IP Law Daily, PATENT—D. Del.: Three of five wireless transmission patents asserted against Netgear invalidated under Alice, (Jun 28, 2024)

By Kevin M. Finson

The claims were invalid because they implemented well-known prior art techniques using generic computer components.

A seller of network equipment showed that three of the five patents asserted against it were invalid for being directed to the abstract ideas of manipulating and transmitting data signals, the U.S. District Court in Wilmington has held. The asserted claims generally implemented well-known radio signal techniques using generic computer components (Redwood Technologies, LLC v. Netgear, Inc., No. 1:22-cv-01271-GBW (D. Del. June 27, 2024)).

Redwood Technologies, LLC (Redwood) was the owner of U.S. Patents Nos. 7,359,457 (the '457 patent), 7,917,102 (the ’102 patent), 7,983,140 (the '140 patent), 8,111,671 (the '671 patent), and 9,462,536 (the '536 patent), all of which were related to wireless communication technology. Redwood brought suit for infringement against Netgear, Inc. (Netgear). Redwood moved to dismiss in part, arguing that the ’457, ’140, ’671, and ’536 patents were invalid for being directed at an unpatentable abstract idea. The court considered each challenged patent in turn, applying the two-step Alice test.

The ’457 patent. This patent claimed the use of two symbol generators to modulate a digital transmission signal. The court found that this was an abstract idea, the changing of a signal based on another signal was well known in the art. While Redwood claimed it contained an inventive concept in the form of improvements to technology, the court found simply the recitation of the abstract idea along with conventional technology. The motion to dismiss was granted as to this patent.

The ’140 patent. This patent concerned the use of a “frame guard” in a transmission system. The court found that there was a dispute of material fact as to whether the frame guard concept was abstract because it appeared to include a novel technological improvement over prior art frames. The motion to dismiss as to this patent was denied.

The ’671 patent. This patent claimed a system for resolving signal interference by using beacons associated with transmitters and receivers to indicate when they could not receive transmissions. The court found that even the specification showed that prior art allowed communication about when systems could be used and when they could not, so this idea was abstract. The court also found that there was no inventive concept to save patentability because the claims did not involve a technological improvement but only recited the use of generic components used in their ordinary capacity. The motion to dismiss was granted as to this patent.

The ’536 patent. This patent described a “communication circuit” for use in a “mesh station” which included a modulator circuit that output a signal conveying the duration and periodicity of transmission opportunities in order to avoid interference. Much like the ’671 patent, the court held that this was well known in the prior art and that the claim was abstract because it was simply the transmission and manipulation of data. There was no inventive concept because, again, there were no technological improvements but only the implementation of the abstract idea using conventional computer components. The motion to dismiss was granted as to this patent.

The court granted leave to amend the dismissed claims.

The Case is No. 1:22-cv-01271-GBW.

Judge: Williams, G.

Attorneys: Ronald P. Golden (Bayard, P.A.) for Redwood Technologies, LLC. Steven J. Balick (Ashby & Geddes P.A.) for Netgear, Inc.

Companies: Redwood Technologies, LLC; Netgear, Inc.

Cases: Patent DelawareNews