DCT
2:24-cv-00367
H2 Intellect LLC v. IBM Corp
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: H2 Intellect LLC (Texas)
- Defendant: International Business Machines Corporation (New York)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Winston & Strawn LLP
- Case Identification: 2:24-cv-00367, E.D. Tex., 05/16/2024
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant has committed acts of infringement and maintains regular and established places of business within the Eastern District of Texas.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s location-aware software platforms and services infringe patents related to the exclusive, geographically-targeted delivery of content to mobile devices.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns geofencing, where digital content or functionality is triggered when a mobile device enters or remains within a predefined geographic boundary.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that the asserted patents stem from a family of applications developed by the inventors beginning in the late 2000s to capitalize on the emergence of GPS-enabled smartphones.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2009-05-01 | Earliest Priority Date for '625, '247, and '171 Patents |
| 2015-03-10 | U.S. Patent No. 8,977,247 Issued |
| 2016-03-15 | U.S. Patent No. 9,286,625 Issued |
| 2020-01-01 | Date of IBM documentation for Max Engage with Watson |
| 2024-01-05 | Date of IBM documentation for MaaS360 and Compliance Rules |
| 2024-04-02 | U.S. Patent No. 11,948,171 Issued |
| 2024-05-16 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 9,286,625 - Exclusive Delivery of Content within Geographic Areas (Issued Mar. 15, 2016)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent describes a technological environment where content delivery to mobile devices was becoming common, but lacked the ability to provide content with geographic and temporal specificity, leading to problems like "alert spam" where users receive irrelevant notifications (’625 Patent, col. 9:10-24; Compl. ¶24).
- The Patented Solution: The invention provides a centralized management system that allows "sponsors" to reserve geographic areas, often exclusively, for delivering their content to registered applications on mobile devices that enter those areas. The system can enforce rules based on time, duration within an area, and can resolve competing claims for the same location, thereby improving the relevance of delivered content and improving mobile device functionality (’625 Patent, col. 3:28-39, col. 7:20-44).
- Technical Importance: This approach provided a method for targeted, location-based mobile advertising and content delivery that was more sophisticated than simple broadcasting, aiming to improve user experience and create new monetization opportunities for app developers (Compl. ¶29).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 20 (’625 Patent, col. 15:5-16:8; Compl. ¶32).
- Essential Elements of Claim 20:
- A non-transitory computer readable medium with instructions for:
- Registering an application program for having content from sponsors delivered to it after an object of interest enters/exits a designated geographic area.
- Receiving, from the registered application, a request to obtain an interest in the designated geographic area.
- Storing a reservation associating the geographic area with the registered application.
- Restricting content delivery to being from the associated sponsor(s) after the object enters the area.
- Causing the sponsor's content to be provided for use by the application.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.
U.S. Patent No. 11,948,171 - Exclusive Delivery of Content within Geographic Areas (Issued Apr. 2, 2024)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the limitations of conventional content delivery, where content is either broadly broadcast or delivered only in response to direct user requests, without leveraging the unique location-aware capabilities of modern mobile devices (’171 Patent, col. 1:48-67).
- The Patented Solution: The invention describes a system where an application on a mobile device can offload location awareness to a central "content delivery platform." The platform manages geographic areas defined by "geometric constructs" and can deliver an "identifier" to the application when the device enters a reserved area, which allows for more efficient, battery-saving operation and enables complex, time-based, and exclusive content delivery rules (’171 Patent, col. 2:6-23, col. 13:3-20).
- Technical Importance: By offloading the constant need for an application to poll for its own location, the invention claims to improve a fundamental aspect of mobile device performance—battery life—while enabling more powerful location-based services (Compl. ¶26).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 43, and the overview section discusses the technology of independent claim 1 (’171 Patent, col. 13:26-14:52, col. 21:1-22:10; Compl. ¶26, 45, 49-51).
- Essential Elements of Claim 1:
- A system including a mobile device with memory, a processor, and code.
- The code includes instructions for sending to a content delivery platform:
- A request to have an identifier, associated with a selected geographic area, delivered to a computer program on the mobile device after it is determined the device has entered the area.
- Geographic reservation data to have the area reserved, where the data comprises a geometric construct used to establish a perimeter.
- And instructions for receiving, via the computer program, the identifier from the platform after the device has entered the area.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.
Multi-Patent Capsule
- U.S. Patent No. 8,977,247: Exclusive Delivery of Content within Geographic Areas (Issued Mar. 10, 2015)
- Technology Synopsis: This patent, part of the same family, describes methods and systems for managing content delivery based on geographic areas. It focuses on resolving competing claims for an area by enabling time-sharing, where different sponsors can have exclusive rights to the same location during different, specified periods of time, thereby solving problems unique to mobile environments with multiple applications and sponsors (’247 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶27-28).
- Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 15 is asserted (Compl. ¶56).
- Accused Features: The complaint accuses IBM's products of infringing through their use of geofencing and location information in advertising and content delivery (Compl. ¶55). The specific allegations for the ’247 Patent concern instructions for registering applications, establishing perimeters, and reserving content delivery for specific sponsors (Compl. ¶60-66).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The complaint identifies IBM's MaaS360, IBM Streams, Maximo Manage, and Max Engage with Watson products as the "Accused Products" (Compl. ¶31).
Functionality and Market Context
- The Accused Products are enterprise software platforms that provide, among other features, location-based services and geofencing capabilities (Compl. ¶31, 36).
- MaaS360 is a mobile device management (MDM) platform that can enforce "Geo-Fencing Rules" to change a device's policy based on its location, such as blocking access to data when a user leaves a secure work environment (Compl. ¶36, Example Image 1.4).
- IBM Streams is a data analytics platform with a "Geospatial toolkit" that includes operators to detect when a moving object enters, exits, or "hangs out" within a defined region for a "minimumDwellTime" (Compl. ¶36, Example Images 1.7, 1.8).
- Max Engage with Watson is a platform that allows ads for local businesses to be "geo-fenced to target customers in their area" (Compl. ¶36, Example Image 1.17).
- The complaint alleges these products are used in major industries like transportation, healthcare, and oil & gas, suggesting significant commercial importance (Compl. ¶35, 48, 59). A screenshot from IBM documentation shows how an administrator can define an address-based location with a specific range in miles (Compl. ¶36, Example Image 1.3).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'625 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 20) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a non-transitory computer readable medium tangibly embodying a program of computer executable instructions | IBM provides software products such as MaaS360 and IBM Streams that contain executable instructions (Compl. ¶36). | ¶36 | col. 15:5-7 |
| at least one instruction for registering an application program for having content associated with one or more sponsors delivered to one or more application program instances after it is determined that an object of interest has one of entered and exited a designated geographic area | MaaS360 allows administrators to enroll devices and install the MaaS360 app, which then becomes subject to location-based rules (Compl. ¶36, Example Image 1.2). | ¶36 | col. 15:8-16 |
| at least one instruction for receiving, from the registered application program, a request to obtain an interest in the designated geographic area | The IBM Streams "region_match" operator receives data from moving devices and matches it against configured regions (geofences), which constitutes a request for location-based processing (Compl. ¶36, Example Image 1.6). | ¶37, 36 | col. 15:17-23 |
| at least one instruction for storing a reservation associating the designated geographic area with the registered application program | MaaS360's "Locations" feature allows an administrator to define and save secure locations (e.g., "Embassy Golf Link") with a specific range, which constitutes a stored reservation (Compl. ¶36, Example Image 1.3). This visual shows a map interface for adding an address-based location. | ¶38, 36 | col. 15:24-30 |
| at least one instruction for restricting content delivery to the one or more application program instances to being content associated with at least one of the one or more sponsors | MaaS360 geofencing policies can be configured to "block access to or selectively wipe sensitive data," thereby restricting content/functionality based on location (Compl. ¶36, Example Image 1.1). | ¶39, 36 | col. 15:31-38 |
| at least one instruction for causing registered application program content associated with at least one of the one or more sponsors to be provided for use by the one or more application program instances | The IBM Streams Geofence operator sends targeted promotions to users when they are detected entering a shopping center geofence (Compl. ¶36, Example Image 1.13). | ¶40, 36 | col. 15:39-46 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: Does the term "sponsor" as used in the patent, which implies a commercial or advertising relationship, read on an IT administrator setting security policies in MaaS360? The complaint conflates these uses, which may become a central dispute over claim scope.
- Technical Questions: What evidence demonstrates that the accused "geofencing rules" for security compliance in MaaS360 function as the claimed "content delivery" system, which the patent describes in a commercial advertising context? The court may need to determine if restricting access to data is equivalent to providing sponsored content.
'171 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| sending, to a content delivery platform: a request to have an identifier... delivered to a computer program on the mobile device after it has been determined... that the mobile device has at least entered the selected geographic area of interest | The complaint alleges that when a mobile device running an IBM-managed application enters a geofence, its location data is sent to an IBM platform, which constitutes a request for location-based services (Compl. ¶49). | ¶49 | col. 13:37-47 |
| sending, to a content delivery platform: geographic reservation data to have the selected geographic area of interest reserved... wherein the geographic reservation data comprises a geometric construct used to establish at least one perimeter as a boundary... | IBM's platforms allow users to define geofences using various geometric shapes. An included image shows the use of polygons to define the state of New York as a geofence (Compl. ¶36, Example Image 1.15). This functionality is alleged to be the claimed "geographic reservation data." | ¶50, 36 | col. 13:48-52 |
| receiving, via the computer program, the identifier delivered by the content delivery platform after it has been determined... that the mobile device has at least entered the selected geographic area of interest | The IBM Streams Geofence operator provides output lists like "fencesEntered()" and "fencesExited()" that report which geofences the object has just entered or exited, which the complaint alleges is the claimed "identifier" (Compl. ¶36, Example Image 1.11). | ¶51, 36 | col. 14:41-52 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: Can the term "identifier" be construed to cover general status outputs like "fencesEntered()", or does the patent require a specific token or unique key for tracking a session, as suggested by other figures in the patent family (e.g., '625 Patent, FIG. 6)?
- Technical Questions: Does defining a geofence in MaaS360 or IBM Streams for compliance or data analytics purposes constitute sending "geographic reservation data" with the intent to "reserve" an area for content delivery, as the claim requires? The defendant may argue its systems merely define boundaries for monitoring, not for the exclusive reservation system described in the patent.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
For the '171 Patent:
The Term: "geographic reservation data"
Context and Importance: This term is central to the infringement allegation. Plaintiff's theory appears to be that any data defining a geofence within the accused products meets this limitation. The viability of the infringement case may depend on whether this term is construed broadly to mean any geofence definition, or narrowly to require data that explicitly creates an exclusive or prioritized right to deliver content within that area.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states that geographic reservation data "comprises a geometric construct used to establish at least one perimeter as a boundary" (’171 Patent, col. 13:50-52), language that focuses on the act of defining a boundary rather than the purpose of the reservation.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent summary repeatedly frames the invention in the context of "reserving particular areas for delivery of content associated with particular sponsors" and resolving "competing claims for exclusivity" (’171 Patent, col. 1:11-12, col. 10:42-44). This context suggests the "reservation" data is not just a boundary, but data that establishes a priority right.
The Term: "identifier"
Context and Importance: Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction determines whether a simple status notification (e.g., "entered fence A") infringes, or if a more specific, unique token is required. The complaint alleges that function calls like "fencesEntered()" meet this limitation (Compl. ¶36, Example Image 1.11).
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself does not place explicit structural limitations on the "identifier," suggesting it could be any data that serves to identify the event of entering a geographic area. The term is generic.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description in related patents discusses a "request identifier" used to "track further interaction" and "a series of interactions" (’247 Patent, col. 11:35-12:1), suggesting the identifier is a persistent key for tracking a session, not just a one-off event notification.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement by asserting that IBM provides user manuals, documentation, and products that direct and instruct its end-user customers to use the Accused Products in an infringing manner (e.g., to set up geofences) (Compl. ¶33, 46, 57).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges knowledge of the patents "at least as early as the filing of this Complaint" (Compl. ¶33, 46, 57). This appears to be a claim for post-filing willfulness, asserting that any continued infringement after receiving the complaint is willful.
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of contextual scope: can claim terms like "sponsor" and "content delivery", which are described in the patent specifications primarily in a commercial advertising context, be construed to read on the accused functionalities of enterprise security policy enforcement (MaaS360) and general data stream analytics (IBM Streams)?
- A key question of claim construction will be the definition of "geographic reservation data". The case may turn on whether this term simply means data defining a boundary, as the Plaintiff's evidence suggests, or if it requires a specific function of creating an exclusive or prioritized right to deliver content, as the patent's background and summary sections may imply.
- A central evidentiary question will be one of technical operation: does the accused systems' use of geofences for monitoring and rule-triggering perform the same function as the patented system for managing and reserving exclusive areas for content delivery, or is there a fundamental mismatch in their respective purposes and operations?