DCT

6:22-cv-00533

DoDots Licensing Solutions LLC v. Apple Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: DoDots Licensing Solutions LLC v. Apple Inc., 6:22-cv-00533, W.D. Tex., 05/24/2022
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is asserted based on Apple's regular and established places of business in the Western District of Texas, including a major campus in Austin, and Best Buy's operation of retail stores within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ mobile devices, operating systems, and app distribution platform (e.g., iPhones running iOS and using the App Store) infringe patents related to systems for displaying internet content in self-contained applications separate from a traditional web browser.
  • Technical Context: The technology concerns methods for packaging and delivering internet content as lightweight, standalone applications or "widgets," a concept that predates and shares architectural similarities with modern mobile app ecosystems.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that all three patents-in-suit were challenged in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). In all three cases, the PTAB found the challenged claims were not unpatentable, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's decisions on December 8, 2021.

Case Timeline

Date Event
1999-04-26 Earliest Priority Date for ’083 and ’407 Patents
2000-01-18 Earliest Priority Date for ’545 Patent
2007-01-01 Apple launches iOS operating system (approximate date)
2011-09-13 U.S. Patent No. 8,020,083 issues
2013-08-13 U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407 issues
2016-06-14 U.S. Patent No. 9,369,545 issues
2020-09-09 PTAB issues Final Written Decision upholding claims of ’545 Patent
2021-01-05 PTAB issues Final Written Decision upholding claims of ’407 Patent
2021-01-19 PTAB issues Final Written Decision upholding claims of ’083 Patent
2021-12-08 Federal Circuit affirms PTAB decisions for all three patents-in-suit
2022-05-24 Complaint filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 9,369,545 - "Accessing and Displaying Network Content," issued June 14, 2016

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: At the time of the invention, internet content was typically "trapped within the frame of the browser," offering developers and users limited control over the presentation and aggregation of content from different sources (Compl. ¶26; ’083 Patent, col. 2:22-24). Viewing content on various devices was hindered because web pages were designed for traditional monitors, were often slow, and required a full browser to access (Compl. ¶25).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention describes a method for a client device to access and display content without a full, traditional browser. The device first requests and receives a "networked information monitor template." This template defines a graphical user interface (GUI) and contains a reference to a network location for the actual content. The device then uses this template to present the GUI and separately requests and displays the content within that GUI, outside of any other browser-like interface (Compl. ¶57; ’083 Patent, Abstract).
  • Technical Importance: This approach provided a model for delivering internet content as discrete, lightweight applications ("Dots") that could run directly on a user's desktop, offering a faster and more integrated experience than the conventional page-by-page web browsing model (Compl. ¶¶30, 33).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts infringement of all claims, with a focus on independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶56).
  • Claim 1 is a method claim comprising the key steps of:
    • Transmitting a request for a networked information monitor template.
    • Receiving the template, which includes a definition of a viewer GUI and a definition of a content element that references a network location.
    • Presenting the viewer GUI on the display separate from any other GUI that has user controls for specifying the network location.
    • Transmitting a content request to that network location.
    • Receiving the content element.
    • Presenting the received content element in the viewer GUI, wherein the GUI definition itself defines all controls for user interaction.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims, but the general allegation against "all claims" implies this right is preserved.

U.S. Patent No. 8,020,083 - "System and Methods for Creating and Authoring Internet Content Using Application Media Packages," issued September 13, 2011

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent describes a "growing desire for individual users to fully control the aggregation and presentation of content and web applications," which was constrained by the traditional browser model that limited developer control over the "frame in which the content appears" (’083 Patent, col. 2:50-53; Compl. ¶26).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention discloses a client device containing electronic storage for "networked information monitor templates." A key feature of the template's GUI definition is that it "lacks controls for manually navigating a network" (e.g., a URL address bar). The template contains instructions that cause the device to automatically request content from a specified network location and generate the GUI with the received content displayed inside its frame, creating a self-contained, application-like experience (’083 Patent, Abstract; Claim 1).
  • Technical Importance: This technology provided a framework for creating "application media packages" that delivered a "Web without a browser" experience, breaking content out of the traditional web page model and into dedicated, interactive widgets (Compl. ¶33).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts infringement of all claims, with a focus on independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶76).
  • Claim 1 is a device claim comprising:
    • Electronic storage having a plurality of networked information monitor templates.
    • A first template comprising a content reference (a network location accessible via TCP/IP).
    • The template also comprising a definition of a GUI that lacks controls for manually navigating a network and includes a frame for displaying content.
    • Instructions configured to cause the monitor to request content from the network location and generate the GUI with the received content inside the frame.
    • An electronic display and one or more processors to access the template and present the GUI.
  • The complaint alleges infringement of "at least claim 1" and "claims 1-8" by various defendants (Compl. ¶¶116, 130).

U.S. Patent No. 8,510,407 - "Displaying Time-Varying Internet Based Data Using Application Media," issued August 13, 2013

Technology Synopsis

This patent builds on the same core technology of browser-less application media packages but focuses specifically on the display of time-varying content, such as stock prices. The invention describes a client device that stores a template defining a GUI, requests time-varying content from a web server, and presents that changing content within the GUI frame, which itself lacks browser-like navigation controls (Compl. ¶¶89, 98).

Asserted Claims

The complaint asserts infringement of "all of the claims," with a focus on independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶¶88, 123).

Accused Features

The infringement allegations target the functionality of Apple devices to run applications, such as the Stocks app, that retrieve and display continuously updated, time-varying data from the internet within a dedicated application interface (Compl. ¶¶94, 98).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The accused instrumentalities are "Accused Apple Devices" (including iPhones, iPads, Apple Watch, and iPod Touches) and the "Accused Apple Software" (including iOS, installers, and the App Store app) that runs on them (Compl. ¶¶51-52).

Functionality and Market Context

The complaint alleges that Apple's devices and software operate in an infringing manner when they download and run applications ("Apple-Supported Apps") from the Apple App Store (Compl. ¶53). The core accused functionality involves the process where the Accused Apple Software transmits a request to an App Store server for an application package (an ".ipa" file). The complaint asserts this ".ipa" file constitutes the claimed "networked information monitor template" (Compl. ¶62). Once received, the software on the device is allegedly responsive to instructions within this ".ipa" file to present a graphical user interface (the app's UI) and then transmit further requests over the internet to obtain and display content within that UI (Compl. ¶¶54, 64, 72).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

’9,369,545 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
transmitting a request to the server over the network, the request requesting networked information monitor template The Accused Apple Software sends a request to an App Store server for an application package, which is alleged to be the template (e.g., an ".ipa" file). ¶62 col. 8:1-15
receiving the requested networked information monitor template from the server...the template comprising: a definition of a viewer graphical user interface...and a definition of a first content element...referencing a first network location... The device receives the ".ipa" file, which allegedly contains data structures that define the app's user interface and reference a network location (e.g., a URL) for the app's content. ¶63, ¶64, ¶67, ¶68 col. 8:45-54
responsive to instructions included in the requested networked information monitor template, presenting the viewer graphical user interface...separate from and outside of any other graphical user interface that includes user controls for specifying the first network location... The software, guided by the ".ipa" file, presents the application's user interface on the device screen, which is separate from a web browser that would contain controls like a URL address bar. ¶69, ¶70 col. 2:22-24
responsive to instructions included in the requested networked information monitor template, transmitting over the network a first content request to the first network location referenced by the definition of the first content element... The software transmits a request over the internet to the network location specified in the ".ipa" file to obtain content (e.g., requesting stock data for a finance app). ¶72 col. 10:24-28
receiving, over the network, the first content element transmitted responsive to the first content request The device receives the requested content (e.g., stock price data) from the network server. ¶73 col. 10:24-28
presenting the received the first content element in the viewer graphical user interface...wherein the definition of the viewer graphical user interface and/or the first content element define all controls for enabling a user to interact... The received content is displayed within the app's GUI. The complaint uses a screenshot of a stock tracking app to show user controls for interaction, like selecting stocks. (Compl. p. 21) ¶74, ¶75 col. 4:21-25

’8,020,083 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
electronic storage having stored thereon a plurality of networked information monitor templates defining a plurality of networked information monitors... The Accused Apple Devices have electronic storage (e.g., flash memory) that stores downloaded application packages (".ipa" files), which are alleged to be the templates. A screenshot shows iPhone storage with space allocated to "Apps." (Compl. p. 28) ¶79, ¶80 col. 5:30-32
a content reference that comprises a network location at which content for the first networked information is accessible via a TCP/IP protocol The ".ipa" file is alleged to contain a content reference, such as a URL, that points to a network location where content (e.g., stock price data) is available via the internet. A screenshot shows a stock application that has pulled data from a network. (Compl. p. 29) ¶81 col. 10:1-5
a definition of a graphical user interface...that lacks controls for manually navigating a network, and that includes a frame within which content received from the network location can be displayed, and frame characteristics defining one or more color, a size, or a position on the electronic display... The ".ipa" file is alleged to define the app's GUI, which is presented as a self-contained frame on the screen and lacks browser-like controls for manual navigation (e.g., a URL bar). The complaint references Apple's developer guidelines regarding UI design. (Compl. p. 30) ¶82, ¶83 col. 8:32-35
instructions configured (i) to cause the first networked information monitor to request content from the network location...and (ii) to cause the first networked information monitor to generate the graphical user interface...with the content received...within the frame The ".ipa" file allegedly contains instructions that, when executed, cause the device to request the specified content over a TCP/IP protocol and to generate and display the app's GUI with the received content rendered inside its frame. ¶84, ¶85 col. 8:39-44
an electronic display; and one or more processors configured to access the first networked information monitor template such that the graphical user interface...is presented to a user on the electronic display... The Accused Apple Devices possess the necessary electronic displays and processors to execute the software and present the GUI to the user. ¶87 col. 5:24-28

Identified Points of Contention

  • Scope Questions: A central dispute may arise over the definition of "networked information monitor template." The patents describe these templates in the context of XML and "browser readable language," whereas the complaint accuses compiled application packages (".ipa" files). The case may turn on whether the definition can be construed broadly enough to cover a modern, compiled app binary.
  • Technical Questions: The infringement theory posits a two-step process: (1) receive a "template," then (2) use instructions in the template to fetch "content." A potential defense could argue this is an artificial distinction in the accused products, where the logic for fetching content is part of the compiled application code itself, not a separate set of "instructions" contained within a passive "template" that is received first. The complaint's equation of the entire ".ipa" file with the "template" raises the question of what, then, constitutes the separate "content."

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • Term: "networked information monitor template" (appearing in asserted claims of both the ’545 and ’083 patents)

    • Context and Importance: This term is the lynchpin of the infringement allegations. The Plaintiff’s case appears to depend on construing this term to read on Apple’s ".ipa" application packages. Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction will determine whether the foundational premise of the complaint—that an app package is a "template"—is viable.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The abstract of the related ’083 patent describes an "Application Media Package" as a "software component for accessing and displaying Internet content which includes a definition for rendering a graphical user interface and a URL." This functional language could be argued to encompass an ".ipa" file, which serves a similar purpose (’083 Patent, Abstract).
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description and figures of the ’083 patent, from which the ’545 patent is descended, repeatedly describe the "template" or "Application Media Package (Dot)" as being based on an "XML Definition" and "browser readable language" (’083 Patent, Fig. 3; col. 8:39-41). This may support a narrower construction limited to interpreted, text-based definition files rather than compiled application binaries.

  • Term: "lacks controls for manually navigating a network" (appearing in asserted claim 1 of the ’083 patent)

    • Context and Importance: This negative limitation is critical for distinguishing the claimed invention from a conventional web browser. Infringement of the ’083 patent requires the accused applications to meet this limitation.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation (potentially favoring non-infringement): The specification contrasts the invention with a "viewer application, such as a browser to view Internet content provided at a destination address" (’083 Patent, col. 2:6-9). A defendant may argue that any feature within an app that allows for open-ended web access, such as an embedded WebKit view, constitutes a "control for manually navigating a network."
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation (potentially favoring infringement): The specification’s focus is on creating a unique, branded "frame, independent of a Web Browser application and window" (’083 Patent, col. 2:1-3). This suggests the limitation refers to the primary application interface itself lacking the persistent navigational chrome of a browser (e.g., a URL bar), not the mere ability to launch a browser view for specific tasks.

VI. Other Allegations

Indirect Infringement

While the complaint focuses primarily on direct infringement by Apple, Count III alleges Apple is "directly and indirectly infringing" the ’407 patent (Compl. ¶123). The factual basis for indirect infringement is not explicitly detailed but could be premised on Apple providing the App Store and iOS platform, thereby encouraging and facilitating the creation and use of allegedly infringing applications by third-party developers and end-users.

Willful Infringement

The complaint alleges that Apple is "on notice" of the patents-in-suit and "continues to infringe" despite that notice (Compl. ¶¶111, 118, 125). This forms the basis for a potential willfulness claim, though the complaint does not specify whether this notice was provided pre-suit or arises from the filing of the complaint itself.

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

  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: Can the term "networked information monitor template," which is rooted in the patent specification’s context of XML-based definition files from the early 2000s, be construed to cover modern, compiled application packages (".ipa" files) distributed through an app store?
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of technological equivalence: Does the operation of the accused iOS ecosystem, which involves downloading a self-contained, compiled application that subsequently communicates with the internet, represent the same inventive concept as the two-stage process described in the patents, which involves first fetching a "template" and then using that template to fetch separate "content"?
  • A further question of claim scope will concern the negative limitation "lacks controls for manually navigating a network." The court will need to determine whether this limitation is met by applications that, while lacking a traditional URL bar, may contain embedded browser functionalities for viewing web content.