`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`ORLANDO DIVISION
`
`PROXICOM WIRELESS, LLC,
`
` Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`T
`ARGET CORPORATION,
`
` Defendant.
`
`
`C
`ASE NO.: 6:19-cv-01886-RBD-LRH
`
`
`A
`MENDED COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR
`JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Proxicom Wireless, LLC (“Proxicom”), by and through undersigned counsel, files
`this amended complaint pursuant to F ED. R. CIV. PRO. 15(a)(2) and the Court’s Order granting
`Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. 30) for its suit against Def endant Target Corporation
`(“Target”) and, pursuant to FED. R. CIV. PRO. 8 alleges as follows:
`NATURE of Action
`1. This is an action for patent inf ringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271 et seq. arising out
`of Target’s infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,090,359; 8,116,7 49; 8,374,592; 8,385,896;
`8,385,913; 8,369,842; 9,038,129; 7,936,736 and 9,161,164 (collectively, the “patents-in-suit”).
`The following allegations of patent infringement arise from act ions performed by or attributable
`to Target.
`PARTIES, JURISDICTION & Venue
`2. Plaintiff Proxicom is a limited liability company duly organized and existing under
`the laws of the State of Florida and having its principal place of business at 1680 N. Riverside Dr.,
`Indialantic, Florida 32903. Proxicom has only two members: the inventors of the patents-in-suit,
`James Arthur Proctor, Jr. and James Arthur Proctor, III, individuals who are citizens of the State
`of Florida.
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-2-
`3. Target Corporation is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of
`the State of Minnesota and having its principal place of busine ss at 1000 Nicollet Mall,
`Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55403. For purposes of diversity, Targ et is a citizen of the State of
`Minnesota.
`4. Because this is an action arising under the patent laws of the United States, this
`Court has subject matter jurisd iction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). Additionally,
`because there is complete diversity of citizenship between the parties and the amount in
`controversy exceeds $75,000 (exclusive of attorneys’ fees, interest and costs), this Court also has
`subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1).
`5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Target because, inter alia , Target
`maintains or has maintained c ontinuous and systematic contacts with, and regularly transacts
`business in, the State of Florida and this judicial district, and because Proxicom’s claims arise out
`of Target operating, conducting, en gaging in, or carrying on a business venture in the State of
`Florida and this judicial district and committing tortious acts in the State of Florida and this judicial
`district.
`6. Venue is proper in the Middle District of Florida under 28 U.S. C. §§ 1391 and
`1400(b) because Target is subject to personal jurisdiction and, therefore, is deemed to reside in
`this judicial district, and because Target maintains established places of business in this judicial
`district and has committed and continues to commit acts of infringement in violation of 35 U.S.C.
`§ 271 at its places of business in this judicial district. Tar get’s regular and established places of
`business in this judicial district include at least six stores in Orlando, Florida, as well as stores in
`Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Casselberry, Waterford Lakes, Hunters Creek, and Kissimmee,
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-3-
`Florida. Additionally, Proxicom has suffered harm in this judi cial district due to Target’s
`infringement of the patents-in-suit.
`TECHNICAL BACKGROUND
`7. The Patents-in-suit each claim priority to two provisional appl ications that were
`filed in early September, 2008. As of 2008, mobile wireless co mmunication standards had
`progressed to the point where high-speed data connections were possible over mobile networks.
`U.S. Patent No. 8,090,359 (a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1), 1:26-
`30. These standards included (“3G”) third-generation broadband cellular network technology, for
`example, EDGE and GPRS. Id., 1:29-30.
`8. Therefore, mobile devices (such as mobile phones) had access to high-speed
`networks. Some web sites, such as social networking sites, had been optimized to make use of the
`high speed of mobile networks, but for the most part these web sites were simply standard social
`networking sites that had been redesigned for use on a mobile p hone with little change in
`capability. Id., 1:34-37.
`9. At the time, most mobile phones supported at least two wireless standards, one for
`a cellular wireless wide area ne twork connection (such as EDGE and GPRS), and a second for a
`local area network that is typically used for short-range communication such as Bluetooth or WiFi.
`Exhibit 1, 2:11-23. These two channels, however, had not been used in the innovative manner of
`the inventions of the patents-in-suit. Wide-area networks had commonly been used for high-speed
`data connections. Short-range connections had commonly been used to connect hands-free devices
`such as headsets or peripherals. Short-range connections were also used in peer-to-peer network
`applications. Id., 2:17-27.
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-4-
`10. Peer-to-peer communication via th ese commonly-available short-r ange
`communication channels (WiFi, Bluetooth) had been attempted for mobile social networking by
`some social networking services as of 2008. Id., 2:24-27. For example, a service called Flobbi
`allowed community members to identify each other via Bluetooth transmissions and then interact
`with chat, with the messages being carried over the Bluetooth c onnection. Id., 3:67-4:4. These
`social networking services typically consisted of a software application executing on each mobile
`phone to facilitate direct communication between each device by creating an ad-hoc network
`among nearby devices. Id., 2:29-31. Each device in the network is a “peer” of the other devices,
`and each of the “peer” devices share information directly with other devices in the ad-hoc network.
`The social-networking services necessarily stored the information to be exchanged locally on the
`peer devices, which rendered th e services vulnerable to fraud, for example, if one of the peer
`devices copied or misused the information. Id., 2:37-47.
`11. Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers were also commonly av ailable and
`incorporated into mobile phones. GPS is a satellite-based system operated by the United States
`government. GPS receivers provide location information for the mobile device using these
`satellite signals. Signals from several satellites must be simultaneously read (for triangulation) to
`determine a location. Obstacles like buildings block the relat ively weak satellite-based GPS
`signals. Id., 1:43-50. As a result, GPS capabilities for mobile devices we re typically targeted at
`navigation to a specified location outdoors, or GPS was used for mobile social networking to allow
`a user to see where their friends were located in a relatively large geographic location on a map.
`Id., 1:38-43, 1:50-54.
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-5-
`THE Proctors’ Innovative Technology
`12. Proxicom was founded by Messrs. James Arthur Proctor, III and J ames Arthur
`Proctor, Jr. (father and son, co llectively, “the Proctors”). Between them, the Proctors are named
`inventors on more than 290 United States patents. Mr. James A. Proctor, III holds a B.S.E.E. from
`the University of Florida and an M.S.E.E. from the Florida Institute of Technology. He is a former
`member of the faculty of the Florida Institute of Technology wh ere he taught graduate courses in
`electrical engineering. Mr. James A. Proctor, III has forty years of experience in engineering and
`management roles at Harris Cor poration in Melbourne, Florida working with communications
`systems.
`13. Mr. James A. Proctor, Jr., holds a B.S.E.E. from the University of Florida and an
`M.S.E.E. from the Georgia Institute of Technology. Mr. Proctor , Jr. is an accomplished
`technology executive and serial ent repreneur in the wireless an d communications field, having
`contributed to the startup, growth, operation, and exits of a number of programs and companies.
`14. Proxicom was founded by the Proctors to research and develop wireless technology
`using proximity wireless signals. The Proctors are coinventors on the patents-in-suit, each of
`which has been assigned to Proxicom.
`15. The Proctors have developed nume rous innovative technologies in t h e f i e l d o f
`wireless communications, including cellular and local area netw orking, with applications for use
`by governments and businesses. The Proctors’ inventions, various aspects of which are embodied
`by the claims of the patents-in-suit, including each of the claims referenced herein, address several
`deficiencies with prior art pee r-to-peer systems and methods by improving control of user
`information and privacy.
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-6-
`16. One inspiration for the inventions taught and claimed in the patents-in-suit was the
`difficulty that Mr. Proctor, Jr. experienced in sharing files s ecurely. In 2008, Mr. Proctor, Jr.
`realized that devices such as laptops that had WiFi and Bluetoo th capabilities for short-range
`communication, couldn’t communicat e securely with other similar devices, or exchange
`documents using those short-range communication channels. In f act, users could be tracked by
`third parties with the then-existing peer-to-peer technology. A third party could copy the identifier
`associated with a user or user’s device and misuse it. Accordin gly, there was a need in the art for
`technology that could facilitate secure communications between mobile devices using short-range
`communication technologies.
`17. Because of these security concerns, prior to the inventions that are embodied in the
`claims of the patents-in-suit, including the claims referenced herein, mobile applications that relied
`on privacy and security rarely us ed location or proximity information. See Exhibit 1, 1:26-60.
`Prior art peer-to-peer systems and methods, in which peer devices communicated directly with one
`another, were vulnerable to security breaches and fraud, making t h e m i n a d e q u a t e f o r u s e i n
`commerce or for providing user privacy. See id., 2:37-45. There was a need for improved security
`and for fraud resistance. See id. The Proctors recognized the need for a trusted third party server
`to help facilitate these kinds of electronic transactions. See id. , 1:67-2:10. The Proctors also
`understood that a trusted third party server could be used in conjunction with wireless devices with
`both a short-range and long-range communication channel in an innovative manner. An example
`of this innovation is taught by the embodiment of Figure 2 that is identical in each of the patents-
`in-suit.
`18. The embodiment of Figure 2 teaches a Central Server (100) in combination with a
`first wireless device (202) that is connected to a cellular network (101), and also a second wireless
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-7-
`device (204) that does not have a cellular connection that tran smits its identifying information
`using a short range wireless link (203). Exhibit 1, 7:20-29. In the annotated version of Figure 2
`reproduced below the first wireless device is shown in orange (labelled “Long-range & Short-
`range (1st) device”). The second wireless device is shown in blue (labelled “Short-range (2 nd)
`device”):
`
`Exhibit 1, Figure 2 (annotated).
`19. The patents explain that, for th is embodiment, the second devic e (204, in blue) is
`deployed in a museum at a particular exhibit. The first device (202, in orange) belongs to a
`museum patron. The second device (204) will simply broadcast an identifier via the short range
`wireless connection (e.g., Bluetooth). Id., 7:30-33. The first wireless device (202, in orange) will
`pass that identifier to the central server (100). Id., 7:37-38. The central server is aware of the
`association of the second wireless device (204) with a particular museum (and a particular exhibit
`w i t h i n t h e m u s e u m ) . A l s o , t h e c e n t r a l s e r v e r i s a w a r e t h a t t h e patron (with device 202) is in
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-8-
`proximity to the particular exhibit in which the second device (204) is installed, because the
`patron’s device (202) received a short-range signal from the second device (204). The patron’s
`device need not identify itself to the first device (204) or an y other device in the museum. The
`central server passes information that is relevant to the museu m exhibit to the patron’s device
`(204). Id., 7:37-41.
`20. The inventions that are embodied in the claims of the patents-in-suit, including the
`claims referenced herein, are a technical improvement over conventional peer-to-peer systems and
`methods in that the inventions offered enhanced security, priva cy, and fraud resistance. For
`example, through the innovative use of a server in combination with wireless devices, a device’s
`identifier could be periodically changed. See Exhibit 1, 4:22-30, 7:9-15. Only the server need be
`aware of the pattern of changing identifiers, because the server may decode the identifier upon
`request.
`21. Common prior art systems and methods were unable to accommodate a changing
`identifier. For prior-art peer-to-peer systems such as Bluetooth and WiFi, changing the transmitted
`identifier (such as the MAC address of a device) would prevent subsequent communications from
`being received and interpreted properly. Id., 7:15-19. Therefore, common prior-art systems were
`vulnerable to spoofing and fraud, as a device’s identifier could be easily copied and misused.
`22. Another disadvantage of conventio nal prior art peer-to-peer met hods was the
`difficulty of enforcing policies for the delivery of locally-st ored content without the potential for
`fraud such as spoofing (copying) of identifiers between peers. Id., 2:37-43. For example, a policy
`might include a rule to verify the identity and presence of a party before providing access to content
`(such as a picture of the user). Exhibit 1, 4:32-35. Another example of a policy is a rule requiring
`confirmation that a device (or a ssociated user) is on a field l ist or belongs to a specific group or
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-9-
`organization. Id., 4:40-41. As another example, a policy may apply past feedbac k ratings for a
`particular user and provide information only if the user has past positive feedback. Id., 4:41-48.
`23. It was difficult to enforce policies in prior art peer-to-peer systems because, for
`those systems, a device must e xchange information directly with another device in an attempt to
`itself verify the identity of the second device. By the time a device determines whether information
`should be shared with the second device, information such as th e device’s (trackable) identifier
`has already been shared.
`24. The inventions that are embodied in the claims of the patents-i n-suit improve
`systems and methods for exchange of information between devices . The inventions do this by
`using an unconventional combinati on of a server with wireless d evices and several different
`communication channels to enable enforcement of disclosure poli cies. The disclosure policies
`allow better control of exchange of information between two ent ities. By enabling the use of
`policies for security verification between entities, the premature revelation of private information
`can be avoided. Exhibit 1, 3:15-21, 4:12-40. For example, the verification required for applying
`a policy can be performed in accordance with the inventions in an anonymous way. Id., 4:36-41.
`25. By using a central server to “broker” communications in combina tion with the
`innovative use of short and long-range communication channels in an unconventional manner, the
`inventions reduce complexity and resource consumption of system s and methods for exchanging
`information between wireless devices. See U.S. Provision Patent Application No. 61/095,001 (a
`true and correct copy of which is attached here as Exhibit 10) at 6 (to avoid ambiguity, Proxicom
`uses the original page numbering that appears at the bottom-mid dle of the provisional
`applications). The server may verify the identity of a wireless device based on its identifier, instead
`of requiring a consumer device to attempt such verification itself.
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-10-
`26. The claimed inventions reduced the amount of computational resources needed as
`compared to a peer-to-peer approach, as explained in Application No. 61/095,001:
`[U]tilizing a peer to peer based network, supporting an application such
`as social networking, the information flow between the devices running
`the applications are carried over the peer to peer network itse lf. This
`approach creates complexity in a handset, and unnecessary addit ional
`resources are utilized. Further, in most cases, it reduces or e liminates
`the dependency on a central server to "broker" the transaction, reducing
`the ability to manage security and information disclosure. The
`complexity also is increased because one of the main devices ta rgeted
`by the present invention is the phone. In the case of performin g peer to
`peer networking using Bluetooth in a phone significant resource s
`including memory and applicatio n software processing would be
`required to support full IP protocol networking over such a connection.
`The support for IP based networking already is included for WWA N
`connections and as a result, communication between one device t o
`another using the WWAN is curre ntly supported in many devices w ith
`no modification. The use of simple detection of one or more identifiers
`requires significantly less resources in a phone than performing a
`complete peer to peer IP based network with dynamic configurati on of
`nodes being added and dropped continuously.
`Exhibit 10 at 6-7 of 19 (emphasis added) (original page numbering); see also U.S. Provision Patent
`Application No. 61/095,359 (a true and correct copy of which is attached here as Exhibit 11 at 8
`of 28 (original page numbering).
`27. The Proctors’ inventions, embodied by the claims of the patents -in-suit, including
`those claims listed herein, thereby improve the methods or syst ems for exchange of information
`between wireless devices. For example, the claims of the paten ts-in-suit, including the claims
`listed herein, implement a server / first device / second device combination in a manner that allows
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-11-
`a mobile device to advantageously receive information associated with a “broadcast only” device,
`which costs less. See id. at 7 of 19 (original page numbering).
`28. The inventions that are embodied by the claims of the patents-in-suit, including the
`claims referenced herein, are also a technical improvement to systems and methods that determine
`a device’s location or proximity in that the inventions enable the systems and methods to work
`reliably indoors by using proximity to determine a device location rather than relying on weak or
`unreliable GPS signals. Exhibit 10 at 6 (original page numberi ng). This represents a major
`technological improvement over the conventional prior art approach because numerous applicable
`environments that are important for commerce are largely indoors. See id.
`29. One problem with prior art GPS-based systems was inadequate sig nal strength in
`many indoor environments. See Exhibit 1 at 2:37-43. GPS will often not operate indoors, where
`the GPS signal is weak. Exhibit 11 at 7, 12 (original page num ber). GPS signals may also be
`unreliable, particularly in large cities with numerous tall buildings.
`30. The Proctors’ inventions are also an improvement over conventional prior art peer-
`to-peer methods in that, through the innovative manner in which a server is combined with wireless
`devices and the use of short-range and wide-range transmissions, the entities associated with each
`wireless device (such as a user associated with one device, and a business like a retailer that is
`associated with the second device ) can continue to communicate with each other even when the
`wireless devices are no longer in proximity to each other. See Exhibit 1 at 2:35-37. Conventional
`peer-to-peer approaches commonl y required two devices to remain in proximity in order to
`continue to communicate effectively.
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-12-
`THE PATENTS IN SUIT
`31. The patents-in-suit each claim priority through two provisional applications,
`Application No. 61/095,001 ( Exhibit 10), which was filed September 8, 2008, and Application
`No. 61/095,359 (Exhibit 11), which was filed September 9, 2008.
`32. Proxicom is the assignee and owner of all rights to enforce U.S . Patent
`No. 8,090,359 (“’359 Patent”), entitled “Exchanging Identifiers Between Wireless
`Communication to Determine Furthe r Information to Be Exchanged or Further Services to Be
`Provided,” and has full rights to sue and recover damages from all past, present and future
`infringements of the ’359 Patent. The ’359 Patent was duly and legally issued by the United States
`Patent and Trademark Office on January 3, 2012. The inventors of the ’359 Patent are James
`Arthur Proctor, Jr. of Indialantic, Florida and James Arthur Proctor, III of Indialantic, Florida. A
`true and correct copy of the ’359 Patent is attached as Exhibit 1.
`33. The ’359 Patent relates to tech niques for facilitating the exch ange of information
`and transactions between two entities that are associated with two wireless devices, when the two
`devices are in close proximity to each other. Conventional pri or art peer-to-peer methods for
`exchanging information between wireless devices required the de vices to reveal personal
`information, such as a static identifier, so that other peer devices could identify a particular user’s
`wireless device. See Exhibit 1, 4:12-30. Conventional prior art peer-to-peer systems also required
`complex equipment and processes in order for each peer device to determine and track the identity
`of other peer devices over time. Id., 6:54-63.
`34. The inventions taught and claime d in the ’359 Patent solved the se problems in an
`unconventional way that improves the functioning and performanc e of systems and methods of
`exchanging information between wireless devices.
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-13-
`35. For example, the method of claim 1 of the ’359 Patent recites a central server that
`receives a second device identifie r from a first wireless devic e. The second device provides its
`identifier to the first wireless device using short range wireless communication. The central server
`uses the second device identifier “to determine one or more of an identity or related information
`concerning an entity or object located in proximity to the second device.” Exhibit 1, 23:46-49.
`36. By employing a trusted server, a user’s device need not broadcast an identifier that
`can be readily tracked. As a result, users have greater control over their information and may “opt
`out” of location (or proximity) tracking. A wireless device may transmit an anonymous identifier,
`and other wireless devices may authenticate the first wireless device’s identifier via the trusted
`server, without revealing the identity of the first wireless device.
`37. Because the anonymous ident ifier is received via short range wireless signal, the
`trusted server also knows that the second wireless device is in proximity to the first wireless device,
`and the server can use this knowledge as part of the authentication process.
`38. In conventional prior art peer-to-peer systems, devices could not communicate with
`each other by using anonymous identifiers. That technical limit ation put users’ privacy at risk.
`Exhibit 1, 7:9-19.
`39. The system and methods described in the ʼ359 Patent also beneficially enables the
`use of simpler, lower-cost wireless devices that consume less power. This is made possible by the
`inclusion of the trusted server, which handles authentication in the context of the claimed wireless
`devices that communicate via short and long-range signals in accordance with the inventions. For
`example, a method that permits the use of low-cost beacons is a major technological advantage in
`an indoor application such as a retailer, as the entire indoor space can be “blanketed” in low-cost,
`low-power beacons to provide near-total indoor coverage.
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-14-
`40. Further, by using the concept of proximity, the inventions do n ot require GPS
`signals (which can be unreliable indoors) to identify relevant location information. Instead, the
`inventions employ a device that transmits a short-range signal. Only devices in proximity to each
`other will detect the same short -range signal. That proximity information is reported to a server
`via a long-range signal. Therefore, systems and methods that e mploy the claimed inventions can
`detect and report the location of a user’s device reliably indo ors if the location of devices
`broadcasting short-range signals is known.
`41. Also, unlike conventional peer-to- peer systems, the wireless de vices recited by
`claim 1 need not authenticate each other, because the central server performs that function, which
`improves the security and fraud resistance of the method over r outine and conventional prior art
`peer-to-peer methods.
`42. Claim 1 further recites that, “subsequent to the step of the ce ntral server receiving
`the second device identifier information from the first wireless device,” the central server then
`takes “further action to deliver information or a service to th e first wireless device based at least
`in part upon (a) the second devi ce identifier” and “(i) feedback ratings relevant to an entity
`associated with either the first wireless device or the second device identifier information; (ii)
`information representing a reward for an entity associated with the first device's participation in a
`loyalty program; or (iii) a current step in a multiple step pro cess for an ongoing electronic
`commerce transaction.” Id., 23:56-63
`43. Through the innovative use of a tru sted server that not only can determine
`information related to a device, but also is aware of what that devices is in proximity to, the method
`of claim 1 encompasses providing relevant information to a user , such as relevant feedback
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-15-
`ratings—for example, the server can provide feedback ratings for nearby goods and services that
`the server has access to that are relevant to a particular user.
`44. Prior to 2008, it was not routine in the prior art to use proxi mity or location
`information to facilitate electronic transactions. The innovative and unconventional combination
`o f a t r u s t e d t h i r d p a r t y s e r v e r with wireless devices, together with the use of proximity with
`anonymous (or private) identifier s, improves security and fraud resistance and also provides a
`method that works indoors (e.g., in a museum, airport or retail environment).
`45. The unconventional combination of steps recited by claim 1 of t he ’359 Patent
`improves the functioning and performance of systems and methods of exchanging information
`between wireless devices.
`46. As another non-limiting example, claim 48 of the ʼ359 Patent further improves the
`method of claim 1 in an unconventional manner. Claim 48 requir es “the further action taken by
`the central server comprises: notifying the first wireless devi ce of the presence of an entity or
`object associated with or in proximity to the second device.” Prior to 2008, use of proximity was
`unconventional; prior art systems commonly used GPS. Use of pr oximity in the claimed manner
`is a technical improvement over prior-art GPS-based systems for at least two reasons: (i) a
`proximity-system is more reliabl e in indoor environments; and ( ii) a proximity-based system
`allows the second wireless device to be moved (or for an array of wireless devices that includes
`the second wireless device, to be reconfigured) to reflect changes in the location of relevant objects
`(for example, retail goods or departments). Using proximity rather than absolute location enables
`such applications because there i s n o r e q u i r e m e n t f o r t h e w i r e less devices to know the actual
`location of a user’s mobile devi ce, or the actual location of a transmitting beacon device—only
`proximity, determined from short-range signals, need be known.
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-16-
`47. Another non-limiting example is described in claim 52 of the ʼ3 59 Patent, which
`requires that the second wireless device is a broadcast only de vice. This further improves the
`method of claim 1 in an unconventional manner. Because the ser ver handles authentication, the
`second wireless device may be a simple, low-cost broadcast-only device. The ability to use low-
`cost devices is a technical advance over prior art systems and methods (e.g., peer-to-peer systems)
`that enables a business to cost-effectively deploy the technology in a way that reliably covers the
`entire square footage of an indoor space. For example, less co mplex wireless devices such as
`beacons can be deployed that are also less costly.
`48. As another non-limiting example, claim 55 of the ʼ359 Patent further improves the
`method of claim 1 in an unconventional manner. Claim 55 requires that “the further action [of the
`central server] is based at least in part upon both (a) the sec ond device identifier and (b) the an
`identifier associated with the first wireless device or an identifier associated with a user of the first
`wireless device.” The method of claim 55 is a technical improvement over prior-art GPS or peer-
`to-peer systems because, through the innovative combination of wireless devices and server(s) in
`conjunction with the use of short and long-range signals, the information delivered to a user of the
`first wireless device may be customized to that user, and relat e to products in proximity to that
`user. Such customization is not possible indoors with conventi onal GPS based systems, or in
`conventional peer-to-peer based s ystems in which no intermediar y server is used in the claimed
`innovative manner.
`49. Proxicom is the assignee and owner of all rights to enforce U.S . Patent
`No. 8,116,749 (“’749 Patent”), entitled “Protocol for Anonymous Wireless Communication,” and
`has full rights to sue and recover damages from all past, prese nt and future infringements of the
`’749 Patent. The ’749 Patent wa s duly and legally issued by th e United States Patent and
`SCT Exhibit 2022
`IPR2025-01183
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-17-
`Trademark Office on February 14, 2012. The inventors of the ’7 49 Patent are James Arthur
`Proctor, Jr. of Indialantic, Florida and James Arthur Proctor, III of Indialantic, Florida.
`50. A true and correct copy of the ’749 Patent is attached as Exhibit 2.
`51. The ’749 Patent is a sibling of the ’359 Patent. The ’749 Pate nt also relates to
`techniques for facilitating the exchange of information and transactions between two entities that
`are associated with two wireless devices, when the two devices are in close proximity to each
`other. The ’749 Patent focuses on embodiments that improve sec urity and fraud resistance over
`prior art methods. As mentioned above, conventional prior art peer-to-peer methods for
`exchanging information between w ireless devices required the devices to reveal personal
`information, such as a static identifier, so that other peer devices could identify a particular user’s
`wireless device. See Exhibit 2 at 4:13-27.
`52. The inventions claimed in the ’749 Patent solved this problem in an unconventional
`way that improves the functioning and performance of systems by using modified device
`identification information to improve device security. By employing the claimed unconventional
`combination of a server in combination with wireless devices us ing short-range and long-range
`signals in the claimed manner, a device may anonymously transmit an identifier and even change
`that identifier over time, relyi ng on th