DCT

2:24-cv-00662

AGIS Software Development LLC v. Dell Inc

Log In
Key Events
Complaint
complaint Intelligence

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:

  • Case Identification: 2:24-cv-00662, E.D. Tex., 08/13/2024

  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Eastern District of Texas based on Defendants having regular and established places of business in the District, including physical offices, leased co-op spaces, and a network of work-from-home employee residences. The complaint also alleges the presence of authorized sellers of the accused products within the District.

  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant's computer devices and associated software applications for location sharing and remote device management infringe five U.S. patents related to interactive remote communications and the formation of ad hoc digital networks.

  • Technical Context: The technology at issue involves systems for establishing situational awareness among users of mobile devices, including methods for forced message alerts, location tracking on geographical maps, and the rapid formation of secure communication groups.

  • Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that all five patents-in-suit have undergone post-grant proceedings. U.S. Patent No. 8,213,970 had claims canceled in an Inter Partes Review (IPR) but other claims confirmed as valid in a subsequent Ex Parte Reexamination. The other four patents were each subject to Ex Parte Reexaminations that confirmed the validity of their claims. These proceedings may influence the scope and interpretation of the asserted claims.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2004-09-21 Earliest Priority Date for all Patents-in-Suit
2012-07-03 U.S. Patent No. 8,213,970 Issued
2016-09-13 U.S. Patent No. 9,445,251 Issued
2016-10-11 U.S. Patent No. 9,467,838 Issued
2017-01-01 Alleged Infringement Begins (approx.)
2017-08-29 U.S. Patent No. 9,749,829 Issued
2017-11-14 U.S. Patent No. 9,820,123 Issued
2021-05-27 U.S. Patent No. 9,467,838 Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate Issued
2021-06-08 U.S. Patent No. 9,445,251 Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate Issued
2021-08-16 U.S. Patent No. 9,749,829 Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate Issued
2021-09-01 U.S. Patent No. 8,213,970 Inter Partes Review Certificate Issued
2021-09-24 U.S. Patent No. 9,820,123 Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate Issued
2021-12-09 U.S. Patent No. 8,213,970 Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate Issued
2024-08-13 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 8,213,970 - "Method of Utilizing Forced Alerts for Interactive Remote Communications" (Issued July 3, 2012)

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent's background describes the inability of standard digital messaging services (like SMS) to confirm message receipt and compel a response from recipients, which is a critical need in certain communication scenarios Compl. Ex. A, '970 Patent, col. 1:50-61
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a method and system where a sender can transmit a "forced message alert" to a recipient's device Compl. Ex. A, '970 Patent, abstract This alert, enabled by a specialized software application, forces the recipient's device to automatically transmit an acknowledgment of receipt back to the sender Compl. Ex. A, '970 Patent, col. 2:16-20 The software then takes control of the recipient's device, displaying the message content and a "required response list" that the user must select from to clear the alert and release control of the device Compl. Ex. A, '970 Patent, col. 2:25-34 The sender's device can monitor which recipients have acknowledged and responded Compl. Ex. A, '970 Patent, col. 2:35-39
  • Technical Importance: This technology creates a closed-loop communication system, providing senders with certainty about message delivery and compelling a response, which is particularly valuable for coordination in time-sensitive fields like emergency services or military operations Compl. ¶17

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 10 Compl. ¶27
  • Essential elements of Claim 10 (as amended during reexamination) include:
    • A method of receiving, acknowledging, and responding to a forced message alert on a recipient device.
    • Receiving an electronic message and identifying it as a forced message alert, which triggers a software application.
    • Transmitting an automatic acknowledgment of receipt to the sender device.
    • The sender's acknowledgment triggers the software to take control of the recipient device and display the message content alongside a required response list.
    • Transmitting a selected response from the list to clear the alert from the recipient's display.
    • Displaying the received response on the sender's device.
    • Displaying a geographical map on the sender's device, obtaining location data for the recipient device, and presenting a symbol for the recipient on the map at the correct location.

U.S. Patent No. 9,445,251 - "Method to Provide Ad Hoc and Password Protected Digital and Voice Networks" (Issued September 13, 2016)

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent identifies a need for emergency response groups from different organizations (e.g., police, fire departments) to rapidly establish interoperable voice and data communication networks at the scene of a disaster without pre-configuration or pre-entry of user data Compl. Ex. B, '251 Patent, col. 2:9-36
  • The Patented Solution: The invention provides a method for users on mobile devices or PCs to quickly join a temporary, password-protected network hosted on a server Compl. Ex. B, '251 Patent, abstract Users only need to enter the server's IP address, a shared "ad hoc event name," and a password to join Compl. Ex. B, '251 Patent, col. 4:51-54 Once connected, the server mediates the exchange of location, status, and other data among all participants, creating a common operating picture on each user's map-based display Compl. Ex. B, '251 Patent, col. 3:15-28
  • Technical Importance: This approach enables rapid, on-the-fly formation of secure, shared-awareness communication groups among disparate teams, a critical capability in emergency management and other coordinated field operations Compl. Ex. B, '251 Patent, col. 2:7-10

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 24 Compl. ¶37
  • Essential elements of Claim 24 include:
    • A system with a first device programmed to perform operations.
    • Receiving a message from a second device related to joining a group.
    • Participating in the group by sending its location information to a server and receiving location information of other group members from the server.
    • Presenting an interactive, georeferenced map with user-selectable symbols representing other devices in the group.
    • Sending a request to the server for different georeferenced map data (e.g., by panning or zooming).
    • Receiving and presenting the new map data.
    • Identifying user interaction with the display, such as selecting a symbol and specifying an action, and using an Internet Protocol to send data to the selected device via the server.

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 9,467,838

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,467,838, "Method to Provide Ad Hoc and Password Protected Digital and Voice Networks," issued October 11, 2016 Compl. ¶13
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent, from the same family as the '251 patent, describes a server-based system for creating ad hoc communication networks. It focuses on the process of a device joining a group, sending its location to a server, and receiving the locations of other group members for display on an interactive map, enabling coordinated activity Compl. ¶¶55-57
  • Asserted Claims: At least claim 54 Compl. ¶51
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges that features within the Family Safety and Absolute Software applications, which allow users to form groups and share and view locations on a map, infringe this patent Compl. ¶¶55-56

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 9,820,123

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,820,123, "Method to Provide Ad Hoc and Password Protected Digital and Voice Networks," issued November 14, 2017 Compl. ¶14
  • Technology Synopsis: Also from the same family, this patent details a system where a device joins a group and exchanges location data via a server. A key aspect is the user interaction with the map display, where selecting a symbol representing another device is detected and used to identify that device, for example, by searching for the symbol nearest to the coordinates of the user's touch on the screen Compl. ¶69
  • Asserted Claims: At least claim 23 Compl. ¶66
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses the group formation, location sharing, and map-based interaction features of the Family Safety and Absolute Software applications of infringement Compl. ¶¶70-71

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 9,749,829

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,749,829, "Method to Provide Ad Hoc and Password Protected Digital and Voice Networks," issued August 29, 2017 Compl. ¶15
  • Technology Synopsis: This patent, also from the same family, describes a system where a second device receives a request to join a group from a first device via a server. The system emphasizes the process of repeatedly sharing location information, presenting symbols on a map, and repositioning those symbols based on updated location data received from the server, as well as remotely controlling devices Compl. ¶84
  • Asserted Claims: At least claim 34 Compl. ¶82
  • Accused Features: The complaint targets the group communication and location-sharing functionalities of the Family Safety and Absolute Software applications Compl. ¶85

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The accused instrumentalities are Dell computer devices running Windows-based operating systems (including XPS, Latitude, Inspiron, Alienware, etc.) that incorporate software such as the "Family Safety," "Find My Device," and "Absolute Software" applications and services Compl. ¶22

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint alleges that these products include functionalities that allow users to form and join groups, share their locations, and view the locations of other users as symbols on a map Compl. ¶23 A screenshot from the Microsoft Family Safety application shows a list of family members and their last known locations Compl. p. 9
  • The products are also alleged to enable communication between users via text, voice, and multimedia, and to provide features for tracking, remotely monitoring, and controlling lost or stolen devices Compl. ¶23 A visual from a Microsoft support page illustrates the "Find your Windows device" feature, which displays a device's location on a map Compl. p. 12
  • The complaint asserts that these functionalities are provided to improve user experiences and enhance Defendants' market position Compl. ¶23

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

'970 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 10) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a method of receiving, acknowledging and responding to a forced message alert from a sender PDA/cell phone to a recipient PDA/cell phone... forced by a forced message alert software application program The accused products include features to find, lock, and remotely control a lost or stolen device Compl. ¶¶30-31 ¶30 col. 10:9-16
receiving an electronically transmitted electronic message; identifying said electronic message as a forced message alert... which triggers the activation of the forced message alert software application program The accused products can receive remote commands, such as a "Lock" command, which function as a forced message alert Compl. p. 13 ¶30 col. 10:57-65
transmitting an automatic acknowledgment of receipt to the sender PDA/cell phone The complaint does not provide sufficient detail for analysis of this element. ¶30 col. 11:1-10
which triggers the forced message alert software application program to take control of the recipient PDA/cell phone and shows the content of the text message and a required response list on the display recipient PDA/cell phone The "Lock your Windows device remotely" feature takes control of the device and presents security options, such as resetting a password, which allegedly constitute a response list Compl. p. 13 ¶30 col. 11:1-9
transmitting a selected required response from the response list in order to allow the message required response list to be cleared The complaint does not provide sufficient detail for analysis of this element. ¶30 col. 11:11-21
displaying a geographical map... obtaining location and status data... and presenting a recipient symbol on the geographical map corresponding to a correct geographical location The "Find your Windows device" feature displays a map showing the device's location, which is obtained and presented as a symbol Compl. p. 12 ¶30 col. 8:16-20

'251 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 24) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a first device programmed to perform operations comprising: receiving a message sent by a second device, wherein the message relates to joining a group The accused products allow users to invite and add members to a family group via email or phone number Compl. pp. 19-20 ¶42 col. 15:1-3
participating in the group... sending first location information to a server and receiving second location information from the first server The accused products communicate with a server to send the device's location and receive the locations of other group members for display Compl. ¶43 A screenshot shows privacy controls for location sharing within a family group Compl. p. 18 ¶43 col. 15:4-10
presenting, via an interactive display of the first device, a first interactive, georeferenced map and a plurality of user-selectable symbols corresponding to the plurality of second devices The Family Safety application displays an interactive map showing symbols representing the locations of family members Compl. ¶44 A visual depicts a map view with icons for different "loved ones" Compl. p. 24 ¶44 col. 15:11-18
sending, from the first device to a second server, a request for georeferenced map data; receiving, from the second server, the georeferenced map data Users can request additional map data by moving the map screen or selecting different map types, such as satellite images Compl. ¶45 ¶45 col. 15:19-25
identifying user interaction with the interactive display selecting a particular user-selectable symbol... and... specifying an action and, based thereon, using an Internet Protocol to send data Users can select symbols on the map, which permits data to be sent to other devices based on that interaction, such as viewing activity or setting up location alerts Compl. ¶45 A visual shows that tapping a daughter's icon brings up her address and options to be notified when she arrives or departs Compl. p. 25 ¶45 col. 15:32-41
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • A potential point of contention for the '970 patent is whether the accused "Find My Device" or "Lock" functionalities meet the specific claim limitations of a "forced message alert" that presents a "required response list." The analysis may turn on whether a remote lock command and subsequent security prompts function in the same way as the claimed method of forcing a selection from a pre-defined list to clear the alert.
    • For the '251 patent and its family, a key question may be one of claim scope. It may be disputed whether a persistent, consumer-oriented "family group" in an application like Family Safety constitutes an "ad hoc... network" as described in the patent's specification, which heavily emphasizes temporary networks for first responders and military personnel Compl. Ex. B, '251 Patent, col. 2:7-10

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • Term: "forced message alert" (from '970 Patent, claim 10)

    • Context and Importance: This term is central to the '970 patent's inventive concept. The infringement analysis will depend on whether the remote "find" and "lock" commands sent to Dell devices are construed as "forced message alerts." Practitioners may focus on whether this term requires a specific software packet structure and a mandatory response from a list, as opposed to a general remote command.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim describes the alert as comprising "a voice or text message and a forced message alert application software packet," which could arguably cover any software-driven command that compels an action on a remote device Compl. Ex. A, '970 Patent, C1 col. 2:37-41
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification states that the system provides "a manual response list on the display of the recipient... that can only be cleared by manually selecting and transmitting a response" Compl. Ex. A, '970 Patent, col. 2:25-29 This language may support a narrower construction requiring a specific interactive flow that must be completed to restore normal device operation.

  • Term: "ad hoc... network" (related to '251, '838, '123, and '829 Patents)

    • Context and Importance: This term's definition is critical to determining if the accused Family Safety groups fall within the scope of the asserted patents. The patents' background focuses on emergency scenarios, and the dispute will likely involve whether "ad hoc" implies a temporary network for a specific, time-bound event, rather than a persistent social group.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claims do not explicitly limit the "ad hoc" network to emergency responders. The method of joining by entering a server address, event name, and password could be seen as the defining characteristic of the ad hoc network, a process applicable to any user group Compl. Ex. B, '251 Patent, abstract
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly provides context such as "Military, first responder, and other public and private emergency groups" and "Coordinating different organizations at the scene of a disaster" Compl. Ex. B, '251 Patent, col. 2:7-22 This consistent focus could be used to argue that "ad hoc" should be construed in light of these specific, temporary, and urgent use cases.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement of infringement, stating that Defendants instruct their customers to use the accused products in an infringing manner through materials such as "training videos, demonstrations, brochures, installations and/or user guides" Compl. ¶29 Compl. ¶39 Compl. ¶54 Compl. ¶68 Compl. ¶83
  • Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged based on Defendants' knowledge of the patents "at least as of the date of this Complaint" Compl. ¶28 Compl. ¶38 Compl. ¶53 Compl. ¶67 Compl. ¶82 The complaint also includes an alternative allegation that Defendants "remained willfully blind to the infringing nature of others' actions" Compl. ¶28 Compl. ¶38 Compl. ¶53 Compl. ¶67 Compl. ¶82

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

  • Definitional Scope: A primary issue will be whether the term "ad hoc... network," which is rooted in the patents' descriptions of temporary coordination for first responders, can be construed to encompass the persistent, consumer-focused "family groups" created within the accused software applications.
  • Functional Equivalence: A key evidentiary question will be one of functional operation: does the accused products' remote lock and device-finding functionality perform the specific, multi-step method of the '970 patent's "forced message alert," particularly with respect to the claimed "automatic acknowledgment" and "required response list" elements?
  • Claim Construction Post-Reexamination: A central legal question will revolve around the interpretation of claim terms that survived or were amended during the various post-grant proceedings. The prosecution history from these reexaminations and the IPR will likely be critical in defining the scope of the asserted claims and may narrow the patentee's infringement theories.
Loading Complaint