Appeals from the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California in Nos. 4:17-cv-05928-YGR,
4:17-cv-05929-YGR, 4:17-cv-05931-YGR, 4:17-cv-05933-YGR,
4:17-cv-05934-YGR, 4:17-cv-05938-YGR, 4:17-cv-05939-YGR,
4:17-cv-05941-YGR, 4:17-cv-06881-YGR, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez
J. Edmonds, Edmonds & Schlather, PLLC, Houston, TX,
argued for plaintiff-appellant.
Stanley Joseph Panikowski, III, DLA Piper LLP (US), San
Diego, CA, argued for all defendants-appellees in 2018-1817.
Defendant-appellee Nike, Inc. in 2018-1817 and 2018-2178 also
represented by Richard T. Mulloy; Amy Walters, East Palo
Ricardo Bonilla, Fish & Richardson PC, Dallas, TX, argued
for all defendants-appellees in 2018-2178.
Defendants-appellees Fossil Group, Inc., Misfit, Inc. in
2018-1817 and 2018-2178 also represented by David Brandon
Conrad, Theresa Dawson, Neil J. McNabnay; Dalia Beth Kothari,
Redwood City, CA.
Shane Brun, Venable, LLP, San Francisco, CA, for
defendants-appellees Fitbit, Inc., Moov, Inc. Also
represented by Indra Neel Chatterjee, Redwood City, CA;
Leslie A. Lee, Washington, DC.
Rachael D. Lamkin, Lamkin IP Defense, San Francisco, CA, for
defendants-appellees Garmin International, Inc., Garmin USA,
Inc. in 2018-1817.
Seth Goldstein, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP,
Los Angeles, CA, for defendant-appellee Canon U.S.A., Inc.
Also represented by Jeffrey Jakhong Ung; Jared Weston Newton,
Karineh Khachatourian, Rimon, P.C., Palo Alto, CA, for
defendant-appellee GoPro, Inc. Also represented by Nikolaus
A. Woloszczuk. Defendant-appellee GoPro, Inc. in 2018-1817
also represented by Daniel T. McCloskey, Duane Morris LLP,
Palo Alto, CA.
Vann Pearce, Jr., Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP,
Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee Panasonic Corporation
of North America in 2018-1817. Also represented by Melanie L.
Bostwick, Sten Jensen; Jason Kang Yu, Menlo Park, CA.
A. Lateef, Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP, Irvine,
CA, for defendant-appellee JK Imaging Ltd. in 2018-1817. Also
represented by Daniel C. Kiang.
Lourie, O'Malley, and Taranto, Circuit Judges.
O'Malley, Circuit Judge.
Soft, Inc. ("Cellspin") sued Fitbit, Inc.
("Fit-bit"), Moov, Inc. ("Moov"), Nike,
Inc. ("Nike"), Fossil Group, Inc. and Misfit, Inc.
("Fossil"), Garmin International, Inc. and Garmin
U.S.A., Inc. ("Garmin"), Canon U.S.A., Inc.
("Canon"), GoPro, Inc. ("GoPro"),
Panasonic Corporation of America ("Panasonic"), and
JK Imaging LTD ("JKI") (collectively
"Appellees") for infringing various claims of four
different patents. Appellees moved to dismiss, arguing that
the patents are ineligible for patent protection under 35
U.S.C. § 101. The district court granted these motions
and subsequently awarded attorney fees to Fitbit, Moov, Nike,
Fossil, Canon, and GoPro under 35 U.S.C. § 285. See
Cellspin Soft, Inc. v. Fitbit, Inc., 316 F.Supp.3d 1138,
1143 (N.D. Cal. 2018) ("101 Order");
Cellspin Soft, Inc. v. Fitbit, Inc., No.
4:17-cv-5928-YGR, 2018 WL 3328164 (N.D. Cal. July 6, 2018)
("Attorney Fees Order"). Because we
conclude that the district court misapplied our precedent in
granting Appellees' motions to dismiss, we vacate its
grant of the motions to dismiss, vacate its award of attorney
fees, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this
four asserted patents-U.S. Pat. No. 8, 738, 794 ("the
'794 patent"), U.S. Pat. No. 8, 892, 752 ("the
'752 patent"), U.S. Pat. No. 9, 258, 698 ("the
'698 patent"), and U.S. Pat. No. 9, 749, 847
("the '847 patent")-share the same
specification and generally relate to connecting a data
capture device, e.g., a digital camera, to a mobile
device so that a user can automatically publish content from
the data capture device to a website. Each patent is
described in more detail below.
to the '794 patent, which issued May 2014, prior art
devices could digitally capture images, video, or other types
of content. To upload that content on the Internet, however,
users had to transfer their content onto a personal computer
using a memory stick or cable.
'794 patent teaches a way to transfer and upload data
"automatically or with minimal user intervention"
using a "data capture device" and a "mobile
device." '794 patent, col. 1, ll. 64 - col. 2, ll.
1. These two devices communicate via short-range wireless
communication protocols such as Bluetooth. Id. at
col. 2, ll. 18-22. In particular, a "client
application" on the mobile device detects and receives
content from the data capture device over the wireless
connection. The mobile device then "publish[es] the data
and multimedia content on one or more websites automatically
or with minimal user intervention." Id. at col.
5, ll. 55-59.
asserts claims 1-4, 7, 9, 16-18, and 20-21 of the '794
patent. On appeal, Cellspin does not agree that any of its
claims are representative of the '794 patent or the
asserted patents as a whole. Even so, Cellspin offers
separate arguments only as to independent claims 1 and 16.
The remaining claims depend from these two independent
Claim 1 recites:
1. 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
providing a software module on the Bluetooth enabled data
providing a software module on the Bluetooth enabled mobile
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;
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 ...