DCT

1:25-cv-00129

Big Will Enterprises Inc v. Rivian Automotive Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:25-cv-00129, W.D. Tex., 01/29/2025
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Western District of Texas because Defendant operates a showroom, demonstration center, and service center in Austin, routinely conducts business in the district, and has committed acts of infringement within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s comprehensive connected vehicle platform infringes five patents related to using sensor data from a wireless device to determine motion activity and initiate responsive actions.
  • Technical Context: The technology relates to using motion sensors, such as accelerometers and gyroscopes, to identify specific activities (e.g., driving, walking, running) and using that identification to trigger events like targeted advertising or safety alerts.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention any prior litigation, Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, or specific licensing history concerning the patents-in-suit.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2008-01-16 Priority Date for ’846, ’951, ’914 Patents
2012-08-30 Priority Date for ’558, ’273 Patents
2013-05-28 U.S. Patent No. 8,452,273 Issues
2013-10-15 U.S. Patent No. 8,559,914 Issues
2014-05-27 U.S. Patent No. 8,737,951 Issues
2015-06-02 U.S. Patent No. 9,049,558 Issues
2019-12-31 U.S. Patent No. 10,521,846 Issues
2020-05-27 Article published regarding Rivian's insurance team
2021-04-29 Article published regarding Rivian's partnership with Nationwide
2025-01-29 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 10,521,846 - Targeted advertisement selection for a wireless communication device (WCD)

  • Issued: December 31, 2019

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the field of electronic messaging and notification, seeking to provide more intelligent, ID-based, and/or activity-based actions beyond simple message delivery (’846 Patent, col. 2:40-47). A core technical challenge is accurately identifying a "mobile thing motion activity (MTMA)" using sensor data from a wireless device that may not have a fixed orientation (’846 Patent, col. 25:25-33).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes systems and methods to identify a mobile thing’s motion activity (e.g., walking, driving) by analyzing data from sensors like accelerometers. This is achieved by processing sensor data in three dimensions, normalizing it to account for orientation, comparing it to stored "reference MTMA signatures," and determining the likelihood of a match (’846 Patent, col. 89:20-90:26). Once an activity is identified, the system selects and communicates a targeted advertisement to the user’s device (’846 Patent, Abstract).
  • Technical Importance: This approach enabled automated, context-aware actions on mobile devices, moving beyond simple location-based services to activity-based services. (Compl. ¶2-3).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claims 1 (a method) and 12 (a wireless communication device) (Compl. ¶¶19, 30).
  • Claim 1 Essential Elements:
    • Determining a mobile thing motion activity (MTMA) associated with a mobile thing (MT) transporting a wireless communication device (WCD).
    • The determination is based at least in part on sensor data from the WCD measuring physical movement in 3D space.
    • Selecting an advertisement based at least in part on the determined MTMA.
    • Causing the advertisement to be communicated to the WCD.
    • The determining step involves storing reference MTMA signatures, normalizing sensor data, analyzing it in frequency and time domains, and determining likelihoods to select a most likely MTMA signature.
  • The complaint also asserts dependent claims 2-11 and 13-16 (Compl. ¶¶20-29, 31-34).

U.S. Patent No. 9,049,558 - Systems and methods for determining mobile thing motion activity (MTMA) using sensor data of wireless communication device (WCD) and initiating activity-based actions

  • Issued: June 02, 2015

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent family addresses the technical problem of accurately identifying a person's activity using an accelerometer when the device has no fixed orientation relative to the person (e.g., is loose in a pocket or bag) ('273 Patent, col. 1:52-59). Prior art is described as being inaccurate for activities like biking and driving ('273 Patent, col. 2:1-24).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention provides a method to solve the orientation problem by first using sensor data to establish a "reference" that defines the device's orientation in a coordinate system. This reference is typically based on recognizing the constant force of Earth's gravity to determine the vertical axis (’558 Patent, col. 8:1-19). Subsequent sensor data is then normalized against this reference framework, allowing for more accurate calculation of movement data and identification of the specific MTMA (’558 Patent, Abstract).
  • Technical Importance: By mathematically removing the effect of gravity and establishing a consistent coordinate system, the invention claims to enable more accurate and reliable motion activity detection regardless of how a user carries their device. (Compl. ¶3).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claims 1, 17, 27, 36, 42, and 52 (Compl. ¶¶37, 48, 56, 64, 70, 79).
  • Claim 1 Essential Elements:
    • Receiving at least three streams of data sample values from sensors of a WCD transported by a mobile thing.
    • Recognizing a particular set of data sample values as a reference for defining an orientation of the WCD in a coordinate system.
    • Computing reference data based on the recognized particular set.
    • Calculating movement data for subsequent non-reference data based on the reference data.
    • Determining an MTMA based upon the movement data.
  • The complaint also asserts numerous dependent claims (Compl. ¶¶38-47, 49-55, 57-63, 65-69, 71-78, 80-87).

U.S. Patent No. 8,737,951 - Interactive personal surveillance and security (IPSS) systems and methods

  • Issued: May 27, 2014
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a wireless communication device with program instructions to enter different modes of operation based on sensor data. It aims to determine if sensor data indicates a need for assistance, an accident, or a crime, and to capture further data if such an event is detected. (Compl. ¶90; ’951 Patent, col. 43:40-50).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent Claims 1 and 10 are asserted. (Compl. ¶¶90, 95).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges that Rivian’s system uses logic to monitor vehicle movements and enter "accident surveillance modes," which corresponds to the patent's claimed first and second modes of operation. (Compl. ¶90).

U.S. Patent No. 8,559,914 - Interactive personal surveillance and security (IPSS) systems and methods

  • Issued: October 15, 2013
  • Technology Synopsis: The patent discloses a system with logic for determining a user's activity and/or surroundings, and based on that determination, selecting a corresponding "surveillance mode." The system facilitates a user-defined response and communicates surveillance information to a remote device. (Compl. ¶98; ’914 Patent, col. 1:53-2:1).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent Claims 5 and 15 are asserted. (Compl. ¶¶98, 101).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges Rivian's system monitors for risky behaviors like hard braking to evaluate driver actions, which is alleged to be the claimed "surveillance mode." The system then communicates this information to remote servers. (Compl. ¶¶98, 47).

U.S. Patent No. 8,452,273 - Systems and methods for determining mobile thing motion activity (MTMA) using accelerometer of wireless communication device

  • Issued: May 28, 2013
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a method for identifying motion activity using only accelerometer data. It involves receiving 3D acceleration data, recognizing a set of data as a reference to define a relationship between the 3D system and a 2D coordinate system, and then calculating movement data within that 2D system to determine the activity. ('273 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent Claims 1, 12, and 22 are asserted. (Compl. ¶¶105, 116, 124).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses Rivian's telematic systems of using accelerometers to measure 3D accelerations, creating reference data to remove non-movement activities like gravity, and determining driving movements based on the resulting data. (Compl. ¶105).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The "Rivian comprehensive connected vehicle platform" included in Rivian automobile models. (Compl. ¶14).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The accused platform is a telematics system that uses sensors within the vehicle, including accelerometers and gyroscopes, to monitor and analyze driving behavior. (Compl. ¶¶15, 18). It is designed to evaluate facets of driving such as "fast accelerations, hard braking and aggressive cornering (steering)." (Compl. ¶15). This collected data is used in partnership with insurance carriers to analyze telematics and potentially provide drivers with insurance discounts for safe driving. (Compl. ¶16). The complaint includes a screenshot from marketing materials stating, "All Rivian vehicles also include a comprehensive connected vehicle platform that tracks and evaluates your driving patterns." (Compl. p. 7). Another screenshot indicates the system provides "Notifications for incidents such as collisions/crashes, including time of crash, crash details indicating severity of crash, sensor data, and precise location." (Compl. p. 8).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

'846 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A method for use in connection with a wireless communication device (WCD) transported by a mobile thing (MT)... The Rivian platform uses wireless communication devices carried by a vehicle, which is alleged to be the "mobile thing." ¶19 col. 89:56-58
...determining a mobile thing motion activity (MTMA) associated with the MT that is transporting the WCD based at least in part upon sensor data, the sensor data derived from one or more sensors associated with the WCD... The Rivian system monitors accelerometer and other sensor data to determine driver behaviors such as harsh acceleration, braking, and turning. ¶19 col. 89:59-64
...selecting an advertisement based at least in part upon the determined MTMA... The system leverages the collected driver data for "driver-centric advertisements" related to Rivian insurance, which allegedly encourage safer driving habits. ¶19 col. 90:1-3
...causing the advertisement to be communicated to the WCD... The insurance-related advertisements are allegedly communicated to the user. ¶19 col. 90:4-5
...wherein the determining the MTMA comprises: storing a plurality of reference MTMA signatures in the memory... analyzing the normalized data sets in the frequency and time domains... determining likelihoods... and selecting a most likely MTMA signature... The complaint alleges the system compares live sensor data to reference data to create "signatures," normalizes raw accelerometer data to remove gravity, and determines motion activity based on matching live data to predetermined thresholds in the frequency and time domains. ¶19 col. 90:6-26
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A central question may be whether Rivian’s system, which provides feedback and insurance discount information to a driver, performs the claimed steps of "selecting an advertisement" and "causing the advertisement to be communicated." The defense may argue that insurance telematics and safety feedback do not constitute "advertisements" as contemplated by the patent, which provides examples such as advertisements for running shoes being sent to a user identified as running (’846 Patent, col. 78:47-52).
    • Technical Questions: The complaint alleges in a conclusory manner that the Rivian system performs the multi-step process of storing signatures, normalizing data, analyzing it in frequency/time domains, and determining likelihoods. The case may turn on whether the evidence shows Rivian's platform performs this specific sequence of data processing, or if it uses a different technical method to analyze driving behavior.

'558 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A method, comprising: receiving a time value and at least three streams of data sample values from one or more sensors of a wireless communication device (WCD) that is transported by a mobile thing (MT)... The Rivian platform utilizes accelerometers to detect 3D accelerations on the x, y, and z axes to identify driving behaviors. ¶37 col. 33:41-48
...recognizing a particular set of data sample values as a reference for defining an orientation of the WCD in a coordinate system; The system allegedly collects accelerometer data, including gravity data, and processes it to determine a direction. This is described as the system "auto-calibrates determining vertical, and horizontal positions." ¶37 col. 33:49-53
...computing reference data based upon the recognition of the particular set... The system determines reference data based on whether gravitational accelerations are included in the accelerometer data. ¶37 col. 33:54-61
...calculating movement data in the coordinate system of one or more other non-reference data sample values based upon the reference data; and The system continually monitors driver behaviors by calculating real-time movement accelerations across the x, y, and z axes based on the reference data. ¶37 col. 33:62-65
...determining a mobile thing motion activity (MTMA) associated with the MT based upon the movement data. The system identifies unsafe braking and sharp cornering (MTMA) for driver feedback. ¶37 col. 33:66-67
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A key issue will be the construction of "recognizing a particular set of data sample values as a reference for defining an orientation." The patent describes this in the context of a device with an unknown orientation (e.g., a phone in a pocket) needing to establish a baseline using gravity. The defense may argue that sensors in a vehicle, which have a relatively fixed orientation to the vehicle frame, do not need to perform this step in the same way, raising the question of whether its "auto-calibration" is technically equivalent to the claimed method.
    • Technical Questions: What evidence does the complaint provide that the Rivian platform computes "reference data" that defines a relationship between subsequent data and a "particular reference set"? The infringement allegation may depend on whether the system's method for isolating vehicle movement from forces like gravity and road inclination technically meets the claim's specific requirements for how this "reference data" is computed and used.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "advertisement" (’846 Patent, Claim 1)
  • Context and Importance: The infringement theory for the ’846 Patent hinges on whether telematics-based feedback and insurance discount offers constitute an "advertisement." The patent’s viability against the accused system depends heavily on this term being construed broadly enough to cover such communications. Practitioners may focus on this term because the patent's examples lean toward traditional consumer product ads, creating a potential mismatch with the accused functionality.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claims do not define or limit the term "advertisement." The specification mentions initiating "intelligent ID-based and/or activity-based actions" as a goal, which could arguably encompass any commercial communication tied to an activity, including an insurance offer. (’846 Patent, col. 2:42-47).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification provides an example where identifying a user as running could trigger "an advertisement... communicated to the user of the WCD 104 from a server associated with a retailer of running shoes." (’846 Patent, col. 78:47-52). This example of a third-party retail promotion may suggest a narrower scope than internal system feedback or a first-party insurance offer.
  • The Term: "recognizing a particular set of data sample values as a reference for defining an orientation" (’558 Patent, Claim 1)
  • Context and Importance: This term is the core of the ’558 patent's solution to the orientation problem. The infringement case turns on whether Rivian’s in-vehicle sensor system, which is in a semi-fixed position, performs a comparable "recognition" step to that of a free-floating mobile phone. The defense may argue that the technical problem solved by this claim element is absent in the accused system.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language is broad and does not limit the "reference" to any particular source, only that it is used for "defining an orientation." This could potentially cover any calibration or baseline-setting process, even in a system with a semi-fixed orientation.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly discusses the problem of a WCD being in "any pocket, on hand or otherwise transported" (’273 Patent, col. 25:25-33), suggesting the invention is aimed at devices with highly variable and unknown orientations. The detailed description of finding "effectively stationary" points where the net magnitude of acceleration is 1 (i.e., only gravity is acting on the device) supports an interpretation that the "reference" is specifically for establishing a vertical axis in a device with no other orientation cues. (’273 Patent, col. 8:1-19).

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The prayer for relief seeks judgment for contributory and inducing infringement, but the complaint body does not contain specific factual allegations or separate counts to support these claims. (Compl. p. 62).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement of all five patents-in-suit and seeks enhanced damages. (Compl. p. 62). However, the complaint does not allege any specific facts to support this claim, such as pre-suit knowledge of the patents or egregious conduct.

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

  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: Can the term "advertisement," which the patent exemplifies with third-party retail promotions, be construed to cover the insurance telematics feedback and discount offers provided by the accused vehicle platform?
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of technical function: Do the sensors in the accused Rivian vehicles, which are in a relatively fixed orientation, perform the specific, gravity-based method of "recognizing a... reference for defining an orientation" as claimed in the patents, which were developed to solve the problem of orientation-agnostic tracking on mobile phones?
  • A third question concerns the patent family's applicability: The case will test whether a patent portfolio developed in the context of identifying human activities (walking, running, etc.) on smartphones can be broadly applied to the domain of vehicle telematics for monitoring driving behavior.