Evicam International, Inc v. Enforcement Video, LLC

Evicam International, Inc v. Enforcement Video, LLC, No. 16-105 (E.D. Tex. Jun. 5, 2017) 


  • 6,211,907 | Entitled “Secure, vehicle mounted, surveillance system”
  • 6,950,013 | Entitled “Incident recording secure database”


Denial of Defendant’s 12(b)(6) motion

Abstract Idea:


Something More:



  • System for gathering, analyzing and storing information for the purpose of motor vehicle theft and vandalism investigations (‘907 patent).
  • System and method for permanently and securely storing incident information, relating to a vehicle, from remote download to create a secure non-tamperable, permanent database of criminal activity and/or accident evidence for evidentiary purposes (‘013 patent).


The Court described the claims of both asserted patents as broadly encompassing the abstract idea of collecting, organizing, and controlling access to vehicle incident information. “The ’907 Patent discloses an on-board secure vehicle mounted surveillance system that includes: (1) cameras for monitoring the interior and the exterior of the vehicle; (2) a coded access recording device for storing video and other data; and (3) a means for downloading video and data. And the ’013 Patent discloses a tamper-proof data repository for retaining information from an on-board, vehicle surveillance system. Information is obtained from the on-board system using a transfer device.”

Although the claims were directed to an abstract idea, the claims added the inventive concept of a secure mounted surveillance system that is inventive over known techniques in the prior art. For instance, the ‘907 patent claims a camera mounted externally in conjunction with another mounted internally. This solved the “issue of not knowing what was happening inside the vehicle during an incident.” The ‘013 patent adds download triggers with an access code, which causes the system to download its secure data to a transfer device, which helps protect incident information by safeguarding it and allowing access by an authorized person. For these reasons, the patents are not subject matter ineligible.