Last month a patent troll, Chian Chiu Li filed an infringement case in California against Apple for using his Face ID patent. However, Li withdrew his patent infringement case last week without any explanation and now Apple seeks the court’s “declaratory judgment” to stop him from re-filing the same Face ID infringement case at any other court in the United States.
Apple introduced the Face ID authentication in the iPhone X series launch in 2017 and had developed it years earlier. However, Li filed his patent in February 2020 for an eye-tracking technology that would display information on the lock screen when eye contact was made.
Accordingly, there exists a need to utilize idle time of smart phone and other electronic devices to present information to idling users […]
When the user gazes at it, the device begins to show content items on a display. The content items may include advertisements […]
it is desirable to have a method and system which provide advertising information in a less-intrusive but effective way. Because an idle device sometimes means an idling user, it may be less intrusive and probably more effective to present advertisements utilizing an idle device in an unused time slot […]
The idle time may be especially useful for showing advertising contents to idle users.
Apple wants the Face ID patent troll to pay for its legal fees
As per the description of Li’s patent, it is obvious that his eye-detection technology is very different from Apple’s Face ID authentication functionality to unlock a device and authorize logins and purchases. Therefore, the tech giant has asked the court for a “Declaratory Judgment” which means that the court will review the facts and pass a ruling because the withdrawal was made “without prejudice which will allow Li to refile the infringement case.
Patently Apple reports that the tech giant also wants the patent troll to pay legal fees for the case.
Apple filed a complaint for ‘Declaratory Judgement of Non-Infringement of U.S. Patent 11,016,564 in the Northern District of California in an effort to stop the patent infringement case from proceeding […]
“Apple has a reasonable apprehension that Defendant will refile suit and assert that the Accused Devices infringe the ‘564 patent. Both the pre-suit communications between Apple and Defendant and Defendant’s dismissal of the Original Complaint without prior notice and without prejudice, demonstrates that it is highly likely that Defendant will again assert infringement of the ‘564 patent against Apple. In the meantime, the cloud of Defendant’s allegations and litigation hangs over Apple.”