GreatGigz Solutions LLC v. NextCare Holdings Inc

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: GreatGigz Solutions, LLC (Florida)
  • Defendant: NextCare Holdings, Inc. (Delaware)
  • Plaintiff’s Counsel: Garteiser Honea, PLLC
• Case Identification: 6:21-cv-01207, W.D. Tex., 11/18/2021
• Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Western District of Texas because Defendant maintains regular and established places of business within the district, including urgent care facilities in Waco.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s online platform for scheduling patient appointments at its healthcare facilities infringes four patents related to providing recruitment, job searching, and scheduling information in a network environment.
• Technical Context: The patents relate to early, network-based systems for matching individuals (job seekers, freelancers) with entities (employers, hiring entities) by exchanging schedule and availability information.
• Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that during the prosecution of the ’864 Patent, the patent examiner considered its eligibility under 35 U.S.C. §101 in view of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l and found the claims to be directed to patent-eligible subject matter.

Case Timeline

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

U.S. Patent No. 6,662,194 - "Apparatus and Method for Providing Recruitment Information"

Issued December 9, 2003.

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section describes the pre-Internet job search and recruitment process as inefficient, costly, and limited by intermediaries like "headhunters" and employment agencies. This process often lacked confidentiality and was constrained by "limited personal contacts, geographical constraints, [and] monetary constraints." (’194 Patent, col. 2:7-30).
• The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a centralized, network-based "clearinghouse" where individuals and employers can directly interact. The system uses a central processing computer and database to store, manage, and exchange recruitment and availability information, allowing parties to connect while preserving confidentiality. (’194 Patent, col. 3:24-4:43). The system is designed to facilitate scheduling and reserving the services of individuals. (’194 Patent, col. 33:43-52).
• Technical Importance: The invention described a technological solution to the structural inefficiencies of the traditional, pre-Internet recruitment market by creating a centralized digital marketplace for services. (Compl. ¶¶ 18-19).

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts at least independent claim 25.
• Claim 25 describes an apparatus comprising:
  • A memory device for storing work schedule and scheduling information for an individual/freelancer.
  • A receiver for receiving a first request from an employer/hiring entity for that schedule information.
  • A processing device that generates a first message containing the schedule information.
  • A transmitter for sending that first message to the employer's device.
  • The system then receives a second request (e.g., to reserve services), processes it, generates a second message regarding the request, and transmits it to the individual's device.

U.S. Patent No. 7,490,086 - "Apparatus and Method for Providing Job Searching Services Recruitment Services and/or Recruitment-Related Services"

Issued February 10, 2009.

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The technology addresses the same general problems as the ’194 Patent: the limitations of traditional, non-networked job searching and recruitment. (’086 Patent, col. 1:44-2:44).
• The Patented Solution: This invention focuses on an apparatus that processes a job search request upon the automatic detection of a "searching event." A searching event is defined broadly to include not only a job posting but also external triggers like "a news release of a business event, an employment-related event, an economic report, [or] industry-specific news." (’086 Patent, Abstract). Upon detecting such an event, the system generates and transmits a message containing information about a relevant job or individual.
• Technical Importance: The invention proposed an automated, event-driven matching system that could proactively connect individuals and employers based on real-world events, moving beyond simple user-initiated database queries. (Compl. ¶¶ 21-22).

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts at least independent claim 18.
• Claim 18 describes an apparatus comprising:
  • A memory device for storing information about an individual available for a job and information about a recruitment search request.
  • A processing device that processes the recruitment search request upon detecting a "searching event."
  • The processing device utilizes information about the individual stored in memory and generates a responsive message.
  • A transmitter for sending the message to a device associated with an employer or hiring entity.

U.S. Patent No. 9,760,864 - "Apparatus and Method for Providing Job Searching Services, Recruitment Services and/or Recruitment-Related Services"

Issued September 12, 2017.

Technology Synopsis

This patent describes a user-side apparatus (e.g., a personal computer or mobile device) for interacting with a central recruitment system. It claims an apparatus with memory for storing work schedule information, a transmitter for sending a job search request to a remote computer, and a receiver and display for presenting the responsive message containing job information from that computer. (’864 Patent, Abstract).

Asserted Claims & Accused Features

• Asserted Claims: At least Claim 1. (Compl. ¶67).
• Accused Features: The complaint alleges infringement by the entire Accused Instrumentality, which provides recruitment information and allows customers to schedule appointments via a website. (Compl. ¶¶ 68-73).

U.S. Patent No. 10,096,000 - "Apparatus and Method for Providing Job Searching Services, Recruitment Services and/or Recruitment-Related Services"

Issued October 9, 2018.

Technology Synopsis

This patent is directed to an apparatus that stores work or scheduling information, receives a first request for that information from a user device, generates a first message containing the information, and transmits it. It further claims the ability to process a second request (e.g., for offering or reserving services) where the second request's content is based on the information provided in the first message. (’000 Patent, Abstract).

Asserted Claims & Accused Features

• Asserted Claims: At least Claim 1. (Compl. ¶82).
• Accused Features: The complaint alleges infringement by the Accused Instrumentality, which provides recruitment information, stores work schedules for healthcare providers, and facilitates a multi-step appointment booking process. (Compl. ¶¶ 83-88).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The "Accused Instrumentalities" are identified as Defendant's web platform hosted at www.nextcare.com and an integrated web platform provided by SolvHealth, which together allow customers to schedule appointments for health care services. (Compl. ¶¶ 35, 40).

Functionality and Market Context

The complaint alleges the platform functions as an apparatus for providing "recruitment information." (Compl. ¶40). A customer uses a device (e.g., mobile phone, PC) to access the platform, view available appointment times for Defendant's health care providers, select a time, and book the appointment. (Compl. ¶¶ 42-45). This process involves the platform's servers storing provider schedule information, receiving requests from customers, generating a timetable of available slots, and transmitting messages to both the customer to confirm the booking and the provider to notify them of the scheduled service. (Compl. ¶¶ 41-45). A screenshot in the complaint shows the user interface for selecting a date and time and entering patient information. (Compl. Fig. 6, p. 14).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

U.S. Patent No. 6,662,194 Infringement Allegations

Identified Points of Contention

• Scope Questions: A central question may be whether scheduling a healthcare appointment falls within the scope of providing "recruitment information" as contemplated by the patent. The analysis may turn on whether a patient can be considered an "employer or hiring entity" and a healthcare provider an "individual, an independent contractor, a temporary worker, and a freelancer" in the context of reserving a service.
• Technical Questions: The complaint alleges the customer's device is "associated with an employer or hiring entity." (Compl. ¶42). A point of contention could be what evidence supports this characterization, as the device is typically associated with a patient seeking services, not an entity seeking to hire someone.

U.S. Patent No. 7,490,086 Infringement Allegations

Identified Points of Contention

• Scope Questions: The analysis will likely focus on the definition of "searching event." The question is whether a customer filling out an online form to book a pre-defined service constitutes one of the specific types of events listed in the claim, such as a "job posting," a "news release," or an "economic report."
• Technical Questions: Claim 18 requires the processing device to "automatically detect" the searching event. A technical question is what evidence demonstrates that the accused platform's response to a user's web request meets the claim's requirement for "automatic detection" of an event, rather than simply executing a standard client-server data exchange.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

The Term: "recruitment information" (’194 Patent)

Context and Importance

This term is foundational to the infringement theory. Its construction will determine whether the patent, which is framed around job recruitment, can read on the accused instrumentality, which facilitates healthcare appointment scheduling. Practitioners may focus on this term because the complaint equates patient appointment data with "recruitment information." (Compl. ¶40).

Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation

• Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent specification describes the invention as useful for securing the services of not just permanent employees but also "independent contractors, freelancers...and/or other hiring entities." (’194 Patent, col. 4:2-5). This language may support an interpretation that covers any transaction for services, including a one-time healthcare appointment.
• Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The "Background of the Invention" section exclusively discusses the context of "job searching efforts," "employment agencies, recruiters, so-called 'headhunters'," and overcoming limitations in finding "the best possible candidates" for employment. (’194 Patent, col. 2:7-24). This may support an interpretation limiting the term to the traditional employment context.

The Term: "searching event" (’086 Patent)

Context and Importance

The infringement allegation for the ’086 Patent hinges on characterizing a patient's request to schedule an appointment as a "searching event." The definition of this term is critical to determining if the accused system's function matches the claim's requirement for an automated, event-driven process.

Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation

• Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: Claim 18 provides a list of examples of a "searching event," including "an event which creates an interest by at least one employer or at least one hiring entity to fill a position." (’086 Patent, col. 43:63-65). This broad, functional language could be argued to encompass a patient's request, which creates an "interest" to "fill a position" (i.e., an appointment slot).
• Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification and the claim list specific, externally-triggered examples like "a job posting," "a news release of a business event," and "an economic report." (’086 Patent, col. 43:60-63). This may support a narrower construction requiring the "event" to be something other than the direct, user-initiated search request itself.

VI. Other Allegations

Willful Infringement

For all four asserted patents, the complaint alleges that Defendant's infringement became willful upon receiving notice via the service of the complaint. (Compl. ¶¶ 47, 60, 75, 90). The complaint further alleges willfulness based on a purported "policy or practice of not reviewing the patents of others," which it claims constitutes willful blindness. (Compl. ¶¶ 48, 61, 76, 91).

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

The dispute appears to center on fundamental questions of claim scope and the application of patent language from one technological context to another.

• A core issue will be one of definitional scope: Can terms rooted in the 1999 art of online job recruitment—such as "recruitment information," "hiring entity," and "freelancer"—be construed to cover the subject matter of modern online patient-provider appointment scheduling?
• A second key question will be one of technical interpretation: Does a patient's interaction with a web-based scheduling portal constitute an automated, event-driven "searching event" as defined by the patent claims, or is it a fundamentally different type of user-initiated data request that falls outside the claimed invention?