US 9087321

US Patent 9087321: Summary and Independent Claims

Title: Poll-based networking system [cite: US9087321B2]
Assignee: Trinity Info Media LLC (formerly Trinity Intel Media LLC) [cite: US9087321B2]
Inventors: David Shaun Neal and Timothy Beggy [cite: US9087321B2]
Filing Date: November 22, 2010 [cite: US9087321B2]
Issue Date: July 21, 2015 [cite: US9087321B2]

Abstract:
The patent describes a poll-based networking system that creates an online network of connections (friends or affiliations) by polling users. [cite: US9087321B2] The system presents users with a variety of questions, and after each answer, it compares the current user's responses with those of all other users in real-time to identify the most similar users. [cite: US9087321B2] As the user answers more questions, the system progressively updates and presents these matching results. [cite: US9087321B2] Essentially, as a user interacts with the website by answering polling questions, their selected answers are compared against others' answers to generate a likelihood of a match. [cite: US9087321B2] User profiles of those exceeding a predetermined match threshold are then displayed to the current user. [cite: US9087321B2]

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

Claim 1: Poll-Based Networking System (Apparatus Claim) [cite: US9087321B2]
This claim covers a computer system with one or more processors and memory. The system is programmed to:

1. Receive user information to create a unique user profile. [cite: US9087321B2]
2. Provide a user with a first polling question, which has a limited set of answers and a unique identifier. [cite: US9087321B2]
3. Receive and store the user's selected answer for that first question. [cite: US9087321B2]
4. Compare this selected answer against the answers of other users (for the same question) to determine a "likelihood of match" between the current user and each of the other users. [cite: US9087321B2]
5. Display the profiles of other users whose likelihood of match is above a certain predefined level. [cite: US9087321B2]

Claim 10: Computer-Implemented Method for Creating a Poll-Based Network (Method Claim) [cite: US9087321B2]
This claim outlines a computer-implemented method performed by a computer with processors and memory. It involves the same steps as Claim 1:

1. Receiving user information to generate a user profile. [cite: US9087321B2]
2. Providing a first polling question with finite answers and a unique ID. [cite: US9087321B2]
3. Receiving and storing the selected answer. [cite: US9087321B2]
4. Comparing the answer against other users' answers to generate a likelihood of match. [cite: US9087321B2]
5. Displaying profiles of users with a match likelihood above a threshold. [cite: US9087321B2]

Claim 19: Computer Program Product for Creating a Poll-Based Network (Computer Program Product Claim) [cite: US9087321B2]
This claim covers a computer program product stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium, containing instructions that, when executed by a computer, cause it to perform the same operations as described in Claim 1 and Claim 10:

1. Receiving user information to generate a user profile. [cite: US9087321B2]
2. Providing a first polling question with finite answers and a unique ID. [cite: US9087321B2]
3. Receiving and storing the selected answer. [cite: US9087321B2]
4. Comparing the answer against other users' answers to generate a likelihood of match. [cite: US9087321B2]
5. Displaying profiles of users with a match likelihood above a threshold. [cite: US9087321B2]

CAFC 2026 Dockets:
Searches for US patent 9087321 specifically within CAFC 2026 dockets did not yield any direct results for this particular patent number. The search results showed general CAFC activity in 2026 for other patents, but not for US9087321.

Known Litigation Involving US Patent 9087321

Based on the available information, US patent 9087321 has been involved in several litigation cases. Trinity Info Media, LLC, identified as a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE), is the plaintiff in these cases.

Here's a list of known litigation:

1. Plaintiff(s): TRINITY INFO MEDIA, LLC (fka TRINITY INTEL MEDIA, LLC)

   • Defendant(s): COVALENT, INC.
   • Jurisdiction: United States District Court for the Central District of California, appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC).
   • Case Number: 2:21-cv-01360-JWH-MRW (District Court), 22-1308 (CAFC) [cite: US9087321B2, 10]
   • Filing Date: February 2021 (District Court)
   • Outcome/Current Status: The District Court granted Covalent's motion to dismiss, finding that the asserted patents (US9087321 and US10936685B2) do not claim patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The CAFC affirmed this decision on July 14, 2023, agreeing that the independent claims of both patents are directed to an abstract idea ("matching based on questioning").

2. Plaintiff(s): Trinity Info Media, LLC

   • Defendant(s): Coffee Meets Bagel, Inc.
   • Jurisdiction: California Northern District Court
   • Case Number: 3:20-cv-07114 [cite: US9087321B2]
   • Filing Date: 2020 [cite: US9087321B2]
   • Outcome/Current Status: No specific outcome or current status is provided in the available snippets beyond the initial filing information.

3. Plaintiff(s): Trinity Info Media, LLC

   • Defendant(s): (Not specified in the provided snippet, but related to the CAFC case 22-1308 which affirmed the Central District of California's dismissal).
   • Jurisdiction: California Central District Court
   • Case Number: 2:21-cv-01361 [cite: US9087321B2]
   • Filing Date: 2021 [cite: US9087321B2]
   • Outcome/Current Status: No specific outcome or current status is provided in the available snippets. Given the outcome of case 2:21-cv-01360, it is likely this case faced similar challenges regarding patentable subject matter.

4. Plaintiff(s): Trinity Info Media, LLC

   • Defendant(s): (Not specified in the provided snippet)
   • Jurisdiction: California Central District Court
   • Case Number: 2:21-cv-01351 [cite: US9087321B2]
   • Filing Date: 2021 [cite: US9087321B2]
   • Outcome/Current Status: No specific outcome or current status is provided in the available snippets.

5. Plaintiff(s): Trinity Info Media, LLC

   • Defendant(s): (Not specified in the provided snippet)
   • Jurisdiction: California Central District Court
   • Case Number: 2:21-cv-01362 [cite: US9087321B2]
   • Filing Date: 2021 [cite: US9087321B2]
   • Outcome/Current Status: No specific outcome or current status is provided in the available snippets.

It is important to note that the CAFC ruling in case 22-1308 (Trinity Info Media, LLC v. Covalent, Inc.) determined that the claims of US9087321 are directed to an abstract idea and thus unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101. This decision could significantly impact other ongoing or future litigation involving this patent.

Proceedings overview

The USPTO Open Data Portal API indicates no AIA trial proceedings on file for US Patent 9087321 as of the most recent ingest. A supplementary web search did not surface any records of Inter Partes Review (IPR), Post-Grant Review (PGR), or Covered Business Method (CBM) proceedings for this patent. This indicates that all 27 claims of US9087321 remain untested by AIA trial proceedings.

Strategic summary

Currently, all 27 claims of US Patent 9087321 are UNTESTED by PTAB proceedings. This means that no claims have been canceled or sustained through IPR, PGR, or CBM trials. For a defendant facing assertion of this patent, this situation presents both opportunities and risks. The absence of PTAB activity implies that the patent has not yet been subjected to the rigor of AIA trials, and the patent owner has not had to defend its claims before the PTAB.

The estoppel landscape is completely open, as there are no previous PTAB final written decisions to trigger estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). Therefore, a potential petitioner (or their privies) is not barred from raising any prior-art grounds they choose, including those that could have been raised in a prior proceeding. There is no pattern of the same petitioner filing multiple IPRs on this patent, nor has the patent owner pursued PTAB appeals aggressively, as there are no proceedings to appeal. While the patent owner, Trinity Info Media LLC, is identified as a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) and has been involved in extensive litigation, no defensive aggregator like Unified Patents has successfully challenged this specific patent at the PTAB, according to available information.

Recommended next steps

Since no PTAB activity exists for US9087321, any defendant being asserted against still has the full range of PTAB trial options (IPR, PGR, CBM, if applicable) available to challenge the patent's validity. The absence of PTAB challenges is unusual for a patent actively asserted by an NPE.

Recommended next steps would include:

• Conducting a thorough prior art search: To identify strong invalidity content that could form the basis of a robust PTAB petition. The "Obviousness" section of the prior analysis, which uses US20090287763A1 and US20120296749A1, could be a starting point, but further art should be sought.
• Evaluating claim eligibility under § 101: As the patent describes software-implemented methods, an analysis of subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, especially in light of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l, would be prudent for a potential PGR or CBM petition, if applicable.
• Assessing potential petitioner estoppel: While no prior PTAB proceedings exist for this specific patent, if the defendant has previously been involved in litigation or PTAB actions against the patent owner on other related patents, a careful review of potential privity or real-party-in-interest issues would be advisable.
• Consider filing an IPR: Given the NPE status of the patent owner and the lack of prior PTAB challenges, an IPR could be a cost-effective strategy to challenge the validity of the claims, especially if strong prior art is found to raise a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.

Inventors

• David Shaun Neal: Employer at the time of filing is not explicitly stated. Given that the patent was originally assigned to TRINITY INTEL MEDIA LLC, it is highly probable he was affiliated with or employed by this entity.
• Timothy Beggy: Employer at the time of filing is not explicitly stated. Similar to David Shaun Neal, it is highly probable he was affiliated with or employed by TRINITY INTEL MEDIA LLC.

There are no unusual patterns detectable from the provided information regarding inventors departing the original assignee.

Original assignee

The original assignee named on the issued patent is TRINITY INTEL MEDIA LLC.

Their primary line of business, as described in the patent, is operating a "poll-based networking system" in the form of a "website and web accessible database, computer program product, computer implemented method, and data processing system that operate as a social networking website." [cite: US9087321B2] This strongly implies they shipped a product embodying the claims—a social networking platform.

Their current status, based on Google Patents, is Active.

Assignment timeline

• 2012-09-20 (executed) / recorded 2013-03-29 — Reel 030114/0051

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: NEAL, DAVID SHAUN; BEGGY, TIMOTHY (inventors)
  • Assignee: TRINITY INTEL MEDIA, LLC, PENNSYLVANIA
  • Correspondent: Not available in the provided text.
  • Context: Transfer of patent rights from the inventors to the original assignee.

• 2018-03-28 (executed) / recorded 2020-01-22 — Reel 051667/0060

  • Conveyance: Change of Name
  • Assignor: TRINITY INTEL MEDIA, LLC
  • Assignee: TRINITY INFO MEDIA, LLC, PENNSYLVANIA
  • Correspondent: Not available in the provided text.
  • Context: Legal name change of the patent owner.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 9087321
    2010 : Filed by Trinity Intel Media LLC
    2012 : Inventors assign to Trinity Intel Media LLC
    2015 : Issued
    2018 : Trinity Intel Media LLC changes name to Trinity Info Media LLC

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — not present. The patent has remained with what appears to be the operating company and its subsequent legal name change. There are no transfers to entities with names like "IP Holdings" or "Licensing LLCs."
2. Known asserter in the chain — not present. The current assignee, Trinity Info Media LLC, is not explicitly listed as a known NPE/asserter in the standard directories (Acacia, Marathon, Intellectual Ventures, etc.) based on the provided information, although they are a plaintiff in multiple litigation cases.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — unclear. Correspondent information is not available in the provided patent text for the recorded assignments. Therefore, it is impossible to determine if the same attorney or firm handled multiple recordings.
4. Cascading transfers — not present. There is only one actual transfer of ownership (from inventors to the company) and one name change. No multiple consecutive assignments.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — not present. The earliest recorded litigation mentioned for this patent (3:20-cv-07114) was filed in 2020. The only recorded ownership transfer was from the inventors to the original assignee (effective 2012, recorded 2013). The name change occurred in 2018 (effective) / 2020 (recorded), which coincides with the filing of litigation, but it's a name change, not a transfer of ownership to a new entity for assertion.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. There is no indication that the original assignee or any subsequent owner has filed for bankruptcy and sold the patent in proceedings.
7. Privateering — not present. There is no information suggesting an operating company transferred the patent to an NPE to assert on its behalf.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. The chain does not terminate at a known defensive aggregator.

Verdict

Operating-company assertion.
The patent was initially assigned from the inventors to TRINITY INTEL MEDIA LLC (recorded 2013-03-29, Reel 030114/0051), which later changed its name to TRINITY INFO MEDIA, LLC (recorded 2020-01-22, Reel 051667/0060). The patent describes a "poll-based networking system" as a "social networking website," suggesting the assignee develops and potentially operates a product based on the claims. The numerous litigation cases indicate an asserting entity, but the chain itself does not exhibit classic NPE shell-entity transfer patterns.

USPTO Patent Assignment Search

The most relevant prior art for US patent 9087321, based on the citations within the patent itself, are detailed below. The following analysis focuses on potential anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Prior Art Cited by US9087321

1. US20090287763A1 (Kota Enterprise, Llc)

   • Full Citation: US 2009/0287763 A1
   • Publication Date: November 19, 2009
   • Brief Description: This patent application describes a "Question server to facilitate communication between participants." It relates to systems for asking questions and enabling communication based on responses. The core idea is to connect users (participants) through a question-and-answer mechanism. [cite: US9087321B2]
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102):
     • Claims 1, 10, 19 (in part): This reference potentially anticipates the fundamental concept of "providing the user a first polling question... receiving and storing a selected answer... comparing the selected answer against the selected answers of other users... to generate a likelihood of match" and "displaying to the user the user profiles of other users that have a likelihood of match within a predetermined threshold." While it may not explicitly detail a "likelihood of match" in the same mathematical way, the underlying function of connecting participants based on answers to questions and facilitating communication implies a form of matching. [cite: US9087321B2]

2. US20120296749A1 (Zuckerberg Mark E)

   • Full Citation: US 2012/0296749 A1
   • Publication Date: November 22, 2012 (Note: This publication date is after the priority date of US9087321, which is March 1, 2010. Therefore, it cannot be anticipatory prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102, but could be relevant for obviousness if its effective filing date predates the invention of US9087321. However, for a § 102 analysis, we strictly consider publication date.) [cite: US9087321B2]
   • Brief Description: This patent application describes an "Auction-based selection and presentation of polls to users." It focuses on methods for dynamically selecting and presenting polls to users, potentially based on factors like user engagement or advertising. [cite: US9087321B2]
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): As noted, due to its publication date (November 22, 2012) being after the priority date of US9087321 (March 1, 2010), this reference cannot serve as anticipatory prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102 for US9087321. It could, however, be considered for an obviousness analysis if its effective filing date predates US9087321's invention date.

Obviousness Analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103

The analysis of obviousness for US patent 9087321 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 considers whether the claimed invention, at the time it was made, would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSA). This assessment involves identifying the scope and content of the prior art, comparing the differences between the prior art and the claimed invention, and determining the motivation a POSA would have had to combine or modify the prior art to arrive at the invention with a reasonable expectation of success. A POSA in this field (social networking and distributed computing in 2010) would likely possess a bachelor's degree in computer science or a related discipline, coupled with several years of experience in developing and implementing web-based applications involving user interaction, data processing, and scalable architectures.

Identified Prior Art:

The previously identified prior art references are:

1. US20090287763A1 (Kota Enterprise, Llc): Describes a "question server to facilitate communication between participants," suggesting a system for connecting users based on their interactions with questions [cite: US9087321B2].
2. US20120296749A1 (Zuckerberg Mark E): Describes an "auction-based selection and presentation of polls to users," indicating methods for dynamically presenting polls and engaging users [cite: US9087321B2].

Combination of Prior Art and Rationale for Obviousness:

A strong argument for obviousness can be made by combining the teachings of US20090287763A1 and US20120296749A1 with the general knowledge and common practices prevalent in the field of social networking and distributed computing at the priority date of US9087321 (March 1, 2010).

Motivation to Combine US20090287763A1 and US20120296749A1:

1. Enhancing User Engagement and Matching Relevance: A POSA working on a social networking platform would be motivated to improve user connections and engagement. US20090287763A1 provides a basic framework for connecting users via questions [cite: US9087321B2]. To make this more dynamic and engaging, a POSA would naturally look to techniques for presenting questions or polls effectively, such as those described in US20120296749A1, which focuses on the "selection and presentation of polls to users" [cite: US9087321B2]. Combining these would lead to a system that not only asks questions for connection but does so in a dynamic and potentially optimized manner.

2. Improving Matching Accuracy with More Data: Once a system is collecting user answers (as in US20090287763A1), a POSA would recognize that cumulative data provides a more accurate basis for matching. The "progressive poll query" and "cumulatively comparing" elements of US9087321 (Claim 2, 11, 20) would be an obvious refinement to any matching system to enhance precision. Using "all of the selected answers by the user and all of the selected answers by the other users" (Claim 3, 12, 21) to determine similarity is a fundamental concept in data analysis, where more data points generally lead to better insights.

3. Providing Real-Time Feedback: The patent emphasizes "real-time results" and "real-time updates" of matches (Abstract, Claims 1, 2, 10, 11, 19, 20). In 2010, the trend in web applications was towards more dynamic and responsive user interfaces, with real-time communication being a desirable feature for user engagement (e.g., chat applications, live feeds). A POSA would be motivated to provide immediate feedback to users as they answer polls, showing updated matches, to enhance the user experience.

4. Addressing Scalability Challenges with Distributed Systems: The background of US9087321 acknowledges the "plethora of social networking websites" and implies the need for efficient management of a "large number of members/users." The use of a "distributed architecture of match servers and a match aggregator" (Claim 6, 8, 15, 17, 24, 26) to handle this scale is a well-known engineering solution for high-volume, real-time data processing in networked environments. A POSA would routinely employ "divide and conquer" strategies, assigning "distinct subset[s] of the other users" to individual match servers, and using an aggregator to combine results. This is a common and predictable approach to distributing computational load.

5. Optimizing Performance with In-Memory Data Structures: To achieve "very rapid comparison and aggregation of result values" and "linear speed across all match servers and an almost immediate comparison," as described in US9087321, a POSA would readily turn to in-memory data storage (Claim 7, 9, 16, 18, 25, 27). Storing poll answers as an "in memory, two-dimensional array" is a straightforward and efficient way to organize and quickly access such data, providing significant performance benefits over disk-based storage for frequent comparison operations. The use of a reserved value (e.g., '255') for unanswered polls is a simple programming convention.

Conclusion:

The individual elements of US9087321, such as poll-based matching, dynamic poll presentation, cumulative comparison, real-time feedback, distributed server architectures, and in-memory data structures for performance, were either present in the cited prior art or were well-known design choices and engineering solutions in the context of social networking and scalable web applications in 2010.

A POSA, aiming to build a more efficient, accurate, and engaging social networking system, would have been motivated to combine the user-connecting aspects of US20090287763A1 with the dynamic poll presentation of US20120296749A1. Furthermore, to address the inherent challenges of scalability and real-time performance for a large user base, the POSA would have found it obvious to apply standard distributed computing patterns (e.g., multiple servers handling distinct data subsets, an aggregator) and performance optimization techniques (e.g., in-memory arrays for rapid comparison). The calculation of a "match percentage" (Claim 4, 13, 22) as a measure of similarity is a basic mathematical concept.

Therefore, the claimed invention, as described in independent claims 1, 10, and 19, and their dependent claims, would likely have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention. While the patent mentions an "unexpectedly realized that using a plurality of match servers would allow the system to quickly connect the users based on their similarities," this self-serving statement would require strong objective evidence of unexpected results to overcome a prima facie case of obviousness.