Recog IP LLC v. Sephora USA Inc

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Recog IP LLC (Texas)
  • Defendant: Sephora USA, Inc. (Michigan)
  • Plaintiff’s Counsel: Direction IP Law
• Case Identification: 6:23-cv-00324, W.D. Tex., 05/05/2023
• Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant has committed acts of infringement and maintains a regular and established place of business in the district, specifically a retail store in Austin, Texas.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s e-commerce website, which displays a list of recently viewed products to users, infringes a patent related to methods for generating a temporary presentation to help users re-locate previously visited web pages.
• Technical Context: The technology at issue involves tracking user navigation on a website to present a history of visited pages, a common feature in modern e-commerce designed to enhance user experience and facilitate return visits to products of interest.
• Key Procedural History: No prior litigation, licensing history, or other significant procedural events are mentioned in the complaint.

Case Timeline

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

U.S. Patent No. 7,296,062 - "Method for Generating a Presentation for Re-locating an Information Page that has Already Been Called"

• Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,296,062, "Method for Generating a Presentation for Re-locating an Information Page that has Already Been Called," issued November 13, 2007.

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the problem that occurs when internet users, after "surfing" through multiple pages on a vendor's website, wish to return to a specific page they previously visited but have since exited. Standard browser tools like the "back" button or history lists are described as "only conditionally suited" for this task, especially for pages deep within a site's hierarchy that are not easily found again (’062 Patent, col. 2:13-31, 2:42-53).
• The Patented Solution: The invention provides a method where the information vendor's server registers a user and the sequence of pages they call. The server then generates a temporary presentation, such as a graphical map of the user's navigation path, which is displayed to the user. This presentation allows the user to recognize and re-locate a previously visited page. A key aspect is that this presentation is deleted from the server after the user's "information session" ends, thereby reducing data storage needs (’062 Patent, Abstract; col. 5:1-14; col. 6:1-5).
• Technical Importance: The described method aimed to provide a more intuitive, context-aware navigation history than standard browser tools, specifically tailored to a single vendor's website and designed to be ephemeral to conserve server resources (’062 Patent, col. 6:1-5).

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts infringement of at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶13).
• Essential elements of independent claim 1 include:
  • when a user, via a user computer in communication with said vendor server, calls a home page... registering said user at said vendor server;
  • at said vendor server registering information pages of said information vendor called by said user directly and indirectly proceeding from said home page; and
  • at said vendor server only temporarily generating a displayable presentation, for display at said user computer which visually identifies a sequence of said information pages... and deleting said presentation from said vendor server, with no storage of said presentation or said information pages at said vendor server, when said user exits an information session with said information vendor.

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

• The accused instrumentality is the website of the Defendant, Sephora USA, Inc., available at Sephora.com (Compl. ¶13).

Functionality and Market Context

• The complaint focuses on the website’s "Recently Viewed" feature. This feature is alleged to appear after a user navigates from the home page to view at least one product page and then a subsequent page (Compl. ¶13, Figures 1-2). Figure 1 from the complaint shows a product page on the Sephora website before the "Recently Viewed" feature has been populated (Compl. p. 4). The "Recently Viewed" section then displays a list of products the user has previously browsed during their visit, with links to return to those product pages (Compl. ¶13, Figure 3). The complaint alleges this functionality provides a presentation for re-locating information pages that have been previously called and exited (Compl. ¶13).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

'062 Patent Infringement Allegations

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Scope Questions: A central question may be whether the accused "Recently Viewed" list, which presents previously visited items, meets the claim limitation of a presentation that "visually identifies a sequence of said information pages." The patent figures depict a graphical, path-based site map with arrows and numbered steps, which may suggest a more structured, sequential representation than a simple list of products (’062 Patent, Figs. 3-4).
  • Technical Questions: The infringement theory for the "deleting said presentation... when said user exits an information session" limitation appears to rely on the functionality of clearing cookies or using a private browsing mode (Compl. ¶16). A key technical question will be whether this user-initiated action (clearing cookies) or browser setting (incognito mode) satisfies the claim requirement of the vendor server "deleting said presentation" when a user "exits an information session." The patent's description may suggest a more automatic, server-side deletion at the end of a defined session, independent of cookie management.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

• The Term: "exits an information session"

• Context and Importance: The definition of this term is critical to the final limitation of claim 1, which requires the presentation to be deleted from the vendor server upon the user exiting a session. The complaint's infringement theory hinges on equating "exiting an information session" with user actions like clearing cookies (Compl. ¶16). Practitioners may focus on whether this interpretation aligns with the intrinsic evidence.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent does not provide an explicit definition of "information session," which could leave room for arguing that any event terminating the link between the user's prior activity and a new visit (such as clearing a tracking cookie) constitutes the end of a session.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification discusses generating presentations "only temporarily" to "reduce the memory outlay of data" (’062 Patent, col. 2:56-60). It further states the presentation is "deleted after the user has ended his information session with the information vendor" (’062 Patent, col. 6:3-5). This language may support a definition tied to a specific period of continuous activity, after which the server automatically purges the data, rather than a state that persists indefinitely until a user manually clears local data.

• The Term: "a presentation... which visually identifies a sequence"

• Context and Importance: This term defines the nature of what is generated and displayed to the user. The dispute may turn on whether the accused "Recently Viewed" list constitutes a "sequence."

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The term "sequence" is not explicitly limited, and one could argue that a chronologically ordered list of visited pages represents a sequence of those visits. The patent also mentions characterizing the sequence with "numbers" or "arrows" but does not state these are required (’062 Patent, col. 5:22-26).
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's exemplary embodiments and figures consistently show a graphical, tree-like structure representing the user's navigation path (e.g., "the sequence... can be graphically seen in the windows 80 and 81 with arrows") (’062 Patent, col. 5:20-22, Figs. 3-4). This may support a narrower construction requiring a visual depiction of the user's traversal path, not merely a list of visited endpoints.

VI. Other Allegations

• Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges induced infringement, stating that Sephora intended its customers to use its website in an infringing manner by providing "access to support for, training and instructions for, its website" (Compl. ¶17).
• Willful Infringement: The complaint does not allege facts supporting pre-suit knowledge of the ’062 Patent. However, the prayer for relief requests an award of damages for willful infringement, including trebling of damages (Compl. p. 8, ¶D).

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

• A core issue will be one of temporal scope: Does the claim limitation requiring the server to "only temporarily" generate a presentation and "delet[e] said presentation... when said user exits an information session" read on a system where the viewing history persists across browsing sessions and is only removed when a user manually clears cookies? The case may depend on whether "exiting an information session" can be equated with clearing local browser data.
• A second key question will be one of definitional scope: Does the accused "Recently Viewed" feature, which displays a list of previously viewed products, constitute a "presentation which visually identifies a sequence" as taught by the patent? The answer may turn on whether a simple list of items meets the claim requirement, particularly in light of patent figures that depict a more structured, navigational path.