DCT

4:25-cv-01426

Near Field Electronics LLC v. Genesco Inc

Log In
Key Events
Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 4:25-cv-01426, E.D. Tex., 12/19/2025
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Eastern District of Texas because Defendant Genesco maintains regular and established places of business for its retail brands (Journeys Kidz, Johnston & Murphy) within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s credit card reader devices, which incorporate a specific Near Field Communication (NFC) component, infringe five U.S. patents related to semiconductor interface technology, power management, and signal processing.
  • Technical Context: The patents-in-suit relate to foundational technologies for integrated circuits that manage communication protocols, power consumption, and bus interfaces for peripheral devices.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that four of the five asserted patents ('201, '071, '350, '727) are expired. For these patents, Plaintiff seeks damages only for a past infringement period ending on each patent's respective expiration date. Infringement, including willful and indirect infringement, is alleged to be ongoing for the single unexpired patent ('531).

Case Timeline

Date Event
2000-06-21 U.S. Patent No. 6,691,201 Priority Date
2000-07-25 U.S. Patent No. 6,742,071 Priority Date
2000-08-28 U.S. Patent No. 6,996,727 Priority Date
2002-06-28 U.S. Patent No. 6,959,350 Priority Date
2004-02-10 U.S. Patent No. 6,691,201 Issued
2004-05-25 U.S. Patent No. 6,742,071 Issued
2005-05-05 U.S. Patent No. 7,373,531 Priority Date
2005-10-25 U.S. Patent No. 6,959,350 Issued
2006-02-07 U.S. Patent No. 6,996,727 Issued
2008-05-13 U.S. Patent No. 7,373,531 Issued
2021-11-21 U.S. Patent No. 6,742,071 Expired
2022-01-31 U.S. Patent No. 6,691,201 Expired
2022-04-14 U.S. Patent No. 6,996,727 Expired
2023-08-12 U.S. Patent No. 6,959,350 Expired
2025-12-19 Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 6,691,201 - “Dual Mode USB-PS/2 Device” (Issued Feb. 10, 2004)

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the problem of peripheral devices needing to support multiple communication protocols, such as USB and PS/2. Conventional approaches required costly external components, dedicated I/O pins, and complex firmware to manage the different protocols, increasing board space and compromising performance (Compl. ¶11; ’201 Patent, col. 1:28-50).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a single integrated circuit that can automatically detect the signaling protocol of a connected bus (e.g., USB or PS/2) and configure itself to operate using that protocol, all through a single shared set of I/O pins. This "single chip solution" aims to eliminate the need for external components and simplify firmware design (Compl. ¶12; ’201 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:51-60).
  • Technical Importance: This approach enabled the creation of more versatile, compact, and cost-effective peripheral devices (like computer mice) that could seamlessly connect to different types of computer ports without modification (Compl. ¶12).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent method claim 14 (Compl. ¶31).
  • Essential elements of claim 14 include:
    • Detecting a signaling protocol of a bus connected to an integrated circuit that operates in a plurality of signaling protocols.
    • Configuring the integrated circuit to communicate in one of the plurality of protocols in response to the detected protocol.
    • Operating each of the selected protocols over the connected bus through a single set of pins.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for the ’201 Patent.

U.S. Patent No. 6,742,071 - “Real-time I/O Processor Used to Implement Bus Interface Protocols” (Issued May 25, 2004)

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent describes the limitations of conventional bus interface designs, which were often rigid, protocol-specific, and unable to adapt to new or evolving bus standards. Traditional microprocessor-based I/O systems were often too slow for high-speed data transfer (Compl. ¶16; ’071 Patent, col. 1:16-32).
  • The Patented Solution: The patent discloses a flexible, programmable general-purpose interface (GPIF) architecture. This real-time I/O processor uses a limited instruction set to generate interface-specific control signals and waveforms, responding to external events on a clock-cycle-by-clock-cycle basis. This allows a single chip to implement various bus protocols without being hardwired for a specific one (’071 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:52-67).
  • Technical Importance: This technology provided a more flexible and high-performance alternative to fixed-function hardware, enabling devices to support multiple bus protocols and adapt to future standards through programming rather than hardware redesign (Compl. ¶16).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent method claim 15 (Compl. ¶36).
  • Essential elements of claim 15 include:
    • Generating a plurality of first control signals in response to a current state of a processor.
    • Progressing to a next state based on the current state, an internal control signal, and an input signal from an external bus.
    • Driving at least one output control signal onto the external bus.
    • Updating the current state to the next state.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for the ’071 Patent.

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 6,959,350 - “Configurable USB Interface With Virtual Register Architecture” (Issued Oct. 25, 2005)

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses the inflexibility of hard-coded USB endpoint configurations in interface controllers. The invention provides a configurable controller that uses a hardware description language (HDL)-based configuration package to generate circuitry for different USB endpoint setups, allowing for flexible reconfiguration without rewriting HDL code for each version (Compl. ¶19, 21).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 10 (Compl. ¶41).
  • Accused Features: Credit card readers equipped with an NXP PN512 NFC Front-End or similar components are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶41).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 6,996,727 - “Power Supply for Universal Serial Bus Interface with Programmable Bus Pullup Resistor” (Issued Feb. 7, 2006)

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent describes a power supply architecture for a bus interface that operates in two modes: a standard mode and a low-power standby mode. In standby mode, the main power supply is turned off to reduce consumption, while a low-power programmable resistor maintains the necessary pullup voltage for signaling, compensating for process variations (Compl. ¶24, 25).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 18 (Compl. ¶46).
  • Accused Features: Credit card readers equipped with an NXP PN512 NFC Front-End or similar components are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶46).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 7,373,531 - “Signal Detection Method, ... and Electronic Apparatus” (Issued May 13, 2008)

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent is directed to methods and devices for detecting the presence, absence, or frequency of a signal by monitoring the current flowing through a circuit of connected transistors. By detecting an operation state, the apparatus can execute a power supply stopping or reducing process to lower power consumption (Compl. ¶28, 29).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 2 (Compl. ¶51).
  • Accused Features: Credit card readers equipped with an NXP PN512 NFC Front-End or similar components are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶51).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The "Accused Instrumentalities" are identified as credit card reader devices equipped with an NXP PN512 NFC Front-End, as well as other NFC-capable readers with components that have similar functionality (Compl. ¶31).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges these devices are used by Defendant Genesco in the regular course of its business operations for processing NFC payment transactions (Compl. ¶33). The functionality at issue is the device's ability to conduct these NFC transactions. The complaint does not provide further technical detail on the operation of the NXP PN512 chip or the readers in which it is incorporated. No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint references, but does not include, claim chart exhibits (Exhibits A-1, B-1, C-1, D-1) that purport to show infringement of the asserted claims (Compl. ¶32, 37, 42, 47, 52). In the absence of these exhibits, the infringement theory must be summarized from the complaint's narrative allegations.

U.S. Patent No. 6,691,201 Infringement Allegations

The complaint alleges that when Genesco puts the Accused Instrumentalities into use for processing NFC payments, the devices perform "each and every step of the method(s) claimed by '201 patent" (Compl. ¶33). This conclusory allegation suggests the Plaintiff's theory is that the NXP PN512 chip's handling of NFC protocols constitutes the claimed method of "automatically selecting a signaling protocol." The complaint does not specify which signaling protocols are allegedly being selected between, nor does it detail how the chip's operation maps to the specific steps of claim 14.

  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Question: A primary issue may be whether the claimed method, described in the patent's specification in the context of distinguishing between wired protocols like USB and PS/2, can be construed to read on the operation of a wireless NFC chipset detecting and communicating with a payment card.
    • Technical Question: What evidence will show that the NXP PN512 chip performs the specific step of "detecting a signaling protocol of a bus" and then "configuring said integrated circuit to communicate" in response, as opposed to simply operating within a single, albeit complex, protocol family (NFC)?

U.S. Patent No. 6,742,071 Infringement Allegations

Similar to the '201 patent, the complaint alleges that the use of the Accused Instrumentalities for NFC payments constitutes performance of "each and every step of the method(s) claimed by '071 patent" (Compl. ¶38). The underlying theory appears to be that the NXP PN512 chip contains a real-time I/O processor that executes instructions to manage the NFC interface in the manner recited by claim 15. The complaint does not provide specifics on the internal architecture of the accused chip or how it allegedly executes instructions to progress through different states.

  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Question: The dispute may turn on whether the internal logic of the accused NFC chip can be characterized as the "processor" executing "instructions" to "generate... control signals" as contemplated by the patent, which describes a specific programmable architecture with a finite state machine and writable control store.
    • Technical Question: Does the accused NXP chip actually operate based on a sequence of states updated by internal and external bus signals on a per-clock-cycle basis, or does it employ a different, non-infringing architecture for managing the NFC interface?

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

For the ’201 Patent:

  • The Term: "automatically selecting one of said plurality of signaling protocols in response to a signaling protocol of a connected bus" (from claim 14).
  • Context and Importance: This phrase is the central limitation of the method claim. The outcome of the infringement analysis will depend heavily on whether the accused NFC reader's function of detecting and communicating with an NFC card falls within the scope of this term. Practitioners may focus on this term because it presents a potential mismatch between the patent's original context (wired computer ports) and the accused technology (wireless NFC).
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself is not expressly limited to any particular protocols, referring generally to "a plurality of signaling protocols" ('201 Patent, col. 6:55-56). This could support an argument that the term should apply to any system that chooses between different communication modes.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description focuses exclusively on the USB and PS/2 protocols as examples. The background section frames the problem in terms of these specific peripheral interfaces ('201 Patent, col. 1:15-27), and the preferred embodiments describe logic for distinguishing between them (col. 3:44-67). This context could support a narrower construction limited to selecting between distinct, wired bus standards.

For the ’071 Patent:

  • The Term: "progressing to a next state based on said current state, at least one internal control signal... and an input signal received from said external bus" (from claim 15).
  • Context and Importance: This term defines the core operational logic of the claimed real-time I/O processor. Infringement will require showing that the accused NXP chip operates according to this specific state-based model.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language describes a general state machine operation which could be argued to be a fundamental concept in digital logic design, potentially covering a wide range of processor architectures.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification provides detailed embodiments, including a finite state machine with a lookup table (Fig. 6) and an alternative with a writable control store (Fig. 7). These specific implementations ('071 Patent, col. 6:21-39) could be used to argue that the claimed "progressing to a next state" requires the specific architectural elements disclosed, rather than any generic state-based logic.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges induced infringement for the ’531 Patent only. It asserts that since at least receiving notice via the complaint, Genesco has induced its partners, customers, and end users to infringe by "advertising and distributing the Accused Instrumentalities and providing instruction materials, training, and services" with specific intent or willful blindness (Compl. ¶55-56).
  • Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged for the ’531 Patent only, based on alleged knowledge of the patent and infringement acquired "since the filing of this Complaint" (Compl. ¶57). This is a claim for post-filing willfulness.

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

  1. A core issue will be one of technological scope: Can the claims of patents written in the context of wired peripheral interfaces (USB, PS/2) and programmable bus controllers from the early 2000s be construed to cover the internal operations of a modern, highly integrated NFC wireless communication chipset? The defense may argue a fundamental mismatch between the technologies, while the plaintiff will likely focus on the general applicability of the claimed methods.

  2. A second issue will be one of evidentiary proof: The complaint makes high-level allegations that the accused devices perform the claimed methods. A key focus of discovery and expert analysis will be establishing the precise internal architecture and method of operation of the NXP PN512 chip to determine if it actually performs the specific steps of automatic protocol selection ('201 patent) and instruction-based, state-driven waveform generation ('071 patent) as required by the asserted claims.