DCT

6:23-cv-00429

Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Volvo Car Corp

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 6:23-cv-00429, W.D. Tex., 06/08/2023
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Western District of Texas because Defendants operate regular and established places of business in the district through authorized Volvo dealerships, which are alleged to act as agents for Volvo. The complaint also asserts that Defendant Volvo Car USA LLC has previously consented to venue in this district in prior litigation.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that certain Volvo vehicles, along with their infotainment, connectivity, and camera systems, infringe eight U.S. patents related to in-vehicle networking, wireless data transmission, and digital camera technologies.
  • Technical Context: The technologies at issue involve advanced automotive electronics, including in-vehicle data buses for component communication, cellular and Wi-Fi connectivity for telematics and entertainment, and multi-camera systems for driver assistance.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint references prior litigation in the W.D. Tex. where Defendant Volvo Car USA LLC admitted it has a regular and established place of business in the district and consented to venue and personal jurisdiction, which may be relevant to precluding challenges on those grounds in this case. The complaint also alleges that Defendants received actual notice of the patents-in-suit via a letter dated one day prior to the filing of the suit, which forms the basis for the willfulness allegations.

Case Timeline

Date Event
1999-10-06 Priority Date for ’004 and ’008 Patents
2000-06-15 Priority Date for ’283 Patent
2002-03-08 Priority Date for ’318 Patent
2003-08-29 Priority Date for ’641 Patent
2004-08-25 Priority Date for ’158 Patent
2006-05-08 Priority Date for ’138 Patent
2012-10-04 Priority Date for ’608 Patent
2004-12-14 U.S. Patent No. 6,832,283 Issued
2009-01-27 U.S. Patent No. 7,484,008 Issued
2010-03-23 U.S. Patent No. 7,684,318 Issued
2011-02-15 U.S. Patent No. 7,891,004 Issued
2015-02-10 U.S. Patent No. 8,953,641 Issued
2016-01-05 U.S. Patent No. 9,232,158 Issued
2017-03-21 U.S. Patent No. 9,602,608 Issued
2019-05-14 U.S. Patent No. 10,292,138 Issued
2023-06-08 Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 6,832,283 - "METHOD FOR ADDRESSING NETWORK COMPONENTS"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent describes the difficulty in addressing individual electronic components within complex vehicle data bus systems, particularly when components are exchanged or when an external network, such as the Internet, needs to communicate with a specific component inside the vehicle (’283 Patent, col. 1:11-30; col. 2:13-22).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention discloses a method where components on an internal vehicle network (a "first network") are assigned a "first address" based on their function, with these addresses stored in a central register. When a component on this internal network communicates with an external network (a "second network"), it is assigned a "second address" by that external network. This dual-addressing scheme is intended to provide a stable, function-based internal addressing system while enabling communication with external networks (’283 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:23-34).
  • Technical Importance: This approach sought to simplify network management in automotive systems by decoupling internal, function-based addressing from the dynamic addressing required for external network communication, thereby facilitating component replacement and remote diagnostics (Compl. ¶54).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts infringement of at least Claim 1 (Compl. ¶78-79).
  • Essential elements of independent claim 1 include:
    • A method for addressing components of a first network in a data bus system in a transport vehicle, in which each component is assigned a first address for mutual communication within the network and the first addresses are stored in a central register;
    • wherein at least one particular component of the first network communicates with a second network;
    • said one component, when dialling into the second network, is assigned a second address by the second network;
    • and wherein, within the first network, addressing takes place on the basis of function-specific address components, identical function blocks of the components being addressed via identical function-specific address components.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.

U.S. Patent No. 7,891,004 - "METHOD FOR VEHICLE INTERNETWORKS"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent family addresses the need for secure and integrated communication among the diverse electronic systems within a vehicle, as well as enabling communication between those in-vehicle systems and external networks like the Internet (’008 Patent, col. 1:40-47).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention describes an internetworking method centered on a "gateway node" within a motor vehicle. This gateway node bridges a "first vehicle bus" and a "second vehicle bus," allowing disparate in-vehicle networks to communicate. A key aspect of the method is coupling a network element from within the vehicle to a "remote computer located outside of the motor vehicle" to allow that remote computer to "remotely control" a function of an in-vehicle component (’004 Patent, cl. 68).
  • Technical Importance: This technology provides a framework for modern connected-vehicle services, enabling features such as remote diagnostics, telematics (e.g., remote lock/unlock), and in-vehicle access to external data networks (Compl. ¶57).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts infringement of at least Claim 68 (Compl. ¶95-96).
  • Essential elements of independent claim 68 include:
    • A method for internetworking, comprising: coupling, at a gateway node, a plurality of network elements in a motor vehicle, the motor vehicle comprising the gateway node, a first vehicle bus, and a second vehicle bus;
    • automatically forming a network of the plurality of network elements in which the gateway node provides a bridge between the first and second vehicle bus;
    • coupling at least one network element... to a remote computer located outside of the motor vehicle; and
    • remotely controlling, at the remote computer, at least one function of the assembled plurality of network elements.
  • The complaint states infringement of "at least claim 1," but reproduces claim 68 as exemplary, suggesting other claims may be asserted later (Compl. ¶96).

U.S. Patent No. 9,232,158 - "LARGE DYNAMIC RANGE CAMERAS"

The Invention Explained

  • The patent describes a system for expanding the dynamic range of a digital camera. It uses a plurality of "channels," each with its own sensor, and a processing component that determines a distinct "integration time" (exposure time) for each channel before combining the data to create a single high-dynamic-range image (Compl. ¶60, 111).

Asserted Claims

  • At least Claim 9 (Compl. ¶111).

Accused Features

  • The "Surround View Camera" system in Volvo vehicles, which allegedly uses four cameras as the claimed "plurality of channels." The complaint alleges a processing component determines an integration time for each camera and combines the data to create a stitched-together, bird's-eye view of the vehicle's surroundings (Compl. ¶110, 114-115).

U.S. Patent No. 10,292,138 - "DETERMINING BUFFER OCCUPANCY AND SELECTING DATA FOR TRANSMISSION ON A RADIO BEARER"

The Invention Explained

  • The patent relates to wireless data transmission from user equipment (UE). It claims a UE with a processor configured to determine the amount of data in transmission buffers for various "radio bearers" and to select which data to transmit based on a two-iteration process that considers both network-provided parameters and the amount of buffered data (Compl. ¶63, 124).

Asserted Claims

  • At least Claim 1 (Compl. ¶125).

Accused Features

  • Volvo's "Mobile Hotspot System" and its associated 4G LTE modem, which the complaint alleges function as a UE that implements the claimed method for managing data transmission over a cellular network in compliance with 3GPP standards (Compl. ¶126-129, 131).

U.S. Patent No. 8,953,641 - "METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR MULTI-CARRIER COMMUNICATIONS WITH VARIABLE CHANNEL BANDWIDTH"

The Invention Explained

  • The patent describes a mobile station for use in an Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) system. The station receives broadcast information in a narrow "first band" and uses that information to determine the bandwidth of a wider "second band" that is used for data communication (Compl. ¶66, 144).

Asserted Claims

  • At least Claim 11 (Compl. ¶144-145).

Accused Features

  • Volvo's Mobile Hotspot System and its 4G LTE modem, which allegedly operate according to 3GPP standards. These standards allegedly specify that a mobile device receives system bandwidth information on a narrow broadcast channel before communicating across the full, wider data channel (Compl. ¶146, 149-152).

U.S. Patent No. 7,684,318 - "SHARED-COMMUNICATIONS CHANNEL UTILIZATION FOR APPLICATIONS HAVING DIFFERENT CLASS OF SERVICE REQUIREMENTS"

The Invention Explained

  • The patent claims a method for managing data transmission over a shared channel by queuing data frames and "setting a length of time for the transmit opportunity based on a priority of the queue." This allows higher-priority applications (e.g., voice) to transmit more data than lower-priority ones (Compl. ¶69, 167).

Asserted Claims

  • At least Claim 1 (Compl. ¶168).

Accused Features

  • The Wi-Fi functionality in Volvo vehicles, which allegedly implements the IEEE 802.11 standard. The complaint alleges this standard includes Quality of Service (QoS) mechanisms, such as Enhanced Distributed Channel Access (EDCA), that create separate queues for different traffic types and assign transmit opportunities (TXOPs) based on priority (Compl. ¶170-173).

U.S. Patent No. 9,602,608 - "SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR NOTIFYING A USER OF PEOPLE, PLACES OR THINGS HAVING ATTRIBUTES MATCHING A USER'S STATED PREFERENCE"

The Invention Explained

  • The patent describes a computer-implemented method for providing localized information. The method involves receiving a user's preference, location, and a geographic limit, then finding a matching "object" in a database based on its attributes and proximity to the user, and finally sending information about the match to the user (Compl. ¶72, 183).

Asserted Claims

  • At least Claim 1 and Claim 8 (Compl. ¶183-184).

Accused Features

  • The Volvo Connected Navigation System, particularly its Real Time Traffic Information (RTTI) feature. This system is alleged to receive the user's location, identify matching "objects" (e.g., traffic events) within a geographic area based on attributes, and send information about these events to the user's navigation screen (Compl. ¶182, 184, 186-189).

U.S. Patent No. 7,484,008 - "APPARATUS FOR VEHICLE INTERNETWORKS"

The Invention Explained

  • The patent claims a "gateway node" apparatus for a vehicle internetwork. The claimed node comprises at least one interface port, a "real-time processor" for real-time operations, and an "application processor" for high-level functions, with the real-time processor situated between the interface port and the application processor (Compl. ¶75, 198).

Asserted Claims

  • At least Claim 75 (Compl. ¶199).

Accused Features

  • The infotainment architecture in Volvo vehicles, particularly the "Display and Navigation Module Display Electronic Control Unit (ECU)." The complaint alleges this ECU functions as the claimed gateway node, using a MOST Intelligent Interface Controller (INIC) as the real-time processor and an External Host Controller as the application processor (Compl. ¶201-203).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The accused instrumentalities are various Volvo vehicle models (including C40, V40, XC40, S60, V60, XC60, S90, V90, XC90, and XC90 Recharge) and components and services therein (Compl. ¶77, 94, 110, 123, 143, 166, 182, 197). Specific systems identified include the MOST infotainment network, Volvo Sensus Connect, Connected Services, the Surround View Camera, the in-vehicle Mobile Hotspot System, and the Connected Navigation system (Compl. ¶80, 97, 110, 126, 169, 182).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The accused functionalities represent core features of modern high-end automobiles. The complaint alleges that Volvo's infotainment systems use a MOST (Media Oriented System Transport) network to connect various components like the display, audio, and connectivity modules (Compl. ¶80, 98). The complaint also highlights the Volvo Sensus Connect system, which provides an in-vehicle Wi-Fi hotspot by using an integrated 4G LTE cellular modem, allowing passengers to connect devices to the internet (Compl. ¶51, 97). A screenshot from an AT&T webpage advertises the ability to "Turn your Volvo into a POWERFUL WI-FI HOTSPOT" (Compl. p. 18, Figure 9). The Surround View Camera system uses multiple exterior cameras to generate a composite bird's-eye view for parking assistance (Compl. ¶114-115). The complaint alleges these features are marketed and sold in the accused Volvo models throughout the United States (Compl. ¶51).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

U.S. Patent No. 6,832,283 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
Method for addressing components of a first network in a data bus system in a transport vehicle, in which each component is assigned a first address ... and the first addresses are stored in a central register The accused vehicles include a MOST network, which is alleged to be the "first network." The complaint alleges that components on this network are assigned addresses that are stored in a central registry as part of the MOST standard. A table from the MOST specification shows an example of such a registry (Compl. p. 30). ¶80, 82 col. 2:23-34
wherein at least one particular component of the first network communicates with a second network A Human Machine Interface (HMI) module, which is a component on the MOST network, includes a Bluetooth component that can connect and pair with an external Bluetooth device, such as a mobile phone. This connection is alleged to constitute communication with a "second network." ¶83-84 col. 2:23-25
said one component, when dialling into the second network, is assigned a second address by the second network When the HMI pairs with the external Bluetooth device, it is allegedly assigned a second address by that second (Bluetooth) network. ¶85 col. 2:25-28
and wherein, within the first network, addressing takes place on the basis of function-specific address components, identical function blocks ... being addressed via identical function-specific address components Addressing on the MOST network allegedly occurs based on function-specific identifiers. The complaint cites a MOST specification showing a "Central Registry" with a "FBlockID" (Function Block ID) to support this allegation. ¶81 col. 2:30-34
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A central question may be whether the temporary, ad-hoc network formed between the vehicle's HMI and a user's mobile phone via Bluetooth qualifies as a "second network" that "assigns a second address" in the manner contemplated by the patent.
    • Technical Questions: The analysis will likely focus on whether the addressing scheme used in Volvo's implementation of the MOST protocol is truly "on the basis of function-specific address components." The defendant may argue that the addressing is primarily based on device position or logical node address, rather than the specific function of a component block as required by the claim.

U.S. Patent No. 7,891,004 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 68) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A method for internetworking, comprising: coupling, at a gateway node, a plurality of network elements in a motor vehicle, the motor vehicle comprising the gateway node, a first vehicle bus ... a second vehicle bus The accused vehicles allegedly contain an infotainment architecture with a gateway node (e.g., the Infotainment Control Module) that couples and bridges multiple in-vehicle networks, such as a MOST bus ("first vehicle bus") and a CAN bus ("second vehicle bus"). ¶98, 99 ’008 Patent, col. 4:50-55
automatically forming a network of the plurality of network elements in which the gateway node provides a bridge between the first vehicle bus and the second vehicle bus The complaint alleges the accused systems automatically form a network where the gateway node bridges the vehicle buses. A diagram of the Volvo XC90 network shows the Infotainment Control Module (ICM) bridging the MOST ring and other network components (Compl. p. 38). ¶99 ’008 Patent, col. 10:45-50
coupling at least one network element ... to a remote computer located outside of the motor vehicle The accused vehicles include a Telematics and Connectivity Antenna Module that provides a cellular link, coupling the in-vehicle network elements to remote Volvo Sensus Connect servers, which are "remote computers located outside the motor vehicle." ¶100-101 ’008 Patent, col. 6:3-10
and remotely controlling, at the remote computer, at least one function of the assembled plurality of network elements Through the connection to the remote servers, features are enabled that allow for remote control of vehicle functions. ¶102 ’008 Patent, col. 6:11-15
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A potential dispute may arise over the term "automatically forming a network." A defendant could argue that the vehicle's network is pre-configured at the time of manufacture and does not "automatically form" in the dynamic, self-organizing sense described in the patent's specification (’008 Patent, col. 4:32-37).
    • Technical Questions: The factual analysis will likely scrutinize whether the accused Volvo architecture truly contains a component that functions as the claimed "gateway node" bridging two distinct "vehicle buses." The complaint's inclusion of a network diagram from a Volvo technical document showing the ICM connecting the MOST ring to other modules provides factual support for this allegation (Compl. p. 38).

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "function-specific address components" (’283 Patent, cl. 1)

  • Context and Importance: This term is the central limitation defining the internal addressing scheme of the asserted method. The outcome of the infringement analysis for the ’283 patent will likely depend on whether Volvo's implementation of the MOST protocol uses addresses that are defined by component function, as opposed to physical location or logical network position. Practitioners may focus on this term because it distinguishes the claimed method from simple positional addressing.

  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification suggests that addressing a component can be done via its "main function block," implying a focus on the primary purpose of a device rather than a sub-component ('283 Patent, col. 3:39-44). This could support a reading that covers any addressing scheme that references a device's general purpose.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification provides specific examples of function blocks, such as "an amplifier or a unit which controls the car telephone" ('283 Patent, col. 3:15-18). This could support a narrower construction requiring the address component to correspond to a discrete, defined hardware or software function rather than a general device category.

  • The Term: "gateway node" (’004 Patent, cl. 68)

  • Context and Importance: This is the core structural element of the claimed internetworking method. Infringement of the ’004 patent hinges on whether a specific component within the Volvo architecture, such as the Infotainment Control Module (ICM), meets the structural and functional requirements of the "gateway node."

  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The related ’008 patent specification describes the gateway node's functions broadly as providing "protocol translation, security, and privacy functions" and acting to "bridge... heterogeneous networks" (’008 Patent, col. 7:55-59, col. 17:39-42). This could support construing any component that performs these functions as a "gateway node."
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification also describes a specific gateway architecture comprising "at least one interface port," "at least one real-time processor," and "at least one application processor," with a specific relationship between them (’008 Patent, cl. 75). A defendant may argue that this more detailed structure, claimed in the related ’008 patent, limits the meaning of "gateway node" and that its accused device is architecturally different.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: For all asserted patents, the complaint alleges both induced and contributory infringement. Inducement is based on allegations that Volvo provides the accused vehicles with instructions and encouragement for customers to use the infringing features in their intended manner (e.g., Compl. ¶91, 106). Contributory infringement is based on allegations that Volvo knowingly sells products and components that are especially made for use in an infringing way and are not staple articles of commerce with substantial non-infringing uses (e.g., Compl. ¶90, 107).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement for all patents. The basis for willfulness is alleged pre-suit knowledge ("knew of... or should have known of") and, more specifically, actual knowledge from receiving a letter dated June 7, 2023, the day before the complaint was filed. The complaint alleges that continued infringement after this date is intentional and willful (e.g., Compl. ¶88, 105, 118).

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

  • A core issue will be one of architectural mapping: Does Volvo's infotainment architecture, which utilizes components such as an Infotainment Control Module (ICM) to manage communication between MOST, CAN, and external networks, embody the specific "gateway node" and dual-network structures recited in the '283, '004, and '008 patents, or are there fundamental differences in how the system components are organized and addressed?
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of standards implementation: For patents asserted against systems implementing industry standards (e.g., 4G LTE/3GPP for the '138 and '641 patents, and IEEE 802.11 for the '318 patent), the question will be whether practicing those standards necessarily results in performing the specific, granular steps required by the asserted claims, or if the standards can be implemented in multiple, non-infringing ways.
  • A central factual question will be one of operational equivalence: Does the processing performed by the accused "Surround View Camera" constitute determining discrete "integration times" for each of its camera "channels" as claimed in the '158 patent, and does the "Connected Navigation" system's traffic alert functionality meet all limitations of the claimed method for matching user "preferences" with "objects" as recited in the '608 patent?