DCT

6:23-cv-00718

Advanced Transactions LLC v. Staples Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 6:23-cv-00718, W.D. Tex., 10/16/2023
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Western District of Texas because Staples maintains regular and established places of business in the district, employs multiple individuals based in the district, transacts business there, and has committed alleged acts of patent infringement within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s integrated marketing and e-commerce systems—including its marketing emails, mobile applications, and website functionalities—infringe eight patents related to email campaign generation, mobile commerce transactions, and global e-commerce platforms.
  • Technical Context: The technologies at issue cover foundational aspects of modern digital retail, such as automated email marketing, mobile coupon redemption, and localized web content delivery, which are central to customer engagement and online sales.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff provided Defendant with notice of the patents-in-suit via letters sent in June 2022 and July 2023, the first of which included a draft of the complaint, which may form the basis for the allegations of willful infringement.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2000-04-25 Priority Date for ’555, ’594, and ’950 Patents
2000-10-06 Priority Date for ’057, ’519, ’608, and ’529 Patents
2000-12-22 Priority Date for ’736 Patent
2006-06-20 ’555 Patent Issued
2008-06-10 ’594 Patent Issued
2010-04-06 ’950 Patent Issued
2011-07-12 ’057 Patent Issued
2012-04-03 ’736 Patent Issued
2012-05-08 ’519 Patent Issued
2017-08-29 ’608 Patent Issued
2020-09-22 ’529 Patent Issued
2022-06-09 Plaintiff sends first pre-suit notice letter to Defendant
2023-07-07 Plaintiff sends second pre-suit notice letter to Defendant
2023-10-16 Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 7,065,555 - System and Method Related to Generating and Tracking an Email Campaign

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section describes the difficulties of then-existing email campaigns, including challenges in locating relevant recipients, tailoring messages for large audiences, measuring a campaign’s success, and tracking recipient feedback (Compl. ¶24; ’555 Patent, col. 1:15-43).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention claims to provide an "efficient way to create and track a email campaign" by implementing a systematic process (Compl. ¶25; ’555 Patent, col. 1:44-45). This process involves using a computer system to generate an "email campaign template" from a database of recipients, using that template to form a custom email for each recipient, sending the custom email, and then tracking the responses to measure the campaign's effectiveness (’555 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:1-12).
  • Technical Importance: The technology addressed the growing need for scalable and measurable online marketing techniques as internet-based commerce became increasingly important (’555 Patent, col. 1:15-17).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶93).
  • Claim 1 is a method claim with the following essential elements:
    • Receiving an email target database.
    • Generating an email campaign template related to at least one email target in the received email target database.
    • Sending to each of the at least one email target a corresponding custom email, wherein the custom email is formed from the email campaign template.
    • Tracking the custom email sent to each of the at least one email target.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.

U.S. Patent No. 7,386,594 - System and method related to generating an email campaign

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The ’594 Patent shares its specification with the ’555 Patent and thus addresses the same problems of creating, tailoring, and tracking email marketing campaigns for effectiveness (Compl. ¶32; ’594 Patent, col. 1:15-43).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention provides a system for generating and tracking an email campaign (’594 Patent, Abstract). It elaborates on the solution in the ’555 patent by specifying that generating the template involves creating a "message template" and a separate "configuration file" that contains data specific to each recipient, which is then inserted into the message template to create the customized email (’594 Patent, col. 2:15-28).
  • Technical Importance: This approach provided a structured way to separate the static content of an email (the message) from the dynamic, personalized data (the configuration file), a key concept for efficiently personalizing mass email communications.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶104).
  • Claim 1 is a method claim with the following essential elements:
    • Receiving an email target database.
    • Generating an email campaign template related to at least one email target in the received email target database, wherein the step of generating an email campaign template comprises the step of generating a message template and generating a configuration file to contain data related to each of the at least one email target, wherein the data is insertable in the generated message template.
    • Sending to each of the at least one email target a corresponding custom email, wherein the custom email is formed from the email campaign template.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.

Multi-Patent Capsules

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,693,950, System and Method Related to Generating and Tracking an Email Campaign, issued April 6, 2010.

  • Technology Synopsis: The ’950 Patent, which shares the same specification as the ’555 Patent, discloses a method for producing a custom email template (Compl. ¶¶37-38). The method involves producing a configuration file containing recipient-specific data and a custom URL, along with a message file containing the textual message and custom tags for data insertion (’950 Patent, Abstract).

  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 21 is asserted (Compl. ¶114).

  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses Staples' email servers of infringing by receiving email addresses, producing a custom email template comprising a configuration file and a message file, and including custom URLs in the emails (Compl. ¶¶116-120).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,979,057, Third-Party Provider Method and System, issued July 12, 2011.

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses problems with physical coupons and proprietary marketing systems, such as their inefficiency, low redemption rates, and fraud (Compl. ¶¶47-48). The solution involves a method for processing "negotiable economic credits" (e.g., coupons) using a wireless handheld device that can communicate with a wireless network to receive and store these credits based on a configurable filter (Compl. ¶¶49, 125-127).

  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶124).

  • Accused Features: The Staples Marketing System, particularly the Staples mobile application on a smartphone, is accused of processing negotiable economic credits like coupons and rewards through a wireless handheld device (Compl. ¶125).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,150,736, Global Electronic Commerce System, issued April 3, 2012.

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses barriers to global e-commerce, such as language, culture, and the use of separate, cloned websites for different regions, which leads to inefficiency and inaccurate information across databases (Compl. ¶59). The invention is a "Global Store" system that uses a single, multi-version database to provide language and locale-specific marketing and sales information, allowing a manufacturer to market globally from a single point of operation (Compl. ¶¶60, 63).

  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶140).

  • Accused Features: The Staples website is accused of infringing by receiving a web page request that includes a "locale identifier value" (e.g., from a search for a local store), retrieving a version of marketing information based on that locale, and generating and transmitting a localized web page (Compl. ¶¶141-144).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,175,519, Third-Party Provider Method and System, issued May 8, 2012.

  • Technology Synopsis: Sharing a specification with the ’057 Patent, this patent describes a method for using a wireless handheld device to manage negotiable economic credits (Compl. ¶73). The claimed method involves requesting, receiving, storing, and retrieving at least one credit from the device's memory.

  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 22 is asserted (Compl. ¶148).

  • Accused Features: The Staples Marketing System, including the Staples App on a smartphone, is accused of infringing by requesting, receiving, storing, and retrieving credits such as coupons and rewards (Compl. ¶¶149-152).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,747,608, Third-Party Provider Method and System, issued August 29, 2017.

  • Technology Synopsis: Also sharing a specification with the ’057 Patent, this patent focuses on the interaction between an electronic portable device and a point-of-sale (POS) system (Compl. ¶79). The claimed method involves the device transmitting a request for a data structure (e.g., a coupon), receiving it, detecting a transaction, and then transmitting the credit information to a POS device for application to the transaction.

  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 10 is asserted (Compl. ¶158).

  • Accused Features: The Staples Marketing System is accused of infringing through the Staples App, which allegedly transmits requests for data structures corresponding to rewards, receives them, and transmits the credit information to in-store POS devices during a transaction (Compl. ¶¶159-162).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,783,529, Third-Party Provider Method and System, issued September 22, 2020.

  • Technology Synopsis: Sharing a specification with the ’057 Patent, this patent claims a method for using an electronic portable device to conduct a transaction (Compl. ¶85). The method involves storing a data structure that encodes a negotiable economic credit and authentication information, detecting a user-initiated transaction, and transmitting this information to a POS device, which then authenticates and applies the credit.

  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 8 is asserted (Compl. ¶172).

  • Accused Features: The Staples Marketing System and Staples App are accused of infringing by storing data structures for coupons and rewards on a smartphone, detecting a transaction, and transmitting the credit and authentication information to a POS device for application (Compl. ¶¶173-176).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The complaint identifies the accused instrumentalities as the "Staples Marketing Products and Services" and the underlying "Staples Marketing System" (Compl. ¶¶7-8). This encompasses a broad range of customer-facing technologies, including Staples Marketing Emails, the Staples Mobile Apps for iOS and Android, the Staples website (Staples.com), Staples online and in-store shopping services, and the Staples Rewards program (Compl. ¶7).

Functionality and Market Context

The accused system provides an integrated retail and marketing experience. Customers provide their email addresses when creating an account, which are then used as targets for marketing emails (Compl. ¶95). These emails contain dynamically generated content and tracking links that monitor user engagement (Compl. ¶¶98, 100). The complaint includes a screenshot of an email received from Staples' email server, titled "Thanks for signing up!", as an example of the accused functionality (Compl. ¶94, p. 31). The Staples Mobile Apps allow users to manage "negotiable economic credits" such as coupons and rewards, which can be redeemed online or at in-store point-of-sale terminals (Compl. ¶¶125, 162). The complaint provides screenshots from the Staples mobile app showing a "Coupons & Rewards" screen where users can manage their rewards (Compl. ¶125, p. 80). The Staples website allegedly uses geolocation data from referral sites (e.g., a Google search) to generate and transmit web pages with locale-specific information, such as local store details (Compl. ¶141). A screenshot in the complaint shows the Staples website asking for permission to access the user's location to "Allow stores.staples.com to access your location?" (Compl. ¶141, p. 104). The complaint alleges these services are central to Staples' retail operations in the United States (Compl. ¶12).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

’555 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a method for conducting an email campaign, comprising the steps of: receiving an email target database; Staples' Marketing System receives a database of email targets when customers provide their email addresses and other information upon creating an account on the Staples website (Compl. p. 34). ¶95 col. 2:13-14
generating an email campaign template related to at least one email target...; The system generates an email campaign template that includes a message template (e.g., the visual layout and static text of the email) and a configuration file containing data related to the recipient. ¶¶96-98 col. 2:15-28
sending to each of the at least one email target a corresponding custom email...; Staples' email servers send the custom email, formed from the template and configuration data, to the email address of the target recipient. ¶99 col. 2:38-41
tracking the custom email sent to each of the at least one email target. Staples tracks user interaction with the custom email through embedded code and hyperlinks containing tracking parameters. The complaint provides an HTML code excerpt showing a tracking link (Compl. p. 41). ¶100 col. 2:42-47
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: The dispute may center on the definition of "generating an email campaign template." A question for the court could be whether using a pre-designed HTML file and populating it with user data constitutes "generating" a template as required by the claim, or if the claim requires the template itself to be created dynamically for each campaign or target.
    • Technical Questions: What level of "tracking" does the claim require? The claim recites "tracking the custom email," and the specification describes creating a "campaign tracking list that includes the received at least one response" (’555 Patent, col. 2:42-47). The complaint alleges tracking via hyperlinks and cookies (Compl. ¶100), but a factual question may arise as to whether this functionality meets the specific "tracking" limitation as understood in the context of the patent.

’594 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a method for conducting an email campaign, comprising the steps of: receiving an email target database; Staples receives a database of email targets when customers provide their email addresses and other personal information upon creating an account. ¶106 col. 2:13-14
generating an email campaign template...wherein the step of generating an email campaign template comprises the step of generating a message template and generating a configuration file to contain data related to each of the at least one email target...; The Staples Marketing System is alleged to generate an email campaign template that is composed of two distinct parts: a "message template" (the email's structure and static content) and a "configuration file" (recipient-specific data). ¶¶107-109 col. 2:15-28
...wherein the data is insertable in the generated message template; The recipient-specific data from the alleged configuration file is inserted into the message template to create the final personalized email. ¶109 col. 2:25-28
sending to each of the at least one email target a corresponding custom email, wherein the custom email is formed from the email campaign template. Staples' email servers send the final custom email, formed from the combination of the message template and the configuration file, to the target user's email address. ¶110 col. 2:38-41
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: This claim is more specific than claim 1 of the ’555 patent, explicitly requiring the generation of both a "message template" and a "configuration file." A central question will be whether Staples' system architecture actually separates email content and recipient data into two distinct files that correspond to these claimed elements, or if it uses a different method of personalization (e.g., a single script that pulls data directly from a database into an HTML structure).
    • Technical Questions: What is the evidentiary basis for the allegation that Staples’ system generates a distinct "configuration file"? The complaint's evidence is external (the received email and its source code) (Compl. p. 58). The factual determination of whether an actual "configuration file" is generated will likely depend on discovery of the internal workings of the Staples Marketing System.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

The Term: "generating an email campaign template" (’555 Patent, Claim 1; ’594 Patent, Claim 1)

  • Context and Importance: This term is central to the infringement allegations for the email-related patents. The dispute may turn on whether Staples' process of creating and personalizing marketing emails aligns with the specific act of "generating" a "template" as described in the patents. Practitioners may focus on this term because the defendant could argue its system merely uses static, pre-made templates rather than actively generating them in a manner tied to the email target database, as the claim language suggests.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states that generating the template comprises "generating a message template, and generating a configuration file to contain data related to each email target" (’555 Patent, col. 2:15-18). This could be interpreted broadly to cover any process that combines a base message with recipient-specific data, regardless of the precise technical implementation.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description explains that the process begins with an "email target list" and that the generator "outputs a text message file... and a configuration file" (’555 Patent, col. 5:14-17). A narrower reading might require that the template generation process itself be initiated by and directly related to the specific target list, rather than being a pre-existing asset.

The Term: "configuration file" (’594 Patent, Claim 1)

  • Context and Importance: The infringement allegation against the ’594 patent requires the explicit generation of a "configuration file." The existence and nature of this file will be a critical factual and legal issue. The defendant may argue that its system, which might for example use an API to pull data directly into an email at the time of sending, does not generate a discrete "configuration file" as contemplated by the patent.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent describes the file as being generated "to contain data related to each email target" and that this data is "insertable in the generated message template" (’594 Patent, Claim 1). This could be construed to cover any data structure, whether a physical file or a logical grouping of data in memory, that serves the function of holding recipient-specific information for insertion into a message.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification describes the configuration file as containing "invariant data and variant data" and shows it as a distinct output of the "email campaign generator" alongside the "text message file" (’594 Patent, Fig. 3A; col. 5:30-45). This could support a narrower interpretation requiring a discrete, structured file that is generated as a distinct step in the process before being merged with the message template.

VI. Other Allegations

Indirect Infringement

The complaint alleges induced infringement for patents related to the Staples mobile applications (’057 and ’608 patents). The allegations are based on Staples instructing and encouraging its customers to download and use the apps to perform the claimed methods, allegedly with knowledge of the patents since at least June 2022 (Compl. ¶¶133, 137, 165, 169).

Willful Infringement

The complaint alleges willful infringement of all patents-in-suit (Compl. ¶91). This allegation is based on alleged pre-suit knowledge stemming from notice letters sent by Plaintiff's counsel to Staples' CEO on or about June 9, 2022 and July 7, 2023, which allegedly included a draft of the complaint and identified the asserted patents (Compl. ¶¶86, 88).

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

  • A core issue will be one of technological evolution and scope: Can claim terms drafted in the context of early 2000s technology (e.g., "email campaign template," "hand held devices," "PDA") be construed to cover the architecture of modern, integrated e-commerce platforms that utilize cloud-based services, sophisticated mobile applications, and dynamic content-generation systems? The resolution will depend on whether the fundamental processes described in the patents are still performed by the accused systems, despite the change in underlying technology.
  • A second central question will be one of architectural equivalence: The email-related patents (’555, ’594, ’950) claim a specific process involving the generation of templates and distinct configuration files. The mobile commerce patents (’057, ’519, ’608, ’529) claim specific methods of requesting, storing, transmitting, and redeeming electronic credits. The case will likely hinge on whether discovery reveals that the internal architecture and data flows of the "Staples Marketing System" map onto these specific claimed methods, or if Staples achieves similar commercial outcomes through a fundamentally different technical approach.
  • A key evidentiary question will concern willfulness: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff provided a draft of the complaint to the defendant over a year before filing suit. If proven, this fact may significantly influence the analysis of willfulness, as it suggests detailed, pre-suit notice not only of the patents but of the specific infringement theories now being asserted in court.