Infogation Corp v. Mappedin Inc

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Infogation Corporation (Texas)
  • Defendant: Mappedin Inc. (Canada)
  • Plaintiff’s Counsel: GARTEISER HONEA, PLLC
• Case Name: Infogation Corporation v. Mappedin Inc.
• Case Identification: 2:26-cv-00860, E.D. Tex., 09/21/2026
• Venue Allegations: Plaintiff asserts that venue is proper under the alien-venue rule because Defendant is a foreign corporation organized under the laws of Canada.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s indoor mapping and navigation software, SDKs, and related products infringe a patent related to navigation on non-linearly scaled, artistic maps.
• Technical Context: The technology at issue involves using a hidden, geographically accurate map for route calculation while displaying navigational guidance on a separate, stylized "artistic" map, such as those used in malls or theme parks.
• Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention any prior litigation, Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings, or licensing history related to the patent-in-suit.

Case Timeline

Date	Event
2007-08-11	'628 Patent Priority Date
2018-10-23	'628 Patent Issue Date
2026-09-21	Complaint Filing Date

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

• Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,107,628, "Method and Apparatus for Navigating on Artistic Maps," issued October 23, 2018.

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent's background section notes that standard Global Positioning System (GPS) displays are often ill-suited for leisure activities, such as touring a zoo or park, where artistic maps are common '628 Patent, col. 1:41-54 These artistic maps often feature exaggerated, non-linearly scaled points of interest that are incompatible with traditional, geographically precise navigation systems '628 Patent, col. 1:48-54
• The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a system that bridges the gap between a stylized "artistic map" and an underlying, accurate "geographical map" '628 Patent, abstract '628 Patent, Fig. 3 A user interacts with the visually engaging artistic map displayed on a device '628 Patent, col. 2:55-58 When the user selects a destination on this map, the system captures the coordinates of the selection and transforms them into a physical point (e.g., latitude and longitude) on the hidden geographical map '628 Patent, col. 2:45-48 A navigational route is then calculated using this accurate geographic data, and the resulting directions are transformed back and synchronized for display on the user-facing artistic map '628 Patent, col. 2:48-54
• Technical Importance: This method allows for the creation of functional, interactive digital navigation experiences using pre-existing, aesthetically-driven venue maps that are not strictly to scale '628 Patent, col. 1:56-65

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts independent claims 1 and 11.
• Independent Claim 1 (Method) requires the steps of:
  • Downloading an "artistic map" that is "non-linearly scaled" and has "exaggeratedly shown" objects.
  • Receiving a user's selection of an object on the map.
  • Determining coordinates for a point on the selected object.
  • Transforming these coordinates to a "physical point" (latitude and longitude) in a "geographical map not being shown on the display."
  • Detecting the device's current location in the geographical map.
  • Determining a navigational direction.
  • Showing the navigational direction on the displayed artistic map.
• Independent Claim 11 (Apparatus) recites a portable device with a processor and memory configured to perform substantially the same steps as method claim 1.
• The complaint asserts dependent claims 4-8 and 12-18 and reserves the right to assert additional claims as the case proceeds Compl. ¶26

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

• The complaint identifies the "Accused Instrumentalities" as Mappedin Navigation, Mappedin Web and Mobile SDKs, Blue Dot, and customer applications implementing these products Compl. ¶17

Functionality and Market Context

• The complaint alleges that the Accused Instrumentalities provide indoor mapping and wayfinding services Compl. ¶¶19-21 It is alleged that they download or receive map content and display a "customized or artistic map" on a portable device Compl. ¶22 The complaint asserts that this system allows a user to select a destination, determines the user's current location, computes a route using "georeferenced navigation data" that is maintained separately from the stylized display layer, and renders the guidance on the displayed map Compl. ¶22 Compl. ¶24 The complaint includes a screenshot of the Mappedin interface showing a calculated route within a shopping mall environment, which it identifies as an "Official Mappedin navigation image (S1)" Compl. p. 4

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

'628 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1)	Alleged Infringing Functionality	Complaint Citation	Patent Citation
...downloading from a network into a computing device an artistic map, the artistic map being non-linearly scaled and including various objects being exaggeratedly shown...	The accused products download digital map content and display a "customized or artistic map" where features like stores and aisles are "enlarged, modeled, extruded, emphasized, or otherwise displayed out of strict geographic scale."	¶22; ¶25	col. 7:26-30
...receiving in the computing device a selection on the one of the objects from the user as a selected object...	The accused products permit "selection of a displayed object or destination," and displayed objects are rendered as "selectable screen regions."	¶22; ¶23	col. 8:1-2
...determining by the computing device a pair of coordinates for one of the points on the selected object...	Selecting a point within a displayed region is alleged to identify a destination associated with "latitude and longitude or equivalent geographic coordinates."	¶23	col. 8:38-41
...transforming in the computing device the pair of coordinates to a physical point represented by a pair of latitude and longitude in the geographical map not being shown on the display...	The accused products are alleged to maintain "georeferenced navigation and route data separately from the branded, stylized, or three-dimensional presentation layer" and that this geographic data "is not displayed directly."	¶24	col. 8:41-50
...detecting a current location of the computing device in the geographical map...	The accused products allegedly "determine current location," and the "Blue Dot" documentation is cited as describing "live position" and coordinate tracking.	¶20; ¶22	col. 8:51-52
...determining according to the geographical map a navigational direction from the current location to the one of the objects being selected...	The accused products are alleged to "compute a route or direction," citing wayfinding documentation that describes "generating and rendering a wayfinding path between locations."	¶21; ¶22	col. 8:53-57
...showing the navigational direction on the artistic map being displayed.	The accused products "render that guidance on the displayed map." The complaint provides a screenshot showing a highlighted route on a mall map.	¶22; p. 4	col. 8:58-60

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Scope Questions: A potential point of contention may be whether the accused indoor mall maps qualify as "artistic maps" with "exaggeratedly shown" objects, as the patent specification primarily provides examples related to zoos and parks '628 Patent, col. 1:56-65 '628 Patent, Fig. 1 The dispute may turn on if the term's scope can be extended from highly illustrative outdoor maps to more structured, albeit stylized, indoor commercial maps.
  • Technical Questions: The infringement theory relies on the accused system performing a "transformation" from artistic display coordinates to an underlying, non-displayed "geographical map." A key technical question will be what evidence supports this specific two-layer architecture, as opposed to a system that more directly associates stylized map objects with a set of geographic coordinates without the claimed intermediate transformation step.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

• The Term: "artistic map"

• Context and Importance: This term is foundational to the patent. Its construction will be critical, as the defense may argue that the accused indoor mall maps are merely schematic or stylized, not "artistic" in the manner described and illustrated in the patent, which focuses on leisure venues like zoos '628 Patent, Fig. 1

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claims themselves do not limit the map's subject matter to a specific type of venue. Claim 2, a dependent claim, explicitly recites a "theme park map," which may suggest that the base term "artistic map" in claim 1 is not inherently so limited '628 Patent, col. 8:61-63
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly frames the invention in the context of leisure activities and uses a zoo map as a primary example '628 Patent, Fig. 1 '628 Patent, col. 1:56-65 The abstract describes the map as containing "various objects being exaggeratedly shown," which could be interpreted as requiring a higher degree of artistic embellishment than a standard mall directory.

• The Term: "non-linearly scaled"

• Context and Importance: This term defines a key characteristic of the "artistic map." Plaintiff alleges the accused maps are non-linear because points of interest are enlarged to facilitate selection Compl. ¶25 Practitioners may focus on this term because the defense may argue that the accused maps follow a consistent, if simplified, scale and are not "non-linear" in the way contemplated by the patent.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states that on such a map, "objects or distances are nonlinearly scaled" and "objects are exaggeratedly shown" '628 Patent, col. 6:7-9 This language could support a construction that includes any map where certain features are intentionally enlarged or distorted relative to their actual geographic size.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figure 4C and its accompanying description detail a specific type of non-linearity where the map has higher resolution at the center and lower resolution toward the edges, creating a "fisheye" effect '628 Patent, col. 5:40-45 A party could argue that "non-linearly scaled" is limited to this type of variable-resolution display.

VI. Other Allegations

• Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges that Defendant induces infringement by "distributing the Accused Instrumentalities and providing documentation, SDKs, demonstrations, updates, marketing, and technical support instructing customers and users to operate the accused functions" Compl. ¶32
• Willful Infringement: The allegation of willfulness is based on Defendant's continued infringement after receiving notice of the patent and the lawsuit via service of the complaint Compl. ¶33 Compl. ¶34 The complaint does not allege pre-suit knowledge.

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

This dispute appears to center on the applicability of a patent, originally framed around leisure and tourism maps, to the domain of commercial indoor navigation. The outcome may depend on the court’s determination of several key questions:

• A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "artistic map", which the patent illustrates with examples of outdoor zoos and describes as having "exaggeratedly shown" objects, be construed to cover the stylized but functionally-oriented indoor maps of the accused navigation products?
• A key evidentiary question will be one of technical architecture: does the accused system utilize the claimed two-layer architecture, performing a "transformation" of coordinates from a purely visual "artistic map" to a separate, non-displayed "geographical map" for calculation, or does it employ a different method for associating on-screen graphics with routing data that falls outside the patent's claims?