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant operates multiple "regular and established places of business" in the Eastern District of Texas.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s mobile application for restaurant ordering infringes patents related to mobile ordering systems that incorporate location-tracking features.
- Technical Context: The technology at issue involves using patron-operated mobile devices to place orders and tracking the location of those devices to facilitate order fulfillment within a specific service venue.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint highlights an extensive prosecution history for the patent family, noting that claims were allowed after overcoming patent-eligibility rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101. It also references a prior case against a different defendant in the same court where challenges to the patents' eligibility were reportedly denied.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2002-09-23 | Priority Date for ’729, ’414, and ’224 Patents |
| 2014-03-25 | ’729 Patent Issued |
| 2014-09-12 | USPTO issues Non-Final Rejection in application for a related patent |
| 2015-07-15 | USPTO issues Notice of Allowance in application for a related patent |
| 2017-12-29 | USPTO issues Non-Final Rejection in application for ’414 Patent |
| 2018-12-18 | ’414 Patent Issued |
| 2020-04-29 | USPTO issues Non-Final Rejection in application for ’224 Patent |
| 2021-12-07 | ’224 Patent Issued |
| 2023-09-14 | 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's background section describes inefficiencies in service environments like resorts, where patrons have difficulty placing orders and staff have difficulty locating patrons for delivery, especially as patrons move around locations like a pool or beach (e.g., '414 Patent, col. 1:22-56). Conventional solutions like centrally-located kiosks or staff-operated handheld terminals were described as failing to solve these core problems of patron convenience and location tracking (e.g., '414 Patent, col. 2:22-56).
- The Patented Solution: The invention provides a "portable patron unit" (e.g., a mobile device) with a "venue specific application program" that allows a patron to place an order directly (e.g., '414 Patent, col. 4:17-31). The system connects this unit to a central server and determines the unit's location, allowing staff to find the patron for order fulfillment ('729 Patent, Abstract). The system can update the patron's location and order status in real-time.
- Technical Importance: The invention proposed a patron-centric mobile ordering architecture at a time when location-tracking technologies like GPS and Wi-Fi positioning were still nascent, aiming to solve the technical problem of order fulfillment for mobile customers within a large service area (Compl. ¶¶ 36-37).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶57). The full claim language is not provided in the complaint or its exhibits. The complaint’s allegations suggest the claim covers a method with the following essential elements:
- Providing a patron with a wireless patron unit having a venue-specific application
- Connecting the wireless patron unit to a server
- Entering a patron order for an item or service
- Determining a current location of the wireless patron unit
- Updating a status of the order and the current location when the patron moves
- Displaying the patron order on the unit's display
U.S. Patent No. 10,157,414 - Patron Service System and Method
Issued December 18, 2018
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: This patent, from the same family as the ’729 patent, addresses the same technical problems of inefficient ordering and difficult patron location in service venues (e.g., ’414 Patent, col. 1:22-56).
- The Patented Solution: The '414 Patent claims a server-side computer-implemented method. The solution involves providing a venue-specific application to a mobile device, authenticating the user, and then using location information received from the device to determine the device's location at different times ('414 Patent, Abstract). The server maps this location to a region associated with the venue and receives order information from the device, enabling a location-aware ordering process ('414 Patent, Abstract).
- Technical Importance: This patent focuses on the back-end system architecture required to manage location data from multiple mobile devices to facilitate service, an improvement over systems that lacked the technical capacity for real-time, centralized location tracking of patrons (Compl. ¶¶ 38-39).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 8 (Compl. ¶76). Its essential elements are:
- Providing, over a wireless channel, 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 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 location information.
U.S. Patent No. 11,195,224 - Patron Service System and Method
Issued December 7, 2021
- Technology Synopsis: The ’224 Patent claims a system for locating multiple electronic devices. It describes providing a venue-specific application to a plurality of devices, receiving location information from them, determining their locations, and, in response to an order from one device, sending its updated location to a venue's computing system for display in a graphical user interface (Compl. ¶¶ 103-114). This provides a technical solution for tracking a specific ordering customer within a crowd of other customers.
- Asserted Claims: Independent claim 10 (Compl. ¶96).
- Accused Features: The complaint alleges that Defendant’s system for managing and locating multiple mobile devices for curbside pickup infringes this patent (Compl. ¶¶ 102-103).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- Defendant's "mobile-ordering solution," which includes the Chili's mobile application for smartphones and tablets (Compl. ¶¶ 3 fn.1, 50).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint describes the accused product as a "venue-specific application" that allows users to find a Chili's restaurant location, place an order from the menu, and pay for it (Compl. ¶¶ 50-51). The system uses the mobile device's location services to identify nearby stores and to track the user's arrival for curbside pickup, which facilitates order fulfillment (Compl. ¶52). The complaint provides a screenshot showing the application prompting a user with "Allow 'Chili's' to use your location?" and explaining that it uses location "to help us bring your curbside orders to your car quicker!" (Compl. p. 15).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
U.S. Patent No. 8,682,729 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1, as synthesized from Complaint) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Providing a patron with a wireless patron unit with a venue-specific application | Defendant provides the Chili's application for download onto patron-owned smartphones, which is described as a venue-specific application program. | ¶66 | col. 4:17-23 |
| Connecting the wireless patron unit to a server | The Chili's app on a user's smartphone connects to Defendant's server over a Wi-Fi or cellular connection to enable communication. | ¶67 | col. 6:11-18 |
| Entering a patron order for at least one item or service | A user selects items from a store menu within the app to create an order. The complaint includes screenshots of the Chili's app menu and order summary page. (Compl. p. 19) | ¶68 | col. 4:44-50 |
| Determining a current location of the wireless patron unit | The system determines the location of the user's smartphone, for example, to find local stores. | ¶69 | col. 15:8-24 |
| Updating a status of the order and the current location when the patron moves | The system updates the order status (e.g., placed, in progress) and tracks the smartphone's location as the user moves, such as when approaching the store for pickup. | ¶¶71-73 | col. 4:56-62 |
| Displaying the patron order on the display of the wireless patron unit | The app displays the user's order on the smartphone's screen. | ¶74 | col. 4:26-31 |
Note: Patent citations refer to the related ’414 Patent, as the ’729 Patent specification was not provided.
U.S. Patent No. 10,157,414 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 the Chili's app over cellular or WiFi networks to users' smartphones. | ¶84 | col. 26:9-11 |
| communicating... to authenticate, based on a security protocol, a user | The system authenticates a user via login and password and secures financial information for the transaction. | ¶¶85-87 | col. 10:36-44 |
| receiving... location information from the mobile computing device | Defendant's system receives location information from the smartphone via the device's location services. | ¶88 | col. 26:20-21 |
| determining... a location of the mobile computing device at a first time based on the location information | Based on the received data, Defendant's system determines the smartphone's location to, for example, find local stores. | ¶90 | col. 26:22-24 |
| mapping... the location to a region that is associated with a venue | The system maps the smartphone's location to a region associated with a specific Chili's store or group of stores nearby. | ¶91 | col. 26:25-27 |
| receiving, from the mobile computing device, order information for the venue | Defendant's system receives order information when a user selects items from the menu in the app. | ¶92 | col. 26:28-31 |
| receiving... updated location information from the mobile computing device | The system receives updated location information as the device moves, such as when it approaches the store for curbside pickup. | ¶93 | col. 26:32-34 |
| determining... an updated location of the mobile computing device at a second time based on the updated location information | Defendant's system determines updated locations of the smartphone at multiple points after receiving the updated data, including as the device approaches the store. | ¶94 | col. 26:35-37 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: The infringement theory rests on the premise that a chain of individual restaurant locations constitutes a "venue" and that a chain-wide mobile application is a "venue-specific application." A central question may be whether the patent's teachings, which are described primarily in the context of a single, contiguous resort with mobile patrons (e.g., at a pool or beach), can be construed to cover a system for coordinating pickup at discrete, fixed restaurant locations.
- Technical Questions: What evidence demonstrates that the accused system performs "mapping the location to a region" as claimed? The analysis may focus on whether simply identifying that a device is at a street address meets this limitation, or if the claim requires a more granular, intra-venue mapping as depicted in the patent's figures (e.g., ’414 Patent, Fig. 10, showing specific locations around a pool).
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
- The Term: "venue-specific application"
- Context and Importance: This term appears in the independent claims of both the '729 and '414 Patents. The complaint asserts that this limitation was added to the claims of the '414 Patent during prosecution to overcome a patent-eligibility rejection (Compl. ¶47). The definition of this term is therefore critical not only to infringement but potentially to validity. Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction will determine whether a single application that services an entire national chain of restaurants can be considered "specific" to a "venue."
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states that a "venue" can include "stadiums, arenas, retail locations, zoos, transportation centers," among others ('414 Patent, col. 4:5-9). This list of diverse and potentially non-contiguous locations may support an interpretation that "venue" is not limited to a single property like a resort.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The primary embodiment described throughout the specification is a "resort" ('414 Patent, col. 3:57-59). The problems described—locating mobile patrons for delivery around a pool or on a beach—are most directly applicable to a single, large, contiguous property, which could support a narrower construction. The complaint itself alleges the Chili's app is configured for "a venue (e.g., a Defendant store)" but also that it "may apply to more than one location (e.g., multiple Defendant stores)" (Compl. ¶51), highlighting the ambiguity.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement of infringement on the basis that Defendant provides its mobile application to consumers and provides instructions and encouragement (e.g., through app stores) on how to use the application in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶¶ 61, 80, 100).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Defendant "knew or should have known" of the patents but was "willfully blind" to their existence pre-suit. It further alleges that Defendant has had actual knowledge of the patents and its infringement since at least the filing of the complaint, making any continued infringement post-suit willful (Compl. ¶¶ 62, 81, 101).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "venue-specific application," which was added to secure patentability and is rooted in the context of a single resort, be construed to cover a single, chain-wide mobile application used across hundreds of geographically dispersed restaurant locations?
- A key evidentiary question will be one of technical operation: does the accused app's function of tracking a user's approach to a fixed curbside pickup spot perform the same function as the "mapping" and continuous location updating described in the patents, which were designed to solve the problem of finding a mobile patron within a large, dynamic area like a beach?
- A third question, relating to both validity and infringement, will be the impact of the prosecution history: how will the arguments made to the USPTO to overcome patent eligibility rejections, particularly the addition of the "venue-specific application" limitation, influence the court’s construction of the claims and its analysis of the accused system?