DCT
2:20-cv-01130
International Business Machines Corporation v. Zillow Group Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: International Business Machines Corporation (New York)
- Defendant: Zillow Group, Inc., and Zillow, Inc. (Washington)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Harrigan Leyh Farmer & Thomsen LLP; Desmarais LLP
- Case Identification: 2:20-cv-01130, W.D. Wash., 11/04/2020
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the Western District of Washington because Defendants are Washington corporations that reside and conduct business in the district, and the alleged infringement occurred and continues to occur there.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s online real estate platform infringes five patents related to graphical user interfaces, personalized search result ranking, portal page organization, dynamic web content delivery, and customer relationship management systems.
- Technical Context: The technologies at issue relate to foundational methods for organizing and presenting information on websites and applications to enhance user experience and operational efficiency.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint states this is the second lawsuit filed by IBM against Zillow, following a prior suit concerning seven other patents. IBM alleges it provided Zillow with pre-suit notice of infringement for all five patents-in-suit between August and December 2019, including detailed claim charts, but that Zillow refused to acknowledge or respond to the notices.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2001-02-07 | Earliest Priority Date for ’193 Patent |
| 2001-02-07 | Earliest Priority Date for ’676 Patent |
| 2004-01-01 | Zillow founded (approximate product launch period) |
| 2004-08-17 | ’193 Patent Issued |
| 2004-08-31 | ’676 Patent Issued |
| 2005-07-01 | Earliest Priority Date for ’234 Patent |
| 2009-06-02 | ’234 Patent Issued |
| 2011-08-09 | Earliest Priority Date for ’414 Patent |
| 2013-05-19 | Earliest Priority Date for ’168 Patent |
| 2017-02-14 | ’414 Patent Issued |
| 2018-10-30 | ’168 Patent Issued |
| 2019-08-26 | IBM alleges it sent notice of ’234 patent infringement |
| 2019-11-25 | IBM alleges it sent notice of ’193, ’676, ’414 infringement |
| 2019-12-12 | IBM alleges it sent notice of ’168 patent infringement |
| 2020-11-04 | First Amended Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 6,778,193 - "Customer Self Service Iconic Interface for Portal Entry and Search Specification"
- (Compl. ¶9, ¶79)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent describes that prior art graphical user interfaces (GUIs) for search systems were inefficient because they failed to address the full range of relevant contextual variables for user queries and did not provide a graphical method for fine-tuning those variables. (Compl. ¶25).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a GUI structured into multiple "visual workspaces." These include a "cockpit" for initial selection of user context via icons, another workspace for viewing search results, and an "engine room" for refining search parameters. (Compl. ¶28). This "soft wizard" system is designed to allow a user to freely navigate between these functional workspaces to dynamically alter the search specification in a closed-loop feedback system. (Compl. ¶29-31; ’193 Patent, Abstract).
- Technical Importance: The claimed interface aimed to improve search efficiency by enabling users to express complex context with minimal input, thereby reducing user time and server-side processing. (Compl. ¶9).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1. (Compl. ¶81).
- The essential elements of claim 1 include:
- A graphical user interface for a customer self service system comprising:
- A first visual workspace comprising an entry field for a query and one or more selectable graphical user context elements.
- A second visual workspace for visualizing the set of resources matching the query, with the system indicating a degree of fit.
- A third visual workspace enabling a user to select and modify context attribute values to increase specificity and accuracy.
- A mechanism enabling the user to navigate among the first, second, and third visual workspaces.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.
U.S. Patent No. 6,785,676 - "Customer Self Service Subsystem for Response Set Ordering and Annotation"
- (Compl. ¶9, ¶95)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent states that conventional search systems required users to input contextual information but failed to use that information to rank results or to adapt those rankings as a user's context changed over time. (Compl. ¶32).
- The Patented Solution: The invention applies machine learning to translate heterogeneous data about a user (e.g., interaction history, background) into a "user context vector." ('676 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶35). This vector is then used by an "ordering and annotation function" to rank and annotate search results, enabling the system to interactively adapt to a user's changing context without requiring explicit new input. (Compl. ¶33, ¶36).
- Technical Importance: The technology sought to solve the problem of information overload by providing a more personalized and accurate set of search results that were ordered in a meaningful manner specific to the user. (Compl. ¶36).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 14. (Compl. ¶97).
- The essential elements of claim 14 include:
- A method for annotating resource results in a customer self-service system, comprising the steps of:
- Receiving a resource response set of results in response to a user query.
- Receiving a user context vector comprising data associating an interaction state with the user and including context that is a function of the user.
- Applying an ordering and annotation function to map the user context vector with the resource response set to generate an annotated response set.
- Controlling the presentation of the resource response set according to the annotations, wherein the function is executed interactively at the time of each user query.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.
U.S. Patent No. 7,543,234 - "Stacking Portlets in Portal Pages"
- (Compl. ¶9, ¶112)
- Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses the problem of "cluttered portal pages" that become overcrowded and disorganized as users add more content windows, known as portlets. (Compl. ¶37). The patented solution is a method for organizing portlets into "stacks" and "stacks of stacks" based on common attributes, which reduces clutter and allows users to navigate large amounts of information on a single page more effectively. (Compl. ¶38-39, ¶46).
- Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1. (Compl. ¶114).
- Accused Features: The complaint accuses Zillow's search results page, alleging that the individual home listings function as portlets, which are grouped into pages or sets (a "stack"). The ability to sort these listings by different criteria (e.g., price, newest) is alleged to create a "stack of stacks." (Compl. ¶114).
U.S. Patent No. 9,569,414 - "Method, Framework, and Program Product for Formatting and Serving Web Content"
- (Compl. ¶9, ¶121)
- Technology Synopsis: The technology addresses inefficiencies in serving dynamic web content, where prior methods required creating unique, monolithic JavaScript libraries for each combination of content and formatting. (Compl. ¶50). The invention separates the dynamic data (as JavaScript objects) from the formatting functions, allowing one set of data to be formatted in multiple ways and enabling the data and functions to be requested in a single HTTP request for better performance. (Compl. ¶51, ¶54-55).
- Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1. (Compl. ¶123).
- Accused Features: The complaint alleges that Zillow's websites request a set of JavaScript objects (JSON data representing property search results) and a distinct set of JavaScript functions (from s.zillowstatic.com) within a single HTTP request to format and display the property data. (Compl. ¶123).
U.S. Patent No. 10,115,168 - "Integrating Metadata from Applications Used for Social Networking into a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) System"
- (Compl. ¶9, ¶141)
- Technology Synopsis: The patent describes improving CRM systems, which traditionally relied on manual data entry or inefficient "web scraping" of front-end social media data. (Compl. ¶58-60). The patented solution is a "smart" CRM that obtains and analyzes back-end metadata (e.g., social graphs, user interactions) from applications to automatically infer sales opportunities, map client relationships, and populate the CRM with dynamic insights. ('168 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶63-64).
- Asserted Claims: At least independent claims 1 and 8. (Compl. ¶143, ¶144).
- Accused Features: The complaint accuses Zillow's websites and the Zillow Premier Agent applications, which allegedly function as a CRM system by obtaining and analyzing metadata from user activity (clicks, saves, likes) to infer opportunities (personalized listings) and populate the CRM with client relationship data. (Compl. ¶143).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused instrumentalities are Defendants' websites, including at least www.zillow.com and www.premieragent.zillow.com, and associated mobile applications, including the Zillow Real Estate & Rentals, Zillow Rentals, and Zillow Premier Agent applications. (Compl. ¶14, ¶67).
Functionality and Market Context
- The accused products constitute an online real estate platform that provides property listings and related services to consumers and real estate agents. (Compl. ¶14). The complaint identifies several specific functionalities as infringing: the search GUI with its query fields and map-based filters (Compl. ¶81); the system for ranking and personalizing search results, including carousels of similar homes (Compl. ¶97, ¶99); the organization of listings into sortable pages (Compl. ¶114); the back-end architecture for serving dynamic web content (Compl. ¶123); and the Premier Agent platform, which allegedly functions as a CRM for real estate agents. (Compl. ¶143).
- The complaint alleges that Zillow Group operates the "largest portfolio of real estate and home-related brands on mobile and the web" and that it used the patented technology to grow its business to over two billion dollars in annual revenue. (Compl. ¶12, ¶66-67).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.
’193 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a graphical user interface... comprising: a. a first visual workspace... comprising entry field enabling entry of a query for a resource... and, one or more selectable graphical user context elements... | The initial Zillow search/query screen, which includes query fields and selectable search options that represent context elements. | ¶81(b) | col. 12:19-27 |
| b. a second visual workspace for visualizing... the set of resources that the customer self service system has determined to match the user's query, said system indicating a degree of fit of said determined resources with said query... | The Zillow search results page, which displays a set of home listings. The sort order of the results allegedly indicates the degree of fit between the listing and the user's query and profile. | ¶81(c), ¶82 | col. 13:21-31 |
| c. a third visual workspace for enabling said user to select and modify context attribute values to enable increased specificity and accuracy of a query's search parameters... | The Zillow search results map, which allows a user to modify search parameters, such as geographic boundaries, by zooming in or out. | ¶81(d) | col. 13:32-41 |
| d. a mechanism enabling said user to navigate among said first, second and third visual workspaces to thereby identify and improve selection logic and response sets fitted to said query... | The user's cursor on the Zillow GUI, which allegedly enables navigation between the different functional areas of the interface. | ¶81(e) | col. 13:42-47 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central question may be whether Zillow's integrated search results page, which can display a list and a map view concurrently, constitutes three distinct "visual workspaces" as contemplated by the patent. The analysis may explore whether the term requires functionally distinct areas on a single screen or entirely separate, sequentially-viewed interfaces.
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges that the "sort order" of results indicates a "degree of fit" based on the user's context. (Compl. ¶82). A point of contention may be what evidence demonstrates that this functionality is distinct from a conventional sort by price or date and is specifically based on the "user's context" and "resource selection parameters" as required by the claim.
’676 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 14) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| receiving a resource response set of results... obtained in response to a current user query... | Receiving search result listings for the "similar home carousel" that appears on a home details page in response to a user selecting that listing. | ¶97(f) | col. 20:3-5 |
| receiving a user context vector... associated with said current user query, said user context vector comprising data associating an interaction state with said user and including context that is a function of the user... | Receiving a set of data associated with the user's current search, allegedly including a short-term history and data classifying the user. | ¶97(g) | col. 20:6-10 |
| applying an ordering and annotation function for mapping the user context vector with the resource response set to generate an annotated response set having one or more annotations... | Applying Zillow's ranking algorithm to generate an ordered set of listings (e.g., a JSON array) for inclusion in the similar home carousel. | ¶97(h) | col. 20:11-15 |
| controlling the presentation of the resource response set to the user according to said annotations, wherein the ordering and annotation function is executed interactively at the time of each user query... | Presenting the similar home carousel on the Zillow website, with the ranking algorithm allegedly executing whenever a user selects a listing. | ¶97(i) | col. 20:16-21 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Technical Questions: The nature and structure of the alleged "user context vector" will likely be a key issue. The analysis will question what specific data Zillow uses for its ranking algorithm and whether it meets the technical definition of a "vector" that includes both an "interaction state" and "context that is a function of the user."
- Scope Questions: It may be disputed whether Zillow's algorithm for generating a "similar home carousel" performs the specific claimed step of "mapping the user context vector with the resource response set," or if it uses a different method for determining similarity that does not read on the claim.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
For the ’193 Patent
- The Term: "visual workspace"
- Context and Importance: Claim 1 requires three distinct "visual workspaces." The viability of the infringement allegation depends on whether Zillow's user interface, which integrates multiple functions onto a single page (e.g., results list and map), can be considered to contain these separate workspaces. Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction could determine if a modern, integrated UI infringes a claim drafted with more discrete UI elements in mind.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent specification describes the workspaces conceptually by their function (e.g., a "cockpit" for context selection, a workspace for "visualizing and exploring the set of resources"). (’193 Patent, col. 4:18-31). This could support a reading where functional areas, even if on the same screen, constitute distinct workspaces.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The complaint itself distinguishes between the "initial Zillow search/query screen," the "Zillow search results page," and the "Zillow search results map," suggesting they are separate views. (Compl. ¶81). Additionally, Figure 2 of the patent depicts the workspaces as visually distinct screen layouts, which may support an interpretation requiring separate pages or views.
For the ’676 Patent
- The Term: "user context vector"
- Context and Importance: This term defines the core data input for the claimed method. The infringement case rests on whether the data Zillow collects and uses to personalize rankings qualifies as the specific "vector" claimed. Practitioners may focus on this term to determine if a general collection of user activity data meets the potentially more structured and specific definition in the patent.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The complaint notes the patent's description of combining "heterogeneous data about a user from a wide variety of sources (such as the user's background, skill level, intentions and goals, history of searching...)." (Compl. ¶35). This language may support a broad definition encompassing various types of user data.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The complaint also highlights the patent's teaching of transforming heterogeneous data "into a homogeneous data structure" and a "fixed length vector, which is directly usable by a learning algorithm." (Compl. ¶35). This suggests a specific technical requirement for a structured data format, which could be used to argue that Zillow's alleged general data collection practices do not meet this limitation.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges both induced and contributory infringement for all five patents. The theory is that Zillow provides computer code (e.g., HTML, JavaScript) and instructs end users to operate its websites and mobile applications in a manner that directly infringes the claims. The complaint further alleges that the provided code has no substantial non-infringing use. (Compl. ¶84-87, ¶101-104).
- Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged for all five patents. The allegations are based on Zillow's alleged pre-suit knowledge stemming from a series of letters and communications from IBM between August 2019 and December 2019. The complaint claims these communications provided notice and detailed evidence of infringement, and that Zillow's alleged refusal to "acknowledge or respond" constitutes willful blindness. (Compl. ¶68-75, ¶83, ¶100).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- Definitional Scope: A core issue for the '193 patent will be one of definitional scope: can the term "visual workspace," which the patent illustrates as a series of discrete screens, be construed to cover the functionally distinct but concurrent components of a modern, integrated web interface like Zillow's search results page?
- Technical Equivalence: For several patents, particularly the '676 patent, a key evidentiary question will be one of technical implementation: does the user data Zillow aggregates for personalizing results (e.g., clicks, search terms) meet the specific structural and functional requirements of a "user context vector" as defined by the patent, or is there a fundamental mismatch in technical operation?
- Willfulness and Pre-Suit Conduct: Given the specific allegations that IBM provided detailed pre-suit notice and claim charts, a central question for damages will be state of mind: did Zillow's alleged policy of not responding to such notices constitute willful blindness, which could justify an award of enhanced damages if infringement is found?