DCT
7:25-cv-00186
Adaptive Avenue Associates Inc v. Best Buy Co Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. (Minnesota)
- Defendant: Best Buy Co., Inc., Best Buy Stores, L.P., and BestBuy.com, LLC (Minnesota/Virginia)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Direction IP Law; Padmanabhan & Dawson, P.L.L.C.
- Case Identification: 7:25-cv-00186, W.D. Tex., 04/21/2025
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Western District of Texas because Defendants conduct business in the district, operate the accused website ("www.bestbuy.com") for users in the district, and maintain a regular and established place of business in Waco, Texas.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s e-commerce website, specifically its use of "carousel ad" features, infringes two patents related to systems and methods for creating and displaying automated, sequential presentations of web content.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns server-side systems for generating automated "slide shows" of web pages or content, a feature now common in e-commerce and advertising for displaying multiple products or offers in a single rotating module.
- Key Procedural History: The ’707 Patent is a continuation-in-part of the application that issued as the ’629 Patent. The complaint notes that during the prosecution of the ’707 Patent, the Examiner found the claims allowable over the prior art based on the unconventional feature of automatically composing a slideshow by extracting web page details, such as hyperlinks.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2000-10-20 | Priority Date for '629 and '707 Patents |
| 2007-01-30 | '629 Patent Issued |
| 2008-09-23 | '707 Patent Issued |
| 2020-04-01 | Date of Accused Instrumentality Screenshots |
| 2025-04-21 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 7,171,629, "Customizable Web Site Access System And Method Therefore," Issued January 30, 2007
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: In the early 2000s, navigating the web was often tedious, requiring users to manually click through static pages or return repeatedly to a search results list ('629 Patent, col. 7:48-59). The patent identifies a need for a system that could create automated presentations of web page sequences without costly reprogramming of site content or installing client-side tools ('629 Patent, col. 7:60-67).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a server-side software system with two main components: a "composer" and a "performer" ('629 Patent, col. 8:5-14; FIG. 1). A website owner or a query system uses the composer to create a "presentation," which is defined by a list of URLs, a display sequence, and a display duration ('629 Patent, Abstract). The performer then automatically displays this sequence of web pages to the end-user as a "slide show," which the user can pause or otherwise control ('629 Patent, col. 10:51-65).
- Technical Importance: The patent describes a shift from a "passive site and active visitor" model to an "active site/active visitor model," aiming to increase user engagement and information absorption by presenting content in automated, pre-established "tours" ('629 Patent, col. 11:36-50).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent method claim 11 (Compl. ¶48).
- The essential elements of claim 11 are:
- Remotely invoking a "composer" operating on a host server.
- Creating a "presentation" in the composer, which involves:
- Establishing a list of URLs using manual or automatic (query-based) methods.
- Determining a display sequence for the list of URLs.
- Determining a duration of display for the list of URLs.
- Remotely invoking a "performer" on the host server to present the created presentation.
- Automatically locally displaying the presentation in a "slide show format", where each URL is a slide displayed for a pre-determined duration without human intervention.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert other claims but infringement allegations are limited to at least claim 11.
U.S. Patent No. 7,428,707, "Customizable Web Site Access System And Method Therefore," Issued September 23, 2008
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: As a continuation-in-part of the '629 Patent, the '707 Patent addresses the same general problem of web navigation but focuses on the specific challenge of creating the presentation list ('707 Patent, col. 1:21-28). Prior art methods often required manual composition of slideshows ('707 Patent, as cited in Compl. ¶44).
- The Patented Solution: This invention adds a method for "auto-composing" a slideshow by automatically extracting details from a desired web page ('707 Patent, Abstract). The system can create a list of URLs for the presentation by extracting hyperlinks (e.g., "hrefs"), finding a specific presentation text file, or reading a meta tag within the desired web page's code ('707 Patent, FIG. 12). The performer then displays the slideshow based on this automatically generated list ('707 Patent, Abstract).
- Technical Importance: This technology aimed to further automate content presentation by allowing a slideshow to be generated dynamically from the content of a single source page, reducing the need for manual curation of URL lists ('707 Patent, as cited in Compl. ¶44).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent system claim 1 and independent method claim 7 (Compl. ¶66). The infringement analysis focuses on claim 7.
- The essential elements of method claim 7 are:
- Composing a presentation for a desired web page by creating a list of URLs.
- The composing step comprises one of the following:
- Automatically extracting a plurality of hyperlinks from the desired web page.
- Automatically extracting a presentation/rendition text file from the desired web page.
- Automatically extracting a meta tag from the desired web page.
- Automatically displaying the presentation in the order of the created list of URLs.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert other claims but infringement allegations are limited to at least claims 1 and 7.
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused instrumentalities are the systems and methods used on the website "www.bestbuy.com", specifically the "carousel ads" that automatically rotate through a series of advertisements or offers (Compl. ¶48, ¶51, ¶69).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges that the carousel ads on Best Buy's homepage function by displaying a sequence of different promotional panels, each linked to a specific URL (Compl. ¶51, ¶53). These panels are alleged to advance automatically after a predetermined time, presenting different content to the user without requiring manual clicks to navigate between them (Compl. ¶62). The complaint provides screenshots of a carousel ad from April 1, 2020, showing panels for "Contactless Curbside Pickup," "iPad Pro," and "Top Deals" (Compl. ¶53; p. 17-19).
- Plaintiff alleges that such carousel ads are an "industry standard" that can generate significantly higher click-through rates and lower cost-per-conversion compared to static ads, making them commercially important (Compl. ¶46).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'629 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 11) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| remotely invoking a composer operating on a host server; | Best Buy's web servers are the "host server," and the "composer" is invoked when a user accesses "www.bestbuy.com". | ¶52 | col. 13:46-47 |
| establishing a list of URLs in said composer by one of a plurality of list establishment methodologies... manual entry... and automatic entry by a query-based system; | The source code for the carousel ad contains a list of image URLs for the different panels. The complaint alleges this list is created by Best Buy either manually or through an automatic, query-based system. One referenced screenshot shows the source code with an image URL for the "iPad Pro" panel. (Compl. p. 17). | ¶53, ¶55 | col. 13:51-56 |
| determining a display sequence of said list of URLs in said composer; | The panels are displayed in a specific order, as shown in the series of screenshots provided in the complaint. For instance, the "We're still here..." panel is followed by the "iPad Pro" panel. (Compl. p. 19). | ¶56 | col. 13:57-58 |
| determining a duration of display for said list of URLs in said composer; | Each slide is allegedly displayed for a "predetermined duration" before the next one is shown. | ¶57, ¶62 | col. 13:59-61 |
| remotely invoking a performer operating on said host server to present said created presentation; and | A user's navigation to "www.bestbuy.com" allegedly invokes the "performer" to display the carousel ad presentation. | ¶58-59 | col. 13:62-64 |
| automatically locally displaying the created presentation presented by said performer in a slide show format according to said list and said display sequence... | The carousel ad is automatically displayed to the user on the Best Buy homepage, rotating through the panels without user intervention. A screenshot shows the first panel of the carousel, "We're still here to get you what you need," displayed on the homepage. (Compl. p. 17). | ¶60, ¶62 | col. 14:6-14 |
'707 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 7) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| composing a presentation for a desired web page by creating a list of URLs, | The Best Buy system creates the carousel ad presentation for display on its homepage. The complaint presents source code showing the URLs for the ads. A screenshot displays the "Top Deals" panel and its associated source code. (Compl. p. 18). | ¶71, ¶73 | col. 10:7-9 |
| wherein said step of composing comprises automatically extracting a plurality of hyperlinks from the desired web page, wherein the plurality of hyperlinks provides the URLs; | The complaint alleges that the image URLs shown in the source code are the "plurality of hyperlinks" that are "automatically extracted" from the "www.bestbuy.com" webpage to create the presentation. | ¶74-75 | col. 10:14-17 |
| and automatically displaying said presentation, wherein said presentation is presented in order of the created list of URLs. | The carousel ad automatically displays the panels in the order corresponding to the created list of URLs. | ¶76 | col. 10:23-26 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions ('629 Patent): Does Best Buy's content management system for its homepage qualify as the "composer" and "performer" architecture described in the patent? The dispute may center on whether the accused system, which integrates promotional content into a webpage, meets the functional definitions of the distinct composer and performer components that create and present a "presentation."
- Technical Questions ('707 Patent): A central question will be the meaning of "automatically extracting a plurality of hyperlinks from the desired web page." The complaint points to pre-existing URLs in the page's source code as evidence of this step (Compl. ¶75). The defense may argue that this is merely a pre-configured list of content and not an "extraction" process where the system actively finds and collects hyperlinks from the page's rendered content or structure, as the patent specification appears to describe ('707 Patent, FIG. 12, element 904).
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
For the '629 Patent:
- The Term: "composer"
- Context and Importance: This term is central to the claimed system architecture. The infringement case depends on mapping Best Buy's back-end website management tools to this claimed element. Practitioners may focus on whether "composer" requires a standalone tool accessible to a "site owner/developer" for creating presentations, or if it can be read more broadly to cover any server-side process that assembles a sequence of content.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claims define the composer functionally as a component that "create[s] a presentation by accepting a list of a plurality of URLs, a desired sequence... and a pre-set display duration" ('629 Patent, col. 14:60-65). This functional language may support an interpretation covering any system that performs these acts.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly depicts the composer as a distinct module with a user interface for a "site owner/developer" to manually input registration and presentation preferences ('629 Patent, FIG. 2A, FIG. 3). This may support an argument that the term requires a more specific, interactive tool than a general-purpose content management system.
For the '707 Patent:
- The Term: "automatically extracting a plurality of hyperlinks from the desired web page"
- Context and Importance: This term is the key inventive concept alleged for the '707 Patent. The viability of the infringement claim hinges on whether Best Buy's system performs this specific action. The dispute will likely turn on whether populating a content module with a pre-defined list of image URLs constitutes "extracting hyperlinks from the... web page."
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself is general. Plaintiff may argue that any automated process that results in a list of hyperlinks derived for use on a webpage meets the plain meaning of "extracting."
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The '707 patent's detailed description and figures suggest a more specific process. Figure 12 shows a distinct step to "Extract Hyperlinks (hrefs) from Default Page" ('707 Patent, FIG. 12, element 904). The specification further describes this as reviewing a page and "extracting all hyperlinks, i.e., href's, that are within the page" ('707 Patent, col. 8:20-23). This may support a narrower construction requiring an active parsing of a page to find links, rather than using a pre-configured list of assets.
VI. Other Allegations
The complaint does not contain specific counts or factual allegations supporting indirect or willful infringement.
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
A central issue will be one of technical mapping: Can the complaint demonstrate that Best Buy's integrated e-commerce platform, which displays promotional "carousel ads," operates as the specific two-part "composer" and "performer" system required by the '629 patent claims, or is there a fundamental architectural mismatch?
The case for the '707 patent will likely turn on a question of functional operation and claim scope: Does having a pre-configured list of image URLs in a website's source code for a carousel ad meet the '707 patent's claim limitation of "automatically extracting a plurality of hyperlinks from the desired web page"? The court's construction of this phrase will be dispositive, determining whether the patent covers the common industry practice of using curated content lists or is limited to a more specific, dynamic link-parsing technology.