Near Field Electronics LLC v. Shake Shack Inc

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Near Field Electronics LLC (Texas)
  • Defendant: Shake Shack Inc. (Delaware)
  • Plaintiff's Counsel: Shea | Beaty PLLC
• Case Identification: Near Field Electronics LLC v. Shake Shack Inc., 4:26-cv-00643, E.D. Tex., 06/12/2026
• Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper based on Defendant having a regular and established place of business within the Eastern District of Texas.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant's use of Near Field Communication (NFC) components for contactless payment processing infringes five patents related to integrated circuit architecture, bus interface protocols, and power management.
• Technical Context: The asserted patents relate to foundational technologies for enabling integrated circuits to handle multiple communication protocols, manage power consumption, and interface with external systems.
• Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that all asserted patents have expired. Plaintiff seeks damages only for a past infringement period, which for all patents is alleged to begin on June 12, 2020, and end on each patent's respective expiration date.

Case Timeline

Date	Event
2000-06-21	'201 Patent Priority Date
2000-07-25	'071 Patent Priority Date
2000-08-28	'727 Patent Priority Date
2002-06-28	'350 Patent Priority Date
2004-02-10	'201 Patent Issue Date
2004-05-25	'071 Patent Issue Date
2005-01-11	'531 Patent Priority Date
2005-10-25	'350 Patent Issue Date
2006-02-07	'727 Patent Issue Date
2008-05-13	'531 Patent Issue Date
2020-06-12	Alleged Infringement Period Begins for All Patents
2021-11-21	'071 Patent Expiration Date
2022-01-31	'201 Patent Expiration Date
2022-04-14	'727 Patent Expiration Date
2023-08-12	'350 Patent Expiration Date
2026-03-19	'531 Patent Expiration Date
2026-06-12	Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 6,691,201 - "Dual Mode USB-PS/2 Device"

• Issued: February 10, 2004

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent describes that peripheral devices (like a computer mouse) supporting multiple communication protocols, such as Universal Serial Bus (USB) and Personal System 2 (PS/2), conventionally required additional external components, more circuit board space, and complex firmware, which increased cost and could compromise performance Compl. ¶11 '201 Patent, col. 1:29-50
• The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a single integrated circuit capable of automatically selecting and operating in one of a plurality of signaling protocols (e.g., USB or PS/2) using a single set of I/O pins '201 Patent, abstract Compl. ¶10 This is achieved through a dual mode driver and interrupt detection circuitry that allows the device to adapt to the connected bus protocol, thereby eliminating the need for extra components and simplifying the design '201 Patent, col. 3:4-21 '201 Patent, FIG. 1
• Technical Importance: This single-chip solution offered a way to reduce manufacturing costs, decrease physical product size, and simplify firmware development for computer peripherals designed to work with different generations of host computers Compl. ¶12 '201 Patent, col. 1:50-54

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts direct infringement of at least independent method claim 14 Compl. ¶31
• Claim 14 requires the steps of:
  • (A) detecting a signaling protocol of a bus connected to an integrated circuit that operates in a plurality of signaling protocols; and
  • (B) configuring said integrated circuit to communicate in one of said plurality of signaling protocols in response to said detected signaling protocol of said connected bus, wherein each of said selected protocols operate over said connected bus through a single set of pins.
• The complaint reserves the right to assert other claims Compl. ¶32

U.S. Patent No. 6,742,071 - "Real-time I/O Processor Used to Implement Bus Interface Protocols"

• Issued: May 25, 2004

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the limitations of protocol-specific hardware interfaces, which are rigid and unable to adapt to new or multiple bus standards, and user-programmable interfaces, which can be difficult to program and lack the sophistication for complex signaling '071 Patent, col. 1:13-48
• The Patented Solution: The patent discloses a real-time input/output (I/O) processor, described as a programmable general-purpose interface (GPIF), that replaces rigid hardware designs Compl. ¶16 This processor uses a limited instruction set to generate interface-specific waveforms and respond to external events in real time, allowing data path decisions and control outputs to be changed on each clock cycle '071 Patent, abstract Compl. ¶15 '071 Patent, col. 6:4-16
• Technical Importance: This architecture provided a flexible and high-speed solution for a single device to interface with multiple or evolving bus protocols, reducing the risks and costs associated with designing protocol-specific hardware Compl. ¶16 '071 Patent, col. 1:29-38

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts direct infringement of at least independent method claim 15 Compl. ¶36
• Claim 15 requires the steps of:
  • (A) generating a plurality of first control signals in response to a current state of a processor;
  • (B) progressing to a next state based on said current state, at least one internal control signal of said first control signals and an input signal received from said external bus;
  • (C) driving at least one output control signal of said first controls signals onto said external bus; and
  • (D) updating said current state to said next state.
• The complaint reserves the right to assert other claims Compl. ¶37

U.S. Patent No. 6,959,350 - "Configurable USB Interface With Virtual Register Architecture"

• Issued: October 25, 2005
• Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses the problem that conventional USB interface controllers with hard-coded endpoint configurations required designers to write and maintain different versions of hardware description language (HDL) code for each configuration, an approach described as "clumsy, error-prone and produced code that was difficult to debug and maintain" Compl. ¶20 '350 Patent, col. 1:29-33 The invention provides a configurable bus interface controller that uses an HDL-based "configuration package" to flexibly generate the necessary configuration circuitry for different USB endpoints, eliminating the need for separate HDL code for each endpoint Compl. ¶19 Compl. ¶21
• Asserted Claims: At least independent method claim 10 Compl. ¶41
• Accused Features: The complaint alleges that NFC Front-end components used for contactless payments infringe this patent Compl. ¶41

U.S. Patent No. 6,996,727 - "Power Supply for Universal Serial Bus Interface with Programmable Bus Pullup Resistor"

• Issued: February 7, 2006
• Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses the inefficiency of conventional power supplies that provided only a constant voltage supply with no low-power mode, wasting energy during idle states Compl. ¶25 '727 Patent, col. 1:16-20 The invention discloses a power supply architecture with both a standard operating mode and a power-down (standby) mode that significantly reduces current consumption by turning off the main supply and using a low-power programmable resistor to maintain the necessary bus pullup function Compl. ¶24 '727 Patent, abstract
• Asserted Claims: At least independent method claim 18 Compl. ¶46
• Accused Features: The complaint alleges that NFC Front-end components used for contactless payments infringe this patent Compl. ¶46

U.S. Patent No. 7,373,531 - "Signal Detection Method...and Electronic Apparatus"

• Issued: May 13, 2008
• Technology Synopsis: The patent is directed to methods for detecting signals and controlling power consumption by monitoring a "through current" in a circuit Compl. ¶28 Specifically, by applying a signal to the gates of connected transistors, the device can detect the presence, absence, or state of the signal based on whether a through current flows '531 Patent, col. 2:47-3:41 This detection can then be used to trigger a power supply stopping or reducing process to conserve energy Compl. ¶29
• Asserted Claims: At least independent method claim 2 Compl. ¶51
• Accused Features: The complaint alleges that NFC Front-end components used for contactless payments infringe this patent Compl. ¶51

III. The Accused Instrumentality

• Product Identification: The complaint identifies the accused instrumentalities as "NFC Front-end components, including without limitation the NXP PN512 NFC Front-End," and other components with "functionality materially similar" Compl. ¶31 These are collectively referred to as the "Relevant Instrumentalities."
• Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges these components are used by Shake Shack to "process contactless credit card payment transactions at a point of sale" Compl. ¶31 The complaint does not provide further technical detail regarding the specific operation of the accused components, how they are integrated into Defendant's systems, or their market position.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint references claim-chart exhibits for each asserted patent (e.g., Exhibit A-1, B-1), but these exhibits were not filed with the complaint itself Compl. ¶32 Compl. ¶37 Compl. ¶42 Compl. ¶47 Accordingly, the following is a summary of the narrative infringement theory presented in the complaint.

'201 Patent Infringement Allegations

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant directly infringes at least method claim 14 of the '201 Patent Compl. ¶31 The infringement theory is that by "using and/or causing to be used" the Relevant Instrumentalities (e.g., NXP PN512 NFC Front-End) to process contactless payments, Defendant performs the method claimed in the patent Compl. ¶31 The complaint makes the conclusory allegation that when these components are put into their intended use, they perform "each and every step of the method(s) claimed by '201 patent" Compl. ¶33

'071 Patent Infringement Allegations

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant directly infringes at least method claim 15 of the '071 Patent through the same conduct Compl. ¶36 The complaint posits that the use of the Relevant Instrumentalities for processing NFC payment transactions constitutes performance of the steps claimed in the '071 Patent Compl. ¶36 Compl. ¶38 As with the '201 Patent, the complaint alleges that the use of the accused components results in the performance of "each and every step of the method(s) claimed" Compl. ¶38

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Scope Questions: The asserted patents were developed in the context of specific technologies of their time, such as USB/PS/2 peripherals ('201 Patent) and general-purpose interfaces ('071 Patent). A primary legal question will be whether claim terms rooted in those technologies can be construed to read on the distinct technology of modern NFC front-end components used for payment processing.
  • Technical Questions: The complaint provides a high-level and non-technical theory of infringement, stating only that the accused components perform the claimed methods when used for contactless payments Compl. ¶31 Compl. ¶36 A central factual question will be whether Plaintiff can produce evidence to substantiate these allegations and show a technical correspondence between the specific functions of the accused NFC components and the discrete steps recited in the asserted method claims.

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

• The Term: "signaling protocol" (from claim 14 of the '201 Patent)

• Context and Importance: The '201 Patent was developed to handle "USB" and "PS/2" protocols Compl. ¶11 The infringement allegation targets "NFC" payment transactions Compl. ¶31 The construction of "signaling protocol" will be critical in determining whether the claim's scope can extend beyond the specific examples in the patent to encompass the accused NFC technology.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim itself uses the general term "signaling protocol" without express limitation to USB or PS/2 '201 Patent, col. 6:43-52 The specification also refers generally to "a plurality of signaling protocols" '201 Patent, col. 5:60-62, which may support an interpretation not limited to the disclosed embodiments.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent is titled "Dual Mode USB-PS/2 Device", and the background and detailed description focus almost exclusively on the technical problems and solutions related to supporting those two specific protocols '201 Patent, title '201 Patent, col. 1:15-28 This context may support an argument that the term should be understood and limited by the specific problems the inventors set out to solve.

• The Term: "processor" (from claim 15 of the '071 Patent)

• Context and Importance: Claim 15 recites a method performed by a "processor" that moves through various states '071 Patent, col. 12:65-13:8 The complaint accuses an "NFC Front-end component," which is a specialized integrated circuit Compl. ¶31 Whether a logic block or state machine within this specialized component qualifies as a "processor" under the patent's definition will be a key point of dispute.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent abstract refers to a "circuit" that can be configured to interface with an external device, and the claim language is not explicitly limited to a conventional CPU '071 Patent, abstract This could support a reading that encompasses any programmable logic or state machine.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification describes the invention as a "specialized input-output processor" and discusses its implementation as a "microprocessor, micro-controller, [or] digital signal processor (DSP)" '071 Patent, col. 5:6-8 '071 Patent, col. 5:1-4 This may suggest the term implies a more complex and programmable device than a simple, hard-coded logic block within a dedicated-function chip.

VI. Other Allegations

• Indirect Infringement: The complaint does not include counts for indirect or contributory infringement. While it uses the phrase "using and/or causing to be used" Compl. ¶31, it does not plead the specific factual elements of knowledge and intent required to sustain a claim for indirect infringement.
• Willful Infringement: The complaint does not contain an explicit allegation of willful infringement. The prayer for relief includes a request for a declaration that the case is "exceptional" under 35 U.S.C. § 285 for the purpose of recovering attorneys' fees, but does not allege the conduct was "willful" for the purpose of enhanced damages Compl., Prayer for Relief C

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

• Technological Bridging: A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can claim terms and concepts developed for early-2000s bus interface and processor technologies (e.g., "detecting a signaling protocol" between USB and PS/2) be construed to cover the distinct architecture and operation of modern, dedicated NFC components used in contactless payment systems?
• Evidentiary Sufficiency: A key question will be one of evidentiary demonstration: given the complaint's high-level and conclusory infringement allegations, can the Plaintiff produce sufficient technical evidence to show, on an element-by-element basis, that the accused NFC components actually perform the specific, multi-step methods recited in the asserted patents, or will there be a fundamental mismatch in technical operation?
• Damages and Patent Expiration: As all asserted patents have expired, the case is purely retrospective, focusing on calculating reasonable royalty damages for a defined past period Compl. ¶33 Compl. ¶38 Compl. ¶43 Compl. ¶48 Compl. ¶52 The central economic question will be how to value these foundational, yet expired, technologies in the context of a modern, complex product.