DCT

2:24-cv-00153

OBD Sensor Solutions LLC v. Verizon Connect Inc

Log In
Key Events
Complaint
complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:24-cv-00153, E.D. Tex., 03/04/2024
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendants maintain regular and established places of business in the district, have committed acts of infringement in the district, and offer the accused products to customers located there.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s "Hum" line of vehicle tracking devices infringes a patent related to an on-board device for monitoring and processing motor vehicle operating data.
  • Technical Context: The technology concerns on-board diagnostic (OBD) port devices that collect and analyze vehicle performance data, a field central to the modern connected car, telematics, and fleet management industries.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention any prior litigation, Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, or licensing history related to the patent-in-suit.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2001-06-18 U.S. Patent No. 7,146,346 Priority Date
2006-12-05 U.S. Patent No. 7,146,346 Issued
2024-03-04 Complaint Filed

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

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7146346, titled “Fuzzy-Logic On Board Device For Monitoring And Processing Motor Vehicle Operating Data,” issued December 5, 2006 (the “'346 Patent”). (Compl. ¶26).

  • The Invention Explained:

    • Problem Addressed: The patent describes a need in the automotive field for on-board systems that can autonomously collect and process vehicle operating data to optimize vehicle design, monitor component aging, and assess usage patterns without requiring extensive, costly, and dedicated sensors or modifications to the vehicle's electrical system. (’346 Patent, col. 1:15-46).
    • The Patented Solution: The invention is an electronic device that connects to a vehicle’s existing internal data network and its dedicated electronic control units (ECUs). (’346 Patent, col. 2:51-56). It processes data from the vehicle’s own sensors using fuzzy logic and a "genetic algorithm" methodology to create a statistical profile, or "DNA," of the vehicle's unique operational history and usage patterns, which is then stored for analysis. (’346 Patent, col. 3:60-65; col. 4:1-7; Fig. 1).
    • Technical Importance: The described approach sought to provide a more deeply integrated and intelligent data analysis capability that could leverage a vehicle's existing sensor and network infrastructure, rather than relying on external or purpose-built monitoring hardware. (’346 Patent, col. 1:47-56).

  • Key Claims at a Glance:

    • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1. (Compl. ¶32).
    • The essential elements of independent claim 1 include:
      • An electronic device for monitoring and processing vehicle data comprising a central processing unit (CPU), integrated data storage, and a network connector.
      • The network connector is configured to connect to a vehicle's inner network via a standard diagnostic connector (e.g., OED/EOBD).
      • The device is a "stand-alone device cooperating with the vehicle electronic dedicated control units" to process information data from vehicle sensors.
      • Data is processed by the CPU, and the "performed analysis" is stored in the integrated storage.
      • The device includes an interface connector for a radio transmitter or wireless unit, a front-end device, and buses connecting the components.
    • The complaint’s prayer for relief seeks judgment on "one or more claims," suggesting dependent claims may be asserted later. (Compl. ¶44.a).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The accused products are Verizon’s “Hum” vehicle tracking devices, including the “Hum⁺” and “HumX” models, along with their associated software and applications. (Compl. ¶22).

  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges the Hum devices are designed to be plugged into a vehicle’s standard On-Board Diagnostic (OBD-II) port to monitor, process, and transmit data related to the vehicle's use and function. (Compl. ¶22, Fig. 6). The complaint includes a marketing screenshot detailing features such as "Vehicle Diagnostics," "Vehicle Location," "Speed & Boundary Alerts," "Driving History," and a "Safety Score," which are derived from the collected vehicle data. (Compl. ¶22; Fig. 3). The complaint also provides technical specification sheets listing components of the Hum devices, such as a processor and memory. (Compl. Figs. 4-5). A screenshot from an installation guide shows a user plugging the device into the OBD-II port located under the vehicle's dashboard. (Compl. Fig. 6).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

  • ’346 Patent Infringement Allegations
Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
An electronic device for monitoring and processing information data related to the use and functioning of motor vehicles...comprising, a central processing unit (3); an integrated data storage (4)... The Hum devices are electronic devices that monitor and process vehicle data, and contain a processor (e.g., ARM Cortex-A7 or VIA Telecom CBP8.2) and memory (e.g., 256 MB RAM, 512 MB Flash). ¶33; Fig. 4; Fig. 5 col. 6:11-15
...and a network connector (8) operatively connected to the central processing unit and configured to be connected to an inner network of a motor vehicle through a connector (40) used by motor vehicle makers for accessing a vehicle on-board electric system with a diagnostic unit, The Hum devices contain an OBD-II reader that serves as a network connector, which plugs into the vehicle's standard OBD-II port to access the inner network. ¶33; Fig. 6 col. 6:15-21
said device being a stand-alone device cooperating with the vehicle electronic dedicated control units, via said network connector and through said inner network, and processing information data related to use and functioning of the motor vehicle received... The Hum device is a stand-alone unit that plugs into the OBD-II port and allegedly cooperates with the vehicle's systems to receive and process data for features like "Vehicle Diagnostics" and "Auto Health." ¶33; Fig. 3 col. 6:22-29
said data received through said inner network being processed by said central processing unit and performed analysis being stored into said storage (4); The Hum devices process received data to generate outputs like a "Safety Score" and "Driving History," and this analysis is stored in the device's memory. ¶33; Fig. 3 col. 6:30-33
an interface connector (2) providing connection to one of a radio transmitter (6) and a wireless unit; The Hum devices have 4G LTE connectivity, which requires an interface to a radio transmitter for wireless communication. ¶33; Fig. 4; Fig. 5 col. 6:34-36
and a front-end device (6) and a bus (13) connecting said network connector (8) to said central processing unit; and a further bus (14) connecting said central processing unit to said storage (4), The Hum devices necessarily include internal buses and front-end circuitry to connect the OBD-II reader, processor, memory, and LTE radio components. ¶33; Fig. 4; Fig. 5 col. 6:37-41
wherein said device is coupled, through said on-board network connector (8), with one of an OBD- and an EOBD connector (40) for interfacing the motor vehicle inner networks with an outside network of said motor vehicle. The Hum device's OBD-II reader is coupled with the vehicle's OBD-II port, which is a standardized connector for interfacing with the vehicle's internal networks. ¶33; Fig. 6 col. 6:42-47
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A central dispute may arise over the meaning of a "stand-alone device cooperating with the vehicle electronic dedicated control units." The defense may argue that "cooperating" implies a deeper, more interactive level of integration than passively reading data from an OBD-II port, pointing to patent embodiments that describe replacing an ECU or modifying engine control procedures (’346 Patent, col. 5:46-53; Fig. 6). The plaintiff may counter that receiving data for analysis constitutes "cooperation."
    • Technical Questions: The complaint alleges that "performed analysis" is stored in the device. A key factual question will be what level of analysis the Hum devices actually perform and store locally, as opposed to simply transmitting raw or minimally processed data to a remote server for analysis. The case may turn on whether creating a "Safety Score" or "Driving History" (Compl. Fig. 3) meets the "analysis" limitation as construed in light of the patent's disclosure of creating a "DNA" profile using fuzzy logic.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "cooperating with the vehicle electronic dedicated control units" (Claim 1)

    • Context and Importance: The interpretation of this term is critical to determining whether a consumer-grade, plug-in diagnostic reader falls within the scope of the claim. The infringement case hinges on whether passively receiving data from ECUs via the OBD-II port constitutes "cooperating."
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent states the device can be coupled to the vehicle's network via a standard OED or EOBD connector, suggesting it can function as an external, add-on unit. (’346 Patent, col. 5:22-29). In this context, receiving data from ECUs to perform analysis could be argued as a form of cooperation.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification discloses embodiments where the device is more deeply integrated, such as replacing a dedicated ECU or being used to "change the motor vehicle engine control procedures." (’346 Patent, col. 5:46-53; Fig. 6). This language may support a narrower construction requiring more than just one-way data gathering.

  • The Term: "performed analysis" (Claim 1)

    • Context and Importance: This term defines the nature of the processing that must occur on the device. Whether the accused products infringe may depend on whether their data processing qualifies as the claimed "analysis."
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself does not specify the type of analysis. Plaintiff may argue that any data transformation, such as calculating a "Safety Score" or categorizing driving events (Compl. Fig. 3), constitutes a "performed analysis."
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification heavily details a specific form of analysis based on "fuzzy-logic principles" and "genetic algorithm construction" to generate a statistical "DNA" of the vehicle's use. (’346 Patent, col. 2:57-63; col. 3:60-65). A court could be persuaded to limit the scope of "performed analysis" to this more complex statistical profiling, potentially excluding simpler data logging or calculations.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges induced infringement, stating that Verizon provides instructions and encourages customers to use the Hum devices in a way that directly infringes the ’346 Patent. (Compl. ¶34). It further alleges contributory infringement, claiming the accused products contain special features not suitable for substantial non-infringing use. (Compl. ¶35).
  • Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged based on Verizon's knowledge of the patent since at least the filing of the complaint. (Compl. ¶36, ¶39). The complaint also asserts a theory of willful blindness, alleging on information and belief that Verizon has a policy or practice of not reviewing the patents of others. (Compl. ¶37).

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

  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "cooperating with," which is described in patent embodiments involving deep system integration and even ECU replacement, be construed to cover a consumer device that primarily reads data from a standardized diagnostic port?

  • A key evidentiary question will be one of technical implementation: beyond marketing claims, what is the nature of the "analysis" performed by the accused Hum devices? The case will likely require a detailed technical examination of whether the devices merely log and transmit data or if they perform and store a form of local analysis that meets the claim limitation, particularly in light of the patent’s focus on creating a complex statistical "DNA" profile.