DCT
2:23-cv-00414
Tiare Technology Inc v. Deli Management Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Tiare Technology, Inc. (Delaware)
- Defendant: Deli Management, Inc. (Texas)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: The Davis Firm, PC
- Case Identification: 2:23-cv-00414, E.D. Tex., 09/14/2023
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Eastern District of Texas because Defendant operates multiple regular and established places of business (stores) in the District, distributes its mobile application to users in the District, and derives revenue from mobile ordering within the District.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s mobile ordering application for its Jason's Deli restaurant chain infringes three patents related to systems and methods for providing services to patrons in a venue by tracking the location of a wireless device.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns the integration of mobile ordering with real-time location tracking of a user's device to streamline service delivery, a foundational technology in the modern quick-service restaurant and retail industries.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint emphasizes that the asserted patent family underwent extensive examination at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, including overcoming rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Alice). It also notes that in a prior case, Tiare Technology Inc v. Whataburger Restaurants LLC, the same court denied challenges to the eligibility of the asserted patents.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2002-09-23 | Earliest Priority Date Asserted (’729, ’414, ’224 Patents) |
| 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 |
| 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 (’729 Patent)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent specification describes inefficiencies in service at venues like resorts, where patrons face difficulty finding staff to place an order, and staff subsequently face challenges locating the patron for delivery, leading to delays and dissatisfaction. Conventional solutions like fixed kiosks or staff-operated handhelds were seen as inadequate because they either inconvenienced the patron or failed to solve the patron location problem. (’414 Patent, col. 2:22-56).
- The Patented Solution: The invention provides a system where a patron uses a "portable patron unit" (e.g., a modern smartphone) running a "venue specific application" to place orders wirelessly. A central server receives the order and determines the patron unit's location, allowing staff to provide service or deliver goods efficiently to the patron's current position. (’414 Patent, col. 3:1-17; Fig. 1).
- Technical Importance: This approach provided a technical framework for patron-initiated mobile ordering combined with location awareness, aiming to reduce service friction and improve operational efficiency in large, complex environments. (Compl. ¶¶36-38).
Key Claims at a Glance
- Independent Claim Asserted: Claim 1 (Compl. ¶57).
- Essential Elements of Claim 1:
- A method of using a wireless patron unit within a venue.
- Providing a patron with a wireless patron unit (by providing a venue specific application for download).
- Connecting the wireless patron unit to a server.
- Entering a patron order for an item or service into the unit.
- Determining a current location of the wireless patron unit.
- Updating a status of the order and the current location of the unit when the patron moves to a different location.
- Displaying the patron order on the unit's display.
- The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims. (Compl. ¶57).
U.S. Patent No. 10,157,414 - "Patron Service System and Method," issued December 18, 2018 (’414 Patent)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: As a continuation of the same patent family, the ’414 Patent addresses the same technical problems of service inefficiency in venues as described for the ’729 Patent. (’414 Patent, col. 2:22-56).
- The Patented Solution: The solution is also a server-based system that communicates with a mobile device running a venue-specific application. This patent’s claims focus on the server-side method, including steps like authenticating the user, receiving location information at different times, and mapping that location to a region associated with the venue. (’414 Patent, col. 4:18-31; Fig. 13).
- Technical Importance: This patent claims the server-side data processing that enables location-aware mobile ordering, which is a critical component for coordinating service between a mobile user and a fixed-location venue. (Compl. ¶¶38-39).
Key Claims at a Glance
- Independent Claim Asserted: Claim 8 (Compl. ¶76).
- Essential Elements of Claim 8:
- A computer-implemented method executed by one or more processors.
- 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 based on the location information.
- Mapping the location to a region that is 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.
- The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims. (Compl. ¶76).
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 11,195,224 (’224 Patent)
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,195,224, "Patron Service System and Method," issued December 7, 2021.
- Technology Synopsis: The ’224 Patent, also in the same family, claims a system for locating electronic devices. The system provides a venue-specific application to multiple mobile devices, determines their locations based on received signals at different times, and, in response to an order from one device, sends data indicating its updated location to a computing system associated with the venue for display. (’224 Patent, Abstract).
- Asserted Claims: Independent claim 10 is asserted. (Compl. ¶96).
- Accused Features: The complaint accuses Defendant’s system of processors and data stores that execute instructions to provide the mobile application, receive and determine device locations at multiple points in time, and communicate location updates to facilitate order fulfillment. (Compl. ¶¶103, 107-112).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- Defendant’s mobile-ordering solution, including the "Jason's Deli" mobile application and the backend server systems that support it. (Compl. ¶¶1, 50).
Functionality and Market Context
- The accused application allows users to find nearby Jason's Deli store locations, place food orders for pickup, and use location-based services to facilitate curbside delivery. (Compl. ¶¶51-52). The complaint provides a screenshot of the application prompting the user to allow location access, stating it "Allows search for nearby deli locations and to accurately locate you for curbside order delivery." (Compl. p. 16, ¶53). The application includes an "Order Tracker" and "I'm Here" functionality, which allegedly tracks the user's location upon approach to the store for curbside pickup. (Compl. ¶52). The complaint alleges that this mobile ordering system generates significant revenue for the Defendant. (Compl. ¶55).
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 | Defendant provides its mobile application for download in app stores for use on patron-owned smartphones. | ¶65-66 | col. 25:21-30 |
| connecting the wireless patron unit to a server | The application on the user's smartphone connects to Defendant's server via a Wi-Fi or cellular connection to enable communication. | ¶67 | col. 25:30-33 |
| 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 food items from the store menu into the application on their smartphone. A screenshot shows the menu and order entry interface. | ¶68; Compl. p. 19 | col. 25:34-37 |
| determining a current location of the wireless patron unit | Defendant's system determines the location of the smartphone, for example, to find local stores. | ¶69-70 | col. 25:38-39 |
| updating a status of the patron order, and the current location of the wireless patron unit when the patron moves to a different location, on the wireless patron unit | The system allegedly tracks the location of the user's device as it moves, for example when it is in proximity to the store for pickup. It also updates order status (e.g., placed, in progress). | ¶71, 73 | col. 25:40-44 |
| displaying the patron order on a display of the wireless patron unit | The application displays the patron's order on the smartphone screen. A screenshot shows an order confirmation screen with order details. | ¶74; Compl. p. 15 | col. 25:45-47 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: The patent describes a "venue" in the context of a resort or stadium. A primary question will be whether a distributed chain of quick-service restaurants, or a single restaurant location within that chain, constitutes a "venue" as contemplated by the claim.
- Technical Questions: What evidence does the complaint provide that the system performs the specific step of "updating... the current location of the wireless patron unit when the patron moves to a different location"? The complaint alleges this occurs when a device approaches a store for curbside pickup (Compl. ¶73), but the provided screenshots primarily show initial location finding and a static order confirmation. The "Order Tracker" screenshot (Compl. p. 16) showing an ETA may suggest this functionality, but the underlying technical mechanism will be a point of dispute.
’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 mobile application over cellular and WiFi networks to users' smartphones. | ¶84 | col. 26:40-43 |
| communicating... to authenticate, based on a security protocol, a user of the venue-specific application | The system authenticates a user via a login and password, and secures financial information for the purchase. | ¶85-87 | col. 26:44-49 |
| receiving... location information from the mobile computing device | Defendant's processors receive location information from the user's smartphone via the device's location services. | ¶88 | col. 26:50-51 |
| determining... a location of the mobile computing device at a first time based on the location information | The system determines the smartphone's location based on the received information, for example to find nearby stores. | ¶90 | col. 26:52-54 |
| mapping, by the one or more processors, the location to a region that is associated with a venue | The system maps the device's location to a region associated with a nearby store or group of stores for mobile ordering. | ¶91 | col. 26:55-57 |
| receiving, by the one or more processors, updated location information from the mobile computing device | Defendant's system receives updated location information from the smartphone, for instance, as the user travels toward the store. | ¶93 | col. 26:61-62 |
| determining, by the one or more processors, 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, such as when the device approaches the store. | ¶94 | col. 26:63-66 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: The construction of "mapping the location to a region that is associated with a venue" will be critical. Does identifying nearby stores from a list based on GPS coordinates meet this limitation, or does the patent require a more granular, intra-venue mapping as depicted in its figures (e.g., a map of a pool area)?
- Technical Questions: Similar to the '729 Patent, the analysis will focus on the evidence that Defendant’s system actively "receiv[es] updated location information" and "determin[es] an updated location... at a second time" to track a user's movement, as opposed to performing a one-time location query to find stores or a one-time calculation for an ETA.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "venue" (asserted in claims of both ’729 and ’414 patents)
Context and Importance: This term is central to the dispute, as the patent's specification heavily relies on examples like resorts, stadiums, and cruise ships. The Defendant operates a chain of restaurants. Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction could determine whether the accused system falls within the scope of the claims at all.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification provides a non-limiting list, stating a "resort" refers to "hospitality venues, such as, but not limited to, hotels, motels, lodging centers, cruise ships... and any constituent parts of a particular resort, such as, but not limited to, restaurants, bars, pools..." (’414 Patent, col. 3:58-66). The complaint argues a "store-chain" or "single store" can be a venue. (Compl. ¶51).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The problem statement and many embodiments focus on solving issues unique to large, contiguous areas where patrons are mobile but remain within a single property (e.g., locating a patron on a beach or by a pool). (’414 Patent, col. 2:22-56). The term may be construed as being limited to such single, cohesive locations rather than a geographically distributed set of individual stores.
The Term: "updating... the current location of the wireless patron unit when the patron moves to a different location" (’729 Patent, Claim 1)
Context and Importance: This term is crucial for distinguishing the claimed invention from systems that perform only a single location lookup. The infringement allegation hinges on whether the accused app's curbside pickup functionality constitutes continuous or periodic tracking of a moving user.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification does not appear to mandate a specific technical method or frequency for the update, which could support an argument that any update based on movement (e.g., a re-check upon arrival in a geofenced area) meets the limitation. The patent discloses tracking a patron who "wishes to relocate from the beach to the pool." (’414 Patent, col. 6:7-9).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The context implies a system designed to solve the problem of delivering an order to a patron who has moved after placing the order but before delivery within the venue. An "Order Tracker" that provides an ETA for a user traveling to the venue could be argued to be a fundamentally different technical operation than the intra-venue tracking described in the patent.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement of infringement against users of the mobile application. The basis for this allegation is that Defendant provides the application through app stores and provides instructions and encouragement for users to use the infringing location-based ordering features. (Compl. ¶¶61, 80, 100).
- Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged based on Defendant having knowledge of the asserted patents and their infringement "since at least as early as the filing and service of this Complaint." (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," which is described in the patent in the context of self-contained locations like resorts and stadiums, be construed to cover a distributed chain of quick-service restaurants or the individual stores within it? The outcome of this claim construction dispute may significantly impact the infringement analysis for the entire patent family.
- A second central issue will be one of technical proof: What evidence will demonstrate that the accused mobile application performs the specific, dynamic function of "updating" a user's location "when the patron moves," as required by the claims? The case may turn on whether the app’s functionality for curbside pickup involves actual, periodic location tracking or merely a one-time location query and time-of-arrival calculation, and whether the latter meets the claim limitations.
- A third question relates to patent eligibility: Although the complaint notes that eligibility challenges have been overcome during prosecution and in prior litigation (Compl. ¶¶43-49), the defense may re-raise arguments under 35 U.S.C. § 101, forcing an analysis of whether the claims are directed to a patent-ineligible abstract idea and, if so, whether they contain an inventive concept that transforms them into a patent-eligible application.