DCT
6:23-cv-00415
Recog IP LLC v. Belk, Inc.
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Recog IP LLC (Texas)
- Defendant: Belk, Inc. (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Direction IP Law
- Case Identification: 6:23-cv-00415, W.D. Tex., 06/02/2023
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the Western District of Texas because Defendant Belk, Inc. has committed alleged acts of infringement in the district and maintains a regular and established place of business, specifically a retail store in Waco, Texas.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s e-commerce website infringes a patent related to methods for generating a presentation of previously viewed web pages to a user.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns user interface features on e-commerce websites that track and display a user's browsing history to facilitate returning to previously viewed product pages.
- Key Procedural History: No prior litigation, inter partes review proceedings, or other significant procedural events are mentioned in the complaint.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2001-03-30 | Earliest Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 7,296,062 |
| 2007-11-13 | U.S. Patent No. 7,296,062 Issued |
| 2023-06-02 | Complaint Filed |
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 (’062 Patent).
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the problem where internet users find it difficult to relocate a specific webpage they have previously visited and exited, particularly when the page was accessed through a series of hyperlinks from a vendor's home page rather than a direct address. The patent notes that standard browser "back" buttons and history lists offer only "limited possibilities" for this task (’062 Patent, col. 1:13-28).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a server-side method where an information vendor's server registers a user (e.g., via a cookie) upon their arrival at the home page. The server then registers the sequence of information pages the user calls. Upon request, the server generates a "displayable presentation," such as a graphical site map, showing the user's path, which allows the user to easily recognize and return to a previously visited page (’062 Patent, Abstract; col. 4:32-39). The key concept is a server-generated, user-specific navigation history presented within the vendor's site.
- Technical Importance: This server-side approach aimed to provide a more organized and context-aware browsing history within a specific website's ecosystem, improving user experience beyond the capabilities of generic, client-side browser tools of the time (’062 Patent, col. 2:35-41).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts infringement of at least independent claim 1 (’062 Patent, Compl. ¶13).
- Independent Claim 1 requires:
- A user, via a computer, calls a home page of an information vendor, and the vendor server registers the user.
- The vendor server registers the information pages called by the user that proceed from the home page.
- The vendor server only temporarily generates a displayable presentation for the user's computer that visually identifies a sequence of the called information pages.
- The vendor server deletes the presentation, with no storage of the presentation or the information pages, when the user exits the information session.
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused instrumentality is Defendant's website, accessible at "http://www.Belk.com/" (Compl. ¶13).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint focuses on the website’s "Recently Viewed" feature. This functionality tracks the product pages a user visits during a browsing session and displays them in a dedicated section on subsequent pages (Compl. ¶13). Figure 2 of the complaint shows that after a user views a first product, a subsequent product page displays a "Recently Viewed" section containing a link back to the first product (Compl. p. 4, Fig. 2). The complaint alleges this feature is implemented using cookies to track user activity on the vendor server (Compl. ¶14-15).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’062 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| when a user, via a user computer in communication with said vendor server, calls a home page, comprising home page contents, of an information vendor, registering said user at said vendor server; | Belk's website allows users to visit its home page, and the user is registered on the vendor server via cookies (Compl. ¶14). | ¶14 | col. 4:32-39 |
| at said vendor server registering information pages of said information vendor called by said user directly and indirectly proceeding from said home page; | The Belk website temporarily stores visited product pages on a server and analyzes a "Recently Viewed Cookie" to build a new page that includes the "Recently Viewed" section (Compl. ¶15). | ¶15 | col. 5:5-9 |
| 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 of said information vendor called by said user, | The "Recently Viewed" dialog box visually identifies the product pages called by the user. Figure 3 shows the HTML code that generates the "Recently Viewed" section containing links to product pages (Compl. p. 4, Fig. 3). | ¶16 | col. 5:31-39 |
| 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. | The product pages shown in the "Recently Viewed" dialog box are alleged to be temporary, as they are no longer shown when browsing in incognito mode or after clearing cookies, which constitutes exiting an information session (Compl. ¶16). | ¶16 | col. 6:1-6 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central dispute may concern the term "sequence". The complaint alleges that a list of "Recently Viewed" items satisfies this limitation. However, the patent specification describes the "sequence" with graphical elements like "arrows" and "numbers" that illustrate a user's path through the site (’062 Patent, col. 5:21-24). The court may need to determine whether a simple, potentially unordered, list of viewed items "visually identifies a sequence" as required by the claim, or if the term requires an explicit representation of the user's navigation path.
- Technical Questions: The infringement analysis may turn on the limitation requiring "deleting said presentation... with no storage of said presentation or the information pages at the vendor server". The complaint alleges this is met because the "Recently Viewed" list is cleared when cookies are deleted (Compl. ¶16). A key question for the court will be whether this user-facing behavior reflects the actual operation of Belk's server. Evidence may be sought to determine if the server truly deletes all records of the user's viewed pages after a session, or if it retains this data for analytics, marketing, or other purposes, which could suggest a mismatch with the "no storage" requirement.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "sequence"
Context and Importance: The construction of "sequence" is critical because it defines the nature of the required "displayable presentation." A broad definition could cover any list of previously viewed items, while a narrow definition could require a graphical depiction of the user's ordered browsing path. Practitioners may focus on this term because the accused "Recently Viewed" feature appears to be a list, whereas the patent's specification and figures suggest a more structured, path-based visualization.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself requires only that the presentation "visually identifies a sequence," which could arguably be met by any ordered or unordered list of visited pages.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification describes embodiments where "the sequence of the Internet pages... can be graphically seen... with arrows" and "is additionally identified by numbers" (’062 Patent, col. 5:21-24). The patent figures also depict a path with numbered steps and directional flows (e.g., ’062 Patent, FIG. 3). This may support a narrower construction requiring an explicit indication of order or navigation path.
The Term: "deleting said presentation from said vendor server, with no storage"
Context and Importance: This term is central to the non-obviousness of the claimed method and will be a key point of the infringement analysis. It distinguishes the invention from systems that permanently log user history for other purposes. The dispute will likely focus on whether the accused system's server-side operations align with this strict "no storage" requirement.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A party might argue that "no storage" refers only to the data used to generate the specific user-facing presentation, and does not preclude storing the underlying page-view data in a separate system for analytics.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The plain language "no storage of said presentation or the information pages at said vendor server" is encompassing (’062 Patent, col. 5:40-41, emphasis added). The patent further explains that presentations are "deleted after the user has ended his information session" to "reduce the memory outlay of data for the service" (’062 Patent, col. 6:3-6; col. 2:56-59), suggesting a purpose of complete, temporary operation without persistent data retention on the server.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges induced infringement, stating that Belk intends for its customers to use its website in an infringing manner and provides access and instructions for its use (Compl. ¶17).
- Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged based on knowledge of the ’062 Patent "at least as of the service of this Complaint" (Compl. ¶17). No facts are alleged to support pre-suit knowledge of the patent.
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "sequence", which the patent specification illustrates with graphical arrows and numbered steps representing a navigation path, be construed to cover the list of products displayed in the accused "Recently Viewed" feature?
- A key evidentiary question will be one of technical operation: does the accused Belk.com server backend align with the claim requirement to "delete... with no storage" of the presentation or the viewed information pages after a user session ends, or does the server retain this browsing history data for other commercial purposes, creating a factual mismatch with the claim limitation?