UW Health is exploring medical advances in organ and tissue donations

Apple is asking the court to prevent future claims of patent infringement from anyone who looks like a Face ID patent troll.

California-based Chian ChiuLi filed a patent infringement against Apple last month and dropped the complaint last week without explanation …

Patent

Li’s patent is about how to detect that someone isn’t actively using your smartphone, but uses it as a prompt to display information and glances at the lock screen. The patent says this may contain something like news, but the main focus is on displaying ads.

When your smartphone is in standby, the display may dim to save energy. Without user intervention, smartphones would stay that way. In some cases, users may be busy doing other things and may not want to play on the standby phone. In some other cases, users may hesitate to wake up from standby if nothing is interesting, even when they are not busy. In the latter scenario, the user has time to retrieve or display the information, but the smartphone may have a blank screen to display and convey the information. However, there is no convenient way or incentive for users to get started. As a result, the phone can remain idle, but the user can simply stare at the dark empty screen and waste time on both the user and the phone.

Therefore, there is a need to utilize the idle time of smartphones and other electronic devices to present information to idling users. […]

When the user stares at it, the device begins to show the content item on the display.Content items may contain ads […]

It is desirable to have a method and system for providing advertising information in an unobtrusive but effective manner. Idle devices can mean idling users, so it’s probably more unobtrusive and probably more effective to use idle devices to serve ads in unused time slots. […]

Idle time is especially useful for displaying advertising content to idle users.

Obviously, Apple would never do that terrible thing, but nevertheless Li did not stop claiming that the iPhone maker infringed his patent.

Face ID patent troll filing

Patented Apple Li reports that he has filed an infringement claim against Apple for “line-of-sight tracking.”

On April 5, 2022, the defendant filed a patent infringement complaint against Apple in the Northern District of California. Chian Chiu Liv. See Apple Inc., Case Number 4: 22-cv-2159 (Dkt.1) (“Original Complaint”) (attached as Attachment A).

In plaintiffs, defendants alleged that Apple products, such as several versions of the iPhone and iPad Pro, infringed the ‘564 patent. […]

Defendant further alleged that the “Unlock with Face ID” feature of the Defendant’s device violated each limitation of claim 1 of the alleged patent and all of claims 8 and 14.

This is obviously meaningless. The device that responds to what someone sees is the only thing that Face ID and Li patents have in common, and for a completely different purpose.

In addition, Li’s patent was filed only on February 3, 2020. Apple launched the first iPhone with Face ID in 2017. Of course, this technology was developed long before that, perhaps a few years ago.

The site states that Li withdrew the complaint without explanation. Importantly, however, the withdrawal was “unprejudiced” and Li was free to file complaints elsewhere, including California or eastern Texas, suitable jurisdictions for trolls.

Apple is trying to prevent refiling

Patented Apple Apple has sought a declaratory judgment, which means that even if the complaint is withdrawn, Cupertino wants to investigate the facts in court and rule that the patent is not infringed. This will prevent Li from being refiled.

Apple has filed a non-infringement confirmation of US patent 11,016,564 in the Northern California area to prevent the proceedings of the patent infringement proceedings. […]

“Apple is reasonably concerned that the defendant has re-filed the proceedings and alleged that the accused device infringes the ‘564 patent. Pre-procedural communication between Apple and the defendant, And both the defendant’s prior notice and the dismissal of the original complaint without prejudice indicate that the defendant is likely to again claim infringement of the ‘564 patent against Apple, while defendant’s allegations and proceedings. The clouds rest on Apple. ”

Apple also wants Li to pay statutory costs for this case.

FTC: We use affiliate links for earning cars. more.

---

Check out 9to5Mac on YouTube for Apple news.