Onscreen Dynamics Files Two Patent Infringement Suits Regarding Virtual Bezel Area

Onscreen Dynamics filed two patent infringement suits against ASUSTeK Computer and Sharp Corporation on Monday in the Northern District of California regarding its virtual bezel area on a touchscreen and related functionality. The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent No. 9,395,917 (“the ’917 patent”) and 9,645,663 (“the ’663 patent”), both entitled “Electronic Display with a Virtual Bezel.”

The ’917 patent considers “how to prevent unintended registering of touching of a touchscreen electronic display, and thereby avoid unintended actions.” For example, ASUS Computer allegedly infringed at least claims 1-3 of the ’917 patent through its accused products, including the ZenScreen MB16AMT, ASUS VivoBook Flip 14 TP401NA, and ASUS ZEN AiO 27 Z272SD. 

Claim 1 of the ’917 patent “is directed to a display screen having a virtual bezel area and an active touchscreen region, both of which display portions of content but have different modes of response to certain touch-based inputs.” ASUS’s purportedly infringing products include electronic devices with a display screen that includes: “a virtual bezel area, having a touchscreen layer with a first mode of response to a first set of touch-based inputs from a user of the display screen, the virtual bevel area functioning to display a first portion of content on the display screen”; “an active touchscreen region substantially disposed within the virtual bezel area, the active touchscreen region having a touchscreen layer with a second mode of response to the first set of touch-based inputs”; and “a gestural software application in communication with the display screen having a virtual bezel.” 

Onscreen Dynamics averred that ASUS Computer utilized this patented technology. For example, one of the accused instrumentalities has a virtual bezel area on the edges of its display screen, which allows for multiple navigation icons and buttons to be selected. ASUS Computer is accused of direct, contributory and induced infringement of the patent.

Sharp allegedly infringed at least claims 14 and 15 of the ’663 patent, which addresses similar technology to the ’917 patent. Sharp’s accused instrumentalities include the 2-1 Detachable Series, 2-in-1-Convertible Series tablets, and the Portege X30-G1332. These are handheld interactive electronic devices with a virtual bezel area that does not consist of the entire device. The devices also have a touchscreen area, allowing a user to touch an icon on the touchscreen to select it, while swiping on the icon or touchscreen will not select the item. Onscreen Dynamics averred that this constituted infringement of the ’663 patent. Sharp is accused of willfully infringing and through direct, contributory and induced infringement.

Onscreen Dynamics has sought an adjudication that the defendants infringed the patents-in-suit, an award for damages, costs and fees, and other relief. The plaintiff is represented by the Law Offices of Seth W. Wiener and Devlin Law Firm LLC.