United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

MOBILE ACUITY LTD., Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

BLIPPAR LTD., BLIPPAR AR LTD., BLIPPAR GROUP LTD., BLIPBUILDER LTD., BLIPPAR USA LLC, Defendants-Appellees

07446749 LTD., FKA BLIPPAR.COM LTD, BLIPPAR LLC, Defendants ______________________

2022-2216 ______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in No. 2:21-cv-06926-GW-PD, Judge George H. Wu. ______________________

Decided: August 6, 2024 ______________________

GUY RUTTENBERG, Ruttenberg IP Law, PC, Los Ange- les, CA, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by BRUCE DONOVAN KUYPER.

MARTIN BADER, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton Case: 22-2216 Document: 55 Page: 2 Filed: 08/06/2024

2 MOBILE ACUITY LTD. v. BLIPPAR LTD.

LLP, San Diego, CA, argued for defendants-appellees. Also represented by PAUL W. GARRITY, New York, NY. ______________________

Before LOURIE, BRYSON, and STARK, Circuit Judges. STARK, Circuit Judge. Mobile Acuity Ltd. (“Mobile Acuity”) appeals from a judgment entered by the United States District Court for the Central District of California (“Central District”) dis- missing its patent infringement action for failure to state a claim on the basis that the asserted patents claim ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. We affirm. I Mobile Acuity owns U.S. Patent Nos. 10,445,618 (“’618 patent”) and 10,776,658 (“’658 patent”) (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”). The Asserted Patents are both enti- tled “Storing Information for Access Using a Captured Im- age” and share a substantially identical specification. In general, the patents disclose methods and devices relating to “storing information so that it can be accessed using a captured image.” ’618 patent at 1:15-17. In particular, the Asserted Patents describe methods and devices that “asso- ciate[] first information and at least a first portion of a first image, and use[] a second image that includes a portion corresponding to at least the first portion of the first image to access the associated first information.” Id. Abstract. According to the Asserted Patents, in the prior art the de- sire to “attach information to locations in the real world” was “achieved by using barcodes or RFID tags attached to real world objects or by associating information with abso- lute positions in the world.” Id. at 1:21-25. The Asserted Patents purport to provide “an alterna- tive mechanism by which information can be associated with real world locations and objects,” involving an origi- nating user using “a mobile imaging device . . . to capture an image of a location,” and then “upload[ing] [the captured Case: 22-2216 Document: 55 Page: 3 Filed: 08/06/2024

MOBILE ACUITY LTD. v. BLIPPAR LTD. 3

image] . . . to the server.” Id. at 1:26-28, 4:28-29, 50-51. The originating user defines a “target region” in the image, which is “then processed at the server . . . to create a model user image key for that location.” Id. at 4:54-56. The orig- inating user also “defines digital content that is to be asso- ciated with the target region of the captured image.” Id. at 4:56-58. The same originating user or a different user “can subsequently obtain the digital content associated with a location (if any) by capturing an image of the location, us- ing their respective imaging device . . ., and by sending the image to the server.” Id. at 4:62-66. The server then cre- ates “a scene user image key for