Adaptive Avenue Associates Inc v. Dell Inc

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Adaptive Avenue Associates, Inc. (Minnesota)
  • Defendant: Dell Inc. (Delaware)
  • Plaintiff's Counsel: Direction IP Law
• Case Identification: 7:26-cv-00088, W.D. Tex., 06/15/2026
• Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Western District of Texas because Defendant maintains its principal place of business in the district and has committed alleged acts of infringement there.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant's website, www.dell.com, infringes two patents related to systems and methods for creating and displaying automated, customizable slideshows of web content, a feature commonly known as a "carousel ad."
• Technical Context: The technology at issue involves server-side methods for generating sequences of web content (such as images or pages) that display automatically in a user's browser, designed as an alternative to earlier plugin-based technologies like Adobe Flash.
• Key Procedural History: Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint. The asserted U.S. Patent No. 7,428,707 is a continuation-in-part of the application that led to U.S. Patent No. 7,171,629. The complaint references the prosecution history of the '707 patent, noting an alleged agreement by the patent examiner that automatically composing a slideshow via extraction of web page details was unconventional at the time.

Case Timeline

Date	Event
2000-10-20	Earliest Priority Date for '629 Patent and '707 Patent
2007-01-30	U.S. Patent No. 7,171,629 Issued
2008-09-23	U.S. Patent No. 7,428,707 Issued
2026-06-15	Amended Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 7,171,629 - "Customizable Web Site Access System And Method Therefore"

• Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,171,629 ("the '629 Patent"), "Customizable Web Site Access System And Method Therefore," issued January 30, 2007.

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent's background section identifies a need for a system that allows web developers to provide automated presentations of web page sequences without the cost of reprogramming site content or requiring users to install development tools, which was a drawback of prior art technologies like Flash ('629 Patent, col. 7:60-67; Compl. ¶11). It also describes conventional web navigation as a "lengthy and tedious task" '629 Patent, col. 7:59-60
• The Patented Solution: The invention is a server-side system comprising a "composer" and a "performer" '629 Patent, FIG. 1 The composer is used to create a presentation by establishing a list of URLs, a display sequence, and a display duration '629 Patent, abstract The performer, also on the host server, is invoked to automatically load and display this presentation to a user in a slideshow format, without requiring a specialized client-side plugin Compl. ¶25 '629 Patent, col. 8:5-12
• Technical Importance: This server-side approach aimed to deliver dynamic, sequential web content while avoiding the compatibility, installation, and maintenance issues associated with client-side plugins that were prevalent at the time Compl. ¶25

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts independent claim 11 Compl. ¶42
• The essential elements of claim 11 are:
  • A method for customizing access to web sites, comprising:
  • remotely invoking a composer operating on a host server;
  • creating a presentation in the composer by establishing a list of URLs (via manual entry or a query-based system), determining a display sequence, and determining a display duration;
  • remotely invoking a performer operating on the host server to present the created presentation;
  • automatically locally displaying the presentation in a slide show format;
  • wherein each URL comprises a slide, and each slide is automatically displayed to a user, absent human intervention, for the pre-determined duration.

U.S. Patent No. 7,428,707 - "Customizable Web Site Access System And Method Therefore"

• Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,428,707 ("the '707 Patent"), "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 problems of creating automated web presentations Compl. ¶63 It adds a specific focus on automating the creation of the slideshow content itself, which the complaint alleges was previously a manual process Compl. ¶63
• The Patented Solution: The '707 Patent discloses an "auto-composing" system that creates a slideshow presentation by automatically extracting "web page details" from a desired web page. These details can be a plurality of hyperlinks, a presentation/rendition text file, or a meta tag found within the page, which provide the URLs for the slideshow '707 Patent, abstract '707 Patent, col. 8:1-17
• Technical Importance: This "auto-compose" feature is presented as a technological improvement that automates the generation of a presentation's content list, rather than requiring a developer to manually compile it Compl. ¶63

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts independent claim 7 Compl. ¶65
• The essential elements of claim 7 are:
  • A computer-implemented method for auto composing a web site, comprising:
  • composing a presentation for a desired web page by creating a list of URLs, where the composing step includes one or more of:
    • automatically extracting a plurality of hyperlinks from the web page;
    • automatically extracting a presentation/rendition text file from the web page; or
    • automatically extracting a meta tag from the web page;
  • automatically displaying the presentation in the order of the created list of URLs.

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

• The accused instrumentality is Defendant's website, www.dell.com, and specifically the automatically rotating slideshows of promotional content, referred to as "carousel ads" Compl. ¶23 Compl. ¶42

Functionality and Market Context

• The complaint alleges that the homepage of www.dell.com features a slideshow that automatically rotates through a series of images, each of which is a URL Compl. ¶46 This functionality is allegedly implemented using HTML, JavaScript, and CSS and is presented to a user's browser automatically upon visiting the website Compl. ¶44 Compl. ¶50 A screenshot provided as Exhibit E in the complaint shows a web browser displaying the dell.com homepage with a large slideshow feature in the upper portion Compl. ¶43 The complaint alleges these types of "carousel ads" have become an industry standard and can drive significantly higher click-through rates and leads compared to static ads Compl. ¶23

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;	A user's web browser, upon navigating to www.dell.com, allegedly invokes a "composer" on Dell's host server or network of servers.	¶44	col. 14:45-46
creating a presentation in said composer, wherein said step of creating comprises the steps of: establishing a list of URLs in said composer by one of a plurality of list establishment methodologies... comprising manual entry via a user interface portion of the composer...	The complaint alleges that Defendant manually enters a list of image URLs into a website management system, which functions as the user interface of the composer. The complaint provides two example image URLs from dell.com and references Exhibit D, which contains a code excerpt showing the URL list.	¶46	col. 14:49-54
determining a display sequence of said list of URLs in said composer;	The display sequence is allegedly visible in the source code and the slide sequence provided in the complaint's exhibits.	¶47	col. 14:54-55
determining a duration of display for said list of URLs in said composer;	The slideshow composer allegedly accepts a pre-set display duration for each URL, and the slides advance based on this duration.	¶48	col. 14:56-57
remotely invoking a performer operating on said host server to present said created presentation;	A user's navigation to www.dell.com allegedly invokes a "performer" on the host server to present the slideshow.	¶49	col. 14:58-60
and automatically locally displaying the created presentation presented by said performer in a slide show format... wherein each slide is automatically displayed to a user, absent human intervention, for the pre-determined display duration...	The slideshow is allegedly automatically displayed on the user's device without user action and advances based on a pre-set duration. The complaint alleges that the variable "dds_active" in a code snippet (Exhibit A) rotates through the URLs to display them.	¶50; ¶53	col. 14:60-67

'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, wherein said step of composing comprises (a) automatically extracting a plurality of hyperlinks from the desired web page, wherein the plurality of hyperlinks provides the URLs...	The complaint alleges that dynamic server-side components on Dell's servers automatically extract "web page details" to create the slideshow presentation. It further alleges that the "plurality of hyperlinks... that got automatically extracted" are the image URLs themselves, as shown in Exhibit C.	¶67; ¶68	col. 10:5-12
and automatically displaying the presentation, wherein the presentation is presented in order of the created list of URLs.	The slideshow presentation is allegedly activated when a user enters the www.dell.com website, and the software components load and advance the URLs in order. The complaint alleges that a variable named "dds_active" in a code snippet progressively rotates through the displayed URLs.	¶69	col. 10:13-17

Identified Points of Contention

• Architectural Mapping: The infringement allegation for the '629 Patent hinges on mapping Dell's web application, built with HTML, JavaScript, and CSS Compl. ¶44, to the patent's specific "composer" and "performer" architecture '629 Patent, FIG. 1 This raises the question of whether Dell's system contains these distinct components as claimed, or if it is a more integrated system for which this claimed architecture is an inapt description.
• "Manual Entry" vs. "Automatic Extraction": A potential point of contention arises from the seemingly conflicting allegations for the two patents. The '629 patent infringement theory relies on Dell manually entering URLs into a composer Compl. ¶46, while the '707 patent infringement theory relies on the system automatically extracting hyperlinks or other details Compl. ¶68 The factual basis for how the list of slideshow URLs is actually generated will be a central issue.
• Scope of "Extracting": For the '707 patent, a key question will be one of claim scope. The infringement analysis may turn on whether retrieving a pre-configured list of image URLs from a database or configuration file, as is common in modern content management systems, meets the claim limitation of "automatically extracting a plurality of hyperlinks from the desired web page."

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

• Term: "composer" and "performer" ('629 Patent, Claim 11)

  • Context and Importance: These terms define the core architecture of the claimed system. The infringement analysis depends on whether Defendant's accused system can be characterized as having these two distinct software components operating on a host server. Practitioners may focus on this term because Defendant may argue its modern web application does not map onto this specific structure.
  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification provides functional descriptions, stating the composer is "used to create a presentation" and the performer "operates to load and automatically display the presentation" '629 Patent, col. 8:5-12 Plaintiff may argue that any server-side code modules that perform these respective functions satisfy the claim.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figure 1 of the patent depicts the "Composer 12" and "Performer 14" as distinct blocks within the "Host Server 16" '629 Patent, FIG. 1 The detailed description also discusses them as separate components '629 Patent, col. 9:11-44 This may support an interpretation that they must be structurally separate and distinct software components.

• Term: "automatically extracting" ('707 Patent, Claim 7)

  • Context and Importance: This term is the central inventive concept added in the '707 patent. Infringement of claim 7 depends entirely on whether the accused system "extracts" URLs from a web page, as opposed to receiving them through another mechanism.
  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The complaint alleges the system "automatically extracted web page details" Compl. ¶67, which could be argued to cover any automated server-side process that gathers URLs associated with a page, including from a related database. The patent describes this as part of a function to "auto compose" a presentation '707 Patent, col. 7:62-67
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description of the "auto compose" function specifies extracting "hyperlinks, i.e., href's" from the page, searching for a "presentation/rendition text file," or searching for a "composer-recognizable meta tag" '707 Patent, col. 8:20-37 This suggests "extracting" requires parsing the page or its associated files for specific, defined data structures, not simply retrieving a pre-set list from a CMS database.

VI. Other Allegations

The complaint does not contain explicit allegations of indirect or willful infringement. It advances a direct infringement theory, asserting that Defendant is liable for steps performed on a user's computer because it "directs and controls" the performance of those steps as a condition of accessing its website Compl. ¶51 Compl. ¶70

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

• Architectural Equivalence: A core issue for the '629 patent will be one of structural mapping: does the accused Dell.com website, which uses modern web technologies like JavaScript, embody the specific server-side "composer" and "performer" architecture required by the patent's claims, or is there a fundamental mismatch?
• The Mechanism of Content Curation: A key evidentiary question for the '707 patent will be one of technical operation: does the accused system "automatically extract" hyperlinks or meta-tags from a web page to build a slideshow, as claim 7 requires, or is the list of slideshow content populated through a different mechanism, such as manual entry into a content management system?
• Pleading in the Alternative: The case may present questions regarding the plaintiff's alternative infringement theories. The court will have to consider whether the allegation of "manual entry" for the '629 patent and "automatic extraction" for the '707 patent, for what appears to be the same accused functionality, can coexist or if discovery will force a choice between these two narratives.