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.

Scvngr Inc. v. Dailygobble Inc.

United States District Court, D. Rhode Island

March 2, 2017

SCVNGR, INC. d/b/a LEVELUP Plaintiff,
v.
DAILYGOBBLE, INC. d/b/a RELEVANT, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          John J. McConnell, Jr. United States District Judge.

         Plaintiff SCVNGR, Inc. d/b/a/ LevelUp ("LevelUp") brought the instant action against Defendant DailyGobble, Inc. d/b/a/ Relevant ("Relevant") for patent infringement. The patent at issue, United States Patent No. 8, 924, 260 ("the '260 patent"), provides for an improved POS system through the use of sentinels-that is, a first data sequence and second data sequence. A POS terminal equipped with the ability to recognize and process the sentinels can distinguish a data stream with the sentinels from other data inputs as well as interrupt a current process of the POS terminal to process a transaction. Relevant has moved for judgment on the pleadings, arguing that LevelUp's '260 patent is an abstract idea and therefore patent ineligible.

         BACKGROUND

         LevelUp designs applications for restaurants that combine a reward's program and payment method into one quick-response code ("QR Code"). A consumer can both receive rewards and initiate payment through the presentment of a single QR Code on her mobile device. The application eliminates the need for a consumer to provide a QR Code for a rewards program and a separate payment form. In order to process a QR Code transaction, LevelUp encodes the data stream with sentinels, a system for which LevelUp received the '260 patent.

         LevelUp filed the complaint in this action, alleging that Relevant is infringing on LevelUp's '260 patent. ECF NO. 1. After LevelUp moved for a preliminary injunction, ECF No. 12, and the Court granted that motion, ECF No. 29, Relevant filed the instant motion for judgment on the pleadings, ECF No. 34. Relevant reasserts an argument-that the relevant claims in the '260 patent are directed towards patent-ineligible subject matter-previously briefed at the preliminary injunction stage, ECF No. 20 at 12-16; ECF No. 21 at 7-12, and rejected in this Court's granting of the preliminary injunction.

         Mobile payment processing occurs through a mobile device's communication with an optical or near-field communication reader. The mobile device, once scanned, sends an electronic token to the POS terminal. Then, the POS terminal combines this token with other payment information, such as the price of the transaction and the name of the merchant, and sends the information to the payment processor.

         The '260 patent encodes the data stream with a "sentinel" at the beginning and the end of the data stream. The sentinels bracket the token data to differentiate it from other data within the data stream (i.e., metadata) and other data streams. The sentinels can provide multiple functional applications, Claims 1-2 concern the "interrupt protocol, " which causes the POS terminal to interrupt its current task upon receipt of the first sentinel. After interruption, the POS terminal begins processing the payment information contained in the data stream. And after receiving the second sentinel, the POS terminal completes the transaction. Claims 11-12 are for a POS terminal configured to process a transaction as set forth by the method in Claims 1-2. The image below illustrates the patent '260 method of processing transactions through multiple data inputs.

         (Image Omitted)

         The figure depicts a POS terminal receiving data streams from three different inputs-a scanner, reader, and touch screen. The data stream from the scanner contains two "LU" sentinels, and the data stream between the two sentinels contains the "interrupt" "data-handling protocol."

         The claims at issue are as follows:

1. A method of processing a transaction at a point-of-sale (POS) terminal, the method comprising the steps of
receiving, by the POS terminal, a stream of data from a credential reader;
recognizing, by the POS terminal, a first data sequence in the received data stream;
in response to the recognized first data sequence, handling, by the POS terminal, transaction data coming in sequence after the first the data sequence according to a ...

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.