Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Cellspin Soft, Inc. v. Fitbit, Inc.

United States District Court, N.D. California, Oakland Division

April 3, 2018

Cellspin Soft, Inc. Plaintiff,
v.
Fitbit, Inc. Defendant.
v.
Moov, Inc. Defendant.
v.
Nike, Inc., Defendant.
v.
Fossil Group, Inc. et al Defendant.
v.
Garmin International Inc. et al Defendant.
v.
Cannon U.S.A., Inc. Defendant
v.
GoPro, Inc. Defendant.
v.
Panasonic Corporation of North America Defendant.
v.
JK Imaging, Ltd. Defendant.

          ORDER RE: OMNIBUS MOTION TO DISMISS; MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS DKT. NO. 31, 75 DKT. NO. 29, 63 DKT. NO. 23, 63 DKT. NO. 41, 81 DKT. NO. 27, 61 DKT. NO. 43, 69 DKT. NO. 31, 66 DKT. NO. 34, 67 DKT. NO. 43, 70

          YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

         Plaintiff Cellspin Soft, Inc. (“Cellspin”) brings fourteen patent infringement actions[1] alleging that each defendant infringed one or more of Cellspin's patents, namely U.S. Patent Nos. 8, 738, 794 (the “‘794 Patent”); 8, 892, 752 (the “‘752 Patent”); 9, 749, 847 (the “‘847 Patent”); and 9, 258, 698 (the “‘698 Patent”) (collectively the “Asserted Patents”).[2] Cellspin asserts claims 1-4, 7, 9, 16-18 and 20-21 from the ‘794 Patent; claims 1, 2, 4, 5, and 12-14 from the ‘752 Patent; claims 1-3 from the ‘847 Patent; and claims 1, 3-5, 7-8, 10-13, 15-20 from the ‘698 Patent. (See, e.g., Cellspin Soft Inc. v. Fitbit, Inc., 17-cv-05928-YGR, Dkt. No. 1, Complaint for Infringement of U.S. Patents (“Complaint”).)[3]

         Defendants Fitbit, Moov, Nike, Fossil, Cannon, GoPro, Panasonic, and JK (the “Omnibus Defendants”) have filed an omnibus motion to dismiss plaintiffs claims pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 12(b)(6) on the ground that the asserted patents are not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. (Dkt. No. 31, Motion to Dismiss Cellspin Soft, Inc.'s Complaints (“Omnibus MTD”).) Also before the Court is defendant Garmin's motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) on the same ground. (See Cellspin Soft Inc. v. Garmin International, Inc., 17-cv-5934-YGR, Dkt. No. 27.)

         Having carefully reviewed the pleadings, the papers and exhibits submitted on these motions, the parties' arguments at the hearing held on March 6, 2018, and for the reasons set forth more fully below, the Court Grants the Omnibus Defendants' motion to dismiss Cellspin's complaints and Grants Garmin's motion for judgment on the pleadings.

         I. Patents at Issue

         Each of the four Asserted Patents is titled “Automatic Multimedia Upload for Publishing Data and Multimedia Content” and recites the same specification. (See, e.g., Cellspin Soft, Inc. v. Garmin International, Inc., 17-cv-5934-YGR, Dkt. No. 1, Exs. A-D at 1:1-3.) Accordingly, the Court shall first discuss the ‘794 Patent and then highlight variations presented by the ‘752, ‘847, and ‘698 Patents, respectively.

         A. The ‘794 Patent

         The specification for the ‘794 Patent describes a “method of utilizing a digital data capture device [such as a digital or video camera or wearable fitness tracker] in conjunction with a Bluetooth™ enabled mobile device for publishing data and multimedia content on one or more websites automatically or with minimal user intervention.” (Id. at 3:28-32.) According to the patent, the conventional method for publishing data and multimedia content on a website was time-consuming required and manual user intervention:

Typically, the user would capture an image using a digital camera or a video camera, store the image on a memory device of the digital camera, and transfer the image to a computing device such as a personal computer (PC). In order to transfer the image to the PC, the user would transfer the image off-line to the PC, use a cable such as a universal serial bus (USB) or a memory stick and plug the cable into the PC. The user would then manually upload the image onto a website which takes time and may be inconvenient for the user.

(‘794 Patent at 1:38-47.) The ‘794 Patent purports to solve this problem by “utilizing a digital data capture device in conjunction with a Bluetooth™ (BT) enabled mobile device” to “automatically publish[] data and multi-media content on one or more websites simultaneously.” (Id. at 1:33-36, 1:65-2:3.) Independent Claim 1 recites:

A method for acquiring and transferring data from a Bluetooth enabled data capture device to one or more web services via a Bluetooth enabled mobile device, the method comprising:
providing a software module on the Bluetooth enabled data capture device;
providing a software module on the Bluetooth enabled mobile device;
establishing a paired connection between the Bluetooth enabled data capture device and the Bluetooth enabled mobile device;
acquiring new data in the Bluetooth enabled data capture device, wherein new data is data acquired after the paired connection is established;
detecting and signaling the new data for transfer to the Bluetooth enabled mobile device, wherein detecting and signaling the new data for transfer comprises:
determining the existence of new data for transfer, by the software module on the Bluetooth enabled data capture device; and
sending a data signal to the Bluetooth enabled mobile device, corresponding to existence of new data, by the software module on the Bluetooth enabled data capture device automatically, over the established paired Bluetooth connection, wherein the software module on the Bluetooth enabled mobile device listens for the data signal sent from the Bluetooth enabled data capture device, wherein if permitted by the software module on the Bluetooth enabled data capture device, the data signal sent to the Bluetooth enabled mobile device comprises a data signal and one or more portions of the new data;
transferring the new data from the Bluetooth enabled data capture device to the Bluetooth enabled mobile device automatically over the paired Bluetooth connection by the software module on the Bluetooth enabled data capture device;
receiving, at the Bluetooth enabled mobile device, the new data from the Bluetooth enabled data capture device;
applying, using the software module on the Bluetooth enabled mobile device, a user identifier to the new data for each destination web service, wherein each user identifier uniquely identifies a particular user of the web service;
transferring the new data received by the Bluetooth enabled mobile device along with a user identifier to the one or more web services, using the software module on the Bluetooth enabled mobile device;
receiving, at the one or more web services, the new data and user identifier from the Bluetooth enabled mobile device, wherein the one or more web services receive the transferred new data corresponding to a user identifier; and
making available, at the one or more web services, the new data received from the Bluetooth enabled mobile device for public or private consumption over the internet, wherein one or more portions of the new data correspond to a particular user identifier.

(Id. at 11:48-12:39 (emphasis supplied).) Six asserted claims (2 through 5, 7, and 9) depend on independent claim 1 and add further limitations such as when the “data signal and the new data are transferred from the Bluetooth enabled data capture device to the Bluetooth enabled mobile device simultaneously[;]” “Bluetooth capability is provided internally in the Bluetooth enabled data capture device[;] and the “Bluetooth enabled mobile device comprises one or more of audio data, video data, image data, text data, or digital data.” (Id. at 12:39-50 (Claim 2), 13:48-50 (Claim 7), 13:55-58 (Claim 9).)

         Additionally, the ‘794 Patent contains two other independent claims, namely claims 6 and 16.[4]Asserted independent claim 16 of the ‘794 Patent is directed to transferring content from an “Internet incapable data capture device to an Internet server via separate Internet capable mobile device by polling the Bluetooth enabled data capture device for newly captured data within an already paired and Bluetooth connection between the data capture device and the mobile device.” (Dkt No. 38, Opposition at 20-21 (citing ‘794 Patent at 14:14-64) (emphasis supplied).) Claim 16 has five dependent claims and adds further limitations such as when the “Bluetooth capability is provided internally in the Bluetooth enabled data capture device[;]” “Bluetooth capability is provided to the Bluetooth enabled data capture device by an external Bluetooth module[;]” and “the new data transferred from the Bluetooth enabled mobile device to one or more web services is data associated with new data.” (‘794 Patent at 14:65-15:14.)

         B. The ‘752 Patent

         Independent Claim 1 of the ‘752 Patent is directed to method of transferring data from an internet incapable data capture device to an internet server via an intermediary internet capable mobile device by pushing event notifications within an already paired and encrypted Bluetooth connection. (See ‘752 patent at 11:48-59.) Unlike the ‘794 Patent, the ‘752 Patent recites the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.