DCT

1:23-cv-00324

Carbyne Biometrics LLC v. Apple Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:23-cv-00324, W.D. Tex., 03/24/2023
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Western District of Texas due to Defendant’s substantial and continuous presence, including two large Austin campuses, an engineering center, a manufacturing facility, and multiple retail stores where accused products are developed, sold, and demonstrated. The complaint also identifies specific Apple engineers and third-party witnesses relevant to the accused technologies who are located in the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s devices incorporating the Secure Enclave and biometric systems (Face ID, Touch ID) infringe three patents related to secure authentication, and that Defendant's Apple Cash platform infringes three patents related to fraud reduction in electronic transactions.
  • Technical Context: The patents relate to hardware-isolated biometric authentication systems and methods for verifying a user’s "liveness" during electronic transactions to prevent fraud.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint references prior litigation (Identity Security LLC v. Apple, Inc.) to support its assertion that key witnesses with knowledge of the accused Secure Enclave technology are based in Defendant's Austin offices.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2010-05-06 Priority Date ('010, '656, '886 Patents)
2012-01-17 Priority Date ('512, '105, '138 Patents)
2017-12-13 Apple press release regarding Finisar investment for Face ID components
2018-04-06 Apple CEO Tim Cook states on MSNBC that Face ID modules are made in Texas
2018-05-15 U.S. Patent No. 9,972,010 ('010 Patent) Issued
2019-11-20 Apple CEO Tim Cook tweet regarding Mac Pro manufacturing in Austin
2020-07-14 U.S. Patent No. 10,713,656 ('656 Patent) Issued
2021-02-23 U.S. Patent No. 10,929,512 ('512 Patent) Issued
2022-10-18 U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105 ('105 Patent) Issued
2022-11-29 U.S. Patent No. 11,514,138 ('138 Patent) Issued
2022-12-13 U.S. Patent No. 11,526,886 ('886 Patent) Issued
2023-03-24 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 10,929,512 - "Authentication Translation"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section states that providing credentials to a service is often a "tedious experience for a user," which leads to insecure practices like password re-use and the selection of poor-quality passwords (’512 Patent, col. 1:35-40).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes an "authentication translator" system within a user's device that securely stores credentials in a vault and automatically provides them to services on the user's behalf (’512 Patent, col. 2:63-3:1). To ensure security, the system uses a specific hardware architecture comprising a main, "insecure" processor and storage area, and a separate, dedicated "secure" processor and storage area accessible only through a "restricted API." Biometric data is processed and credentials are managed within this secure hardware partition, isolated from the main operating system (’512 Patent, col. 3:67-4:8, Fig. 3).
  • Technical Importance: This approach allows for the integration of hardware-backed biometric authentication with existing services that rely on traditional passwords, enhancing security without requiring modification to the services themselves (Compl. ¶41).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2-4, 10-14, and 20-21 (Compl. ¶77).
  • Independent Claim 1 of the ’512 Patent recites essential elements including:
    • A system with a first processor establishing a secure connection with an external resource.
    • The first processor communicates with a second processor using a restricted interface.
    • The second processor receives a biometric input, accesses a record in secure storage, and retrieves a credential (e.g., password, cookie, cryptographic key).
    • In response to a biometric match, the second processor facilitates a login by transmitting output based on the retrieved credential.
    • The system performs a secure backup of the record to a storage service, where it can be downloaded by a second, registered device associated with the user.

U.S. Patent No. 9,972,010 - "Method, Medium, and System for Reducing Fraud"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent background identifies fraudulent electronic transactions as an "ongoing problem," noting that electronic fraud is particularly devastating because the perpetrator does not need physical access to a victim's resources (’010 Patent, col. 1:19-27). The complaint adds that fraudsters can defeat simple countermeasures, for example by using a photograph of a legitimate user (Compl. ¶36).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention aims to reduce fraud by increasing the "likelihood (either real or perceived by the fraudster) that the fraudulent act will be detected" (’010 Patent, col. 4:46-48). It proposes a method where, during an electronic transaction, the system captures contextual information, including biometric information, and performs an analysis to determine that the user is "alive" before completing the transaction (’010 Patent, col. 8:54-67). This "liveness" check can involve analyzing multiple photographs taken in rapid succession to ensure a fraudster is not simply using a static picture of the legitimate user (Compl. ¶60).
  • Technical Importance: This technology provides a specific technical solution to combat biometric spoofing attacks by incorporating a "liveness" verification step directly into the transaction authorization process (Compl. ¶60).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 5, 6, 9, 13, 14, 17, and 21-22 (Compl. ¶95).
  • Independent Claim 1 of the ’010 Patent recites essential elements including:
    • A system with one or more processors.
    • Rendering, in an interface, a virtual likeness of a face of an account holder.
    • Rendering a transaction icon in the interface.
    • Receiving an indication of a user interaction with the transaction icon.
    • Capturing contextual information associated with the transaction, which comprises captured biometric information from the user.
    • Performing a fraud detection analysis on the captured information, which includes determining that the user is alive.
    • Completing the electronic transaction based on both the user interaction and the fraud detection analysis.

U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105 - "Authentication Translation"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,475,105, "Authentication Translation," Issued October 18, 2022 (Compl. ¶38).
  • Technology Synopsis: Related to the '512 Patent, this patent adds teachings for a "same brand" backup system. This system enhances security by, for example, restricting the backup of authentication vaults only to computational devices of the same brand, enabling stronger controls over key distribution and access (Compl. ¶47).
  • Asserted Claims: 1, 9, 18, 28, 35 (Compl. ¶83).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges infringement by Apple's ecosystem, where the Secure Enclave and iCloud Keychain securely synchronize authentication data across a user's various Apple-branded devices (Compl. ¶¶46-47, 74).

U.S. Patent No. 11,514,138 - "Authentication Translation"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,514,138, "Authentication Translation," Issued November 29, 2022 (Compl. ¶39).
  • Technology Synopsis: Also related to the '512 Patent, this patent discloses using a "cryptographic key as the credential" for services that support stronger authentication methods beyond passwords. It further discusses and claims methods for facilitating the wiping of such a key (Compl. ¶48).
  • Asserted Claims: 1, 3, 7-8, 10-13, 15, 19, 22-25 (Compl. ¶89).
  • Accused Features: The complaint implicates Apple's Secure Enclave, which manages cryptographic keys used for features like Apple Pay and password autofill (Compl. ¶¶63, 65, 74).

U.S. Patent No. 10,713,656 - "Method, Medium, and System for Reducing Fraud"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,713,656, "Method, Medium, and System for Reducing Fraud," Issued July 14, 2020 (Compl. ¶52).
  • Technology Synopsis: Related to the '010 Patent, this patent's claims require capturing "location data associated with the user" in addition to biometric information. The fraud detection analysis then involves comparing the captured biometric information against stored biometric information to determine if the user is alive (Compl. ¶58).
  • Asserted Claims: 1, 4, 7-10, 13, 16-19 (Compl. ¶101).
  • Accused Features: This patent is asserted against the Apple Cash platform, which the complaint alleges uses location data to verify that the sender is located in the United States before processing a transfer (Compl. ¶70).

U.S. Patent No. 11,526,886 - "Method, Medium, and System for Reducing Fraud"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,526,886, "Method, Medium, and System for Reducing Fraud," Issued December 13, 2022 (Compl. ¶53).
  • Technology Synopsis: Also related to the '010 Patent, this patent's claims require capturing both location data and "a set of biometric information, wherein capturing the set... comprises capturing, using a camera, a set of images." The fraud detection analysis then determines whether to allow the transaction based on both the location and an analysis of the captured images (Compl. ¶59).
  • Asserted Claims: 1-2, 4-7, 9-11, 12, 14, 18, 20 (Compl. ¶107).
  • Accused Features: This patent is asserted against Apple's Face ID feature as used in Apple Cash, which the complaint alleges uses a TrueDepth camera to take "multiple photos of the sender's face" to verify liveness (Compl. ¶69).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The complaint identifies two main groups of accused functionalities corresponding to the two patent families: (1) Apple's Secure Enclave architecture and associated biometric systems (Touch ID, Face ID) across various iOS, iPadOS, and Mac devices (Compl. ¶74); and (2) the Apple Cash payment platform on iOS and iPadOS devices (Compl. ¶¶68, 75).

Functionality and Market Context

  • Secure Enclave and Biometric Systems: The complaint describes the Secure Enclave as a "dedicated secure subsystem integrated into Apple systems on chip (SoCs)" that is "isolated from the main processor to provide an extra layer of security" (Compl. ¶63). A diagram from Apple's security guide is reproduced in the complaint, illustrating the Secure Enclave Processor's isolation from the main Application Processor (Compl. p. 28). This architecture is designed to protect sensitive data like biometric information even if the main operating system kernel is compromised (Compl. ¶63). The complaint alleges Apple markets the Secure Enclave as a key security differentiator and provides documentation instructing developers that the Secure Enclave manages all biometric authentication data out of reach of the app and the main OS (Compl. ¶¶64, 67). A reproduced diagram shows this layered access model (Compl. p. 33).
  • Apple Cash Platform: The complaint describes Apple Cash as a peer-to-peer payment platform integrated into iMessage and Apple Wallet (Compl. ¶68). To authorize a transaction, a sender is prompted to authenticate, which activates the Face ID feature (Compl. ¶68). The complaint alleges that Face ID uses a "TrueDepth camera... to take multiple photos of the sender's face" to perform an analysis that verifies "the sender is alive and not a two-dimensional photograph" (Compl. ¶69). The complaint also states that Apple Cash transactions can only be completed if the sender is located in the United States, which requires the platform to use "location data captured by the sender's device" (Compl. ¶70). The complaint includes a screenshot from an Apple support page showing the user interface for sending money via iMessage (Compl. p. 36).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

U.S. Patent No. 10,929,512 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a system, comprising: a first processor of a first device; wherein the first processor is configured to: based at least in part on a request associated with a user to access an external resource, establish a secure connection with the external resource... Apple devices contain an Application Processor (e.g., A-series, M-series) that establishes secure connections to external services like websites and apps. ¶¶63, 74 col. 3:67-4:1
...and communicate with a second processor using a restricted interface... The Application Processor communicates with the Secure Enclave Processor. Apple documentation states this communication is isolated from the main OS. ¶¶63, 67 col. 4:5-8
...wherein the second processor is configured to: receive a biometric input from a sensor... The Secure Enclave Processor receives data from the device’s Face ID or Touch ID sensors. ¶¶66, 67 col. 4:2-4
...access a record stored in a secure storage... The Secure Enclave Processor accesses records containing sensitive data from its dedicated secure storage mechanism. ¶63 col. 3:63-65
...retrieve, from the record, at least one of a password, a cookie, or a cryptographic key... Upon successful biometric authentication, the system retrieves stored passwords or keys from the iCloud Keychain vault. ¶¶23, 43 col. 6:40-46
...in response to determining that there is a match between the biometric input and a stored biometric template... facilitate a login of the user to the external resource... After a Face ID or Touch ID match, Apple's Password Autofill feature provides the retrieved credentials to log the user into the external resource. ¶¶43, 65 col. 6:40-46
...and perform a secure backup of the record to a storage service, wherein a second device associated with the user is registered with the storage service, and wherein the record is downloaded from the storage service by the second device. The iCloud Keychain service synchronizes saved credentials across multiple registered Apple devices associated with a single user account. ¶46 col. 7:55-59
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A central question may be whether the hardware and software architecture of Apple’s Application Processor and Secure Enclave Processor, which communicate via system-level APIs, constitutes the claimed "first processor" and "second processor" communicating via a "restricted interface" as described in the patent.
    • Technical Questions: The analysis may focus on whether Apple's iCloud Keychain synchronization mechanism, which updates credential databases across multiple devices, performs the specific steps of a "secure backup" where a "record is downloaded... by the second device" as required by the claim.

U.S. Patent No. 9,972,010 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A system, comprising: one or more processors... configured to: render, in one or more interfaces, a virtual likeness of a face of an account holder... Apple iOS devices render the Apple Cash interface within iMessage or the Wallet app. ¶¶68, 75 col. 5:25-34
render, in the one or more interfaces, a transaction icon associated with the electronic transaction. The Apple Cash interface includes a payment icon or a payment bubble that the user interacts with to initiate or confirm payment. ¶68 col. 5:35-38
receive an indication of an action taken by a user, the action comprising a user interaction with the transaction icon... The system receives a tap or other input on the Apple Cash icon or payment bubble. ¶68 col. 5:35-38
capture contextual information associated with the electronic transaction, the captured contextual information comprising captured biometric information associated with a user... After user interaction, the system activates Face ID, which uses the TrueDepth camera to capture biometric information about the sender’s face. ¶69 col. 8:54-56
perform a fraud detection analysis of the captured contextual information... wherein... the fraud detection analysis comprises determining... that the user is alive... The Face ID system analyzes the captured facial data, including depth information from multiple images, to verify that the sender is a live person and not a 2D photograph. ¶69 col. 8:54-60
based at least in part on both the user interaction with the transaction icon... and performing the fraud detection analysis... complete the electronic transaction. The Apple Cash transfer is processed and completed only after the user has interacted with the interface and the Face ID scan has been successfully completed. ¶69 col. 4:50-54
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A dispute may arise over the term "virtual likeness of a face of an account holder." The accused Apple Cash interface shows the recipient’s contact information, not necessarily a likeness of the sender (the account holder). The infringement theory may depend on whether the recipient in a P2P system is also considered an "account holder" or if the claim language can be construed more broadly.
    • Technical Questions: An evidentiary question may be whether the Face ID system, which captures and analyzes a 3D depth map of a user's face, operates in a manner consistent with the patent's disclosure of determining liveness by analyzing "multiple photographs" taken in "rapid succession" (’010 Patent, col. 8:55-60).

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

From the ’512 Patent (Claim 1)

  • The Term: “restricted interface”
  • Context and Importance: This term defines the nature of the connection between the secure and non-secure processors and is central to the patent’s security model. The outcome of the case may depend on whether Apple's software- and hardware-based isolation of the Secure Enclave meets this claimed limitation. Practitioners may focus on this term because it appears to be the primary technical mechanism for achieving the claimed security benefits.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the interface's function: "users cannot access the secure storage area, and the fast processor can only communicate with the dedicated processor/sensor via a restricted API" (’512 Patent, col. 4:5-8). This functional language could support a construction covering any interface that achieves this isolation.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The depiction of distinct, physically separate processors and storage blocks in Figure 3 could be cited to argue for a more limited construction that requires a specific hardware partitioning not present in all integrated SoC designs (’512 Patent, Fig. 3).

From the ’010 Patent (Claim 1)

  • The Term: “virtual likeness of a face of an account holder”
  • Context and Importance: This term is critical because the complaint's primary example, Apple Cash, displays the recipient's information, not the sender's (the account holder's) face. Infringement may turn on whether this element is met. Practitioners may focus on this term because there is an apparent mismatch between the claim language and the functionality depicted in the complaint’s own evidence (Compl. p. 36).
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states the "image may be a photograph, an avatar, or other representation" of the person, suggesting the term is not limited to a realistic photograph (’010 Patent, col. 5:46-48).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent’s detailed description explains that showing the account holder's face is intended to induce guilt in a potential fraudster who is misusing that person's account (e.g., a son using his father's account) (’010 Patent, col. 5:10-24; col. 6:56-58). This purpose suggests the "likeness" must be of the person whose account is being debited to achieve the invention's stated goal, not the transaction's recipient.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges active inducement of infringement for all asserted patents. The alleged acts of inducement include Apple’s communications with customers and developers through functionality, instructions, user guides, developer documentation, APIs, and by encouraging software updates that include the accused features (Compl. ¶¶ 67, 71-72, 80, 86, 92, 98, 104, 110). For example, the complaint alleges Apple induces third-party developers like 1Password to infringe by providing tools and APIs to use the Secure Enclave (Compl. ¶23).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Defendant has had knowledge of each asserted patent "since no later than the filing of this Original Complaint" (e.g., Compl. ¶¶ 79, 85, 91, 97, 103, 109). This allegation appears to support a claim for post-filing willful infringement rather than pre-suit willfulness.

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

  • A core issue will be one of "architectural correspondence": Does Apple's integrated System-on-Chip design, which separates a main Application Processor from a Secure Enclave co-processor via system-level controls and APIs, embody the "first processor" and "second processor" communicating via a "restricted interface" as claimed in the Authentication Patents, or is there a fundamental architectural distinction?
  • A second central question will be one of "definitional scope": Can the term "virtual likeness of a face of an account holder," which the Fraud Reduction Patents describe as a tool to deter the payer from committing fraud, be construed to read on the accused Apple Cash interface, which displays a likeness of the payee?
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of "operational equivalence": Does Apple’s Face ID system—which captures and analyzes a 3D depth map to confirm user presence—perform the same function, in substantially the same way, to achieve the same result as the "liveness" determination claimed in the Fraud Reduction Patents, which is described in the specification primarily through the analysis of a sequence of 2D images?