Bumble Trading v. Match - Removal of State Court Case

Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1 Filed 09/26/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
BUMBLE TRADING, INC. and BUMBLE §

HOLDING, LTD., §
§
Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants, §
§ C.A. No. 3:18-cv-2578
VS. §
§
MATCH GROUP, LLC, §
§
Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff. §
§
NOTICE OF REMOVAL
Defendant Match Group, LLC (“Match”) hereby removes the above-captioned action, from
the 160th Judicial District of the District Court of Dallas County, Texas, to the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, pursuant to (1) 28 U.S.C. § 1454
on the ground that the claims and counterclaims arise under federal patent law, and (2) 28 U.S.C.
§ 1441 on the ground that the federal district court has original jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1331 and 1338 because plaintiffs’ suit arises under federal patent and trademark law.
INTRODUCTION
1. Match is a worldwide leader in online dating, with multiple popular brands of
matchmaking services, including “Tinder,” a mobile dating app famously characterized by a stack
of swipeable cards containing photographs of potential matches. If a user is interested in the person
shown, the user swipes right. If not, the user swipes left. If two users swipe right on each other,
a match has been made, and the users can communicate with one another through the app. Match
has been awarded two utility patents and numerous design patents by the United States Patent and
Trademark Office protecting the fundamental features of Tinder. Match has also been awarded a
federally registered trademark for “swipe” in connection with mobile dating apps.
2. “Bumble” is a mobile dating app owned by plaintiffs Bumble Trading, Inc.
(“Bumble Trading”) and Bumble Holding, Ltd. (collectively, “plaintiffs” or “Bumble”). Bumble
was founded by three former Tinder executives. The Bumble app is virtually identical to Tinder
and incorporates the patented and trademarked features owned by Match that have made Tinder
the most widely downloaded dating app in America.
3. To protect its extraordinarily valuable intellectual property rights, on March 16,
2018, Match filed a civil action against Bumble Trading in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Texas. Exhibit 1. Match subsequently filed an amended complaint on April
30, 3018. Exhibit 2.
4. Plaintiffs responded by filing claims against Match alleging that Match tortiously
interfered in plaintiffs’ effort to sell Bumble. But the “tort” that Match is alleged to have engaged
in is the filing of its federal suit enforcing its patent and trademark rights — a suit that plaintiffs
label as “frivolous,” “meritless,” and “bogus.” Exhibit 6 (Petition) ¶¶ 3-4, 39-45. Plaintiffs further
allege that Match’s patents are “invalid.” Id. ¶¶ 41-44. Rather than filing these claims in federal
court as compulsory counterclaims, Bumble instead sued Match in Texas state court, even though
federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over patent disputes. See 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a) (“No State
court shall have jurisdiction over any claim for relief arising under any Act of Congress relating
to patents, plant variety protection, or copyrights.”); Tank Insulation Int’l, Inc. v. Insultherm, Inc.,
104 F.3d 83, 86 (5th Cir. 1997) (claim alleging wrongful use of infringement lawsuit is a
compulsory counterclaim absent some applicable exception); Eon Labs., Inc. v. Smithkline
Beecham Corp., 298 F. Supp. 2d 175, 183 (D. Mass. 2003) (state-law tortious interference claim
based on patent litigation is a compulsory counterclaim).
2
5. Since March, Bumble has filed a series of motions to extend its time to answer the
federal lawsuit. Exhibit 3 (federal court docket). During that time, Bumble’s state court action sat
idle and unserved. With Bumble’s answer now due on September 30, however, Bumble will have
to respond to Match’s federal lawsuit. With that deadline looming in less than one week, Bumble
finally effected service in its state court action on September 24, 2018.
6. This dispute — which is centered on the validity of Match’s intellectual property
rights — should be heard in a single, federal forum with the power to adjudicate the validity of
Match’s patents and trademarks. Match therefore seeks removal of Bumble’s state court action,
including the patent counterclaims Match has filed in that action, so that all of the issues raised by
the parties can be resolved in a single forum. To that end, Match also has simultaneously filed a
Motion to Transfer the case from this Court to the Western District of Texas, where Match’s patent
and trademark suit against Bumble Trading is currently pending.
7. As discussed in further detail below, this action is removable on two grounds. First,
28 U.S.C. § 1454 allows removal whenever “any party asserts a claim for relief arising under any
Act of Congress relating to patents.” 28 U.S.C. § 1454 (emphasis added). That statute was passed
in 2011, as part of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, which was “intended to provide federal
courts . . . with a broader range of jurisdiction” over patent matters. Vermont v. MPHJ Tech.
Invests., LLC, 803 F.3d 635, 644 (Fed. Cir. 2015). As numerous courts have recognized, Congress,
through § 1454, legislated an exception to the “well-pleaded complaint rule.” See, e.g., Team
Express Distrib. LLC v. Junction Sols., Inc., 2016 WL 3081020, at *2 (W.D. Tex. May 31, 2016)
(“Under § 1454, a defendant with a patent or copyright counterclaim is no longer bound by a
plaintiff’s well-pleaded state law complaint to litigate in state court.”).
3
8. Section 1454 thus allows removal by a defendant based on claims arising under the
patent laws, “even when asserted in counterclaims, rather than in an original complaint.” MPHJ
Tech. Invests., 803 F.3d at 644 (emphasis added). Because Match has filed patent counterclaims
against Bumble in the state court action, this action is removable so that Match’s federally-
protected intellectual property rights can be heard by a court with the power to adjudicate the
entirety of the dispute between the parties. See, e.g., Apollo Enter. Sols., Inc. v. Lantern Credit,
LLC, 2018 WL 437472, at *5-6 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 16, 2018) (allowing removal pursuant to § 1454
based on patent declaratory judgment counterclaim).
9. Second, plaintiffs’ claims are removable under 28 U.S.C. § 1441 and the well-
pleaded complaint rule. As pleaded, plaintiffs’ claims arise under federal law because they
necessarily raise disputed federal issues, in an area of exclusive federal jurisdiction, and create a
risk of conflicting judgments between state and federal courts. See Gunn v. Minton, 568 U.S. 251,
258 (2013).
GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL
A. This action is removable pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1454.
10. 28 U.S.C. § 1454(a) provides that a “civil action in which any party asserts a claim
for relief arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents . . . or copyrights may be removed
to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where the
action is pending.” 28 U.S.C. § 1454(a) (emphasis added).
11. As noted, § 1454 provides an intellectual-property exception to the “well-pleaded
complaint rule” normally governing removal. Accordingly, Texas federal courts regularly permit
removal of state court actions where, as here, the defendant asserts patent or copyright law
counterclaims. See, e.g., Team Express, 2016 WL 3081020, at *2 (removal by defendant based on
4
copyright infringement counterclaim); Van Steenburg v. Hageman, 2015 WL 1509940, at *6
(W.D. Tex. Mar. 31, 2015) (same); DEA Specialties Co. v. DeLeon, 2014 WL 4385967, at *2-4
(W.D. Tex. Sept. 4, 2014) (same). As these courts have recognized, removal in such circumstances
is “clearly permitted” under Section 1454. Van Steenburg, 2015 WL 1509940, at *5.
12. Match’s counterclaims allege patent infringement and seek declaratory judgments
that its patents are valid and that plaintiffs are infringing them. See Exhibit 16 (Answer and
Counterclaims). In particular, the counterclaims seek declarations of the subject matter eligibility
of U.S. Patent No. 9,733,811 and U.S. Patent No. 9,959,023 and the non-functionality of U.S.
Patent No. D798,314, as well declarations of infringement of those patents by plaintiffs, damages
for such infringement, and an injunction against further infringement. These claims expressly
invoke, and arise under, the patent laws. See, e.g., Golan v. Pingel Enter., Inc., 310 F.3d 1360,
1367 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (declaratory judgment actions seeking to resolve patent claims arise under
patent laws). As a result, this action is removable pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1454.
13. As discussed below, plaintiffs’ claims also arise under the patent laws and are
therefore themselves removable pursuant to § 1454. Further, in the alternative, plaintiffs’ claims
are subject to the Court’s supplemental jurisdiction because they “are so related to” Match’s patent
counterclaims that they form part of the same case or controversy. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). According
to plaintiffs’ state court petition, all of Match’s allegedly tortious actions — including “bringing
frivolous intellectual property claims,” misappropriating confidential information, and disparaging
Bumble through statements in its federal lawsuit and in press stories about the federal lawsuit —
were part of “a concerted effort by Match to poison and devalue Bumble” in order to “chill the
investment market” so that Match could acquire Bumble at a depressed price. Exhibit 6 (Petition)
¶ 27; see also id. ¶ 25 (alleging Match sought to “poison[] the investment market through tortious
5
conduct”), ¶ 50 (alleging Match made disparaging media statements claiming that its patents were
valid and were being infringed by Bumble “to allay suspicion that its lawsuit against Bumble was
not well founded”).
14. Because plaintiffs’ claims of an improper scheme turn on the validity of Match’s
patent claims, these claims all share a common nucleus of operative fact. They should be heard in
a single case.
B. This action is also removable pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441.
15. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) provides that, “[e]xcept as otherwise expressly provided by
Act of Congress, any civil action brought in a State court of which the district courts of the United
States have original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant or the defendants, to the district
court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where such action is
pending.”
16. 28 U.S.C. § 1331 grants district courts “original jurisdiction of all civil actions
arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.”
17. 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a) grants district courts “original jurisdiction of any civil action
arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents, plant variety protection, copyrights and
trademarks.”
18. A state law cause of action “arises under” federal law when “a federal issue is: (1)
necessarily raised, (2) actually disputed, (3) substantial, and (4) capable of resolution in federal
court without disrupting the federal-state balance approved by Congress.” Gunn v. Minton, 568
U.S. 251, 258 (2013).
6
19. Plaintiffs’ claims arise under federal patent and trademark law because they are
premised on the contention that Match’s federal lawsuit is meritless and was filed for an improper
purpose. See Exhibit 6 (Petition) ¶¶ 3-4, 25, 27, 39-45, 50, 51, 57, 63, 72, 78, 85, 86.
20. First, plaintiffs’ claims “necessarily raise” federal patent and trademark issues,
including the validity of Match’s patents and the merit of Match’s patent and trademark claims.
Indeed, the central theme of plaintiffs’ entire suit is that Match’s federal patent and trademark
claims are “frivolous,” “meritless,” and “bogus.” For example, to prove their tortious interference
claim under Texas law, plaintiffs must establish that Match’s conduct “was either independently
tortious or unlawful.” Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Sturges, 52 S.W.3d 711, 713 (Tex. 2001). That
element cannot be satisfied where the allegedly tortious lawsuit was asserted in good faith. See
Intel Corp. v. Intel-Logistics, Inc., 2006 WL 1517510, at *2 (S.D. Tex. May 30, 2006). Thus,
evaluating plaintiffs’ claim necessarily requires consideration of the merits of Match’s claims,
which in turn requires application of federal patent and trademark law. See Gunn, 568 U.S. at 259;
see also Old Reliable Wholesale, Inc. v. Cornell Corp., 635 F.3d 539, 550 (Fed. Cir. 2011)
(discussing federal law presumption “that an assertion of infringement of a duly granted patent is
made in good faith”).
21. Second, the federal patent and trademark issues are “actually disputed.” The entire
basis of plaintiffs’ claims is that Match’s federal patent and trademark suit is frivolous, which
Match disputes.
22. Third, the federal patent and trademark issues raised in Bumble’s state court
complaint are “substantial.” The disputed issues involve the validity of Match’s patents and
plaintiffs’ continuing infringement of Match’s patents and trademarks. Further, given that Match’s
federal lawsuit against Bumble Trading addresses these exact issues, allowing the claim to remain
7
in state court would risk inconsistent judgments between state and federal courts. See Jang v.
Boston Sci. Corp., 767 F.3d 1334, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (federal issues are substantial when they
are “neither entirely backward-looking nor hypothetical” and “could result in inconsistent
judgments between state and federal courts”).
23. Finally, plaintiffs’ claims can be heard in federal court “without disrupting the
federal-state balance approved by Congress.” States have no special responsibility for the kinds
of claims asserted by plaintiffs, which are regularly heard by federal courts. On the other hand,
patent law is an area of special federal concern — indeed, federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction
over patent law claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a).
24. Accordingly, plaintiffs’ claims arise under federal patent and trademark law. This
Court would therefore have original jurisdiction over this action, and it is removable pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1441. Moreover, to the extent the Court holds that any of plaintiffs’ claims arise solely
under state law, for the reasons discussed above, such claims are subject to the Court’s
supplemental jurisdiction because they “are so related to” the federal claims that they form part of
the same case or controversy. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).
COMPLIANCE WITH REMOVAL PROCEDURES
25. This Notice of Removal is properly filed in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, because the 160th Judicial District of the District
Court of Dallas County, Texas, is located in this federal judicial district and division.
26. Plaintiffs’ state court petition was filed with the clerk of the Dallas County Court
on March 28, 2018. Match was served with the petition on September 24, 2018. This Notice of
Removal is filed within 30 days of service and is therefore timely pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b).
See Murphy Bros., Inc. v. Michetti Pipe Stringing, Inc., 526 U.S. 344, 347-48 (1999) (“[A] named
8
defendant’s time to remove is triggered by simultaneous service of the summons and complaint,
or receipt of the complaint, ‘through service or otherwise,’ after and apart from service of the
summons, but not by mere receipt of the complaint unattended by any formal service.”).
27. Match is the sole defendant in the state court action, and no other party’s consent
is required for removal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(2).
28. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a) and Local Rule 81.1, attached to this Notice
of Removal are an index of all documents filed in the state court, the state court docket sheet, and
a copy of each document filed in the state court. In addition, a Civil Cover Sheet, Supplemental
Civil Cover Sheet, Notice of Related Case, and Certificate of Interested Persons accompany this
Notice pursuant to Local Rule 81.1.
29. Match will promptly file with the clerk of the Dallas County Court, and will serve
on counsel for plaintiffs, a Notice of Filing and a copy of this Notice of Removal pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1446(d).
9
Dated: September 26, 2018

Dallas, Texas Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Bradley W. Caldwell

Bradley W. Caldwell
Texas State Bar No. 24040630
Marc Wolinsky (pro hac vice forthcoming) Email: bcaldwell@caldwellcc.com
Stephen R. DiPrima (pro hac vice John F. Summers
forthcoming) Texas State Bar No. 24079417
Nathaniel D. Cullerton (pro hac vice Email: jsummers@caldwellcc.com
forthcoming) CALDWELL CASSADY CURRY P.C.
Jonathan Siegel (pro hac vice forthcoming) 2101 Cedar Springs Road, Suite 1000
WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ Dallas, Texas 75201
51 West 52nd Street Telephone: (214) 888-4848
New York, New York 10019 Facsimile: (214) 888-4849
Telephone: (212) 403-1000
Facsimile: (212) 403-2000
ATTORNEYS FOR
MATCH GROUP, LLC
10
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been served
upon the following counsel of record via facsimile and U.S. Mail in accordance with the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure on this 26th day of September, 2018:
Deron Dacus
Texas State Bar No: 00790553
THE DACUS FIRM, P.C.
821 ESE Loop 323, Suite 430
Tyler, TX 75701
903-705-1117 (phone)
903-581-2543 (fax)
903-705-7231 (Direct Dial)
Email : ddacus@dacusfirm.com

Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1-1 Filed 09/26/18 Page 1 of 86 PageID 12
Exhibit 1
Case 6:18-cv-00080 Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 1 of 45
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
WACO DIVISION
MATCH GROUP, LLC §

§
§
Plaintiff, §
§ Civil Action No. 6:18-cv-00080
v. §
§
BUMBLE TRADING INC. § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
§
Defendant. §
§
§
PLAINTIFF MATCH GROUP, LLC’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
I. INTRODUCTION
Match Group, Inc. is the worldwide leader in online dating, with multiple popular brands
of matchmaking services, including Match, Plenty of Fish, OkCupid, and more. Plaintiff Match
Group, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Match Group, Inc., owns Tinder and its related
intellectual property. Tinder is one of Match’s flagship brands. When released, it launched a
cultural revolution in social networking and online dating. Tinder is famously characterized by a
stack of swipeable cards containing photographs of potential matches nearby. If a user is
interested in the person shown, the user swipes right. If not, the user swipes left. If two users
swipe right on each other, a match has been made, and the users are permitted to communicate
with one another through the app. The app has become so well-known that an entire generation
is often described as the “Tinder generation.”
Match, through Tinder, spent significant time and effort developing and implementing
the inventions embodied in versions of the Tinder app and claimed in a recently issued utility
patent. Match, through its Tinder team, has spent significant time and money advertising the
1

Tinder brand, including Tinder’s unique card-based swipe design. Match has also spent
significant time and money designing an attractive, artistic app, protected by both design patents
and copyrights. And Match has spent significant time and money on confidential internal
research and development, including brainstorming potential feature roll-outs. As a result of all
of these efforts, Match has significant intellectual property rights related to the Tinder
application and the Tinder brand. This is a case about infringement and misappropriation of that
intellectual property.
Bumble, founded by three ex-Tinder executives, copied Tinder’s world-changing, card-
swipe-based, mutual opt-in premise. As acknowledged by third-party publications upon its
release, Bumble is “virtually identical” to Tinder in its functionality and general look-and-feel.
The competitive reason is obvious. Bumble sought to mimic Tinder’s functionality, trade off of
Tinder’s name, brand, and general look and feel, meet user expectations that Tinder itself and its
brand created, and build a business entirely on a Tinder-clone, distinguished only by Bumble’s
women-talk-first marketing strategy. Compounding matters, Bumble has released at least two
features that its co-founders learned of and developed confidentially while at Tinder in violation
of confidentiality agreements. All of these actions infringe upon Match’s valid and enforceable
intellectual property rights.
To be clear, this case is not about any Bumble personnel’s personal history with anyone
previously at Tinder. This case is not about feminism or a business marketed based on feminist
themes; Match applauds Bumble’s efforts at empowering women, both in its app and offline, and
Match cares deeply both about its women users and about women’s issues generally. Rather,
this case is simply about forcing Bumble to stop competing with Match and Tinder using
2

Match’s own inventions, patented designs, trademarks, and trade secrets. Match brings this
complaint to stop Bumble’s unlawful use of this intellectual property.
II. THE PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Match Group, LLC (“Match”) is a Delaware Corporation with a principal
place of business in Dallas, Texas at 8750 N. Central Expressway, Suite 1400.
2. Bumble Trading Inc. (“Bumble”) is a Delaware corporation with a principal place
of business at 1105 W 41st St., Austin, TX 78756.
3. Although Bumble Trading Inc. continues to conduct business in Texas, as of the
date of filing this complaint, Bumble has failed to comply with Texas’s franchise tax laws.
4. As of March 16, 2018, Bumble Trading Inc. forfeited its charter and corporate
privileges under Section 171.309 of the Texas Tax Code.
III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Bumble Trading Inc. consistent with the
requirements of the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution and the Texas Long
Arm Statute. Bumble conducts business, maintains an established place of business, and has
committed acts of patent infringement and/or has induced and/or has contributed to acts of patent
infringement by others in the Western District of the Texas, the State of Texas, and elsewhere in
the United States. In addition, Bumble’s headquarters and principal place of business is located
in Austin, Texas, within the District.
6. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over Match’s claims for patent
infringement pursuant to the Federal Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331
and 1338(a). This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over Match’s federal trade secret
claim pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1836-39 et seq. (“Defend Trade Secrets Act”) and 28 U.S.C. §§
1331 and 1343. The Court also has supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims pursuant
3

to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
7. Venue is proper in this District for Bumble Trading Inc. under 35 U.S.C. §
1400(b) because Bumble Trading Inc. has a regular and established place of business in Austin,
Texas and has committed acts of infringement in the District by making, using, and selling the
Bumble app in the District. Venue is also proper for Match’s remaining claims against Bumble
under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because Bumble resides in the District, has its principal place of business
in the District, is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District, and a substantial part of the
events or omissions giving rise to the claim(s) occurred within the District.
8. The Waco Division of the Western District of Texas is convenient for both
parties. The Waco Federal Courthouse is less than 100 miles as the crow flies from both
Bumble’s Austin-based headquarters and Match’s Dallas-based headquarters.
9. Match also has a significant server deployment in the Waco area.
10. Bumble, meanwhile, employs at least four people at Baylor University. One
campus director, along with three campus ambassadors, plan events on and around the Baylor
campus to promote the Bumble app amongst Baylor University students.
IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

A. The Creation of Tinder
11. The Tinder app was first conceived at and created by “Hatch Labs,” a technology
incubator owned by Match’s ultimate parent company, InterActive Corp (“IAC”). Sean Rad,
Justin Mateen, Jonathan Badeen, Joe Munoz, Chris Gulczynski, Whitney Wolfe-Herd, and others
formed the early Tinder team that conceived, designed, developed, and conducted initial
marketing efforts for the Tinder app.
12. Chris Gulczynski’s position as Tinder was “Lead Designer” or “Chief Creative.”
Gulczynski was integral in designing the general look and feel of the earliest iterations of the
4

Tinder app.
13. Whitney Wolfe-Herd’s position with Tinder was “Vice President of Marketing.”
She assisted in promoting the app and encouraging users to sign up in the app’s early days.
14. Sarah Mick joined Tinder in 2013, after Tinder’s initial launch. Mick’s title was
“Vice President of Design” and she assisted Gulczynski on various design aspects of the Tinder
interface.
15. Released in September 2012 for iPhone devices, Tinder revolutionized online
dating services. From its earliest days, the premise of Tinder has been fundamentally the same.
Tinder users are shown other users (“potential match(es)”) based on certain parameters,
including age range and geographic location. The user is shown a card with a photo of a
potential match nearby. The user is then given a choice to indicate interest (or lack thereof) in
the potential match merely by swiping the card right (if interested) or left (if not). Although the
earliest iterations of Tinder did not include the ability to swipe left or right, once implemented,
swiping on Tinder became a cultural sensation.
16. Tinder is now one of the most popular apps in the world.
B. Match’s Tinder-Related Intellectual Property

17. Match has been awarded a utility patent, U.S. Patent No. 9,733,811 (the “’811
Patent”), entitled “Matching Process System and Method,” in connection with the functional
innovations embodied in versions of the Tinder app. The ’811 Patent is attached as Exhibit A.
18. Match has also been awarded numerous design patents related to ornamental
aspects of the Tinder app. One such patent, United States Patent No. D798,314 (the “’314
Patent”), entitled “Display Screen or Portion Thereof With a Graphical User Interface of a
Mobile Device,” issued September 26, 2017. The ’314 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
19. Match also has a federally registered trademark, Reg. No. 4,465,926, for “swipe”
5

in connection with computer application software for mobile devices, namely, software for social
introduction and dating services. Tinder first used this mark in commerce on or around March
28, 2013. The registration for Tinder’s “swipe” mark is attached as Exhibit C.
20. Match is also currently seeking federal registration for “swipe left” and “swipe
right” in connection with mobile applications for social introduction and dating services.
21. Match also has common law trademark rights. For example, Match, through
Tinder, has used the marks “swipe left” and “swipe right” in connection with mobile applications
for social introduction and dating services nationwide. It first used these marks in commerce on
or around March 28, 2013.
22. “Swipe,” “swipe left,” and “swipe right” have become synonymous with the
Tinder app.
23. For example, the Telegraph listed “swipe” as a 2015 “word of the year,” writing
that its choice “reflect[ed] the popularity of the dating app Tinder, in which users can swipe their
finger across the screen to approve or dismiss would-be dates.”
24. The English Oxford Dictionary also specifically defines the terms “swipe right”
and “swipe left” in connection with the Tinder brand:
25. The English Oxford Dictionary also indicates that “swipe right (or left) of dating
app Tinder fame” was consistently one of the dictionary’s most “popular look-ups” in 2017.
26. Indeed, Tinder’s wordmarks have been famous since before Bumble even existed.
For example, in a February 2014 article in TIME Magazine, TIME described the swipe in Tinder
6

as “iconic.”
27. Similarly, in February 2015, a CIO.com article described Tinder’s “swipe right”
as a “trademark” of Tinder.
28. In fact, the Atlanta Hawks, in connection with Tinder, hosted a highly publicized
“Swipe Right Night” at an Atlanta Hawks game in January 2015, reflecting the then-existing
fame of the mark.
29. Match, through Tinder, also has legally protectable trade dress. For example, the
ornamental design claimed in US D798,314 is a non-functional design element with source-
identifying significance, either because it is inherently distinctive or has acquired secondary
meaning.
30. Match, through Tinder, regularly advertises this design, showing a user’s card
being swiped left or right.
31. Third-party Internet publications have recognized that this design is synonymous
with Tinder, describing the “Tinder swipable cards interface” as “famous” and as taking “the app
store by storm.”
7

32. This card swipe interface has also been described as “iconic.”
33. Indeed, this interface is so well-known and iconic that, when other businesses use
similar interfaces in connection with non-social network, non-dating apps, third-party
publications describe such uses as making the app look like Tinder.
34. As reflected by the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s decision to grant
the ’314 Patent, this card-swipe design is non-functional.
35. Similarly, Match has protectable trade dress in its “It’s a Match!” screen, shown
below:
36. As with the swipeable card interface, this screen has distinctive trade dress
source-identifying significance.
37. Match, through Tinder, also regularly uses this screen as a source-identifier in
various advertising materials, including in the Apple App Store, the Google Play Store, and on
YouTube.
38. Finally, Match, like most companies, has trade secrets related to confidential
business planning and research and development efforts.
8

39. Match Group, LLC owns all rights to the intellectual property identified above.
C. Whitney Wolfe-Herd, Chris Gulczynski, and Sarah Mick Leave Tinder and
Create a Tinder Copycat, Bumble.
40. As discussed above, the early Tinder team included Sean Rad, Justin Mateen,
Jonathan Badeen, Joe Munoz, Chris Gulczynski, Whitney Wolfe-Herd, and others. In December
2013, Chris Gulcznyski and Sarah Mick left Tinder. Wolfe-Herd left Tinder shortly thereafter.
Exactly one year after the effective date of Chris Gulczynski and Sarah Mick’s severance
agreements, Gulcznyski, Mick, Wolfe-Herd, and Andrey Andreev, the founder and CEO of
Badoo, another online dating competitor, launched “Bumble.”
41. Like Tinder, Bumble is a mobile dating app that relies on a blind mutual opt-in
premise before users communicate. For those seeking opposite gender relationships, Bumble
requires the female user to send the first message.
42. In the words of the publication TechCrunch, Bumble is “almost identical to
Tinder, complete with the design of the profile pages, setting, and swipe functionality.”
(emphasis in original).
43. Texas Monthly recently wrote of Bumble: “the app looked suspiciously like
Tinder. . . . [I]t has that famous swipe-right-to-match function, a piece of game play so brilliant
it had become a cultural reference point.”
44. Multiple other publications, such as BGR and the Los Angeles Business Journal,
have described Bumble as a “Tinder-lookalike.”
45. Like Tinder, Bumble users interact with “cards” containing photos of other users,
as shown below.
9

46. Like Tinder, Bumble users swipe left and right on cards containing user photos to
indicate whether or not the user is interested in the person shown.
47. Like Tinder, swiping left indicates a user is not interested in the person shown
while swiping right indicates that the user is interested in the person.
48. Like Tinder, two users cannot communicate over Bumble until they both indicate
interest in one another.
49. Like Tinder, if two users both indicate interest, a screen is shown indicating a
10

“match.”
50. Bumble’s “match” screen is nearly identical to Tinder’s. At the top of the screen
is a large exclamatory phrase set off in a font other than the app’s default font. Below that, text
indicating that the users have expressed a mutual interest is displayed in the app’s default font.
Below that, two circles, enclosed in white borders, display the photographs of the matched users.
Below that, both apps include similarly sized and shaped buttons first presenting the option to
either send a message and then, below that, giving the option to return to the swipe screen. Both
“match screens” are placed against a dark background. These similarities are shown in the
pictures below:
51. The “match queue” screen, where users can find new matches and ongoing
conversations with other matches, is also essentially identical. The screens include circle
contacts of various users at the top indicating matches for which no messages have been sent.
These contacts can be scrolled through horizontally. Below that is a “messages” or
“conversations” navigation menu, situated for vertical scrolling, where ongoing conversations
are selectable:
11

52. One third-party publication noted when reviewing Bumble’s user interface that
this “match queue” is “mostly lifted from Tinder.”
53. The look and feel within the chat screen is also nearly identical, as shown below:
54. Compounding the confusion from the copycat looks of the Bumble app, Bumble
also makes extensive use of Tinder’s registered “swipe” mark as well as its “swipe left” and
“swipe right” word marks.
55. For example, in its “About Us” section of its website, Bumble describes itself as
12

an app that “shows you the people you want to see and lets you connect by a mutual opt in by
swiping right.”
56. On its preview in the Apple App Store and Google Play Store, Bumble indicates
that it is an “industry-leading app [that] empowers users to swipe through potential connections
across three different modes . . . .”
57. Bumble’s “July 2017 Press Stats Visual,” located on its website, describes the
number of “swipes per month” Bumble receives in its app.
58. Bumble’s “the Beehive” blog also contains dozens of instances of Bumble using
the “swipe” term in connection with online or mobile matchmaking services.
59. Additionally, Bumble includes a section of “Frequently Asked Questions”
inquiring as to (1) why a user “r[a]n out of people to swipe on”; (2) why a user can’t “start a
conversation with somebody [the user has] swiped right on”; and (3) whether a user can “go
back” if the user “swiped the wrong way.” Bumble describes its “Backtrack” feature as a way to
deal with the situation where a user “accidentally swiped left.”
60. Bumble’s “backtrack” screen also makes prominent use of the swipe and swipe
left marks, asking a user to “confirm below to bring someone back that you swiped left on” and
to “swipe to backtrack”:
13

61. In press interviews, Bumble’s CEO repeatedly references “swipes,” “swipe lefts”
and “swipe rights.” For example, in a CNBC interview, located at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyOMHVrVrZo, Bumble’s CEO discusses “swiping for
opportunity,” “swiping to network,” “swipe left for no,” “swipe right for yes,” and that Bumble
was getting “a lot of swipes.”
62. Similarly, Bumble’s CEO described in a Fox Business interview on November
23, 2015, located at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5Ej92-mKkg, that on Bumble “you
swipe on one another, and so if you both mutually opt in to have a match . . . you swipe right on
her, she swipes right on you, it’s a connection.”
63. In another interview, from CNN Money on February 11, 2016, Bumble’s CEO
described Bumble’s app as “swip[ing] right or left on potential matches.”
64. Bumble’s official advertising also makes use of the “swipe right” term. In an
advertisement where two Bumble personnel provide tips for writing dating “bios,” one of the
“doctors” indicates that she would “swipe right” on a bio she found particularly clever.
65. In fact, it appears Bumble has taken additional, affirmative steps since its initial
release to co-opt Match’s trademarks and trade dress and trade off of Tinder’s powerful brand.
14

As discussed, in both apps, when two users express a mutual preference, a “match screen is
shown.”
66. Bumble’s original match screen looked similar to Tinder’s match screen, but it
had some notable differences, including the location of the of the message and “keep playing”
buttons:
67. Moreover, the screen previously animated the circle photographs to pop out and
drop below the “keep playing” and “start a chat” buttons, a feature not included in Tinder’s
match screen.
68. Bumble has since updated to its app to mirror Tinder’s. Moreover, Bumble
decided to change the phrase “you both liked each other” to “you both swiped each other.”
15

69. In July 2017, Bumble also released a paid feature, the “SuperSwipe.”
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION: UTILITY PATENT INFRINGEMENT BY BUMBLE
70. Match incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth
herein.
71. Bumble directly infringes the ’811 patent by making and using a system that
practices the claims of Tinder’s patent.
72. Claim 1 of the ’811 Patent claims:
A computer implemented method of profile matching, comprising:
electronically receiving a plurality of user online-dating profiles, each profile

comprising traits of a respective user and associated with a social networking
platform;
electronically receiving a first request for matching, the first request electronically
submitted by a first user using a first electronic device;
determining a set of potential matches from the plurality of user online-dating

profiles for the first user in response to receiving the first request;
causing the display of a graphical representation of a first potential match of the set
of potential matches to the first user on a graphical user interface of the first
electronic device, the first potential match corresponding to a second user;
determining that the first user expressed a positive preference indication regarding
the first potential match at least by determining that the first user performed a first
swiping gesture associated with the graphical representation of the first potential
match on the graphical user interface;
in response to determining that the first user expressed the positive preference
indication regarding the first potential match, automatically causing the graphical
user interface to display a graphical representation of a second potential match of
the set of potential matches instead of the graphical representation of the first
potential match;
determining that the second user has expressed a positive preference indication
regarding the first user after determining that the first user expressed the positive
preference indication regarding the first potential match;
determining to enable initial communication between the first user and the second
user in response to determining that both the first user has expressed the positive
preference indication regarding the second user and the second user has expressed
16

the positive preference indication regarding the first user;
in response to determining to enable initial communication between the first user

and the second user, causing the graphical user interface to display to the first user
the graphical representation of the first potential match;
determining that the first user expressed a negative preference indication regarding
a third potential match of the set of potential matches at least by determining that
the first user performed a second swiping gesture associated with a graphical
representation of the third potential match on the graphical user interface, the
second swiping gesture different than the first swiping gesture, the third potential
match corresponding to a third user;
preventing communication between the first user and the third user after
determining that the first user has expressed the negative preference indication
regarding the third user;
a fourth potential match of the set of potential matches at least by determining that
the first user performed the first swiping gesture associated with a graphical
representation of the fourth potential match on the graphical user interface, the
fourth potential match corresponding to a fourth user; and
preventing communication between the first user and the fourth user after
determining that the fourth user has expressed a negative preference indication
regarding the first user.
A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when

executed by a processor, are configured to:
electronically receive a plurality of user online-dating profiles, each

profile comprising traits of a respective user and associated with a social
networking platform;
electronically receive a first request for matching, the first request

electronically submitted by a first user using a first electronic device;
determine a set of potential matches from the plurality of user online-

dating profiles for the first user in response to receiving the first request;
cause the display of a graphical representation of a first potential match of

the set of potential matches to the first user on a graphical user interface of
the first electronic device, the first potential match corresponding to a
second user;
17

determine that the first user expressed a positive preference indication

regarding the first potential match at least by determining that the first user
performed a first swiping gesture associated with the graphical
representation of the first potential match on the graphical user interface;
in response to the determination that the first user expressed the positive
preference indication regarding the first potential match, automatically
cause the graphical user interface to display a graphical representation of a
second potential match of the set of potential matches instead of the
graphical representation of the first potential match;
determine that the second user has expressed a positive preference

indication regarding the first user after determining that the first user
expressed the positive preference indication regarding the first potential
match;
determine to enable initial communication between the first user and the
second user in response to the determination that both the first user has
expressed the positive preference indication regarding the second user and
the second user has expressed the positive preference indication regarding
the first user;
in response to the determination to enable initial communication between

the first user and the second user, cause the graphical user interface to
display to the first user the graphical representation of the first potential
match; determine that the first user expressed a negative preference
indication regarding a third potential match of the set of potential matches
at least by determining that the first user performed a second swiping
gesture associated with a graphical representation of the third potential
match on the graphical user interface, the second swiping gesture different
than the first swiping gesture, the third potential match corresponding to a
third user;
prevent communication between the first user and the third user after
determining that both the first user has expressed the negative preference
indication regarding the second user and the second user;

regarding a fourth potential match of the set of potential matches at least
by determining that the first user performed the first swiping gesture
associated with a graphical representation of the fourth potential match on
the graphical user interface, the fourth potential match corresponding to a
fourth user; and
prevent communication between the first user and the fourth user after
18

determining that the fourth user has expressed a negative preference

indication regarding the first user.
A system for profile matching, comprising:
an interface operable to:

profile comprising traits of a respective user associated with a social

electronically submitted by a first user using a first electronic device; and
a processor coupled to the interface and operable to:
determine a set of potential matches from the plurality of user

online-dating profiles for the first user in response to receiving the
first request;
cause the interface to display a graphical representation of a first

potential match of the set of potential matches to the first user on a
graphical user interface of the first electronic device, the first
potential match corresponding to a second user;
determine that the interface has received a positive preference

indication from the first user regarding the first potential match at
least by determining that the first user performed a first swiping
gesture associated with the graphical representation of the first
potential match on the graphical user interface;
automatically cause the interface to remove the presentation of the

first potential match from the graphical user interface in response
to detecting the gesture and cause the interface to present, on the
graphical user interface, a second potential match of the set of
potential matches to the first user;

indication regarding the first user after determining that the first
user expressed the positive preference indication regarding the first
potential match; and
determine to enable initial communication between the first user

and the second user in response to the determination that both the
first user has expressed the positive preference indication regarding
the second user and the second user has expressed the positive
19

preference indication regarding the first user;
in response to the determination to enable initial communication

between the first user and the second user, cause the graphical user
interface to display to the first user both the graphical
representation of the first potential match;
determine that the first user expressed a negative preference

indication regarding a third potential match of the set of potential
matches at least by determining that the first user performed a
second swiping gesture associated with a graphical representation
of the third potential match on the graphical user interface, the
second swiping gesture different than the first swiping gesture, the
third potential match corresponding to a third user;
prevent communication between the first user and the third user
after determining that the first user has expressed the negative
preference indication regarding the third user;
determine that the first user expressed a positive preference

indication regarding a fourth potential match of the set of potential
matches at least by determining that the first user performed the
first swiping gesture associated with a graphical representation of
the fourth potential match on the graphical user interface, the
prevent communication between the first user and the fourth user
in response to determining that the fourth user has expressed a
negative preference indication regarding the first user.
75. Bumble’s servers practice all of the limitations of these claims, as set forth in the
example below. For example, Bumble’s servers electronically receive a plurality of user online-
dating profiles, each profile comprising traits of a respective user and associated with a social
networking platform. When a Bumble app user downloads and initially accesses the application,
the user device is required to set up a Bumble account that is associated with the user’s Facebook
account:
20

76. Through the account setup process, Bumble receives from each user an online
profile comprising traits of respective users. For example, the Frequently Asked Questions on
Bumble’s website indicates that Bumble “use[s] Facebook to help build your profile by
importing your name, age, school, and/or occupation.”
77. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of electronically receiving a first request
for matching, the first request electronically submitted by a first user using a first electronic
device. For example, after authorizing his or her Facebook account, the Bumble user is taken to
the screen where he or she can indicate positive and negative preferences for various potential
matches. At a point before those potential matches are shown, Bumble has received a request for
matching.
78. Bumble’s servers also perform the step determining a set of potential matches
from the plurality of user online-dating profiles for the first user in response to receiving the first
request. In response to receiving the parameters set forth in the request for matching contained
in the Bumble app user request, Bumble determines a set of potential matches for the requesting
user based on parameters such as location, age, and gender:
21

79. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of causing the display of a graphical
representation of a first potential match of the set of potential matches to the first user on a
graphical user interface of the first electronic device, the first potential match corresponding to a
second user. Bumble causes the display of potential matches of other Bumble app users to
appear on the first Bumble app user’s graphical user interface. The potential matches shown
correspond with the determination of potential matches described in ¶ 78 above:
22

80. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of determining that the first user expressed
a positive preference indication regarding the first potential match at least by determining that
the first user performed a first swiping gesture associated with the graphical representation of the
first potential match on the graphic user interface. A Bumble app user may affirmatively select
(or reject) another Bumble app user by swiping gestures. Bumble makes a determination based
on this Bumble app user indication (e.g., swipe right or swipe left). Bumble determines whether
a first Bumble app user has made a positive preference indication in the form of a first swiping
gesture:
81. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of in response to determining that the first
user expressed the positive preference indication regarding the first potential match,
automatically causing the graphical user interface to display a graphical representation of a
second potential match of the set of potential matches instead of the graphical representation of
the first potential match. After determining that the first Bumble app user has expressed a
positive preference via a swiping gesture (swipe right), Bumble automatically presents a second
potential match:
23

82. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of determining that the second user has
expressed a positive preference indication regarding the first user after determining that the first
user expressed the positive preference indication regarding the first potential match. Bumble
compares the selected preference of each potential match (i.e., of a first Bumble app user and a
second Bumble app user), including making a determination whether the first Bumble app user
and the second Bumble app user each expressed a positive preference for each other.
83. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of determining to enable initial
communication between the first user and the second user in response to determining that both
the first user has expressed the positive preference indication regarding the second user and the
second user has expressed the positive preference indication regarding the first user. In the event
that the determination described in the immediately preceding paragraph results in a mutual
positive preference indication, Bumble determines to enable initial communication between the
first Bumble app user and the second Bumble app user. In the same-gender case, either
participant may communicate. In an opposite-gender case, Bumble makes the determination to
enable initial communication by allowing the female user to message the male user.
24

84. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of in response to determining to enable
initial communication between the first user and the second user, causing the graphical user
interface to display to the first user the graphical representation of the first potential match. For
example, upon determining that mutual positive preference gestures have been made, Bumble
presents the following graphical representation of the first potential match:
a negative preference indication regarding a third potential match of the set of potential matches
at least by determining that the first user performed a second swiping gesture associated with a
graphical representation of the third potential match on the graphical user interface, the second
swiping gesture different than the first swiping gesture, the third potential match corresponding
to a third user. Bumble determines whether the first Bumble app user expressed a negative
preference for a third Bumble app user by determining whether the first Bumble app user swiped
left:
25

86. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of preventing communication between the
first user and the third user after determining that the first user has expressed the negative
preference indication regarding the third user. For example, if the first Bumble app user
expressed a negative preference for a third Bumble app user, the Bumble app will not allow the
first and third Bumble app users to communicate through the app.
a positive preference indication regarding a fourth potential set of matches at least by
determining that the first user performed the first swiping gesture associated with a graphical
representation of the fourth potential match on the graphical user interface, the fourth potential
match corresponding to a fourth user. A Bumble user may affirmatively select (or reject) another
Bumble app user by swiping gestures. Bumble makes a determination based on this Bumble user
indication (i.e., swipe right or swipe left). Bumble determines whether a first Bumble app user
has made a positive preference indication in the form of a first swiping gesture.
88. Finally, Bumble’s servers perform the step of preventing communication between
the first user and the fourth user after determining that the fourth user has expressed a negative
26

preference indication regarding the first user. Upon a determination that a fourth Bumble app
user expressed a negative preference for a first Bumble app user, Bumble will prevent
communication between those users.
89. At least some servers perform this method in the United States.
90. Bumble also indirectly infringes the ’811 patent by inducing infringement by
others, such as end-user customers, by, for example, encouraging and instructing end-user
customers to install and use the Bumble app in the United States.
91. Bumble took the above actions intending to cause infringing acts by others.
92. Bumble was also aware of the ’811 patent. For example, on a February 7, 2018
earnings call, Match Group CEO Mandy Ginsberg discussed the ’811 Patent.
93. That same day, an online publication Axios indicated that it had reached out to
Bumble for a comment about the ’811 Patent.
94. Additionally, it was well-publicized that Tinder was seeking a patent related to its
swipe functionality. For example, a June 22, 2015 article in Adweek indicated that Tinder was
prosecuting a patent related to swipe functionality.
95. Moreover, Whitney Wolfe-Herd, Chris Gulcznyski, and Sarah Mick were all still
at Tinder when the application maturing into the ’811 Patent was filed in October 2013.
96. If Bumble did not know that the actions it encouraged constituted infringement of
the ’811 Patent, Bumble nevertheless subjectively believed there was a high probability that
others would infringe the ’811 patent but took deliberate steps to avoid confirming that it was
actively inducing infringement by others.
97. Bumble also indirectly infringes the ’811 patent by contributing to infringement
by others, such as end-users, by providing within the United States software components for
27

operating Bumble’s app and interacting with the servers associated with Bumble’s app. These
software components are, for example, the Bumble app, and the download package that contains
the Bumble app for interacting with Bumble’s servers. Bumble’s end-user directly infringed
the ’811 Patent by, for example, installing and using the Bumble app in the United States to use
the Bumble system in the United States and Bumble servers in the United States. These software
components are known by Bumble to be especially made or adapted for use in Bumble’s
infringing system.
98. Bumble has known these components to be especially made or especially adapted
for use in infringement of the ’811 patent and that these components are not a staple article or
commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Alternatively, Bumble
subjectively believed there was a high probability that these components were especially made or
especially adapted for use in an infringement of the ’811 Patent and that these components are
not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use but
took deliberate steps to avoid confirming the same.
99. Bumble’s infringement of the ’811 Patent is and has been willful. Bumble at a
minimum knew or had reason to know of certain facts which would lead a reasonable person to
realize their actions were unreasonably risky with respect to infringement of the ’811 Patent. For
example, as discussed above, Bumble is and has been aware of the ’811 Patent. To Match’s
knowledge, Bumble has not attempted to avoid infringement of the patent or to design around it.
Bumble designed its app to mirror Tinder and its swipe functionality specifically to compete with
Tinder and avoid a barrier to entry in the market by mimicking Tinder’s swipe functionality in
connection with an online matchmaking app.
28

100. The inventions claimed in the ’811 patent are not directed to an abstract idea.
Instead, the claims are directed to an improvement in computer and user interface functionality
as well as in online social networking.
101. Specifically, the inventors of the continuation-in-part aspect of the ’811 patent set
out to improve the user interface functionality in dating and other matchmaking apps. The swipe
on a graphical representation of a user equals positive, different swipe on the photographic
representation equals negative, in connection with a mutual opt-in matchmaking app, was a non-
conventional, concrete improvement in how touch screen user interfaces interact with users
sifting through and making binary choices, such as indicating positive or negative preferences
related to potential matches. To be sure, the general gesture of swiping may have been known in
the prior art. But the specific application to a graphical representation of a user in the specific
matchmaking context claimed, in order to make binary choices expressing a preference or lack
thereof regarding potential matches, was unknown and unconventional.
102. This interface improvement allows users to sift through more information, more
quickly than previous interfaces addressing similar binary choice user decisions. These
efficiencies to user interaction revolutionized the world of online dating.
103. That the inventions are directed toward new computer-specific user interface
technology is confirmed by the surrounding limitations. The inventions claim a specific
computer method, system, and computer-readable medium of matchmaking where parties are not
permitted to communicate until a match is made, user profiles are specifically “online-dating
profiles” and those profiles must be “associated with a social networking platform,” a type of
platform that is itself computer specific. The claims further describe various actions of a
graphical user interface that provide certain information at certain times in response to certain
29

types of inputs. This is not conventional post-solution activity in order to monopolize an abstract
idea of matchmaking or even mutual opt-in matchmaking. Instead, these limitations recite a
particularly advantageous computer embodiment of a matchmaking process that also solves
computer-specific problems related to the ease of making fake accounts and profiles, the
inconvenience of filling out profiles, and the problem of certain online dating users being
inundated with messages. This particularly advantageous online matchmaking method may have
been known prior to the inventions claimed. However, this method was not so pervasive as to be
“conventional.”
104. Moreover, even if that matchmaking method was conventional, the inventions are
directed to an improved interface for that method.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION: DESIGN PATENT INFRINGEMENT

herein.
106. Bumble’s app also infringes Match’s Design Patent, D798,314.
107. U.S. Patent D798,314 claims an ornamental aspect of Tinder’s app design related
to swiping left or right on cards containing photographs.
108. The ’314 Patent claims the ornamental design shown in Figures 1 and 2 of that
patent:
30

109. As the patent makes clear, only the solid lines illustrate the ornamental design
claimed. The broken lines are for illustrative purposes only.
110. As discussed above, Bumble looks “virtually identical” to Tinder and infringes on
this ornamental design.
111. Specifically, Bumble’s app includes an ornamental design where photographic
cards are swiped left or right, as shown below:
31

112. The resemblance between the two apps is such as to deceive an ordinary observer
to believing that Bumble’s design is the same as Match’s patented design.
113. Bumble has actual notice of the ’314 Patent. Chris Gulczynski, a co-founder of
Bumble and Bumble’s former Chief Product Officer, is a named inventor on the patent from his
time at Tinder. Gulczynski previously assigned his rights to the patent (and all other relevant to
intellectual property) to Match.
realize their actions were unreasonably risky with respect to infringement of the ’314 Patent.
Specifically, Bumble, at least because of its relationship with Chris Gulczynski, who designed
aspects of the user interfaces of both Tinder and Bumble, knew that the ornamental design
claimed in the ’314 Patent was likely infringed by Bumble’s substantially identical card swipe
ornamental design in the Bumble app.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION: TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT

UNDER 15 U.S.C. § 1114(a)
115. Match incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
116. Match has received a federal registration for the mark “swipe” in connection with
computer application software for mobile devices—software for social introduction and dating
services.
117. Match, through Tinder, first used the mark “swipe” in commerce on or around
March 28, 2013 and continues to do so.
118. Bumble, by using Match’s “swipe” mark to compete with Tinder in the market for
software for social introduction and dating services,” violated 15 U.S.C. § 1114. As discussed
above, Bumble is prominently using Match’s “swipe” mark throughout its app and promotional
32

activities. Bumble’s activities are causing, and unless enjoined, will continue to cause a likelihood
of confusion and deception of members of the public, and, additionally, injury to Match and
Tinder’s reputation and goodwill as reflected in the “swipe” mark. Bumble’s use of the swipe
mark will also actually deceive the public or is at least likely to deceive the public regarding the
source, sponsorship, and/or affiliation of Bumble’s app.
119. These actions have also materially damaged the value of Match’s registered “swipe”
mark.
120. As a proximate result of Bumble’s actions, Match has suffered damages, including,
but not limited to, lost revenue and loss of goodwill associated with its Tinder app.
121. At least because of the prior affiliation of Bumble officers with Tinder and because
of Bumble’s competition with Tinder, Bumble’s actions also demonstrate an intentional, willful,
and malicious intent to trade on goodwill associated with Match and Tinder’s “swipe” mark.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION: TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT

UNDER 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)
herein.
123. Match is the owner of word marks “swipe left” and “swipe right” in connection
with internet-based dating and matchmaking and similar services since at least on around March
28, 2013. Match has used and continues to use these marks throughout the United States.
124. These marks are valid and enforceable and in full force and effort.
125. As described above, Bumble uses Match’s “swipe left” and “swipe right” marks
prominently. Bumble’s doing so is likely to cause confusion or mistake or deceive the public as
to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of the Bumble app.
33

and malicious intent to trade on goodwill associated with the “swipe right” and “swipe left” word
marks.
127. These actions have caused damages to Match, including lost Tinder revenue as well
as damages to Tinder’s brand and associated goodwill.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION: INFRINGEMENT OF TRADE DRESS

UNDER 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)
herein.
129. Match is also the owner of legally protectable trade dress. For example, the non-
functional, ornamental design claimed in the ’314 Patent is a design that is either inherently
distinctive or has acquired secondary meaning designating Match and Tinder as the source of the
product.
130. As described above, this card-based swipe interface has been described as
“famous” or “iconic” by multiple third-party publications.
131. This interface was first used in commerce some time before September 1, 2012.
132. By including this same non-functional ornamental design, Bumble’s app is likely
to cause confusion or mistake or deceive the public as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of
the Bumble app.
133. Match is also the owner of trade dress related to Tinder’s “It’s a Match!” screen,
shown here:
34

134. The Tinder app has included this same or similar design since it was initially
released.
135. The “It’s a Match Screen!” was first used in commerce on August 2, 2012.
136. As described above, Tinder uses this screen in various advertising materials,
including on the App Store, Google Play Store, and on YouTube.
137. This overall design is non-functional.
138. By including this same non-functional design, Bumble’s app is likely to cause
confusion or mistake or deceive the public as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of the
Bumble app.
139. As also discussed above, Bumble’s similar screen is virtually identical to
Tinder’s.
Bumble app.
141. At least because of the prior affiliation of Bumble officers with Tinder and
35

because of Bumble’s competition with Tinder, Bumble’s actions also demonstrate an intentional,
willful, and malicious intent to trade on goodwill associated with Match’s trade dress.
142. These actions have caused damages to Match in the form of lost Tinder revenue
as well as damages to Tinder’s brand and associated goodwill.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION: TRADEMARK DILUTION

herein.
144. Certain of Bumble’s actions also constitute trade mark and trade dress dilution by
blurring under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
145. Match’s wordmark “swipe right” is famous to the general public.
146. As discussed above, the phrase “swipe right” is included in the Oxford English
Dictionary, specifically associated with the Tinder app.
147. “Swipe right,” especially in the connection with “swipe left,” is often described
by third parties as a famous “cultural phenomenon.”
148. These third parties describe the cultural phenomenon specifically in reference to
Tinder and the Tinder app.
149. In light of Tinder’s own extensive marketing as well as the descriptions of third-
parties, “swipe right” has become effectively a “household name” identifying the Tinder brand
and Tinder app.
150. After Tinder’s “swipe right” mark became famous, Bumble began using “swipe
right” in connection with its app. Bumble’s routine use of the mark “swipe right” in connection
with a direct competitor mobile dating service has caused and is likely to cause dilution by
blurring, diluting the distinctiveness of “swipe right” as a brand signifier for Tinder and/or
Match.
36

151. These actions have harmed the reputation of goodwill associated with Tinder.
152. Bumble’s dilution of Tinder’s “swipe right” mark has been done willfully and
intentionally.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION: TEXAS UNFAIR COMPETITION.

herein.
154. As discussed above, Match’s trademarks and trade dress are valid marks in full
force and effect.
155. Bumble knowingly and willfully used these marks and this trade dress in
commerce through the promotion of its app and in the app itself.
156. Bumble’s actions are likely to cause consumer confusion, cause consumer
mistake, and/or deceive ordinarily prudent consumers as to the affiliation, connection,
association, sponsorship, or approval of Match and/or Tinder products because Bumble’s actions
suggest that its own app originates form, is sponsored by, is authorized by, or is otherwise
connected with Tinder and/or Match.
157. These actions have materially damaged the value of Match’s Tinder marks and
trade dress.
158. As a result, Match has suffered damages, including lost Tinder revenue and
damage to goodwill associated with Tinder.
159. Bumble’s actions have caused injury to Match, and Match is entitled to damages
caused thereby, including punitive damages as a result of Bumble’s malicious and willful
actions.
37

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION: MISAPPROPRIATION OF TRADE SECRETS UNDER

THE DEFEND TRADE SECRETS ACT AND THE TEXAS UNIFORM TRADE
SECRETS ACT
herein.
161. In connection with their employment at Hatch Labs/Tinder/Match, at least Chris
Gulczynski and Sarah Mick were given access to certain confidential information related to
proposed Tinder features.
162. Gulczynski and Mick agreed as part of their employment to keep confidential all
confidential information and to not disclose such information to anyone or to use such
information for anyone’s benefit other than Hatch Labs/Tinder/Match.
163. While at Tinder, Gulcynski and Mick were involved in development for a
potential “undo” function for the Tinder app.
164. The concept of the “undo,” as discussed internally at Tinder, involved allowing all
users three “undos.” Once an “undo” was used, it would take a certain period of time for that
“undo” to replenish. If the user did not want to wait that time period for the undo to replenish,
the user could speed up the process by promoting that app via social media.
165. For example, the image below reflects an internal Tinder mock-up of the “undo”
idea in which Gulcynski and Mick were involved:
38

166. In March of 2015, Bumble implemented a nearly, if not literally, identical concept
in its “Backtrack” feature. In Bumble’s own words on its website:
167. To be sure, Tinder had previously announced its “rewind” functionality before
Bumble released its rewind feature. But Tinder’s “rewind” feature was different and remains
different from this confidential concept misappropriated from Gulcyzsnki and Mick’s time at
Tinder.
168. Tinder’s rewind allows for “Tinder Plus” users to “rewind” errant left swipes in
connection with a paid subscription.
169. Bumble’s backtrack feature, in contrast, plainly mirrors the three “undos” that
replenish over time and/or with promoting the app on social media outlets.
170. At least because of their confidentiality agreements, Gulczysnki and/or Mick
knew or had reason to know at the time they began using these concepts that they were acquired
39

by improper means or under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain the secrecy of or
limit the use of the secret.
171. Additionally, because Gulczysnki and Mick were co-founders and executives at
Bumble, Bumble used this trade secret knowing or with reason to know that the secret was
acquired by improper means, acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain the
secrecy of the trade secret, or was derived from a person (Gulczynski and/or Mick) who owed a
duty to Match and Tinder to maintain the secrecy of the idea.
172. Bumble’s app, which uses this trade secret, is used in interstate commerce.
173. In light of the totality of the circumstances between Match/Tinder and Bumble,
this misappropriation was willful and malicious misappropriation, made with conscious
disregard of the rights of Match and Tinder in the trade secret.
174. Indeed, Bumble’s misappropriation related to “backtrack” appears to reflect a
pattern of disregard for Match’s trade secret rights.
175. While Gulczynski and Mick were still at Tinder, Sean Rad came up with an idea
to implement picture messaging within the Tinder app.
176. Although dating apps had been reluctant to include a direct picture messaging
function because of concerns related to unsolicited lewd photographs, Rad conceived the idea of
allowing direct photograph messaging but sending only a deliberately blurred photo that the
photo recipient would be required to click before viewing an unblurred image. In this way,
anyone looking over your shoulder could not see the message unless the recipient clicked it.
Further, the user recipient could, based on context, determine whether the sent picture was one
the recipient was comfortable viewing in public (or ever).
177. After Rad conceived of the idea, he asked Gulczynski to perform a mock-up of
40

the concept. Below is a PDF screenshot of Gulczynski’s design mock-up at Tinder:
178. The two icons with the hands over them would, once clicked, display the full
photo.
179. In February 2015, after Gulczynski and Mick left Tinder to work at Bumble,
Bumble implemented the identical concept, complete with same white hand surrounded by a
white circle over the blurred image:
41

180. When Bumble released the feature, Bumble indicated that it was implementing a
“Snapchat-like” feature, implying that Bumble was co-opting a feature from Snapchat.
181. The truth is that Gulczynski and/or Mick took the idea from confidential
development discussions at Tinder.
182. These co-founders of Bumble that previously worked with Tinder have
inappropriately used confidential information related to Bumble’s backtrack function.
183. It is currently unknown and unknowable to Match whether Bumble is using any
algorithms or source code acquired at Tinder from Gulczysnki, Mick, and/or Wolfe-Herd’s time
at Tinder. It is also unknown and unknowable to Match whether Bumble acquired or is using
other confidential information acquired from Gulczysnki, Mick, and/or Wolfe-Herd’s time at
Tinder.
184. Bumble’s use of the backtrack/undo trade secret constitutes a misappropriation of
trade secrets in violation of the Defend Trade Secrets Act and the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets
Act.
185. Bumble’s misappropriation of the “undo” trade secret has caused damage to
Match. It has been forced to compete for users and revenue against a competitor implementing
Match’s own confidential idea, developed at Match, for Match, by personnel being paid by
Match.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the entry of a judgment from this Court:
1. Judgment in Plaintiffs’ favor and against Defendant on all causes of action alleged
herein;
42

2. A preliminary and/or permanent injunction restraining Defendant, and its agents,
servants, employees, attorneys, successors and assigns, and all persons, firms, and corporations
acting in concert with them, from directly or indirectly violating Match’s utility patent rights,
design patent rights, rights under the Lanham Act, rights arising from common law unfair
competition, and from any further misappropriation or unauthorized use of Match/Tinder’s trade
secrets.
3. For damages in an amount to be further proven at trial, including:
a. Damages assessed against Defendant pursuant to the Defend Trade Secrets Act of
2016, including compensatory damages, unjust enrichment or restitution damages,
reasonably royalty, and exemplary damages;
b. Damages assessed against Defendant pursuant to the Texas Uniform Trade Secret
Act, including compensatory damages, unjust enrichment or restitution damages,
c. Damages assessed against Defendant pursuant to the Lanham Act, including
compensatory damages, statutory damages, treble damages, restitution, including
disgorgement of profits,
d. Damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284, including enhancement and including
supplemental damages for any continuing post-verdict infringement up until entry
of final judgment, with an accounting, as needed;
e. Damages under 35 U.S.C. § 289, including Bumble’s total profit and revenue
realized and derived from its infringement of U.S. Patent D798,314 and in an
amount not less than a reasonable royalty.
43

f. Damages for Defendant’s common law unfair competition, including punitive
damages
4. For Plaintiffs’ reasonable attorney’s fees;
5. For costs of suit incurred herein, including all disbursements;
6. For pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the damages awarded;
7. If an injunction is not granted, that Plaintiffs be awarded an ongoing licensing fee;
and
8. For such other and further relief (including any and all equitable relief) as the
Court may deem to be just and proper.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs demand a trial by
jury on all issues triable of right by a jury.
44

DATED: March 16, 2018 Respectfully submitted,
CALDWELL CASSADY & CURRY
Bradley W. Caldwell (Admission Pending)

Email: bcaldwell@caldwellcc.com
John F. Summers
Email: jsummers@caldwellcc.com
Warren J. McCarty, III
Illinois State Bar No. 6313452
Email: wmccarty@caldwellcc.com
CALDWELL CASSADY CURRY P.C.
2101 Cedar Springs Road, Suite 1000
Dallas, Texas 75201
Telephone: (214) 888-4848
Facsimile: (214) 888-4849
/s/ John P. Palmer

John P. Palmer
State Bar. 15430600
Email: palmer@namanhowell.com
Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee, PLLC
400 Austin Avenue, 8th Floor
P.O. Box 1470
Waco, TX 76701
Telephone: (254) 755-4100
Facsimile: (254) 754-6331
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

MATCH GROUP, LLC

45

Case 6:18-cv-00080 Document 1-1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 1 of 30
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
JS 44 (Rev. 06/17) CIVIL COVER
Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1-1 FiledSHEET
09/26/18 Page 85 of 86 PageID 96
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

Match Group, LLC Bumble Trading Inc.
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Dallas County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
John P. Palmer - Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee, PLLC, 400 Austin Ave.,
8th Floor, P.O. Box 1470, Waco, Texas 76701 (254) 755-4100
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
u 1 U.S. Government u 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State u 1 u 1 Incorporated or Principal Place u 4 u 4
of Business In This State
u 2 U.S. Government u 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State u 2 u 2 Incorporated and Principal Place u 5 u 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a u 3 u 3 Foreign Nation u 6 u 6

Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
u 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY u 625 Drug Related Seizure u 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 u 375 False Claims Act
u 120 Marine u 310 Airplane u 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 u 423 Withdrawal u 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
u 130 Miller Act u 315 Airplane Product Product Liability u 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
u 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability u 367 Health Care/ u 400 State Reapportionment
u 150 Recovery of Overpayment u 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS u 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury u 820 Copyrights u 430 Banks and Banking
u 151 Medicare Act u 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability u 830 Patent u 450 Commerce
u 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability u 368 Asbestos Personal u 835 Patent - Abbreviated u 460 Deportation
Student Loans u 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application u 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) u 345 Marine Product Liability u 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
u 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY u 480 Consumer Credit
of Veteran’s Benefits u 350 Motor Vehicle u 370 Other Fraud u 710 Fair Labor Standards u 861 HIA (1395ff) u 490 Cable/Sat TV
u 160 Stockholders’ Suits u 355 Motor Vehicle u 371 Truth in Lending Act u 862 Black Lung (923) u 850 Securities/Commodities/
u 190 Other Contract Product Liability u 380 Other Personal u 720 Labor/Management u 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange
u 195 Contract Product Liability u 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations u 864 SSID Title XVI u 890 Other Statutory Actions
u 196 Franchise Injury u 385 Property Damage u 740 Railway Labor Act u 865 RSI (405(g)) u 891 Agricultural Acts
u 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability u 751 Family and Medical u 893 Environmental Matters
Medical Malpractice Leave Act u 895 Freedom of Information
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS u 790 Other Labor Litigation FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act
u 210 Land Condemnation u 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: u 791 Employee Retirement u 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff u 896 Arbitration
u 220 Foreclosure u 441 Voting u 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act or Defendant) u 899 Administrative Procedure
u 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment u 442 Employment u 510 Motions to Vacate u 871 IRS—Third Party Act/Review or Appeal of
u 240 Torts to Land u 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision
u 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations u 530 General u 950 Constitutionality of
u 290 All Other Real Property u 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - u 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION State Statutes
Employment Other: u 462 Naturalization Application
u 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - u 540 Mandamus & Other u 465 Other Immigration
Other u 550 Civil Rights Actions
u 448 Education u 555 Prison Condition
u 560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
u 1 Original u 2 Removed from u 3 Remanded from u 4 Reinstated or u 5 Transferred from u 6 Multidistrict u 8 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
35 U.S.C. § 271
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Patent Infringement, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Misappropriation of Trade Secrets
VII. REQUESTED IN u CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: u Yes u No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
03/16/2018 /s/ John P. Palmer
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 06/17) Case 6:18-cv-00080 Document 1-4 Filed 03/16/18 Page 2 of 2
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44
Authority For Civil Cover Sheet
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:
I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and
then the official, giving both name and title.
(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land
condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)
(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section "(see attachment)".
II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes
precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
cases.)
III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
section for each principal party.
IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code
that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.
When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.
Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing
date.
Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or
multidistrict litigation transfers.
Multidistrict Litigation – Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C.
Section 1407.
Multidistrict Litigation – Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to
changes in statue.
VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service
VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.
VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket
numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.
Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.
Exhibit 2
Case 6:18-cv-00080-ADA-JCM Document 10 Filed 04/30/18 Page 1 of 53
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
WACO DIVISION
MATCH GROUP, LLC §

§
§
Plaintiff, §
§ No. 6:18-cv-00080-RP-JCM
v. §
§
BUMBLE TRADING, INC. § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
§
Defendant. §
§
§
PLAINTIFF MATCH GROUP, LLC’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
I. INTRODUCTION
Match Group, Inc. is the worldwide leader in online dating, with multiple popular brands
of matchmaking services, including Match, Plenty of Fish, OkCupid, and more. Plaintiff Match
Group, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Match Group, Inc., owns Tinder and its related
intellectual property. Tinder is one of Match’s flagship brands. When released, it launched a
cultural revolution in social networking and online dating. Tinder is famously characterized by a
stack of swipeable cards containing photographs of potential matches nearby. If a user is
interested in the person shown, the user swipes right. If not, the user swipes left. If two users
swipe right on each other, a match has been made, and the users are permitted to communicate
with one another through the app. The app has become so well-known that an entire generation
is often described as the “Tinder generation.”
Match, through Tinder, spent significant time and effort developing and implementing
the inventions embodied in versions of the Tinder app and claimed in a recently issued utility
patent. Match, through its Tinder team, has spent significant time and money advertising the
1

Tinder brand, including Tinder’s unique card-based swipe design. Match has also spent
significant time and money designing an attractive, artistic app, protected by both design patents
and copyrights. And Match has spent significant time and money on confidential internal
research and development, including brainstorming potential feature roll-outs. As a result of all
of these efforts, Match has significant intellectual property rights related to the Tinder
application and the Tinder brand. This is a case about infringement and misappropriation of that
intellectual property.
Bumble, founded by three ex-Tinder executives, copied Tinder’s world-changing, card-
swipe-based, mutual opt-in premise. As acknowledged by third-party publications upon its
release, Bumble is “virtually identical” to Tinder in its functionality and general look-and-feel.
The competitive reason is obvious. Bumble sought to mimic Tinder’s functionality, trade off of
Tinder’s name, brand, and general look and feel, meet user expectations that Tinder itself and its
brand created, and build a business entirely on a Tinder-clone, distinguished only by Bumble’s
women-talk-first marketing strategy. Compounding matters, Bumble has released at least two
features that its co-founders learned of and developed confidentially while at Tinder in violation
of confidentiality agreements. All of these actions infringe upon Match’s valid and enforceable
intellectual property rights.
To be clear, this case is not about any Bumble personnel’s personal history with anyone
previously at Tinder. This case is not about feminism or a business marketed based on feminist
themes; Match applauds Bumble’s efforts at empowering women, both in its app and offline, and
Match cares deeply both about its women users and about women’s issues generally. Rather,
this case is simply about forcing Bumble to stop competing with Match and Tinder using
2

Match’s own inventions, patented designs, trademarks, and trade secrets. Match brings this
complaint to stop Bumble’s unlawful use of this intellectual property.
II. THE PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Match Group, LLC (“Match”) is a Delaware Corporation with a principal
2. Bumble Trading Inc. (“Bumble”) is a Delaware corporation with a principal place
of business at 1105 W 41st St., Austin, TX 78756.
3. Although Bumble Trading Inc. continues to conduct business in Texas, as of the
date of filing this complaint, Bumble has failed to comply with Texas’s franchise tax laws.
4. As of March 16, 2018, Bumble Trading Inc. forfeited its charter and corporate
privileges under Section 171.309 of the Texas Tax Code.
III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Bumble Trading Inc. consistent with the
requirements of the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution and the Texas Long
Arm Statute. Bumble conducts business, maintains an established place of business, and has
committed acts of patent infringement and/or has induced and/or has contributed to acts of patent
infringement by others in the Western District of the Texas, the State of Texas, and elsewhere in
the United States. In addition, Bumble’s headquarters and principal place of business is located
in Austin, Texas, within the District.
6. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over Match’s claims for patent
infringement pursuant to the Federal Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331
and 1338(a). This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over Match’s federal trade secret
claim pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1836-39 et seq. (“Defend Trade Secrets Act”) and 28 U.S.C. §§
1331 and 1343. The Court also has supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims pursuant
3

to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
7. Venue is proper in this District for Bumble Trading, Inc. under 35 U.S.C. §
1400(b) because Bumble Trading Inc. has a regular and established place of business in Austin,
Texas and has committed acts of infringement in the District by making, using, and selling the
Bumble app in the District. Venue is also proper for Match’s remaining claims against Bumble
under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because Bumble resides in the District, has its principal place of business
in the District, is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District, and a substantial part of the
events or omissions giving rise to the claim(s) occurred within the District.
8. The Waco Division of the Western District of Texas is convenient for both
parties. The Waco Federal Courthouse is less than 100 miles as the crow flies from both
Bumble’s Austin-based headquarters and Match’s Dallas-based headquarters.
9. Match also has a significant server deployment in the Waco area.
10. Bumble, meanwhile, employs at least four people at Baylor University. One
campus director, along with three campus ambassadors, plan events on and around the Baylor
campus to promote the Bumble app amongst Baylor University students.
IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

incubator owned by Match’s ultimate parent company, IAC/InterActive Corp (“IAC”). Sean
Rad, Justin Mateen, Jonathan Badeen, Joe Munoz, Chris Gulczynski, Whitney Wolfe-Herd, and
others formed the early Tinder team that conceived, designed, developed, and conducted initial
12. Chris Gulczynski’s position as Tinder was “Lead Designer” or “Chief Creative.”
4

Tinder app.
interface.
15. First released in September 2012 for iPhone devices, Tinder revolutionized online

17. Match has been awarded one utility patent, U.S. Patent No. 9,733,811 (the “’811
18. Match has been awarded another utility patent, U.S. Patent No. 9,959,023 (the
“’023 patent”), entitled “Match Process System and Method,” in connection with other
innovations embodied in Tinder app. That patent issued at 12:00 AM EDT on May 1, 2018, or
11:00 PM CDT on April 30, 2018.
5

Patent”), entitled “Display Screen or Portion Thereof with a Graphical User Interface of a
Mobile Device,” issued September 26, 2017. The ’314 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
20. Match also has a federally registered trademark, Reg. No. 4,465,926, for “swipe”
in connection with computer application software for mobile devices, namely, software for social
introduction and dating services. Tinder first used this mark in commerce on or around March
28, 2013. The registration for Tinder’s “swipe” mark is attached as Exhibit C.
21. Match is also currently seeking federal registration for “swipe left” and “swipe
right” in connection with mobile applications for social introduction and dating services.
22. Match also has common law trademark rights. For example, Match, through
Tinder, has used the marks “swipe left” and “swipe right” in connection with mobile applications
for social introduction and dating services nationwide. It first used these marks in commerce on
or around March 28, 2013.
23. “Swipe,” “swipe left,” and “swipe right” have become synonymous with the
Tinder app.
24. For example, the Telegraph listed “swipe” as a 2015 “word of the year,” writing
that its choice “reflect[ed] the popularity of the dating app Tinder, in which users can swipe their
finger across the screen to approve or dismiss would-be dates.”
25. The English Oxford Dictionary also specifically defines the terms “swipe right”
and “swipe left” in connection with the Tinder brand:
6

26. The English Oxford Dictionary also indicates that “swipe right (or left) of dating
app Tinder fame” was consistently one of the dictionary’s most “popular look-ups” in 2017.
27. Similarly, a recent episode of the game show “Jeopardy” indicated that “swipe
left” and “swipe right” were trademarks of the Tinder app.
28. Indeed, Tinder’s wordmarks have been famous since before Bumble even existed.
For example, in a February 2014 article in TIME Magazine, TIME described the swipe in Tinder
as “iconic.”
29. Similarly, in February 2015, a CIO.com article described Tinder’s “swipe right”
as a “trademark” of Tinder.
30. In fact, the Atlanta Hawks, in connection with Tinder, hosted a highly publicized
“Swipe Right Night” at an Atlanta Hawks game in January 2015, reflecting the then-existing
fame of the mark.
31. Match, through Tinder, also has legally protectable trade dress. For example, the
ornamental design claimed in US D798,314 is a non-functional design element with source-
identifying significance, either because it is inherently distinctive or has acquired secondary
meaning.
32. Match, through Tinder, regularly advertises this design, showing a user’s card
being swiped left or right.
7

33. Third-party Internet publications have recognized that this design is synonymous
with Tinder, describing the “Tinder swipable cards interface” as “famous” and as taking “the app
store by storm.”
34. This card swipe interface has also been described as “iconic.”
35. Indeed, this interface is so well-known and iconic that, when other businesses use
similar interfaces in connection with non-social network, non-dating apps, third-party
publications describe such uses as making the app look like Tinder.
36. As reflected by the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s decision to grant
the ’314 Patent, this card-swipe design is non-functional.
37. Similarly, Match has protectable trade dress in its “It’s a Match!” screen, shown
below:
8

38. As with the swipeable card interface, this screen has distinctive trade dress
source-identifying significance.
39. Match, through Tinder, also regularly uses this screen as a source-identifier in
various advertising materials, including in the Apple App Store, the Google Play Store, and on
YouTube.
40. Finally, Match, like most companies, has trade secrets related to confidential
business planning and research and development efforts.
41. Match Group, LLC owns all rights to the intellectual property identified above.
C. Whitney Wolfe-Herd, Chris Gulczynski, and Sarah Mick Leave Tinder and
Create a Tinder Copycat, Bumble.
42. As discussed above, the early Tinder team included Sean Rad, Justin Mateen,
Jonathan Badeen, Joe Munoz, Chris Gulczynski, Whitney Wolfe-Herd, and others. In December
2013, Chris Gulcznyski and Sarah Mick left Tinder. Wolfe-Herd left Tinder shortly thereafter.
Exactly one year after the effective date of Chris Gulczynski and Sarah Mick’s severance
agreements, Gulcznyski, Mick, Wolfe-Herd, and Andrey Andreev, the founder and CEO of
9

Badoo, another online dating competitor, launched “Bumble.”
43. Like Tinder, Bumble is a mobile dating app that relies on a blind mutual opt-in
premise before users communicate. For those seeking opposite gender relationships, Bumble
requires the female user to send the first message.
44. In the words of the publication TechCrunch, Bumble is “almost identical to
Tinder, complete with the design of the profile pages, setting, and swipe functionality.”
(emphasis in original).
45. Texas Monthly recently wrote of Bumble: “the app looked suspiciously like
Tinder. . . . [I]t has that famous swipe-right-to-match function, a piece of game play so brilliant
it had become a cultural reference point.”
46. Multiple other publications, such as BGR and the Los Angeles Business Journal,
have described Bumble as a “Tinder-lookalike.”
47. Like Tinder, Bumble users interact with “cards” containing photos of other users,
as shown below.
48. Like Tinder, Bumble users swipe left and right on cards containing user photos to
10

indicate whether or not the user is interested in the person shown.
49. Like Tinder, swiping left indicates a user is not interested in the person shown
while swiping right indicates that the user is interested in the person.
50. Like Tinder, two users cannot communicate over Bumble until they both indicate
interest in one another.
51. Like Tinder, if two users both indicate interest, a screen is shown indicating a
“match.”
52. Bumble’s “match” screen is nearly identical to Tinder’s. At the top of the screen
is a large exclamatory phrase set off in a font other than the app’s default font. Below that, text
indicating that the users have expressed a mutual interest is displayed in the app’s default font.
Below that, two circles, enclosed in white borders, display the photographs of the matched users.
Below that, both apps include similarly sized and shaped buttons first presenting the option to
either send a message and then, below that, giving the option to return to the swipe screen. Both
“match screens” are placed against a dark background. These similarities are shown in the
pictures below:
11

53. The “match queue” screen, where users can find new matches and ongoing
conversations with other matches, is also essentially identical. The screens include circle
contacts of various users at the top indicating matches for which no messages have been sent.
These contacts can be scrolled through horizontally. Below that is a “messages” or
“conversations” navigation menu, situated for vertical scrolling, where ongoing conversations
are selectable:
54. One third-party publication noted when reviewing Bumble’s user interface that
this “match queue” is “mostly lifted from Tinder.”
12

55. The look and feel within the chat screen is also nearly identical, as shown below:
56. Compounding the confusion from the copycat looks of the Bumble app, Bumble
also makes extensive use of Tinder’s registered “swipe” mark as well as its “swipe left” and
“swipe right” word marks.
57. For example, in its “About Us” section of its website, Bumble describes itself as
an app that “shows you the people you want to see and lets you connect by a mutual opt in by
swiping right.”
58. On its preview in the Apple App Store and Google Play Store, Bumble indicates
that it is an “industry-leading app [that] empowers users to swipe through potential connections
across three different modes . . . .”
59. Bumble’s “July 2017 Press Stats Visual,” located on its website, describes the
number of “swipes per month” Bumble receives in its app.
60. Bumble’s “the Beehive” blog also contains dozens of instances of Bumble using
the “swipe” term in connection with online or mobile matchmaking services.
61. Additionally, Bumble includes a section of “Frequently Asked Questions”
13

inquiring as to (1) why a user “r[a]n out of people to swipe on”; (2) why a user can’t “start a
conversation with somebody [the user has] swiped right on”; and (3) whether a user can “go
back” if the user “swiped the wrong way.” Bumble describes its “Backtrack” feature as a way to
deal with the situation where a user “accidentally swiped left.”
62. Bumble’s “backtrack” screen also makes prominent use of the swipe and swipe
left marks, asking a user to “confirm below to bring someone back that you swiped left on” and
to “swipe to backtrack”:
63. In press interviews, Bumble’s CEO repeatedly references “swipes,” “swipe lefts”
and “swipe rights.” For example, in a CNBC interview, located at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyOMHVrVrZo, Bumble’s CEO discusses “swiping for
opportunity,” “swiping to network,” “swipe left for no,” “swipe right for yes,” and that Bumble
was getting “a lot of swipes.”
64. Similarly, Bumble’s CEO described in a Fox Business interview on November
23, 2015, located at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5Ej92-mKkg, that on Bumble “you
swipe on one another, and so if you both mutually opt in to have a match . . . you swipe right on
her, she swipes right on you, it’s a connection.”
14

65. In another interview, from CNN Money on February 11, 2016, Bumble’s CEO
described Bumble’s app as “swip[ing] right or left on potential matches.”
66. Bumble’s official advertising also makes use of the “swipe right” term. In an
advertisement where two Bumble personnel provide tips for writing dating “bios,” one of the
“doctors” indicates that she would “swipe right” on a bio she found particularly clever.
67. In fact, it appears Bumble has taken additional, affirmative steps since its initial
release to co-opt Match’s trademarks and trade dress and trade off of Tinder’s powerful brand.
As discussed, in both apps, when two users express a mutual preference, a “match screen is
shown.”
68. Bumble’s original match screen looked similar to Tinder’s match screen, but it
had some notable differences, including the location of the of the message and “keep playing”
buttons:
69. Moreover, the screen previously animated the circle photographs to pop out and
drop below the “keep playing” and “start a chat” buttons, a feature not included in Tinder’s
match screen.
70. Bumble has since updated to its app to mirror Tinder’s. Moreover, Bumble
decided to change the phrase “you both liked each other” to “you both swiped each other.”
15

71. In July 2017, Bumble also released a paid feature, the “SuperSwipe.”
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’811 PATENT BY BUMBLE
herein.
73. Bumble directly infringes the ’811 patent by making and using a system that
practices the claims of Tinder’s patent.

platform;

16

potential match;


17





second user;


match;
the first user;

third user;
18

determining that the first user has expressed the negative preference
indication regarding third user;

fourth user; and



first request;



19





interface to display to the first user the graphical representation of
the first potential match;


77. Bumble’s servers practice all of the limitations of these claims, as set forth in the
example below. For example, Bumble’s servers electronically receive a plurality of user online-
20

dating profiles, each profile comprising traits of a respective user and associated with a social
networking platform. When a Bumble app user downloads and initially accesses the application,
the user device is required to set up a Bumble account that is associated with the user’s Facebook
account:
profile comprising traits of respective users. For example, the Frequently Asked Questions on
Bumble’s website indicates that Bumble “use[s] Facebook to help build your profile by
importing your name, age, school, and/or occupation.”
matching.
80. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of determining a set of potential matches
21

correspond with the determination of potential matches described in ¶ 78 above:
22

gesture:
83. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of, in response to determining that the first
23

potential match:
24

second user has expressed the positive preference indication regarding the first user. In the event
that the determination described in the immediately preceding paragraph results in a mutual
positive preference indication, Bumble determines to enable initial communication between the
first Bumble app user and the second Bumble app user. In the same-gender case, either
participant may communicate. In an opposite-gender case, Bumble makes the determination to
enable initial communication by allowing the female user to message the male user.
86. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of, in response to determining to enable
25

left:
a positive preference indication regarding a fourth potential match of the set of potential matches
at least by determining that the first user performed the first swiping gesture associated with a
graphical representation of the fourth potential match on the graphical user interface, the fourth
potential match corresponding to a fourth user. A Bumble user may affirmatively select (or
reject) another Bumble app user by swiping gestures. Bumble makes a determination based on
this Bumble user indication (i.e., swipe right or swipe left). Bumble determines whether a first
26

Bumble app user has made a positive preference indication in the form of a first swiping gesture.
92. Bumble also indirectly infringes the ’811 Patent by inducing infringement by
94. Bumble was also aware of the ’811 Patent. For example, on a February 7, 2018
earnings call, Match Group, Inc. CEO Mandy Ginsberg discussed the ’811 Patent.
95. That same day, the online publication Axios indicated that it had reached out to
others would infringe the ’811 patent but took deliberate steps to avoid confirming that it was
27

99. Bumble also indirectly infringes the ’811 Patent by contributing to infringement
the Bumble app for interacting with Bumble’s servers. Bumble’s end-user directly infringed
infringing system.
for use in infringement of the ’811 patent and that these components are not a staple article or
example, as discussed above, Bumble is and has been aware of the ’811 Patent. To Match’s
knowledge, Bumble has not attempted to avoid infringement of the patent or to design around it.
Bumble designed its app to mirror Tinder and its swipe functionality specifically to compete with
28

Tinder and avoid a barrier to entry in the market by mimicking Tinder’s swipe functionality in
102. The inventions claimed in the ’811 patent are not directed to an abstract idea.
103. Specifically, the inventors of the continuation-in-part aspect of the ’811 patent set
out to improve the user interface functionality in dating and other matchmaking apps. The swipe
on a graphical representation of a user to denote positive, and of a different swipe on the
graphical representation to denote negative, in connection with a mutual opt-in matchmaking
app, was a non-conventional, concrete improvement in how touch screen user interfaces interact
with users sifting through and making binary choices, such as indicating positive or negative
preferences related to potential matches. Although the general gesture of swiping may have been
known in the prior art, the specific application to a graphical representation of a user in the
specific matchmaking context claimed, in order to make binary choices expressing a preference
or lack thereof regarding potential matches, was unknown and unconventional.
permitted to communicate unless and until a match is made, user profiles are specifically
“online-dating profiles” and those profiles must be “associated with a social networking
29

platform,” a type of platform that is itself computer specific. The claims further describe various
actions of a graphical user interface that provide certain information at certain times in response
to certain types of inputs. This is not conventional post-solution activity in order to monopolize
an abstract idea of matchmaking or even mutual opt-in matchmaking. Instead, these limitations
recite a particularly advantageous computer embodiment of a matchmaking process that also
solves computer-specific problems related to the ease of creating fake accounts and profiles, the
“conventional.”
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’023 PATENT BY

BUMBLE
herein.
108. Bumble directly infringes the ’023 Patent at least by making and using a system
that practices the claims of Tinder’s patent.
109. For example, independent claim 3 of the ’023 Patent recites:
A system, comprising:
present a graphical representation of a first item of information of a

plurality of items of information, the first item of information comprising
a graphical representation of a first online dating profile associated with a
first user, wherein the interface is further operable to present the graphical
representation of the first item of information of the plurality of items of
information as a first card of a stack of cards;
30

detect a gesture associated with the graphical representation of the first

item of information, the gesture corresponding to a positive preference
indication associated with the first item of information, the positive
preference indication associated with the first item of information
comprising an expression of approval for the first user associated with the
first online dating profile, wherein the processor is further operable to
detect a right swiping direction associated with the gesture;
store the positive preference indication associated with the first item of
information in response to detecting the gesture; and
the interface further operable to:
automatically present a graphical representation of a second item of

information of the plurality of items of information in response to the
processor detecting the gesture, the second item of information comprising
a graphical representation of a second online dating profile associated with
a second user; and
automatically remove the graphical representation of the first item of

information in response to detecting the gesture.
110. A user device running the Bumble app comprises the claimed system. The
Bumble app comprises an interface. When in operation, the app presents a graphical
representation of a first item of information of a plurality of items of information, the first item
of information comprising a graphical representation of a first online dating profile associated
with a first user. Specifically, the app presents a graphical representation of a first online dating
profile at least by showing a picture of a user associated with an online dating profile:
31

111. Bumble’s interface is further operable to present the graphical representation of
the first item of information (i.e., the graphical representation of the online dating profile) as a
first card of a stack of cards. Specifically, Bumble’s graphical interface presents dating profiles
in a stacked, card-based format:
112. User devices compatible with the Bumble app include processors.
32

113. When the Bumble app is downloaded and installed, those processors are operable
to detect a gesture associated with the graphical representation of the first item of information,
the gesture corresponding to a positive preference indication associated with the first item of
information, the positive preference indication associated with the first item of information
comprising an expression of approval for the first user associated with the first online dating
profile. Specifically, when the Bumble app is operating on a device, it detects a gesture—a right
swiping gesture—performed on the graphical representation of the online dating profile to
indicate a positive preference for the user associated with that profile:
114. As shown above, the code comprising the Bumble app, when downloaded,
installed, and operating on a user device renders the device’s processor operable to detect a right
swiping direction associated with the positive preference indication gesture.
115. The code comprising the Bumble app also renders the device’s processor operable
to store that positive preference indication associated with the first item of information in
response to detecting the gesture. Specifically, after the app detects that a user has swiped right
on the graphical representation of the dating profile, it stores data in memory indicating a
positive preference before transmitting that data to Bumble’s servers.
116. Bumble’s app also comprises an interface that automatically presents a graphical
representation of a second item of information of the plurality of items of information in
response to the processor detecting the gesture, the second item of information comprising a
33

graphical representation of a second online dating profile associated with a second user. In the
Bumble app, in response to the processor detecting the positive indication gesture, the Bumble
app automatically presents the entire graphical representation of a second online dating profile
associated with a second user:
117. As shown above, the Bumble app also automatically removes the graphical
representation of the first item of information in response to detecting the gesture.
120. If Bumble did not know that the actions it has encouraged and continues to
encourage constitute infringement of the ’023 Patent, Bumble nevertheless subjectively believes
there was and is a high probability that others have and will infringe the ’023 Patent but has
taken and is taking deliberate steps to avoid confirming that it is actively inducing infringement
by others.
34

operating Bumble’s app. These software components are, for example, the Bumble app, and the
download package that contains the Bumble app. Bumble’s end-users directly infringed the ’023
Patent by, for example, installing and using the Bumble app in the United States to use the
Bumble system in the United States. These software components are known by Bumble to be
especially made or adapted for use in Bumble’s infringing system.
for use in infringement of the ’023 Patent and that these components are not a staple article or
subjectively believes there was and is a high probability that these components were especially
made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of the ’023 Patent and that these
components are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-
infringing use but has taken and is taking deliberate steps to avoid confirming the same.
123. Bumble’s infringement of the ’023 Patent is and has been willful at least as of the
filing of this complaint. At that point, Bumble at a minimum knew or had reason to know of
certain facts which would lead a reasonable person to realize their actions were unreasonably
risky with respect to infringement of the ’023 Patent. Bumble has not attempted to avoid
infringement of the patent or to design around it. And Bumble designed its app to mirror Tinder
and its swipe functionality specifically to compete with Tinder and avoid a barrier to entry in the
market by mimicking Tinder’s swipe functionality in connection with an online matchmaking
app.
35

124. The inventions claimed in the ’023 Patent are not directed to an abstract idea.
125. Specifically, the inventors of the continuation-in-part aspect of the ’023 Patent set
out to improve the user interface functionality in online dating apps. Far from claiming the
general concept of matchmaking or even mutual opt-in matchmaking on a computer or over the
Internet, the ’023 Patent recites a new, innovative interface design that reflects a non-
conventional, concrete improvement in graphical interfaces for online dating.
126. For example, claim 3 recites multiple specific, concrete aspects related to an
improved interface. The claim requires that the graphical representation of a dating profile be
represented as the first card of a stack of cards, that the system be operable to detect a gesture
corresponding to a positive preference indication of the dating profile, that the interface be
operable to detect a right swiping direction associated with that positive preference gesture, that
a graphical representation of a second online dating profile is automatically presented in
response to detecting the positive preference gesture, and that the graphical representation of the
first data profile is automatically removed.
127. As with the ’811 Patent, the requirements of this claim reflect a non-conventional,
concrete improvement in how touch screen user interfaces interact with users sifting through and
making binary choices. Even if the general gesture of swiping was known in the prior art, the
specific application of a right swipe gesture to indicate a positive preference on a card-based
online dating interface was unknown and unconventional and provides specific, concrete
improvements to the interface.
36

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION: DESIGN PATENT INFRINGEMENT

herein.
130. Bumble’s app also infringes Match’s Design Patent, D798,314.
131. The ’314 Patent claims an ornamental aspect of Tinder’s app design related to
swiping left or right on cards containing photographs.
patent:
134. As discussed above, Bumble looks “virtually identical” to Tinder and infringes on
37

this ornamental design.
into believing that Bumble’s design is the same as Match’s patented design.
time at Tinder. Gulczynski previously assigned his rights to the patent (and all other relevant
38

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION: TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT

UNDER 15 U.S.C. § 1114(a)
139. Match incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
140. Match has received a federal registration for the mark “swipe” in connection with
computer application software for mobile devices—software for social introduction and dating
services.
141. Match, through Tinder, first used the mark “swipe” in commerce on or around
March 28, 2013 and continues to do so.
142. Bumble, by using Match’s “swipe” mark to compete with Tinder in the market for
software for social introduction and dating services,” violated 15 U.S.C. § 1114. As discussed
above, Bumble is prominently using Match’s “swipe” mark throughout its app and promotional
activities. Bumble’s activities are causing, and unless enjoined, will continue to cause a likelihood
of confusion and deception of members of the public, and, additionally, injury to Match and
Tinder’s reputation and goodwill as reflected in the “swipe” mark. Bumble’s use of the swipe
mark will also actually deceive the public or is at least likely to deceive the public regarding the
source, sponsorship, and/or affiliation of Bumble’s app.
143. These actions have also materially damaged the value of Match’s registered “swipe”
mark.
144. As a proximate result of Bumble’s actions, Match has suffered damages, including,
but not limited to, lost revenue and loss of goodwill associated with its Tinder app.
and malicious intent to trade on goodwill associated with Match and Tinder’s “swipe” mark.
39

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION: TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT

UNDER 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)
herein.
147. Match is the owner of word marks “swipe left” and “swipe right” in connection
with internet-based dating and matchmaking and similar services since at least on around March
28, 2013. Match has used and continues to use these marks throughout the United States.
148. These marks are valid and enforceable and in full force and effort.
149. As described above, Bumble uses Match’s “swipe left” and “swipe right” marks
prominently. Bumble’s doing so is likely to cause confusion or mistake or deceive the public as
to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of the Bumble app.
and malicious intent to trade on goodwill associated with the “swipe right” and “swipe left” word
marks.
151. These actions have caused damages to Match, including lost Tinder revenue as well
as damages to Tinder’s brand and associated goodwill.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION: INFRINGEMENT OF TRADE DRESS

UNDER 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)
herein.
153. Match is also the owner of legally protectable trade dress. For example, the non-
functional, ornamental design claimed in the ’314 Patent is a design that is either inherently
distinctive or has acquired secondary meaning designating Match and Tinder as the source of the
40

product.
154. In its state court petition, Bumble has alleged that the ’314 Patent’s claim scope
extends only to the precise angle of the cards shown in the figures.
155. Bumble is incorrect. But to the extent that the ’314 Patent’s claim scope is
limited to cards swiped at the angles shown in Figures 1 and 2 of the ’314 Patent, Match
nevertheless has protectable trade dress in the non-functional, ornamental design of cards
showing photographs tilted in both the directions shown in Figures 1 and 2 of the ’314 Patent as
well as the directions utilized by the Bumble app, as shown below:
156. This is because the visual impression of the Tinder app allows for card swipes at
both angles depending on a user’s particular thumb movement. The Tinder app allows for cards
to be swiped at the same angle as the cards in the Bumble app, and has always done so:
41

157. As described above, this card-based swipe interface has been described as
“famous” or “iconic” by multiple third-party publications.
158. This interface was first used in commerce some time before September 1, 2012.
159. By including this same non-functional ornamental design, Bumble’s app is likely
to cause confusion or mistake or deceive the public as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of
the Bumble app.
160. Match is also the owner of trade dress related to Tinder’s “It’s a Match!” screen,
shown here:
42

161. The Tinder app has included this same or similar design since it was initially
released.
162. The “It’s a Match Screen!” was first used in commerce on August 2, 2012.
163. As described above, Tinder uses this screen in various advertising materials,
including on the App Store, Google Play Store, and on YouTube.
164. This overall design is non-functional.
Bumble app.
166. As also discussed above, Bumble’s similar screen is virtually identical to
Tinder’s.
Bumble app.
168. At least because of the prior affiliation of Bumble officers with Tinder and
43

because of Bumble’s competition with Tinder, Bumble’s actions also demonstrate an intentional,
willful, and malicious intent to trade on goodwill associated with Match’s trade dress.
169. These actions have caused damages to Match in the form of lost Tinder revenue
as well as damages to Tinder’s brand and associated goodwill.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION: TRADEMARK DILUTION

herein.
171. Certain of Bumble’s actions also constitute trade mark and trade dress dilution by
blurring under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).
172. Match’s wordmark “swipe right” is famous to the general public.
173. As discussed above, the phrase “swipe right” is included in the Oxford English
Dictionary, specifically associated with the Tinder app.
174. “Swipe right,” especially in the connection with “swipe left,” is often described
by third parties as a famous “cultural phenomenon.”
175. These third parties describe the cultural phenomenon specifically in reference to
Tinder and the Tinder app.
176. In light of Tinder’s own extensive marketing as well as the descriptions of third-
parties, “swipe right” has become effectively a “household name” identifying the Tinder brand
and Tinder app.
177. After Tinder’s “swipe right” mark became famous, Bumble began using “swipe
right” in connection with its app. Bumble’s routine use of the mark “swipe right” in connection
with a direct competitor mobile dating service has caused and is likely to cause dilution by
blurring, diluting the distinctiveness of “swipe right” as a brand signifier for Tinder and/or
Match.
44

178. These actions have harmed the reputation of goodwill associated with Tinder.
179. Bumble’s dilution of Tinder’s “swipe right” mark has been done willfully and
intentionally.
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION: TEXAS UNFAIR COMPETITION.

herein.
181. As discussed above, Match’s trademarks and trade dress are valid marks in full
force and effect.
182. Bumble knowingly and willfully used these marks and this trade dress in
commerce through the promotion of its app and in the app itself.
183. Bumble’s actions are likely to cause consumer confusion, cause consumer
mistake, and/or deceive ordinarily prudent consumers as to the affiliation, connection,
association, sponsorship, or approval of Match and/or Tinder products because Bumble’s actions
suggest that its own app originates form, is sponsored by, is authorized by, or is otherwise
connected with Tinder and/or Match.
184. These actions have materially damaged the value of Match’s Tinder marks and
trade dress.
185. As a result, Match has suffered damages, including lost Tinder revenue and
damage to goodwill associated with Tinder.
186. Bumble’s actions have caused injury to Match, and Match is entitled to damages
caused thereby, including punitive damages as a result of Bumble’s malicious and willful
actions.
45

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION: MISAPPROPRIATION OF TRADE SECRETS UNDER

THE DEFEND TRADE SECRETS ACT AND THE TEXAS UNIFORM TRADE
SECRETS ACT
herein.
188. In connection with their employment at Hatch Labs/Tinder/Match, at least Chris
Gulczynski and Sarah Mick were given access to certain confidential information related to
proposed Tinder features.
189. Gulczynski and Mick agreed as part of their employment to keep confidential all
confidential information and to not disclose such information to anyone or to use such
information for anyone’s benefit other than Hatch Labs/Tinder/Match.
190. While at Tinder, Gulcynski and Mick were involved in development for a
potential “undo” function for the Tinder app.
191. The concept of the “undo,” as discussed internally at Tinder, involved allowing all
users three “undos.” Once an “undo” was used, it would take a certain period of time for that
“undo” to replenish. If the user did not want to wait that time period for the undo to replenish,
the user could speed up the process by promoting that app via social media.
192. For example, the image below reflects an internal Tinder mock-up of the “undo”
idea in which Gulcynski and Mick were involved:
46

193. In March of 2015, Bumble implemented a nearly, if not literally, identical concept
in its “Backtrack” feature. In Bumble’s own words on its website:
194. To be sure, Tinder had previously announced its “rewind” functionality before
Bumble released its rewind feature. But Tinder’s “rewind” feature was different and remains
different from this confidential concept misappropriated from Gulcyzsnki and Mick’s time at
Tinder.
195. Tinder’s rewind allows for “Tinder Plus” users to “rewind” errant left swipes in
connection with a paid subscription.
196. Bumble’s backtrack feature, in contrast, plainly mirrors the three “undos” that
replenish over time and/or with promoting the app on social media outlets.
197. At least because of their confidentiality agreements, Gulczysnki and/or Mick
knew or had reason to know at the time they began using these concepts that they were acquired
47

by improper means or under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain the secrecy of or
limit the use of the secret.
198. Additionally, because Gulczysnki and Mick were co-founders and executives at
Bumble, Bumble used this trade secret knowing or with reason to know that the secret was
acquired by improper means, acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain the
secrecy of the trade secret, or was derived from a person (Gulczynski and/or Mick) who owed a
duty to Match and Tinder to maintain the secrecy of the idea.
199. Bumble’s app, which uses this trade secret, is used in interstate commerce.
200. In light of the totality of the circumstances between Match/Tinder and Bumble,
this misappropriation was willful and malicious misappropriation, made with conscious
disregard of the rights of Match and Tinder in the trade secret.
201. Indeed, Bumble’s misappropriation related to “backtrack” appears to reflect a
pattern of disregard for Match’s trade secret rights.
202. While Gulczynski and Mick were still at Tinder, Sean Rad came up with an idea
to implement picture messaging within the Tinder app.
203. Although dating apps had been reluctant to include a direct picture messaging
function because of concerns related to unsolicited lewd photographs, Rad conceived the idea of
allowing direct photograph messaging but sending only a deliberately blurred photo that the
photo recipient would be required to click before viewing an unblurred image. In this way,
anyone looking over your shoulder could not see the message unless the recipient clicked it.
Further, the user recipient could, based on context, determine whether the sent picture was one
the recipient was comfortable viewing in public (or ever).
204. After Rad conceived of the idea, he asked Gulczynski to perform a mock-up of
48

the concept. Below is a PDF screenshot of Gulczynski’s design mock-up at Tinder:
205. The two icons with the hands over them would, once clicked, display the full
photo.
206. In February 2015, after Gulczynski and Mick left Tinder to work at Bumble,
Bumble implemented the identical concept, complete with same white hand surrounded by a
white circle over the blurred image:
49

207. When Bumble released the feature, Bumble indicated that it was implementing a
“Snapchat-like” feature, implying that Bumble was co-opting a feature from Snapchat.
208. The truth is that Gulczynski and/or Mick took the idea from confidential
development discussions at Tinder.
209. These co-founders of Bumble that previously worked with Tinder have
inappropriately used confidential information related to Bumble’s backtrack function.
210. It is currently unknown and unknowable to Match whether Bumble is using any
algorithms or source code acquired at Tinder from Gulczysnki, Mick, and/or Wolfe-Herd’s time
at Tinder. It is also unknown and unknowable to Match whether Bumble acquired or is using
other confidential information acquired from Gulczysnki, Mick, and/or Wolfe-Herd’s time at
Tinder.
211. Bumble’s use of the backtrack/undo trade secret constitutes a misappropriation of
trade secrets in violation of the Defend Trade Secrets Act and the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets
Act.
212. Bumble’s misappropriation of the “undo” trade secret has caused damage to
Match. It has been forced to compete for users and revenue against a competitor implementing
Match’s own confidential idea, developed at Match, for Match, by personnel being paid by
Match.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the entry of a judgment from this Court:
1. Judgment in Plaintiff’s favor and against Defendant on all causes of action alleged
herein;
50

2. A preliminary and/or permanent injunction restraining Defendant, and its agents,
acting in concert with them, from directly or indirectly violating Match Group LLC’s utility
patent rights, design patent rights, rights under the Lanham Act, rights arising from common law
unfair competition, and from any further misappropriation or unauthorized use of Match/Tinder’s
trade secrets.
a. Damages assessed against Defendant pursuant to the Defend Trade Secrets Act of
2016, including compensatory damages, unjust enrichment or restitution damages,
b. Damages assessed against Defendant pursuant to the Texas Uniform Trade Secret
Act, including compensatory damages, unjust enrichment or restitution damages,
c. Damages assessed against Defendant pursuant to the Lanham Act, including
compensatory damages, statutory damages, treble damages, restitution, including
disgorgement of profits,
d. Damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284, including enhancement and including
e. Damages under 35 U.S.C. § 289, including Bumble’s total profit and revenue
realized and derived from its infringement of U.S. Patent D798,314 and in an
amount not less than a reasonable royalty.
51

f. Damages for Defendant’s common law unfair competition, including punitive
damages
4. For Plaintiffs’ reasonable attorney’s fees;
7. If an injunction is not granted, that Plaintiffs be awarded an ongoing licensing fee;
and
Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs demand a trial by
jury on all issues triable of right by a jury.
52

DATED: April 30, 2018 Respectfully submitted,

Bradley W. Caldwell
John F. Summers
Warren J. McCarty, III
Illinois State Bar No. 6313452
Email: wmccarty@caldwellcc.com
Dallas, Texas 75201
Telephone: (214) 888-4848
Facsimile: (214) 888-4849
John P. Palmer
State Bar. 15430600
Email: palmer@namanhowell.com
Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee, PLLC
400 Austin Avenue, 8th Floor
P.O. Box 1470
Waco, TX 76701
Telephone: (254) 755-4100
Facsimile: (254) 754-6331
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

MATCH GROUP, LLC

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically with the
Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to all counsel
registered as Filing Users on this 30th day of April, 2018.

Bradley W. Caldwell
53

Exhibit 3
012312456 789
8ÿ717ÿÿÿÿ

ÿ7
!
"#
Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1-3 Filed 09/26/18 12345678295:9;942<5=24>
Page 2 of 7 PageID 153
?@A@ÿCDEFGDHFÿIJKGFÿLMNOPQÿ
RSEFSGTÿCDEFGDHFÿJUÿVSWXEÿYRXHJZÿ
INONMÿC[I\PVÿ][^ÿI_APÿ̀aÿbacdeHfegggdge_C_ehIi
ÿ ÿ
=klmnÿopqrs7ÿtt1ÿuvÿwrxyz{ÿ9pk|}~ÿ~mvÿ <kl{ÿ6}z{|ÿ;;ÿ
2}~{|ÿlqÿr|{ÿ2zk~ÿ<ÿ2zyp}nlÿ rpÿ<{xk~|ÿ8zk}~l}ÿ
4{{pp{|ÿlqÿr|{ÿ{p{ÿ1vÿ=k~{ :klrp{ÿqÿ3r}lÿÿ8kl{~lÿ
1kr{ÿÿ8kl{~lÿ~p}~{x{~l ÿ rp}|}ml}q~ÿ6{|{pkzÿr{l}q~
XDTFDUU
iXFHÿGJKÿMMI p{sp{{~l{|ÿyGXSÿR@ÿIXSÿ
1kz|{zzÿ1kk|ÿk~|ÿ1rppÿ81ÿ
ÿ1{|kpÿ3sp}~ÿ4|v7ÿ3l{ÿÿ
<kzzk7ÿ9ÿÿ
ÿ
6kÿÿ
5xk}zÿymkz|{zz mkz|{zzmmvmqxÿÿ
¡¢£¤ÿ£¦¦§¨©¢ªÿ
£¦¦§¨©¢ªÿ¦§ÿ«¢ÿÿ©§¦¬¢¤ÿ
ÿ
hJTÿ]@ÿAK®®SGEÿ
<kzzk7ÿ9ÿÿ
ÿ
6kÿÿ
5xk}zÿ̄rxx{p mkz|{zzmmvmqxÿÿ
¡¢£¤ÿ£¦¦§¨©¢ªÿ
£¦¦§¨©¢ªÿ¦§ÿ«¢ÿÿ©§¦¬¢¤ÿ
ÿ
iSDEEXÿ^DHXGEÿA®DFÿ
o}zzkxÿk~|ÿ3x}ln7ÿtt8ÿ
ÿ3qrlnÿ°kn}~lq~ÿ2u{~r{ÿ
=kpnkzz7ÿ9ÿÿ
±²ÿ
6kÿ±²ÿ
5xk}zÿx{z}k }zzkxx}lnzkvmqxÿÿ
¡¢£¤ÿ£¦¦§¨©¢ªÿ
£¦¦§¨©¢ªÿ¦§ÿ«¢ÿÿ©§¦¬¢¤ÿ
ÿ
RXGGSTÿh@ÿiHIXGFÿÿNNNÿ
<kzzk7ÿ9ÿÿ
ÿ
6kÿÿ
5xk}zÿxmmkpl mkz|{zzmmvmqxÿÿ
¡¢£¤ÿ£¦¦§¨©¢ªÿÿ
£¦¦§¨©¢ªÿ¦§ÿ«¢ÿ©§¦¬¢¤ÿ
ÿ
$
%!118&
"#
'(1')91*
+%
% ,2-...-6./533.-505045 51-
012312456 789
8ÿ717ÿÿÿÿ

ÿ7
!
"#
Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1-3 Filed 09/26/18 1234ÿPage
67ÿ689:;
3 of<
ÿ7 PageID 154
=>?>@ÿBCDEFFÿG?HIJÿKÿLEEÿ
MNONÿPCQÿRSTUÿ
V>WCXÿYZÿT[TU\]RSTUÿ
^_`SaÿT``]SRUUÿ
b>Qcÿ^_`SaÿT`S][\\Rÿ
d?>HFcÿe>F?Efg@>?>@JCDEFFNWC?ÿÿ
hiijklmnÿijÿpmÿljiqrms
ÿ
tNÿ
u;v;4w84x
yz:{9;ÿ|<8w}4~ÿ47 fEefEE@IEÿ12;3ÿ7ÿu<8x24ÿ
CCFEÿLLMÿ
RRRSÿE@EÿCÿIJEÿ?EfHW>ÿ
=EDÿCfXÿ=ÿRUU\[ÿ
^_R_aÿST][UUUÿ
b>Qcÿ_R_]ST][_T`ÿ
d?>HFcÿf>IC@gWCCFENWC?ÿÿ
mhsÿhiijklmnÿÿ
kjÿhrÿqrmÿÿ
hiijklmnÿijÿpmÿljiqrmsÿ
ÿ
2;ÿ7ÿ3;984ÿ
CCFEÿLLMÿ
R_ÿME@@F>@H>ÿE@EXÿ=Vÿ
GHIEÿTUUÿ
V>JH@IC@Xÿÿ_UUUS]_SUUÿ
_U_]S_]TUUÿ
b>Qcÿ_U_]S_]Tÿ
d?>HFcÿfDJEF>@gWCCFENWC?ÿÿ
mhsÿhiijklmnÿ
kjÿhrÿqrmÿÿÿ
ÿ
|3;2w2<;ÿx;;424ÿÿÿ
WCCFXÿG?HIJXÿMNNÿ
\UUÿfEWE@IÿCfIÿ
GHIEÿRÙUÿ
>FF>XÿYZÿT`_URÿ
^_RSaÿ\]``Tÿ
d?>HFcÿIIEE@C@g?WCCF?HIJNWC?ÿÿ
imk qlhims¡ÿ¢£¤¢¥¤¦¢¥§ÿÿ
mhsÿhiijklmnÿÿ
ÿ
u;<24ÿÿu8zÿ
YJEÿ>WÿbHf?XÿMNNÿ
_RÿdGdÿLCCeÿ\_\XÿGHIEÿS\Uÿ
YFEfXÿYZÿT`TURÿ
U\T̈U`]RRRTÿ
b>QcÿU\¨`R]_`S\ÿ
d?>HFcÿ>Wg>WHf?NWC?ÿÿ
$
%!118&
"#
'(1')91*
+%
% ,2-...-6./533.-505045 21-
012312456 789
8ÿ717ÿÿÿÿ

ÿ7
!
"#
Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1-3 Filed 09/26/18 12234567
Page ÿ423ÿ
of 96ÿ
7 532:;6<155
PageID
ÿ
ÿ
>?@A@BÿDEÿFGH@BIÿ
JKLMMNÿOPQRSTÿUVWVÿ
XYYÿWZ[\K[]RÿWM^ZRÿ
O^QR[ÿ_`YYÿ
abNNb\Tÿcdÿe`fY_ÿ
gf_hiÿjeklhYYYÿ
mbnoÿgf_hiÿjeklhYhhÿ
pPbQNoÿ\qMN[]\rPKsMMN\PQRSVKMPÿÿ
264t:5126<uÿvwxvyxzvy{ÿÿ
12234567ÿ23ÿ96ÿ532:;6<
D|?@ÿ}~H@ DG@?ÿ@?
YX_fY_k _ÿWJUcÿgÿmQNQ]ÿ[[ÿÿhYYÿZ[K[QRÿ]^P[ZÿY`hfl_YèjjhYiVÿMÿO^PPM]\ÿZ[^[\R[
bRÿRSQ\ÿRQP[TÿQN[ÿÿJbRKSÿZM^TÿWVÿgRRbKSP[]R\oÿÿ_ÿpnSQQRÿTÿÿfÿpnSQQRÿTÿÿX
pnSQQRÿWTÿÿhÿWQQNÿWM[ZÿOS[[RigUbNP[ZTÿMS]iÿgp]R[Z[oÿYX_fY_ki
YX_fY_k fÿpÿeÿaOWOpÿOccpJpcÿQN[ÿÿJbRKSÿZM^TÿWVÿgUbNP[ZTÿMS]i
gp]R[Z[oÿYX_fY_ki
YX_fY_k ÿWb\[ÿb\\Q][ÿRMÿ^[ÿM[ZRÿUQRPb]VÿWJÿÿÿpmpWcÿcpÿap
cOÿOÿUcÿmÿcpÿWOpÿJpVÿUpOpÿUUpaÿcpOpÿap
cOÿcÿcpÿWOpÿJpÿÿpWÿaWJpcÿccÿÿmpÿ
cOÿWOpVÿgiÿgp]R[Z[oÿYX_jfY_ki
YX_fY_k ÿWOpÿpmppaÿRMÿJbQ\RZbR[ÿ^[ÿ[Z[ÿWVÿJb]\s[Vÿgiÿgp]R[Z[oÿYX_jfY_ki
YX_jfY_k Xÿ[MZRÿM]ÿUbR[]RcZb[PbZsÿ\[]RÿRMÿVOVÿUbR[]Rÿb]ÿcZb[PbZsÿQK[Vÿgiÿgp]R[Z[o
YX_jfY_ki
YX_jfY_k hÿppOcÿmÿOOWpÿmÿOJJOÿÿJbRKSÿZM^TÿWVÿgUbNP[ZTÿMS]i
gp]R[Z[oÿYX_jfY_ki
YXfYfY_k `ÿO^PPM]\ÿ\\^[ÿb\ÿRMÿ^PN[ÿcZbQ]ÿ]KVÿgRiÿgp]R[Z[oÿYXfYfY_ki
YXf_fY_k ÿOJJOÿ[R^Z][ÿpn[K^R[ÿÿJbRKSÿZM^TÿWVÿ^PN[ÿcZbQ]ÿ]KVÿ\[Z[ÿM]
XfYfY_kTÿb]\q[Zÿ^[ÿh_YfY_kVÿgUbNP[ZTÿMS]iÿgp]R[Z[oÿYXf_fY_ki
YXfefY_k eÿ]MM\[ÿJcÿMZÿpnR[]\QM]ÿMÿcQP[ÿRMÿmQN[ÿ]\q[Zÿÿ^PN[ÿcZbQ]ÿ]KVV
gRRbKSP[]R\oÿÿ_ÿUZMM\[ÿZ[ZiVÿJMRQM]\ÿZ[[ZZ[ÿRMÿ^[ÿ[Z[ÿWVÿJb]\s[V
gOR[[]\M]TÿcS[MMZ[iÿgp]R[Z[oÿYXfefY_ki
YXfkfY_k ÿc[nRÿZ[ZÿcÿeÿJMRQM]ÿMZÿpnR[]\QM]ÿMÿcQP[ÿRMÿ]\q[Zÿ[]R[Z[ÿÿ^[
[Z[ÿWVÿJb]\s[VÿbQ]ÿKM]\Q[Z[ÿRS[ÿJMRQM]ÿb]ÿRS[ÿZM^]\ÿRS[Z[MZTÿRS[ÿWM^ZR
cOÿa[[]b]R\ÿJMRQM]ÿMZÿpnR[]\QM]ÿMÿcQP[ÿRMÿ[\M]ÿRMÿUNbQ]RQ\ÿWMPNbQ]RV
a[[]b]R\ÿ[bNQ][ÿRMÿZ[\M]ÿQ\ÿJbÿeTÿfY_kVgcSQ\ÿQ\ÿbÿR[nRlM]Nÿ[]RZÿ[][ZbR[ÿÿRS[
KM^ZRVÿcS[Z[ÿQ\ÿ]MÿMK^P[]Rÿb\\MKQbR[ÿqQRSÿRSQ\ÿ[]RZViÿg]Kiÿgp]R[Z[oÿYXfkfY_ki
YXfkfY_k ÿO[R[\[Rÿa[bNQ][\oÿ^PN[ÿcZbQ]ÿ]KVÿb]\q[Zÿ^[ÿ̀efY_kVÿgRiÿgp]R[Z[o
YXfkfY_ki
YXfkfY_k kÿcWpÿMÿRRMZ][ÿ[bZb]K[ÿÿJ[NQ\\bÿQKSbZ\ÿOPQRSÿM]ÿ[SbNÿMÿJbRKSÿZM^T
WVÿRRMZ][ÿJ[NQ\\bÿQKSbZ\ÿOPQRSÿb[ÿRMÿbZRÿJbRKSÿZM^TÿWgRoNbiÿgOPQRST
J[NQ\\biÿgp]R[Z[oÿYXfkfY_ki
YXfkfY_k jÿcWpÿMÿRRMZ][ÿ[bZb]K[ÿÿZbN[ÿVÿWbNq[NNÿM]ÿ[SbNÿMÿJbRKSÿZM^T
$
%!118&
"#
'(1')91*
+%
% ,2-...-6./533.-505045 .1-
012312456 789
8ÿ717ÿÿÿÿ

ÿ7
!
"#
2234ÿ67789:;<ÿ=9>?@;<ÿA4ÿ3>@?B;@@ÿ>??;?ÿ78ÿC>97<ÿD>
Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1-3 Filed 09/26/18 7EFÿG9
Page 8HC7Iÿ223J
5 of C7<KC156
PageID @>LÿJ3>@?B;@@I
=9>?@;<LÿJM:7;9;?KÿNOPQRPQNSRL
NTPONPQNSR SNÿ6DMUVMVÿ3WDX26YUZÿ[\]^_`âaÿc]d̀eÿfghijkÿllmnoÿp^goÿ̀qrs_tstÿmhrj\]^_`
>u>v:w7ÿ=Hxy@;ÿZ9>?v:uÿY:E4ÿ>x;:?v:uIÿzv@;?ÿy<ÿD>7EFÿG98HCIÿ2234ÿJ677>EFx;:7wKÿ{ÿS
M|Fvyv7ÿ6Iÿ{ÿQÿM|Fvyv7ÿ=Iÿ{ÿOÿM|Fvyv7ÿ3LJ3>@?B;@@Iÿ=9>?@;<LÿJM:7;9;?KÿNTPONPQNSRL
N}PNOPQNSR SSÿ~:8CC8w;?ÿDWZYWUÿz89ÿM|7;:wv8:ÿ8zÿZvx;ÿ78ÿv@;ÿ6:wB;9ÿ9;ÿSNÿ6x;:?;?ÿ38xC@>v:7ÿy<
=Hxy@;ÿZ9>?v:uÿY:E44ÿJ677>EFx;:7wKÿ{ÿSÿX98C8w;?ÿW9?;9L4ÿD87v8:wÿ9;z;99;?ÿ78ÿH?u;
;zz9;<ÿ34ÿD>:w;4ÿJV>EHwIÿV;98:LÿJM:7;9;?KÿN}PNOPQNSRL
N}PNOPQNSR SQÿDWZYWUÿ78ÿ6CC;>9ÿX98ÿ>EÿvE;ÿy<ÿV;98:ÿÿV>EHwÿh_ÿse]\aÿhaÿosjeÿcÿg]h̀_ÿJ
v@v:uÿz;;ÿÿSNNÿ9;E;vC7ÿ:Hxy;9ÿN}TQSN}TSQLÿy<ÿ8:ÿy;F>@zÿ8zÿ=Hxy@;ÿZ9>?v:uÿY:E44
J677>EFx;:7wKÿ{ÿSÿX98C8w;?ÿW9?;9L4ÿD87v8:wÿ9;z;99;?ÿ78ÿH?u;ÿ;zz9;<ÿ34ÿD>:w;4ÿJV>EHwI
V;98:LÿJM:7;9;?KÿN}PNOPQNSRL
N}PNOPQNSR SOÿDWZYWUÿ78ÿ6CC;>9ÿX98ÿ>EÿvE;ÿy<ÿV;98:ÿÿV>EHwÿh_ÿse]\aÿhaÿhosÿes\]_ÿJÿv@v:u
z;;ÿÿSNNÿ9;E;vC7ÿ:Hxy;9ÿN}TQSN}TT}Lÿy<ÿ8:ÿy;F>@zÿ8zÿ=Hxy@;ÿZ9>?v:uÿY:E44
J677>EFx;:7wKÿ{ÿSÿX98C8w;?ÿW9?;9L4ÿD87v8:wÿ9;z;99;?ÿ78ÿH?u;ÿ;zz9;<ÿ34ÿD>:w;4ÿJV>EHwI
V;98:LÿJM:7;9;?KÿN}PNOPQNSRL
N}PNOPQNSR STÿUWZY3Mÿ8zÿ67789:;<ÿ6CC;>9>:E;ÿy<ÿV;98:ÿÿV>EHwÿ8:ÿy;F>@zÿ8zÿ=Hxy@;ÿZ9>?v:uÿY:E44
67789:;<ÿV;98:ÿÿV>EHwÿ>??;?ÿ78ÿC>97<ÿ=Hxy@;ÿZ9>?v:uÿY:E4JC7<K?z7LÿJV>EHwIÿV;98:L
JM:7;9;?KÿN}PNOPQNSRL
N}PNTPQNSR ÿZ;|7ÿW9?;9ÿG6UZYUGÿSSÿ~:8CC8w;?ÿD87v8:ÿz89ÿM|7;:wv8:ÿ8zÿZvx;ÿ78ÿ6:wB;9ÿ;:7;9;?
y<ÿH?u;ÿ;zz9;<ÿ34ÿD>:w;4ÿZF;ÿ38H97ÿG6UZÿ7F;ÿx87v8:ÿ>:?ÿ;|7;:?wÿ7F;ÿ?>7;ÿz89
V;z;:?>:7ÿ78ÿzv@;ÿ>:ÿ>:wB;9ÿ89ÿ9;wC8:wv;ÿx87v8:ÿ78ÿH:;ÿIÿQNSR4JZFvwÿvwÿ>ÿ7;|78:@<ÿ;:79<
u;:;9>7;?ÿy<ÿ7F;ÿE8H974ÿZF;9;ÿvwÿ:8ÿ?8EHx;:7ÿ>ww8Ev>7;?ÿBv7Fÿ7Fvwÿ;:79<4LÿJ3DLÿJM:7;9;?K
N}PNTPQNSRL
N}PNTPQNSR ÿ;7P;w;7ÿV;>?@v:;wKÿ=Hxy@;ÿZ9>?v:uÿY:E4ÿ>:wB;9ÿ?H;ÿPPQNSR4ÿJ7yLÿJM:7;9;?K
N}PNTPQNSRL
N}PNPQNSR S}ÿWVMÿG6UZYUGÿSQÿD87v8:ÿ78ÿ6CC;>9ÿX98ÿ>EÿvE;ÿz89ÿ67789:;<ÿ8w;CFÿD4ÿV9><78:
z89ÿ=Hxy@;ÿZ9>?v:uÿY:E4ÿXH9wH>:7ÿ78ÿ8H9ÿ6?xv:vw79>7v;ÿX8@vEv;wÿ>:?ÿX98E;?H9;wÿz89
M@;E798:vEÿv@v:uIÿ7F;ÿ>7789:;<ÿF;9;y<ÿu9>:7;?ÿ78ÿC9>E7vE;ÿC98ÿF>EÿvE;ÿv:ÿ7FvwÿE>w;ÿxHw7
9;uvw7;9ÿz89ÿ;@;E798:vEÿzv@v:uÿBv7Fÿ8H9ÿE8H97ÿBv7Fv:ÿSNÿ?><wÿ8zÿ7Fvwÿ89?;94ÿvu:;?ÿy<ÿH?u;
;zz9;<ÿ34ÿD>:w;4ÿJ7yLÿJM:7;9;?KÿN}PNPQNSRL
N}PNPQNSR SÿWVMÿG6UZYUGÿSOÿD87v8:ÿ78ÿ6CC;>9ÿX98ÿ>EÿvE;ÿz89ÿ67789:;<ÿ8w;ÿ4ÿAF;@>:ÿz89
=Hxy@;ÿZ9>?v:uÿY:E44ÿXH9wH>:7ÿ78ÿ8H9ÿ6?xv:vw79>7v;ÿX8@vEv;wÿ>:?ÿX98E;?H9;wÿz89
M@;E798:vEÿv@v:uIÿ7F;ÿ>7789:;<ÿF;9;y<ÿu9>:7;?ÿ78ÿC9>E7vE;ÿC98ÿF>EÿvE;ÿv:ÿ7FvwÿE>w;ÿxHw7
9;uvw7;9ÿz89ÿ;@;E798:vEÿzv@v:uÿBv7Fÿ8H9ÿE8H97ÿBv7Fv:ÿSNÿ?><wÿ8zÿ7Fvwÿ89?;94ÿvu:;?ÿy<ÿH?u;
;zz9;<ÿ34ÿD>:w;4ÿJ7yLÿJM:7;9;?KÿN}PNPQNSRL
N}PQPQNSR Sÿ~:8CC8w;?ÿDWZYWUÿz89ÿM|7;:wv8:ÿ8zÿZvx;ÿ78ÿv@;ÿ6:wB;9ÿ̀hÿqrs_tstÿmhrj\]^_ÿ̀y<
=Hxy@;ÿZ9>?v:uÿY:E44ÿJ677>EFx;:7wKÿ{ÿSÿX98C8w;?ÿW9?;9L4ÿD87v8:wÿ9;z;99;?ÿ78ÿH?u;
;zz9;<ÿ34ÿD>:w;4ÿJV9><78:Iÿ8w;CFLÿJM:7;9;?KÿN}PQPQNSRL
N}PQPQNSR ÿZ;|7ÿW9?;9ÿG6UZYUGÿSÿD87v8:ÿz89ÿM|7;:wv8:ÿ8zÿZvx;ÿ78ÿ6:wB;9ÿ;:7;9;?ÿy<ÿH?u;
;zz9;<ÿ34ÿD>:w;4ÿ>v:uÿE8:wv?;9;?ÿ7F;ÿD87v8:ÿ>:?ÿ7F;ÿu98H:?wÿ7F;9;z89Iÿ7F;ÿ38H97
G6UZÿV;z;:?>:7wÿ~:8CC8w;?ÿD87v8:ÿz89ÿM|7;:wv8:ÿ8zÿZvx;ÿ78ÿ;wC8:?ÿ78ÿX@>v:7vzzw
6x;:?;?ÿ38xC@>v:74ÿV;z;:?>:7wÿ?;>?@v:;ÿ78ÿ9;wC8:?ÿvwÿ;|7;:?;?ÿ78ÿH:;ÿONIÿQNSR4ÿJZFvw
vwÿ>ÿ7;|78:@<ÿ;:79<ÿu;:;9>7;?ÿy<ÿ7F;ÿE8H974ÿZF;9;ÿvwÿ:8ÿ?8EHx;:7ÿ>ww8Ev>7;?ÿBv7Fÿ7Fvw
;:79<4LÿJ:ELÿJM:7;9;?KÿN}PQPQNSRL
N}PQPQNSR ÿ;7P;w;7ÿV;>?@v:;wKÿ=Hxy@;ÿZ9>?v:uÿY:E4ÿ>:wB;9ÿ?H;ÿPONPQNSR4ÿJ7yLÿJM:7;9;?K
N}PQPQNSRL
$
%!118&
"#
'(1')91*
+%
% ,2-...-6./533.-505045 11-
012312456 789
8ÿ717ÿÿÿÿ

ÿ7
!
"#
1234536157Case53:18-cv-02578-L
7ÿ9:;<:=ÿ>?ÿ@A>Document
BCDEFÿEGÿH>1-3
>?DIJKFiled
ÿLKÿMNOLPJÿ;DECAIQÿ<IRSSÿTH>>ERBOJI>GUÿVÿ5ÿWD?X?GJC
09/26/18 Page 6 of 7 PageID 157
:DCJDYSÿ9?>A?IGÿDJZJDDJCÿ>?ÿ[NCQJÿ[JZZDJKÿ\Sÿ9EIG]JSÿT^>J_JIG?Iÿ̀;BJ?C?DJYÿTaI>JDJCU
1234536157Y
1b31536157 ÿ;Jc>ÿ:DCJDÿdeH=;<=dÿ57ÿ9?>A?Iÿ>?ÿ@A>BCDEFÿEGÿH>>?DIJKSÿJI>JDJCÿLKÿ[NCQJÿ[JZZDJKÿ\S
9EIG]JSÿ;BJÿ\?ND>ÿBEGÿR?IGACJDJCÿfJZJICEI>Gÿ9?>A?Iÿ>?ÿ@A>BCDEFÿEGÿ\?NIGJP̀ÿEICÿAGÿ?Z
>BJÿ?XAIA?Iÿ>BE>ÿ>BJÿ9?>A?IÿGB?NPCÿLJÿdeH=;afSÿ<>ÿAGÿBJDJLKÿ:efaeafÿ>BE>ÿ;BJ?C?DJ
^>J_JIG?Iÿ<<<ÿEICÿ^>J_JIÿfSÿ@?PJIGÿ̀GBEPPÿLJÿEPP?FJCÿ>?ÿFA>BCDEFÿEGÿR?NIGJPÿ?ZÿDJR?DCÿZ?D
fJZJICEI>ÿMNOLPJÿ;DECAIQÿ<IRSÿAIÿ>BAGÿER>A?Iÿ̀EICÿGBEPPÿBE_JÿI?ÿZND>BJDÿDJGX?IGALAPA>AJGÿ?D
?LPAQE>A?IGÿBJDJAISÿ<>ÿAGÿZND>BJDÿ:efaeafÿ>BE>ÿ[?GJXBÿfDEK>?Iÿ̀e?GJÿ@BJPEIÿ̀fJD?IÿeS
fERNGÿ̀GBEPPÿLJÿGNLG>A>N>JCÿEGÿR?NIGJPÿZ?DÿfJZJICEI>ÿMNOLPJÿ;DECAIQÿ<IRST;BAGÿAGÿEÿ>Jc>g
?IPKÿJI>DKÿQJIJDE>JCÿLKÿ>BJÿR?ND>Sÿ;BJDJÿAGÿI?ÿC?RNOJI>ÿEGG?RAE>JCÿFA>Bÿ>BAGÿJI>DKSYÿTIRY
TaI>JDJCUÿ1b31536157Y
1b36736157 5hÿiI?XX?GJCÿ9:;<:=ÿZ?Dÿac>JIGA?Iÿ?Zÿ;AOJÿ>?ÿjAPJÿHIGFJDÿklÿnopqrprÿslotuvwqkÿLK
MNOLPJÿ;DECAIQÿ<IRSSÿTH>>ERBOJI>GUÿVÿ5ÿWD?X?GJCÿ:DCJDYSÿ9?>A?IGÿDJZJDDJCÿ>?ÿ[NCQJ
[JZZDJKÿ\Sÿ9EIG]JSÿTfDEK>?Iÿ̀[?GJXBYÿTaI>JDJCUÿ1b36736157Y
1b36h36157 ÿ;Jc>ÿ:DCJDÿdeH=;<=dÿ5hÿ9?>A?IÿZ?Dÿac>JIGA?Iÿ?Zÿ;AOJÿ>?ÿHIGFJDÿJI>JDJCÿLKÿ[NCQJ
[JZZDJKÿ\Sÿ9EIG]JSÿxE_AIQÿR?IGACJDJCÿ>BJÿ9?>A?IÿEICÿ>BJÿQD?NICGÿ>BJDJZ?Dÿ̀>BJÿ\?ND>
deH=;^ÿfJZJICEI>GÿiI?XX?GJCÿ9?>A?IÿZ?Dÿac>JIGA?Iÿ?Zÿ;AOJÿ>?ÿeJGX?ICÿ>?ÿWPEAI>AZZG
HOJICJCÿ\?OXPEAI>SÿfJZJICEI>GÿCJECPAIJÿAGÿJc>JICJCÿ>?ÿ[NPKÿ45ÿ̀6157SÿT;BAGÿAGÿEÿ>Jc>g
?IPKÿJI>DKÿQJIJDE>JCÿLKÿ>BJÿR?ND>Sÿ;BJDJÿAGÿI?ÿC?RNOJI>ÿEGG?RAE>JCÿFA>Bÿ>BAGÿJI>DKSYÿTIRY
TaI>JDJCUÿ1b36h36157Y
1b36h36157 ÿ^J>3eJGJ>ÿfJECPAIJGUÿMNOLPJÿ;DECAIQÿ<IRSÿEIGFJDÿCNJÿy34536157SÿT>LYÿTaI>JDJCU
1b36h36157Y
1y36236157 61ÿiI?XX?GJCÿ9:;<:=ÿZ?Dÿac>JIGA?Iÿ?Zÿ;AOJÿ>?ÿjAPJÿHIGFJDÿDJÿ51ÿHOJICJCÿ\?OXPEAI>ÿLK
[JZZDJKÿ\Sÿ9EIG]JSÿTfDEK>?Iÿ̀[?GJXBYÿTaI>JDJCUÿ1y36236157Y
1y36236157 ÿ;Jc>ÿ:DCJDÿdeH=;<=dÿ61ÿ9?>A?IÿZ?Dÿac>JIGA?Iÿ?Zÿ;AOJÿ>?ÿHIGFJDÿJI>JDJCÿLKÿ[NCQJ
HOJICJCÿ\?OXPEAI>SÿfJZJICEI>GÿCJECPAIJÿ>?ÿZAPJÿEIÿEIGFJDÿ?DÿDJGX?IGA_JÿO?>A?IÿAG
Jc>JICJCÿ>?ÿHNQNG>ÿ45ÿ̀6157SÿT;BAGÿAGÿEÿ>Jc>g?IPKÿJI>DKÿQJIJDE>JCÿLKÿ>BJÿR?ND>Sÿ;BJDJÿAGÿI?
C?RNOJI>ÿEGG?RAE>JCÿFA>Bÿ>BAGÿJI>DKSYÿTIRYÿTaI>JDJCUÿ1y36236157Y
1y36236157 ÿ^J>3eJGJ>ÿfJECPAIJGUÿMNOLPJÿ;DECAIQÿ<IRSÿEIGFJDÿCNJÿ734536157SÿT>LYÿTaI>JDJCU
1y34536157Y
1736h36157 65ÿjAZ>Bÿ9:;<:=ÿZ?Dÿac>JIGA?Iÿ?Zÿ;AOJÿ>?ÿjAPJÿHIGFJDÿDJÿ51ÿHOJICJCÿ\?OXPEAI>ÿLK
[JZZDJKÿ\Sÿ9EIG]JSÿTfDEK>?Iÿ̀[?GJXBYÿTaI>JDJCUÿ1736h36157Y
1736h36157 ÿ;Jc>ÿ:DCJDÿdeH=;<=dÿ65ÿ9?>A?IÿZ?Dÿac>JIGA?Iÿ?Zÿ;AOJÿ>?ÿHIGFJDÿJI>JDJCÿLKÿ[NCQJ
\?OXPEAI>SÿfJZJICEI>GÿCJECPAIJÿ>?ÿZAPJÿEIÿEIGFJDÿ?Dÿ?>BJDFAGJÿDJGX?ICÿAGÿJc>JICJCÿ>?
^JX>JOLJDÿ41ÿ̀6157SÿT;BAGÿAGÿEÿ>Jc>g?IPKÿJI>DKÿQJIJDE>JCÿLKÿ>BJÿR?ND>Sÿ;BJDJÿAGÿI?
C?RNOJI>ÿEGG?RAE>JCÿFA>Bÿ>BAGÿJI>DKSYÿTIRYÿTaI>JDJCUÿ1736h36157Y
1736h36157 ÿ^J>3eJGJ>ÿfJECPAIJGUÿMNOLPJÿ;DECAIQÿ<IRSÿEIGFJDÿCNJÿh34136157SÿT>LYÿTaI>JDJCU
1736h36157Y
1h35h36157 66ÿ:efaeÿeaH^^<d=<=dÿ\HâSÿ\EGJÿDJEGGAQIJCÿ>?ÿ[NCQJÿHPEIÿfÿHPLDAQB>ÿZ?DÿEPP
XD?RJJCAIQGSÿ[NCQJÿe?LJD>ÿWA>OEIÿI?ÿP?IQJDÿEGGAQIJCÿ>?ÿREGJSÿÂQIJCÿLKÿ[NCQJÿ[JZZDJKÿ\S
$
%!118&
"#
'(1')91*
+%
% ,2-...-6./533.-505045 31-
012312456 789
8ÿ717ÿÿÿÿ

ÿ7
!
"#
1234567ÿ9:;<ÿ9=3:6>6?@ÿABCDBCEADF<
GHIJKÿMNOPQRNÿINSTNO
UOVSWVRTQXSÿKNRNQYT
ABCEZCEADFÿDE@[A@\\
GHIJK
]X^QS_ àAAAF@EbbEb\D@AIcQNSTÿIXdN_ Abb\FeAZAEfg6h6a
iNWROQYTQXS_ jkl56:ÿm6nk>: MIO NVORo b@DFelpeAAAFAeqjqe
QTNOQV_ rs1
tQccVucN
GV^NW_ [ IXWT_ A7[A
%!118&
"#
'(1')91*
+%
% ,2-...-6./533.-505045 -1-
Exhibit 4

Index of Documents Filed in Bumble Trading, Inc. and Bumble Holding, Ltd. v. Match
Group, LLC, Cause No. DC-18-04140 (Dallas Dist. Ct., 160th Jud. Dist.)
A. Docket Sheet (Exhibit 5)
B. Original Petition and Civil Cover Sheet (filed 3/28/2018) (Exhibit 6)
C. Issued Citations (filed 4/4/2018) (Exhibit 7)
D. Motion to Withdraw as Plaintiffs’ Counsel (filed 6/25/2018) (Exhibit 8)
E. Proposed Order Granting Motion to Withdraw as Plaintiffs’ Counsel (filed 6/25/2018)

(Exhibit 9)
F. Order Granting Motion to Withdraw as Plaintiffs’ Counsel (filed 6/25/2018) (Exhibit 10)
H. Notice of Status Conference Hearing (filed 9/5/2018) (Exhibit 11)
I. Request for Service (filed 9/18/2018) (Exhibit 12)
J. Issued Citations (fled 9/18/2018) (Exhibit 13)
K. Request for Service (filed 9/21/2018) (Exhibit 14)
L. Issued Citations (filed 9/21/2018) (Exhibit 15)
M. Answer and Counterclaims (filed 9/26/2018) (Exhibit 16)

Exhibit 5
9/26/2018 Details
Case Information
DC-18-04140 | Bumble Trading, Inc., et al vs. Match Group, LLC
Case Number Court Judicial Officer

DC-18-04140 160th District Court JORDAN, JIM
File Date Case Type Case Status
03/28/2018 CNTR CNSMR COM OPEN
DEBT
Party
PLAINTIFF Active Attorneys 

Bumble Trading, Inc. Lead Attorney
DACUS, DERON
Retained
Work Phone
903-705-1117
Fax Phone
903-581-2543
Inactive Attorneys 
Attorney
STEVENSON,
THEODORE
Retained
Work Phone
214-978-4974
Fax Phone
214-978-4044
https://courtsportal.dallascounty.org/DALLASPROD/Home/WorkspaceMode?p=0#Documents 1/6
9/26/2018 PLAINTIFF ActiveDetails
Attorneys 
BumbleCase 3:18-cv-02578-L
Holding, Ltd. Document 1-5 Filed 09/26/18
Lead Attorney Page 3 of 7 PageID 163
DACUS, DERON
Retained
Work Phone
903-705-1117
Fax Phone
903-581-2543
Inactive Attorneys 
Attorney
STEVENSON,
THEODORE
Retained
Work Phone
214-978-4974
Fax Phone
214-978-4044
DEFENDANT Active Attorneys 

Match Group, LLC Lead Attorney
CALDWELL, BRADLEY
Address
Retained
SECRETARY OF STATE
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE STATE Work Phone
CITATION UNIT-P.O. BOX 12079 214-978-4000
AUSTIN TX 78711
Fax Phone
214-978-4044
Events and Hearings
03/28/2018 NEW CASE FILED (OCA) - CIVIL
03/28/2018 ORIGINAL PETITION 
Pltfs' Original Petition and RFD
9/26/2018 Details
03/28/2018 CASE FILING COVER SHEET
Case 3:18-cv-02578-L 
Document 1-5 Filed 09/26/18 Page 4 of 7 PageID 164
Civil Case Information Sheet - Bumble Match (3).pdf
04/04/2018 ISSUE CITATION COMM OF INS OR SOS 
ISSUE CITATION COMM OF INS OR SOS
Comment
PLEASE CALL SPECIAL DELIVERY PROCESS DEPT WHEN READY
FOR PICK UP 214-866-3200
04/06/2018 CITATION SOS/COI/COH/HAG 
Anticipated Server
ATTORNEY
Anticipated Method
Comment
GDL
06/25/2018 MOTION - WITHDRAW ATTORNEY 
Mtn to Withdraw as Pltfs' Counsel.pdf
06/25/2018 NON-SIGNED PROPOSED ORDER/JUDGMENT 
Order Granting Motion to Withdraw Counsel
Comment
06/25/2018 ORDER - WITHDRAW ATTORNEY 
ORDER - WITHDRAW ATTORNEY
09/05/2018 NOTICE OF STATUS CONFERENCE HEARING 
160th Notice of Status Conference
09/18/2018 REQUEST FOR SERVICE 
REQUEST
09/18/2018 ISSUE CITATION 
ISSUE CITATION
09/21/2018 REQUEST FOR SERVICE 
REQUEST FOR SERVICE
9/26/2018 Details
09/21/2018 ISSUE CITATION COMMDocument
Case 3:18-cv-02578-L OF INS OR SOS
1-5 Filed 09/26/18 Page 5 of 7 PageID 165
Comment
ESERVE
09/21/2018 CITATION ISSUED 
DC18-4140.pdf
09/21/2018 CITATION SOS/COI/COH/HAG 
Anticipated Server
ESERVE
Anticipated Method
09/21/2018 CITATION 
Anticipated Server
ESERVE
Anticipated Method
09/26/2018 COUNTER CLAIM 
2018 09 26 Answer and Counterclaim to FILE.pdf
09/26/2018 ORIGINAL ANSWER - GENERAL DENIAL 
10/12/2018 Status Conference 
Judicial Officer
JORDAN, JIM
Hearing Time
9:00 AM
Financial
Bumble Trading, Inc..org/DALLASPROD/Home/WorkspaceMode?p=0#Documents

https://courtsportal.dallascounty 4/6
9/26/2018 Total Financial Assessment Details $324.00
Total
CasePayments and Credits Document
3:18-cv-02578-L 1-5 Filed $324.00
09/26/18 Page 6 of 7 PageID 166
3/29/2018 Transaction $292.00

Assessment
3/29/2018 CREDIT CARD - Receipt # Bumble ($292.00)

TEXFILE (DC) 20218-2018- Trading,
DCLK Inc.
4/4/2018 Transaction $8.00

Assessment
4/4/2018 PAYMENT Receipt # SPECIAL ($8.00)

(CASE FEES) 21458-2018- DELIVERY
DCLK

Assessment
4/4/2018 PAYMENT Receipt # SPECIAL ($4.00)

(CASE FEES) 21460-2018- DELIVERY
DCLK

Assessment

DCLK Inc.
9/21/2018 Transaction $12.00

Assessment

DCLK Inc.
Match Group, LLC
Total Financial Assessment $80.00
Total Payments and Credits $80.00
9/26/2018 Transaction $80.00

Assessment
9/26/2018 CREDIT CARD - Receipt # Match ($80.00)

TEXFILE (DC) 64372-2018- Group,
DCLK LLC
Documents
9/26/2018 Details
Pltfs'Case
Original Petition and RFD
3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1-5 Filed 09/26/18 Page 7 of 7 PageID 167
Civil Case Information Sheet - Bumble Match (3).pdf

Mtn to Withdraw as Pltfs' Counsel.pdf

ORDER - WITHDRAW ATTORNEY

REQUEST
REQUEST FOR SERVICE

DC18-4140.pdf
ISSUE CITATION
Exhibit 6
FILED
DALLAS COUNTY
3/28/2018 9:44 PM
Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1-6 Filed 09/26/18 Page 2 of 24 PageID 169 FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
Marissa Pittman
DC-18-04140
CAUSE NO.: __________
BUMBLE TRADING, INC. and BUMBLE § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

HOLDING, LTD. §
§
Plaintiff, §
§
v. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
MATCH GROUP, LLC. §
§
Defendant. § 160TH
§ ____ JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
PLAINTIFFS’ ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE
Bumble Trading, Inc. and Bumble Holding, Ltd. (collectively referred to herein as
“Bumble” or “Plaintiffs”) file this Original Petition against Defendant Match Group, LLC,
(“Match”) and allege as follows:
DISCOVERY
Plaintiffs intend to conduct discovery under a Level 2 discovery control plan pursuant to
Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 190.3.
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. Bumble is a fast growing social networking platform that has revolutionized the
way we form relationships. Bumble’s success stems from its creation of a safe platform for
people to connect in dating, friendship, and networking. Bumble empowers, and in fact requires,
women to initiate the conversation. Unsurprisingly, Tinder has lost significant ground and
market share to Bumble, a fact that Tinder’s owner, Match, is keenly aware of. This is why
Tinder recently announced that it intends to copy Bumble’s core women-make-the-first-move

feature and why it launched Tinder Gold (a copy of Bumble Boost). Tinder’s revenue has
increased by around 20% since launching Tinder Gold as a result of copying Bumble Boost.
2. This suit was triggered by the tortious actions of Match Group, LLC, who owns
the Tinder platform. After Bumble’s parent company rejected repeated lowball offers by Match
to invest in the Bumble platform, Match embarked upon a tortious and fraudulent campaign
against Bumble. Match asked for, and received subject to a confidentiality obligation, Bumble’s
most deeply confidential and sensitive business strategy plans and performance metrics using the
false assurances that it needed them so that it could increase its prior offer to invest in Bumble.
Mere days after Match received the documents, rather than making the revised offer, Match
abruptly, and without warning, broke off negotiations when it filed a frivolous intellectual
property infringement suit against Bumble. Contrary to Match’s public pronouncements, its
lawsuit against Bumble was not actually intended to uphold its employees’ work (if that was
true, Match would have filed its suit years earlier) or to protect its legitimate right to compete (if
that was true, Match would have notified Bumble of its claims before filing suit to seek a
resolution).
3. Match has behaved in an underhanded and devious way that transcends sharp
negotiation practices and rises to the level of an actionable tort. Unwilling to pay fair value for
Bumble, Match tried to poison Bumble in the investment market by filing bogus intellectual
property claims to wrongfully disparage the Bumble platform. Knowing its lawsuit would
immediately kill its negotiations with Bumble, Match deviously asked for, and received,
Bumble’s most sensitive competitive information—without disclosing that it was already
planning to sue Bumble. Then, to head off the adverse publicity that its scare tactics would
undoubtedly spawn, Match made a series of false statements assuring the public that its intent in
PLAINTIFFS’ ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE — Page 2 of 22

filing the lawsuit was completely above board and an honorable attempt to protect its intellectual
property rights.
4. One example of the frivolous claims in Match’s lawsuit are its trademark
infringement claims based on “swipe left” and “swipe right.” Match asserts in its complaint that
“Match is currently seeking federal registration for ‘swipe left’ and ‘swipe right.’” This is
misleading (at best), and the truth is the U.S. Trademark Office’s Trademark Status & Document
Retrieval system shows that Match’s trademark applications for “swipe left” and “swipe right”
are suspended or rejected. Another example is Match’s claims for design patent infringement
related to specific, narrow swiping animations. Match’s asserted design patent requires a photo
to rotate clockwise when swiped left and counter-clockwise when rotated right. But, Bumble’s
swipe animations work exactly the opposite way, as is clear from the screen shots included in
Match’s complaint, and are not covered by the ’314 patent. Yet another example is Match’s
assertion of its utility patent no. 9,733,811, which relates to the obvious and well-known idea of
profile matching of users using swiping gestures to indicate positive or negative preferences.
This patent is facially invalid, as recent changes in U.S. patent law have rendered abstract ideas
like those in the ’811 patent ineligible for patent protection. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank
Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014).
5. As a result of Match’s wrongful conduct, Bumble has filed this suit to recover
damages and to enjoin further wrongful interference in Bumble’s business. Bumble estimates its
damages at $400 million. As part of this lawsuit, Bumble also requests that Match disclose the
identities of all persons, whether Match employees or otherwise, to whom it has provided any
confidential information related to Bumble’s business.

THE PARTIES
6. Plaintiff Bumble Trading, Inc. is a corporation organized under the laws of
Delaware, having its principal place of business in Travis County, Texas.
7. Plaintiff Bumble Holding, Ltd. is a corporation organized under the laws of the
United Kingdom, having its principal place of business in London, United Kingdom.
8. Defendant Match Group, LLC (“Match”) is a corporation organized under the
laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business in Dallas County, Texas. Upon
information and belief, at all times pertinent, Match was licensed to do business, and was and is
conducting and transacting business, in the State of Texas.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
9. This Court has general subject matter jurisdiction over this lawsuit because it is a
court of general jurisdiction and the amount in controversy exceeds the Court’s minimum
jurisdictional requirements and exceeds $1,000,000.
10. This Court also has jurisdiction, pursuant to Art. 5, Sec. 8 of the Texas
Constitution, to determine questions of actual controversy between the parties to this action as
more fully set forth herein.
11. This Court has jurisdiction over Match because Match maintains its principal
place of business is in Texas, is licensed or authorized to do business in Texas, has employees in
Texas, sells products in Texas, and otherwise has pervasive contacts with Texas sufficient to
support general jurisdiction over Match in this state. This Court furthermore has jurisdiction over
Match pursuant to Texas Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 17.042 because Match committed the
torts giving rise to this cause of action within Texas.

12. Venue is proper in this Court under Texas Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. §
15.002(a)(3) because Match currently resides in Dallas County.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
A. THE FOUNDING AND SUCCESS OF BUMBLE
13. The Bumble app was launched in December 2014. Bumble flipped traditional
gender dynamics on its head by requiring women to initiate conversations with potential
matches. Bumble’s goal was to empower women, and its novel approach has proven successful.
Within eight months, Bumble saw more than 5 million unique conversations initiated—all by
women.
14. Empowering women to make the first move was a key driver to Bumble’s fast
growth, as evidenced by the app’s unusually high ratio of women users. Just over three years
after going live, the Bumble app has amassed 30 million users, who spend on average more than
an hour per day on the app. With 70% year-over-year growth, Bumble is swiftly closing the gap
with Tinder, which, by comparison has 46 million registered users and averages roughly 10%
annual growth.
15. Bumble has expanded its platform to allow people to make empowered
connections in all areas of their lives, whether that means seeking a romantic relationship,
making new friendships with Bumble BFF, or growing their professional network with Bumble
Bizz.
16. Bumble prides itself on creating and maintaining a safe platform which does not
tolerate abuse.

B. MATCH’S REPEATED ATTEMPTS TO INVEST IN THE BUMBLE

BUSINESS
17. Recognizing that the Bumble platform occupied an important place in the market
for social applications, Match embarked upon a plan to invest in the Bumble platform.
18. Match made its first overture in June 2017, when it offered $450 million to
acquire the Bumble platform. Within two months, news of the offer hit the press, and reactions
were that the offer was unattractive. Forbes published an article stating that its sources
“suggested the $450 million offer was seen to undervalue Bumble, which has quickly set itself
apart in a crowded market with its ‘women-first’ branding and functionality . . .” TechCrunch
also reported that sources viewed the value of Bumble at over $1 billion. Match’s stock price
rose around this time, likely as an intentional result of the news it had approached Bumble.
19. Bumble made clear to Match that its initial offer was unappealing. Match
persisted, suggesting that if Bumble allowed it to perform due diligence that may allow it to
increase its offer. As a result, Match requested, and was confidentially provided, information
related to Bumble’s monthly active user count, paying user count, revenue projections, female-
to-male ratio, marketing spend, and other financial metrics.
20. Believing that Match was acting in good faith, Bumble invited Match CEO and
CFO to visit its Austin offices on November 21, 2017, including a tour of the Bumble offices,
and Match accepted the invitation.
21. In December 2017, after confidentially receiving the due diligence data it had
requested, Match candidly acknowledged that its earlier offer had been unappealing. Match
indicated that it had revised its views, and disclosed its new view of Bumble’s valuation, which
was now many times higher than the $450 million it had initially offered. Match indicated that it
would soon provide an increased offer consistent with its revised view of Bumble’s valuation.

22. But after a period of inaction, Match suddenly backtracked and said that it had
decided not to make another offer to invest. The parties amicably suspended negotiations. At this
point, it became clear that Match’s strategy was to wait things out in the hopes of getting a stake
in Bumble for below fair value.
23. Unfortunately, Match did not anticipate the amount of market interest the
suggestion of an investment in the Bumble platform would generate. In January 2018, Match
learned that there were numerous other companies that were interested, and highly motivated, to
invest in the Bumble platform. Running out of time and at risk of losing its target, Match
changed its tactics. In February 2018 Match finally made a revised investment offer. But,
Match’s revised offer was substantially less than the valuation Match had previously
communicated.
24. In response to Match’s February 2018 offer, Bumble told Match it was still
running behind other interested parties, and if that offer was the final landing spot for Match,
there was no point in the parties spending any further time negotiating. Bumble’s negotiators
shared some information about the identities of the other interested bidders and their projected
valuation ranges and warned Match that Bumble was expecting more bids to arrive in mid-
March. The message to Match was that, if Match wanted to stay in the running, it would have to
“run fast.”
25. At this point, it became clear to Match that there was aggressive competition in
the market, and Match would not be able to pull off a lowball investment. That left Match with
the choice of either paying fair value, or trying to chill competition by poisoning the investment
market through tortious conduct. Match went the latter route, but before revealing its intentions,

made one final run at extracting even more competitive information from Bumble, under false
pretenses.
C. AS A LATE COMPETITIVE RESPONSE, TINDER COPIES BUMBLE’S

CORE FEATURE IN WHICH WOMEN MAKE THE FIRST MOVE
26. In February 2018, realizing the pace at which Tinder was losing ground to
Bumble, and also after receiving Bumble’s confidential financial and performance data as part of
its due diligence, Match made a surprise announcement. Match announced that Tinder would be
copying Bumble’s keystone feature—letting Tinder’s female users choose whether only they can
initiate conversations with future matches—for its competing dating platform. This was not the
first time that Tinder had copied Bumble; Tinder also launched Tinder Gold in 2017, copying
Bumble’s Bumble Boost feature, which had been part of the Bumble application since 2016.
27. The timing of the announcement was not coincidental. Match’s announcement
that it planned to copy the core feature of Bumble and begin competing in the space Bumble had
created was calculated to chill the investment market. At the time of the announcement, Tinder’s
parent company, Match, spun the decision as being “not a reaction to any competitor.” Match
suggested in press statements that it was only now belatedly realizing the importance of the
feature that was at Bumble’s core when it was founded: “[w]e have to constantly listen to what
women want and address their needs,” and that copying Bumble’s women-make-the-first-move
feature, as an option, was an effort to “curtail bad behavior, any negative behavior or advances,
and inappropriate communication” on its platforms. But in truth, this announcement was part of a
concerted effort by Match to poison and devalue Bumble, an effort that also included Match
bringing frivolous intellectual property claims against Bumble and obtaining Bumble’s core
competitive strategy information by false pretenses.

28. At this point, Bumble did not fully appreciate the scope of Match’s scheme, and
thought Match was still negotiating a potential investment in good faith. In fact, Match’s senior
management apologized for its announcement that it planned to copy Bumble’s core feature, and
falsely promised that Match would not do anything else provocative while discussions were
ongoing regarding the investment process. Rather than file a lawsuit asserting that Bumble owns
exclusive rights to the basic concept of women-make-the-first-move, Bumble responded to
Tinder’s announcement by stating that “[w]e applaud any company making business decisions
that empower women.”
D. KNOWING THAT IT WOULD SOON FILE SUIT AGAINST BUMBLE,

MATCH EXTRACTS SENSITIVE COMPETITIVE BUSINESS
STRATEGY INFORMATION FROM BUMBLE UNDER FALSE
PRETENSES
29. On or about February 12, 2018, Match, through its Chief Financial Officer,
requested additional sensitive and proprietary information from Plaintiffs. Bumble had already
confidentially provided certain confidential financial metrics to Match, but Match falsely
justified its request for Bumble’s most sensitive information on the grounds that this information
was necessary if Match was to increase its offer. In addition to requesting these confidential
financial metrics, Match also repeatedly pushed for details of Bumble’s marketing strategy,
starting in the end of 2017, and continued these requests throughout February 2018.
30. A few days later, on or about February 15, 2018, through the Chief Financial
Officer and Chief Executive Officer of IAC (InterActiveCorp, the parent of Match) Match again
requested highly sensitive and proprietary information from Plaintiffs, again falsely representing
that Match needed the information to “firm up” its offer price.
31. On or about February 16, 2018, Match’s CFO, likewise promising to make a
higher bid, reiterated Match’s request for sensitive and proprietary information. Match’s CFO

made clear that Match would need the sensitive and proprietary information it had requested if
Bumble wanted an increased bid.
32. Believing that Match was negotiating in good faith, on February 19, 2018,
Bumble provided Match with the sensitive and proprietary information it had demanded. The
information provided to Match included detailed financial and performance metrics for Bumble,
which constitute protectable trade secrets under the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act.
33. After receiving the additional information, Match kept pressing for more
information of a highly sensitive and competitive nature. On or about February 20, 2018, Match
again asked for additional financial and performance metrics for Bumble, this time saying Match
had a Board of Directors meeting in the near future and needed the information in advance of
that meeting to allow the Board the opportunity to approve an increased bid for Bumble. Still
believing that Match was making its request in good faith, on that same date, Bumble provided
the additional confidential and proprietary information Match had requested.
34. Even after the board meeting, Match continued to extract confidential financial
and performance metrics from Bumble. On or about February 21st and 23rd, 2018, Match made
additional requests for information, which Bumble complied with on February 27, 2018. A
senior executive of Bumble had dinner with the CEO of the Match Group on February 22, 2018,
believing that the discussions were progressing, an increased offer for the investment would soon
be forthcoming, and Match was acting in good faith.
35. The information requested by, and provided to, Match under the false promise of
a higher offer constitutes protectable trade secrets under the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act.
36. At no time after Plaintiffs provided the sensitive and proprietary information did
Match make a higher proposal, or for that matter, any further proposal of any kind.

E. AFTER OBTAINING BUMBLE’S SENSITIVE COMPETITIVE

INFORMATION, MATCH FILES A FRIVOLOUS INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY INFRINGEMENT LAWSUIT TO SCARE OFF OTHER
POTENTIAL BUMBLE INVESTORS
37. In clear contravention of the promise by Match’s CFO not to do anything
provocative during negotiations, on March 17, 2018, Match filed a lawsuit against Bumble
Trading in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Waco Division
(“Lawsuit”). The Lawsuit suit came as a surprise to Plaintiffs, as it asserted that Bumble’s
platform, which had been in operation for over three years, infringed multiple trademarks and
patents of Match. Despite that fact, Match had never notified Bumble of its alleged intellectual
property disputes and never sought any sort of business resolution prior to filing suit. Just as
with Match’s prior interest in an investment of Bumble, Match’s filing of the Lawsuit also
caused its stock price to rise.
38. During the period of time when Match was requesting Bumble provide its
confidential and trade secret information, and at the time it filed its Lawsuit, Match was aware
that it was in competition with other entities who were actively pursuing an investment in
Bumble.
39. Match asserts numerous claims in its Lawsuit for alleged infringement of its
trademarks, design patent, and utility patent. These claims are meritless, frivolous, and were
brought for the purpose of intimidating other investors so as to quash competition for an
investment in Bumble, paving the way for Match to coerce acceptance of a lowball offer.
40. For instance, in its Lawsuit, Match alleges that it is “currently seeking federal
registration for ‘swipe left’ and ‘swipe right’ in connection with mobile applications for social
introduction and dating services.” Match Complaint at ¶ 20. It is unclear which trademark
applications to which Match refers; however, all four that appear relevant to “social introduction

and dating services” (i.e., Serial Nos. 86608903, 86680923, 86608899, and 86680927) were
suspended in 2016. In addition, two of Match’s applications were actually rejected by the U.S.
Trademark Office in 2015 and all four remain suspended today.
41. Match’s allegations of infringement of its design patent, D798,314, are also
frivolous, as the screenshots of the Bumble app contained in the Lawsuit show there is no
infringement. At most, Match’s design patent covers the specific and narrow ornamental “swipe
left” and “swipe right” features depicted in solid lines in the figures of the D798,314 patent. In
Figure 1 of the patent, the “swipe right” ornamental design requires that the user photo be rotated
counter-clockwise by a discrete amount. In contrast, Bumble’s design rotates the photo in the
opposite direction during swipe right, as shown below. Similarly, in Figure 2, the “swipe left”
ornamental design requires that the photo be rotated clockwise by a discrete amount. However,
Bumble’s “swipe left” design rotates the card in the opposite direction. As a result, Bumble
clearly does not infringe the particular designs illustrated in D798,314.

42. To the extent that Match wishes to pretend that its ornamental design patent
covers any swipe right or left, regardless of the way it is ornamentally depicted or which way it
rotates, then not only would that depart from the letter of the law regarding infringement of
design patents, it would also be an admission of invalidity of the patent. It is well established that
if a design is “primarily functional rather than ornamental, the patent is invalid.” Power Controls
Corp. v. Hybrinetics, Inc., 806 F.3d 234, 238-39 (Fed. Cir. 1986). The availability of alternative
designs is “an important—if not dispositive factor in evaluating the legal functionality of a
claimed design.” Ethicon Endo-Surgery v. Covidien, Inc., 796 F.3d 1312, 1329-20 (Fed. Cir.
2015). Thus, to the extent Match alleges that its design patent covers any “swipe left” or “swipe
right” function, then Match has effectively admitted that its design patent is invalid.
43. In its Lawsuit, Match also asserts U.S. Patent No. 9,733,811 (“the ' 811 patent”),
which is facially invalid because it claims abstract subject matter that is ineligible for patent
protection under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
44. The ' 811 patent relates to the abstract idea, which was well known in the prior art,
of permitting communication between two users who express mutual interest in each other. The

fact that the claims specify the use of swiping, another well-known technique in the prior art, and
invoke conventional computer components to do so does not make the claims eligible for patent
protection. Match itself admits that the swipe feature is generic and known. Match Complaint at
¶ 101 (stating that “the general gesture of swiping may have been known in the prior art.”).
Because the ' 811 patent claims nothing more than the abstract, and well-known, idea of
matching users based on conventional computer components operating in well-known ways, the
' 811 patent is clearly invalid as claiming ineligible subject matter.
45. Match filed its Lawsuit alleging claims, including the claims identified above,
which clearly lack merit and are frivolous. Match filed its suit not to protect its intellectual
property, but rather, to scare investors and disparage Bumble so that Match can displace or chill
competition in bidding.
F. MATCH MAKES FALSE STATEMENTS TO ASSURE THE PUBLIC

THAT ITS INTENTIONS IN FILING THE LAWSUIT WERE ACTUALLY
HONORABLE AND ABOVE BOARD
46. After filing its lawsuit, Match publicly reiterated its bogus charges of
infringement against Bumble. Match also took great pains to emphasize that its intentions in
filing the lawsuit were honorable and above board – to protect its intellectual property. These
statements were not true.
47. Bumble was launched in December 2014 to great fanfare and publicity. This
launch certainly did not escape the attention of executives at Tinder and Match. From its
inception, Bumble included the features that Match now asserts it exclusively owns, such as
swiping left or right, and the look and feel of the graphical user interface. Yet, Match said
nothing to Bumble about its intellectual property grievances until it sued Bumble in March 2018.
Why did Match wait so long—over three years—to file suit? The obvious answer is that Match
filed suit a few weeks after learning that it was behind in the race to invest in Bumble and to

drive down the valuation. Match cobbled together meritless intellectual property infringement
assertions solely because it needed some vehicle by which to cast a pall over Bumble and scare
away competitive bidders.
48. Yet, after filing its suit against Bumble, Match issued multiple statements in the
press disingenuously suggesting that it filed its suit as a matter of principle and was prepared to
go the distance in its Lawsuit.
49. Among the public statements made by Match are the following:
• In a memo to employees that Match later released to the press, Match’s CEO
stated: “Match Group owns various patents that protect our technologies and
designs that are deployed throughout our global portfolio. We have these patents
because we believe the work you do is incredibly important,”
https://moneyish.com/heart/female-friendly-dating-app-bumble-casts-shade-on-
tinder-lawsuit/
• Match’s CEO also shared with its employees, and the press, the company’s intent
in filing the suit: “This is not about singling out any individual company. This is
about protecting the integrity of your work… The least I can do is try and protect
it.” https://moneyish.com/heart/female-friendly-dating-app-bumble-casts-shade-
on-tinder-lawsuit/
• Match’s CEO also publicly accused Bumble “lifting intellectual property off of”
Match. https://www.bloombergquint.com/onweb/2018/03/23/match-ceo-
downplays-intimidation-accusations-in-bumble-brawl-jf47xq2d
• “Match Group has invested significant resources and creative expertise in the
development of our industry-leading suite of products. We are committed to

protecting the intellectual property and proprietary data that defines our business.
Accordingly, we are prepared when necessary to enforce our patents and other
intellectual property rights against any operator in the dating space who infringes
upon those rights.” https://www.recode.net/2018/3/16/17131728/tinder-bumble-
lawsuit-acquisition-patent-infringement-whitney-wolfe
50. Match’s media barrage was intended to allay suspicion that its lawsuit against
Bumble was not well founded, and merely a tactic to improve Match’s bargaining position vis-à-
vis other interested bidders. To make its lawsuit a more effective scare tactic, Match had to
convince the industry that it really believed that it had valid and enforceable intellectual
property, that Bumble infringed it, and that Match was prepared to go the distance in the lawsuit
to vindicate its intellectual property. Match did this through the false statements above.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE BUSINESS RELATIONS)
51. Bumble repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1
through 50 above as if as if fully set forth herein.
52. Bumble was in a position to be invested in by one or more companies, who had
made offers and/or expressed interest in concluding an investment. As a result, there existed a
reasonable probability that Bumble would have entered into a business relationship with a third
party.
53. By the actions detailed above, Match acted intentionally and with conscious
desire to prevent an investment of Bumble from occurring, and to interfere with Bumble
Holding’s right to freely dispose of its assets. This conduct was independently tortious and
unlawful.

54. The interference of Match has proximately caused injury by chilling the market
for an investment in Bumble. Absent Match’s intentional interference, and in the event of more
vigorous competition between bidders, a reasonable probability existed that Bumble would have
been able to accomplish a transaction on more favorable terms.
55. As a proximate cause of Match’s tortious interference, Bumble incurred damages
that are within the jurisdictional limits of this Court.
56. Match engaged in this tortious interference with the specific, malicious intent to
cause substantial injury to Bumble, therefore entitling Bumble to exemplary damages.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(FRAUD)
through 56 above as if fully set forth herein.
58. Match induced Bumble to provide its confidential and trade secret information by
falsely promising that they needed it to provide a higher offer for Bumble. But, Match never
intended to make an offer for Bumble. Match made false material representations that the
purpose of its request for Bumble’s sensitive and proprietary information was to allow Match to
make a higher offer. Instead, Defendant requested and obtained Bumble’s sensitive and
proprietary information for the purpose of wrongfully competing with Bumble after it announced
its intention to copy Bumble’s women-make-the-first-move model.
59. When Defendant made the foregoing representations, it knew the representations
were false (or, at the bare minimum, made them recklessly without knowing if they were true).
Defendant also intended that Bumble rely on the representations, which Bumble did, to their
detriment. From the outset, Defendant planned to take Plaintiffs’ sensitive and proprietary
information and use it to the detriment of Plaintiffs.

60. Defendant’s false material representations caused Plaintiffs injury. Plaintiffs are,
therefore, entitled to recover all damages permitted by law or equity.
61. Match’s conduct was malicious, deliberate, fraudulent, and willful, or in the
alternative, at least grossly negligent.
62. Match’s fraud has caused and will continue to cause damage to Plaintiffs in an
amount to be determined at trial.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(TEXAS UNIFORM TRADE SECRETS ACT)
64. Bumble is the owner of valid and enforceable trade secrets including, without
limitation, confidential business strategy, financial condition, and performance metrics. All of
these trade secrets are confidential, proprietary, and highly valuable.
65. Bumble’s trade secrets are not generally known or readily ascertainable. Bumble
took reasonable precautions to maintain the secrecy of its trade secrets by maintaining
confidentiality provisions in employment agreements with key employees, utilizing secure,
password-protected networks and databases, and insisting on robust confidentially agreements
with third-parties to whom the information is disclosed.
66. Match gained access to Bumble’s trade secrets by making fraudulent
representations concerning its intentions to make an appropriate offer for the investment in
Bumble. Match never received authorization to retain, use, or disclose Bumble’s trade secrets.
67. Match intended to leverage and commercially exploit Bumble’s trade secrets for
the financial benefit of its dating app businesses, including Tinder. For instance, the very same

month Match obtained Bumble’s trade secrets concerning Bumble’s women-make-the-first-move
platform, Match announced its own “ladies first” functionality for Tinder.
68. The foregoing acts constitute trade secret misappropriation of Bumble’s trade
secrets under the Texas Uniform Trade Secret Act, Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 134A.
69. Match’s conduct challenged herein was undertaken with full knowledge of
Bumble’s rights.
71. Match’s misappropriation of Bumble’s trade secrets has caused and will continue
to cause damage to Bumble in an amount to be determined at trial.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(UNFAIR COMPETITION)
73. Bumble’s own trade secrets and other confidential information, which separately
and in combination, create a competitive advantage in the dating app industry, and were created
through extensive time, labor, skill, and money.
74. Match committed one or more illegal acts, including trade secret
misappropriation, by obtaining through improper means, using, and/or disclosing Bumble’s trade
secrets and confidential information.
75. As a direct result of Match’s illegal conduct, Bumble has been deprived of the
ability to control of its trade secrets and confidential information. Match interfered with
Bumble’s ability to return value to its shareholders for the time, money, and effort invested in
developing its trade secrets and confidential information. Match violated the principles of the

common law of unfair competition by obtaining—through illegal and improper means—
Bumble’s trade secrets and proprietary information for use in competition with Bumble.
77. Match’s unfair competition has caused and will continue to cause damage to
Bumble in an amount to be determined at trial.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL)
79. Throughout February 2018, Match promised that Match would “shore up” and
“increase” its offer for investment in Bumble if it was provided with Bumble’s sensitive and
proprietary information. Defendant made representations in a transaction in which it had a
pecuniary interest and for the purpose of convincing Bumble to provide the requested
information. Defendant's representations included that, upon obtaining the trade secret, sensitive
and proprietary information from Bumble, it would make an increased bid.
80. Defendant never intended to make an offer and, instead, used the information in a
manner detrimental to Bumble. Defendant made false representations to Bumble and did not
exercise reasonable care or competence in obtaining the information. Defendant was intentional,
or at the bare minimum, negligent or grossly negligent when making the representations.
81. It was reasonably foreseeable to Match that Bumble would rely on these
promises.
82. Bumble substantially relied on Match’s promises by providing sensitive and
proprietary information to its competitor under the guise of legitimate business dealings.

83. Match never “shored up” or “increased” its offer to invest in Bumble.
84. Plaintiffs have incurred damages within the jurisdictional limits of this Court.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL DISPARAGEMENT)
86. Match published false or disparaging information about Bumble, including
statements in the press falsely claiming that Bumble infringed Match’s intellectual property, as
well as false statements in the Lawsuit.
87. Match made these statements with malice and ill will, to harm Bumble and
interfere with their economic interests. Match acted with intentional disregard for the truth, or at
the bare minimum, reckless disregard. Match had no privilege to make these statements in the
press, and has no privilege to make the statements in the Lawsuit as they were made frivolously
for the purpose of injuring the reputation of Bumble.
88. Bumble has suffered special damages, as the disparagement by Match has chilled
the market for an investment in Bumble.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Bumble prays for relief as follows:
a. An award of damages in an amount to be proven at trial;
b. A preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining Match, its affiliates,

employees, officers, directors, shareholders, agents, any other person in active
concert with it, from further tortious interference with the prospective business
relations of Bumble and is affiliates, or from using the confidential information of
Bumble;
c. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; and,
d. All such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, Match is requested to disclose, within 30
days of service of this request, the information or material described in Rule 194.2, including
without limitation the identity of all persons to whom Match has provided confidential
information of Bumble.
Dated: March 28, 2018 Respectfully submitted,
McKOOL SMITH, P.C.
/s/ Theodore Stevenson, III

Theodore Stevenson, III
tstevenson@mckoolsmith.com
Steven D. Wolens
swolens@mckoolsmith.com
Ashley N. Moore
amoore@mckoolsmith.com
Erik B. Fountain
efountain@mckoolsmith.com
300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500
Dallas, Texas 75201
Telephone: (214) 978-4974
Facsimile: (214) 978-4044
Christine M. Woodin
cwoodin@mckoolsmith.com
300 W. 6th Street, Suite 1700
Austin, Texas 78704
Telephone: (512) 692-8750
Facsimile: (512) 692-8744
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

BUMBLE TRADING, INC. AND BUMBLE
HOLDING, LTD.

FILED
DALLAS COUNTY
3/28/2018 9:44 PM
Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1-6 INFORMATION
Filed 09/26/18SHEET
Page 24 of 24 PageID 191 FELICIA PITRE
CIVIL CASE DISTRICT CLERK
DC-18-04140 Marissa Pittman
CAUSE NUMBER (FOR CLERK mum”): COURT {Fm CLERK UH: GNL Y):
M
STYLED Bumble Trading, lnc‘ and Bumble Holding, Ltd‘ v. Match Group, LLC
(e.gu John Smith v‘ Ail American Insurance Co: 1n re Mary Ann Jonas: ln the Matter orthe Estate ofGenrge Jackson)
A civil case information sheet must be completed and submmcd when an original petition or application is filed Io initiale a ncw civil, family law, probale, or menial
health case or when a pnsl-judgment petition fm- modification or motion for enforcement is fitcd in a family law case. The information should b2 the best available at
the lime offiling,
l. Contact infurmalion roLEerson completing case information sheet: Namrs Ufpnrlies in use: Person or entity completing shut is:
EAuomey fur Plaintlffi‘PeImoner

Name: Email: PlaintifflsNPetilioneds]: DP") S: PlainlifflPelilinner
DTIlle [V-D Agency
Ted SLevensnn, Ill Is:evenson@mckoolsmid1.com Bumble Trading, Inc DOLher:
Address Telephone Bumble Holding, Ltd.
Addilional Parties in Child Support Case:

300 Crescent Cl , Ste. ISOO 2 |4-978v4000
DefendanttsyRespondcn[[5)‘ Custodial Parent:

CItnylalcfZIp: Fax'
Match Group, LLC
Dallas. Texas 7520! 214-978-4044
Nan—Cusmdial Parent.
Signal . SLale Bar No

Presu med Father
19196650
lAuach :ddmnnzl page as nmmsry m I51 ail panics]
2. lndicale use type, ur identify the must important issue in the case (select only I):
Civil Family Law

Pnsl-judgmenl Attica:
[njurv or Damage
e
d
Contract Real Property Marriagt Relationship (non-Title [V-D]
DebI/Conmzcr DAssaulh’Baueuy D Eminent Domain! DAnn ulrnenl D Enforcemem
DConsumen’DTPA DConslruclion Candemnalion UDeclare Marriage DMDdificatiun—Custody
D DeblfContracl DDcfamalien U Partition Divorce U M cation—Othcr
odif'l
D Fra udlMisrepresentalion Malpracnce UQuiet Title DWith Children Tine nan

DOIher DebLt‘Comracl. DAccounung DTrespass lo Try TIlle DNO Children DEnforcemenmodificaliun
DLegal DDli-ner Property:
Dpatemlty
Foreclosure DMedIcal DReciprocals (UIFSA)
UHome Equury—Expedlted
_
DOlher Pruiessional
_
_
Dsuppon Order
UMmem
UOIher Foreclosure Liability:
U Franchise Rllltcd to Criminal
amsurancc Matters Other Famify Law Pnrcnt-Child Relationship
U Landlordn'enam Dprcm [535 DExpuncuon D Enforce Foreign DAdoptiorfiAdoption with
DNon-Competiuon Produc: Liming; Dludgmenl Nisi Judgmem Termination
D Fannership Dashesmsfsu .‘ca DNon-Disclosure D Habeas Corpus DChild Protection
Dower Contract Dower Product Liability DszurefForfeiture DName Change DChiId Support
“51 Product UWril of Habeas Corpus— DPrateclive Order UCuledy or Visiwlion
Pre-indlclmcnl URemoval of Disabllilics DGeslalional Parenting
Bother |njury 0r Damagg‘ DOiher: umeorin UGrandparent Access
UOther‘ DParemagefPalemity
DTerminalion of Parental
Emppymm 0th" CW“ Rights

. .
Dome! Parem-Child:
DLawyer
.
UDlscrlmInauon DAdmlmstIatlve Appeal

. _
DISCIplme
‘ ‘ ,
U Relalialion UAntilIustJU nfair DPerpeluale Testimony

UTermmat-‘on Competition DSecun'tiestsmck
UWotkem‘ Compensation UCode Violations ETonious Interference
UOthzr Employment' DForeign Judgment UOIhcrl
Dlntellectual Property ll
Ta: Probate & Mental Health

UTax Appraisal Probare/Wiflsflmeyate Administration UGuardianship—Adull
UTax Delinquency UDependent Administration UGuardianship—Minur
UOIher Tax Dlndependem Administration UMenml Health
DDIher Estate Proceedings DOrher;
3. Indicate procedure or remedy, if applicahte (my salsa mare than I):

UAppeal from M unicipal or Justice Court D Declaratory Judgment DPrej udgrnent Remedy
DArbilralion-related DGamishment DProtwwe Order
D Anachmcnt
DBiII hcview
DCeniorari
c Dlnterpleader
DLiccnsc
DMandamus
DReceiver
DchueslraLinn
DTemporary Remaining Order/lnjunction
DCIass Action DPosl-Judgment DTumover
4. Indicate damages sought Mo nor select fl11' 1's a gamify law omen
DLess lhan $ |00,000, including damages ofany kind, panalties, coals, expenses, pre-judgment interest, and attorney fees
DLess lhan S |00,000 and non-rnonetary relief
DOver $IOG, 000 but not more than $200,000
DOVer $200,000 bul not more than $1,000,000
flOver $ I £00,000
Rev 2f13
Exhibit 7
w
S
N
A
< i
H i
m D
:
a 0 A
9
: 7 ;
:
m
0 Z
Z v A "
O c O O
"
D Q > O H
~ é < w &
H E m M b Z
.
T Q > O e
m Q H D
3 <
H
~
U
: w
H l a
r fi > O S
0 E U I b 3
" m
a d c H M U N
$ U ”
E H w x
: o fim m
H H
H H m
o H d — b
.
m Z
m 0 w
Z 5
u < z i Z
r
E a c u H m H c N V
b
E m E P i
r
8 9 fi h & A U
m e H a
m
: E m a 5 55 G
wo Q O m
— fi w v
D i
e > > O M H < w
b
l
m n $
0 e0
m 4 0 O v
— U H A a
x ma 0 5 H H A é
.
Z 1 U c <
h 3 E a D
5 fi 0
O 5
» 5a m < H S m w Q :
2
3 :0
m
9 8
:2 uB 6
m 1m
:
5 3
T
9 t
5 v
c
b
.
5
uo
Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1-7 Filed 09/26/18
3 a
m
g s
g xno
: m _m
B a
o ”
m fi m
E co G B m S
N
B P zo o
Em
m fi
fi A wo =a
0 U m E
.
E ox 5 Z a
n
a <
H H fl 3 a
. .
o :2 o
s »
9 Q v o
x c
wH A c
:Q n h
o b
wo E O m
@: wa s
m
3 oB mew t fi
I wo E o
E = m c
a H £0 mBo
5
5 5 fl
8 £ : U a 0 2 n
? t 8 3 “ m 2 m :
E
n
6 3 z
5 : o b m3o c
o zmm £
m >n
9
x
m m Q 5:
o 3
H e
m Q 2 "
w
E = 5 :
9 : 7 3c E o o H
H H 5 2 : D $ 8 Z
»2 E
9
U m 5 5 <
< H
H < t :2 Eo 32 7
: :2 O 0 o
0
A
m H m wt A H E $ >
m m o c Z 3 U
ms wo U <
.
a Q
0 m b n
o l EN : m
— E E n
o U
e o 8 : m MW
> 0 N ? 8
n € fl 9 Q 6 0 3
"
.
fi tw x mms 2 o Q
3 30
. .
M > x 0 m
m E M 8 E :
< m
H <
x : 0 o
n 2 w o n g O
N 0 m H O 50 3
0
o h M 3 :0 mSo 0
-
H m >9 a fi m
a H £ 9 m H 68
§ H 2 0 d8 x Q 2 m
— m € Ro fia
m
0 U M O 9 S co vo o :
.
Z m U h m
— 2 8 S H : 2
O m
.
c m 2 D m a
~ 3 o m
A w H 5 mh
w 9:5 O OB 0 m
E A. H m H :
-
3 c m e E o U H E m
«
t2
K m I H H 8 0 E g E e
m M B M ca a
o
m 3
H
H
UQ
D E E Z a
Dw 5 3 a w
0 8 2 o
Q
Jo w E
V 9
5
:
mE = E H m :
(C
O UB E 2 no E i 5
U >6 0n moe m
r
x
’ IN
m Z m m X
.
no S 5 : E a 0
60 am :
o «
8 Es s z u =9
n
h II
U ~ 0 Z H h
m N £ A :S 3 8
V -
O . 3 t 6 s
m : o q U
r
E > E 2
L i
I
m D1 H
- U Z
H H vo _m mo 0 E s M 2 ? E b0 5
m
-
U H H m
H a
09
m
m c:
H Wm H ” 8 5 H m m : 5
S 9 m
e
< w w oc ms fi 5 0
Z 2m Z m m
< >m ~ E 5 t
. “
E *
H1 E
m E D w —no fl v 3 m U o
c
r
”
O m
.
-1
< o 2
r
” :
a :
8
2 m O U < z >o :0 io m £
L
Z 4: 0 A : : t m E H m
p o g 0 m a 0 3 0 o H
e m m
r
H1 B m o
U5
m £ 3 m o z 5 m
E m 05 € 95 05 o 2m B 3 2 nm o 3 :2 €
"
c i
y
m5 m3 am E:
El
m m 0
O w > 20 3 > E :
o
N ni
F
h H a < 0
K -
r
L k
m
0 0 0 m m H W 3m o § < m 0
0
O
w
0 o
.
v0. 0 9
0 9
0 a 3 o n 3
0
g. o : > m j : c
0 0 2 o
3
: < w
0 : 8 $ Z w 0 a w : o
m 0 z o m 5 z 3 O r
3. m c o = w 0
5 o » al n Z Z
.
m0 o S a0 i $ w 0 a ” E m o
u o
H = 0 ” ? ms 0
$ 0 o Q w
m:m m 0 Q mo ma oo 3 3 E
m 8 8 W C 3 U
o 5
.
1
0 3 5 ma
w O Z 9 O
0 2
0 00
0 5 1
0
: 0 9 s Em 0 C w : L
0 0 0
0 8 E a m
: m 0 a 8 fi2 "
.
0 0
,
0 m 3. : F rm 9
m b
w : . 0 2 0 E A
L
m
c 5
:
8
5 2 : C E
i Q m
" 3 3 5 0 O W i
n E
g 2 : S 0 s ” o
: 0 mmmm 3 E
m : o w
: Z 0
0 5 ? 3 H 0
8 0
3
0 9 a :
0 2 3
:
Z
0 8 : :
V
5 g
B 3 : 0 1 Q
o 0 wc 0 0 E ~
0
0 : m3 a
B 0 2
0 o 0 m ;
3.0
: a 0
: 0 m MS m
»
0 : Q 60
m
;
m m
n m 0
0
0 0 o E 8 % S g
u
0 z Q 3 n
o
0 8 m < 0 0 w >
0 < .0 m
N m a
r
o m ms
v a
H m e
r n Q
0
0 c o
m
o o E
a m : M3
0 r S m
i m m E om
u o fi S
3 30 o B
0 o o
8 0 m 8 m m
vw. 9 m
m
S
o
8 0 0 r
o o
nm
: 8 0: l E a
0 m v
m
5 . m 50. m m isn fi
o
2 m m N
o o
:
0 0 m
0 0 a
o
u
: 3. =
. . .
<
.
2
.
0 N M a
.
N
.
O
.
O
.
0 m o o m
.
:
: O
.
.
J> : fi
.
m
.
0 0
.
g
.
3 W m m
. .
8 0 B Q m
.
H ”
.
0 3 a :
.
O
.
z
a 3 z v
O 5 ~ n
vE. 3 m o < O H o 2 m
8 0 o % —
w o 3 6 w
r : ? E o ~
o 3 ol 0:
0 : o 8 s : fi o g d
0 5 0 o 0 O o o <
l
5m 5
-
0 0. W o
-
:
-
00 o 1 E
-
-
0 0 vE. : 8 E H E
-
-
: w » 9
:
%: 0 H E d d
-
H
:
0 R
a H @0 > d
:
m C
:
m
3
-
r
-
o % O 9
-
3
-
0 0
©0 S
o E m
_ w
Z A 0 3‘ 0. a
1
.
0 8 3 m
Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1-7 Filed 09/26/18
,
m m 3
0 5 ? om 2
m 0
.
0 m
.
? 8 0 3 %
E 3 0 8
r
m
5
0
.
: % m
8 0 0 x 3 m
o x
-
i 3 o
.
2 m o » oo
9 ms fi c
m W
o o 9
m fi
a m
‘
m
a m
0
» mm
H m
n H
o S o
Q a
0 a 8
u
n o
.
9 o
w a 1
0 m 0 m
0 a > 5 o
H
8
? n N
€ 0 Q
u
:
moo
-
8 : fi
3 m
u
m
u 0 m N r
o
: B E o a
0 E m < a
0 00 1
0 z
a u
.
0 : 8 3
o
m 5 0 u
a. : 2
m . 2
0
0
0 3 5
S
o
m 8 0 : w 0. 3
g 0
m : o :
m : o 2 :
vE. 5
: o 0
0 0
0 m 8 0 9o
5 m 0 ?
: 3. 0 v
as O
.
0 9
E o
5
.
% i g
0. 5
2 0
mn c
h
0 m 8 o
m
% 3
o
m
.
.
Z
Exhibit 8
FILED
DALLAS COUNTY
6/25/2018 11:59 AM
DISTRICT CLERK
CAUSE NO. DC-18-04140

HOLDING, LTD., §
§
Plaintiffs, §
§
§
§
Defendant. §
§ 160th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSEL
Attorneys Steven D. Wolens, Theodore Stevenson, III, Ashley N. Moore, Erik B.
Fountain, and Christine M. Woodin of the law firm McKool Smith, P.C. (together, “McKool
Smith”), pursuant to Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 10, file this Motion to Withdraw as counsel
for Plaintiffs Bumble Trading Inc. and Bumble Holding, Ltd. (together, “Bumble”), and
respectfully show as follows:
I.
GOOD CAUSE
McKool Smith moves to withdraw from representing Plaintiffs’ Bumble Trading, Inc.
and Bumble Holding, Ltd. (“Plaintiffs”) in this action for good cause. Among other reasons,
Plaintiffs are represented in a related case, Match Group, LLC v. Bumble Trading Inc., Civil
Action No. 6:18-cv-00080-RP-JCM in the United States District Court, for the Western District
of Texas, Waco Division, a matter in which Bumble has retained other counsel to represent it.
One or more of the counsel representing Plaintiffs in the federal court action is to be
substituted in this action.
MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSEL PAGE 1

II.
CLIENT/PLAINTIFFS’ CONSENT
Plaintiffs consent to this Motion.
III.
SUBSTITUTED COUNSEL
The following attorney is to be substituted as attorney for Plaintiffs:
Deron Dacus
Tyler, TX 75701
903-705-1117 (phone)
903-581-2543 (fax)
903-705-7231 (Direct Dial)
Email : ddacus@dacusfirm.com
IV.
NO DELAY – NO PREJUDICE
Withdrawal is not sought for delay. Since this suit was filed March 28, 2018, Defendant
has not been served. There are no settings or deadlines.
Therefore, granting this Motion to Withdraw will cause no harm or prejudice.

PRAYER
For these reasons, McKool Smith asks this Court to grant this Motion to Withdraw.
Dated: June 25, 2018 Respectfully submitted,
McKOOL SMITH, P.C.
/s/ Steven D. Wolens

Theodore Stevenson, III
tstevenson@mckoolsmith.com
Steven D. Wolens
swolens@mckoolsmith.com
Ashley N. Moore
amoore@mckoolsmith.com
Erik B. Fountain
efountain@mckoolsmith.com
300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500
Dallas, Texas 75201
Telephone: (214) 978-4974
Facsimile: (214) 978-4044
Christine M. Woodin
cwoodin@mckoolsmith.com
300 W. 6th Street, Suite 1700
Austin, Texas 78704
Telephone: (512) 692-8750
Facsimile: (512) 692-8744
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

BUMBLE TRADING, INC. AND BUMBLE
HOLDING LTD.

The undersigned hereby certifies that on the 25th day of June, 2018, a true and correct
copy of the foregoing document was served on the following counsel to be substituted as counsel
of record in the manner indicated below:
Via Email and Certified Mail:

Deron Dacus
ddacus@dacusfirm.com
Tyler, TX 75701
/s/ Steven D. Wolens

Steven D. Wolens
McKool 1367830v3
Exhibit 9
CAUSE NO.: DC-18-04140

HOLDING, LTD., §
§
Plaintiffs, §
§
§
§
Defendant. §
§
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSEL
This Court, having considered Attorneys’ Steven D. Wolens, Theodore Stevenson, III,
Ashley N. Moore, Erik B. Fountain, and Christine M. Woodin of the law firm McKool Smith,
P.C.’s (together, “McKool Smith”) Motion to Withdraw as attorneys of record is of the opinion
that good cause exists for granting the Motion. Accordingly, the Court
GRANTS the Motion to Withdraw, and
ORDERS Attorneys’ Steven D. Wolens, Theodore Stevenson, III, Ashley N. Moore, Erik
B. Fountain, and Christine M. Woodin of the law firm McKool Smith, P.C. (together, “McKool
Smith”) withdrawn as attorneys for Plaintiffs Bumble Trading Inc. and Bumble Holding, Ltd.
SIGNED this _____ day of ____________________, 2018.
.........................................................................................................
Judge Presiding
Exhibit 10
CAUSE NO.: DC-l 8-04140

HOLDING, LTD, §
§
Plaintiffs, §
§
§
§
Defendant. §
§
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSEL
This Court, having considered Attomeys’ Steven D. Wolens, Theodore Stevenson, III,
Ashley N. Moore, Erik B. Fountain, and Christine M. Woodin of the law firm McKool
Smith,
P.C.’s (together, “McKool Smith”) Motion t0 Withdraw as attorneys of record is 0f the opinion
that good cause exists for granting the Motion. Accordingly, the Court
GRANTS the Motion to Withdraw, and
ORDERS Attomeys’ Steven D. Wolens, Theodore Stevenson, III, Ashley N. Moore, Erik
M. Woodin of the law firm McKool Smith, P.C. (together, “McKool

B. Fountain, and Christine
Smith”) withdrawn as attorneys for Plaintiffs Bumble Trading Inc. and Bumble l
edin ,
Ijtd.
flair?”
aj
dmg gr? 77m flaws; fig? fl? u fl avayxima ,7;
“M,
.
SIGNED this Zf’day 2018_

Exhibit 11
Exhibit 12
1 CIT ES THE DACUS FIRM FILED

DALLAS COUNTY
9/18/2018 4:02 PM
ATTORNEYS & COUNSELOHS AT LAW FELICIA PITRE
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION DISTRICT CLERK
September 18, 201 8
Dallas County District Clerk

George Allen Courts Building
600 Commerce Street, Suite 103
Dallas, TX 75202
RE: DC-18-04l40; Bumble Trading, Inc. et al v Match Group, LLC;

160‘“ District Conn, Dallas County, Texas
Dear Clerk:
Please issue the following citation:
Match Group, LLC

8750 North Central Expressway DALLAS COUNTY
Suite 1400
Dallas, TX 75231
When the citation is ready, please forward to dadams@dacusfirm.com. Thank you for
your assistance in this matter.
(Sin erely,
/M/?2V
Deron R. Dacus
DRD/da
Deron Dacus. AnameyAr Law, Certified Pubn'c Accountant
821 ESE Loop 323‘ Suite 430 I Tyler. Texas 75701 I Phone/Fax: 903.705‘1117 i Direct Dial: 903.705.7233 I ddacus©dacusfirmc0m
Exhibit 13
FORM NO. 353-3 - CITATION ESERVE

THE STATE OF TEXAS CITATION
To: MATCH GROUP, LLC
8750 NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAYY, SUITE 1400
DC-18-04140
DALLAS TX 75231
GREETINGS:
You have been sued. You may employ an attorney. If you or your attorney do not file a written BUMBLE TRADING, INC., ET AL
answer with the clerk who issued this citation by 10 o'clock a.m. of the Monday next following the VS.
expiration of twenty days after you were served this citation and petition, a default judgment may be MATCH GROUP, LLC
taken against you. Your answer should be addressed to the clerk of the 160th District Court at 600
Commerce Street, Ste. 101, Dallas, Texas 75202.
ISSUED THIS
Said Plaintiff being BUMBLE TRADING, INC. AND BUMBLE HOLDING LTD 21st day of September, 2018
Filed in said Court 28th day of March, 2018 against FELICIA PITRE
Clerk District Courts,
MATCH GROUP, LLC Dallas County, Texas
For Suit, said suit being numbered DC-18-04140, the nature of which demand is as follows:
Suit on CNTR CNSMR COM DEBT etc. as shown on said petition REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE, a By: GAY LANE, Deputy
copy of which accompanies this citation. If this citation is not served, it shall be returned unexecuted. ________________________________
WITNESS: FELICIA PITRE, Clerk of the District Courts of Dallas, County Texas. Attorney for Plaintiff
Given under my hand and the Seal of said Court at office this 21st day of September, 2018. DERON DACUS
821 ESE LOOP 323
ATTEST: FELICIA PITRE, Clerk of the District Courts of Dallas, County, Texas SUITE 430
TYLER TX 75701
903-705-1117
By__________________________________, Deputy
GAY LANE
DALLAS COUNTY
SERVICE FEES
NDT PAID
OFFICER'S RETURN
Case No. : DC-18-04140
Court No.160th District Court
STYLE: BUMBLE TRADING, INC., ET AL
VS.
MATCH GROUP, LLC
Came to hand on the ________________day of __________________, 20_________, at __________o'clock_________.M. Executed at ______________________________,
within the County of __________________________ at ____________ o'clock _______ .M. on the ________________day of_________________________________________,
20_______________, by delivering to the within named
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
each, in person, a true copy of this Citation together with the accompanying copy of this pleading, having first endorsed on same date of delivery. The distance actually traveled by
me in serving such process was _________miles and my fees are as follows: To certify which witness my hand.
For serving Citation $__________ _______________________________________________

For mileage $__________ of__________________County, ____________________
For Notary $__________ By______________________________________Deputy
(Must be verified if served outside the State of Texas.)
Signed and sworn to by the said__________________________before me this_______day of _____________________, 20_______,
to certify which witness my hand and seal of office.
_____________________________________________________
Notary Public___________________County_________________
Exhibit 14
FILED
DALLAS COUNTY
9/21/2018 11:17 AM
DISTRICT CLERK
1-CIT-SOS-ESERVE
THE DAcus FIRM Marcus Turner
ATTORNEYS 8. COUNSELORS AT LAW
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
September 18, 2018
Dallas County District Clerk

George Allen Courts Building
600 Commerce Street, Suite 103
Dallas, TX 75202
RE: DC—18-04140; Bumble Trading, Inc. et a1 v Match Group, LLC;

160‘“ District Court, Dallas County, Texas
Dear Clerk:
Please issue the following citation:
Match Group, LLC

By Serving the Secretary of State
Office of the Secretary of State
Citations Unit - P. O. Box 12079
Austin, TX 78711
When the citation is ready, please forward to dadams@dacusfirm.com. Thank you for
your assistance in this matter.
m ely,
/ m
Deron R. Dacus
/? .qhi‘wh—H—f
DRD/da
Daron Dacus. AnomeyAr Law, Cemnea Pub/ic Aocounranr
821 ESE Loop 323‘ Suite 430 t Tyler, Texas 75701 I Phone/Fax: 903.705.1117 t Direct Dial: 903.705.7233 | ddacus©dacusfirmcom
Exhibit 15
FORM NO. 353-4—CITATION ESERVE (SOS)

THE STATE OF TEXAS
To: MATCH GROUP, LLC CITATION

BY SERVING THE SECRETARY OF STATE
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE
CITATIONS UNIT - P.O. BOX 12079 No.: DC-18-04140
AUSTIN, TX, 78711
BUMBLE TRADING, INC., ET AL
GREETINGS: VS.
You have been sued. You may employ an attorney. If you or your attorney do not file a written answer with the MATCH GROUP, LLC
clerk who issued this citation by 10 o'clock a.m. of the Monday next following the expiration of twenty days after you
were served this citation and Match Group, LLC petition, a default judgment may be taken against you. ISSUED
Your answer should be addressed to the clerk of the 160th District Court ON THIS THE 21ST DAY OF
at 600 Commerce Street, Dallas, Texas 75202. SEPTEMBER, 2018
Said PLAINTIFF being BUMBLE TRADING, INC. AND BUMBLE HOLDING, LTD.
FELICIA PITRE
Filed in said Court 28th day of March, 2018 against Clerk District Courts,
MATCH GROUP, LLC Dallas County, Texas
For suit, said suit being numbered DC-18-04140 the nature of which demand is as follows: By SHELIA BRADLEY, Deputy
Suit On CNTR CNSMR COM DEBT etc. ___________________________________
as shown on said petition REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE, a copy of which accompanies this citation. If this citation
is not served, it shall be returned unexecuted. Attorney for : Plaintiff
DERON DACUS
WITNESS: FELICIA PITRE, Clerk of the District Courts of Dallas, County Texas. DADAMS@DACUSFIRM.COM
Given under my hand and the Seal of said Court at office on this the 21st day of September, 2018 821 ESE LOOP 323 SUITE 430
ATTEST: FELICIA PITRE TYLER TX 75701
Clerk of the District Courts of Dallas, County, Texas 903-705-1117
/s/ Shelia Bradley
By__________________________________, Deputy
n
i
d
j
m
O
D
D
Z
E
SHELIA BRADLEY
M
H
E
S
O
H
m
m
m
m
:
D
F
m
1
.
n
OFFICER'S RETURN
FOR INDIVIDUALS
Cause No. DC-18-04140
Court No: 160th District Court
Style: Bumble Trading, Inc., et al vs. Match Group, LLC
Received this Citation the __________day of_______________, 20_____at__________o'clock. Executed at _______________, within the County of
_______________________________________, State of_____________, on the __________day of _______________, 20_____, at ______o'clock, by
delivering to the within named___________________________________________ each in person, a copy of this Citation together with the accompanying copy of
Plaintiff's original petition, having first indorsed on same the date of delivery.
----------000000----------
OFFICER'S RETURN
FOR CORPORATIONS
Received this Citation the __________day of_______________, 20_____at__________o'clock ___.M. Executed at _______________, within the County of
_______________________________________, State of___________________, on the __________day of _______________, 20_____, at _________ o'clock ____ .M.
by summoning the within named Corporation, ______________________ by delivering to _____________________________________
__________________________________________ ____________ President - Vice President - Registered Agent - in person, of the said
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
a true copy of this citation together with the accompanying copy of Plaintiff's original petition, having first indorsed on same the date of delivery.
----------000000----------
The distance actually traveled by me in serving such process was _________ miles and my fees are as follows: To certify which witness by my hand.
For Serving Citation $_______________ Sheriff___________________________________
For Mileage $_______________ County of________________________________
For Notary $_______________ State of__________________________________
Total Fees $_______________ By______________________________________
(Must be verified if served outside the State of Texas)

State of__________________________________
County of________________________________
Signed and sworn to me by the said___________________________before me this__________
day of _____________________________, 20______, to certify which witness my hand and seal of office.
____________________________________________
Seal State & County of

Exhibit 16
FILED
DALLAS COUNTY
9/26/2018 4:08 PM
DISTRICT CLERK
Cassandra Walker
BUMBLE TRADING, INC., BUMBLE § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

HOLDING, LTD. §
§ DALLAS COUNTY
§
Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants, § 160th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
v. §
§
MATCH GROUP, LLC §
§
Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff. §
§
DEFENDANT MATCH GROUP, LLC’S ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIMS
MATCH’S ANSWER: GENERAL DENIAL
1. Match Group, LLC (“Match”) enters a general denial.
2. Match denies each and every material allegation of fact and law contained in
Bumble’s1 Original Petition and demands strict proof thereof.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES2
(Preliminary Statement)
3. Bumble’s petition is nothing more than a publicity stunt. While Bumble
immediately hit the media circuit when it filed its lawsuit, it did nothing with the petition for
almost a full six months after it filed. This is not surprising; the claims it asserts in this case are

1
As used herein, “Bumble” refers collectively to both Bumble Holding, Ltd. (“Bumble
Holding”) and Bumble Trading, Inc. (“Bumble Trading”), unless the complaint refers
specifically to one of the entities separately.
2
Match intends to remove this action immediately upon filing this answer and these
counterclaims. Nothing in this pleading: (a) is intended to litigate or seek adjudication on the
merits in the courts of Dallas County; (b) shall be deemed to be a waiver of Match’s right to
remove this action; (c) shall in any way prejudice Match’s right to seek dismissal of aspects of
Bumble’s petition based, among other things, on the forum selection clause in the non-disclosure
agreement between Match Group, Inc. and Worldwide Vision Ltd.
1

Match Answer & Counterclaims 1
entirely and completely without merit. It was only when it became clear that Match would no
longer abide Bumble’s requests for extensions of time to respond to Match’s co-pending lawsuit
in the Western District of Texas—and with an October 12, 2018 hearing scheduled in this action
to address potential dismissal for want of prosecution—Bumble decided it had to press forward
with this meritless case. Beyond confirming that Bumble’s petition is merely a headline
masquerading as a lawsuit, this course of conduct also confirms a related point: Bumble’s case
and Match’s case belong together—in the Waco federal court, where Match’s action is pending.
It is there that Bumble’s claims will be dismissed in due course.
In its federal court action, Match alleged in detail the many ways in which Bumble has
infringed on Match’s intellectual property. Bumble does not deny that fundamental features of
its app were copied from Tinder wholesale. Bumble’s defense instead rests on the claim that the
United States Patent and Trademark Office erred. Yet duly issued patents are presumed valid
under the patent laws precisely because the governing assumption is that these technological
experts correctly did their jobs in issuing those patents. In any event, even setting that
presumption aside, the PTO made no error here. As Match made explicit in its Waco complaint,
Match’s ’811 patent improves existing matchmaking interface technology with swipe
functionality — thus enabling users to sift through information faster than prior technology. The
patent therefore is valid. See, e.g., Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Elecs., Inc., No.
2016-2684, 2018 WL 542672, at *4 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 25, 2018) (finding an improved user interface
within the realm of subject matter eligibility). In fact, since Bumble filed its lawsuit, the PTO
has again confirmed the validity of these claims, issuing an entirely separate patent, the ’023
Patent, which also recites improved matchmaking interface technology related to Tinder’s swipe.
This further confirms that the Patent Office’s issuance of patents to Match was no mistake.
2

Similarly, Bumble’s defense to Match’s trademark claim rests on the misguided notion
that the suspension of Match’s trademark registration process precludes an assertion of common
law trademark rights. Wrong again. It is black letter law that registration does not and cannot
affect preexisting common law rights. See, e.g., Santana Prod., Inc. v. Compression Polymers,
Inc., 8 F.3d 152, 155 (3d Cir. 1993) (reasoning that trademark refusal fails to affect preexisting
common law rights).
In short, while Bumble’s petition alleges that Match’s complaint was “frivolous,” that
label in fact applies to Bumble’s petition, which has no basis in law or fact. Accordingly, Match
pleads the following affirmative defenses and counterclaims. In asserting these defenses, Match
does not assume any burden of proof, persuasion or production not otherwise legally assigned to
it as to any element of plaintiffs’ claims.
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Improper Forum)
4. Match pleads that neither Dallas County nor the Northern District of Texas is an
appropriate forum for all claims arising out of the subject matter in a non-disclosure agreement
between Match Group, Inc. and Worldwide Vision Ltd. Bumble is a “transaction participant”
bound by the forum selection clause in that agreement.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Failure to State a Claim)
5. Match pleads that Bumble’s petition fails to state a claim on which relief may be
granted. Among other things, Bumble’s petition fails to adequately allege that Match’s federal
court action asserting, among other things, claims based on patents duly issued by the United
States Patent and Trademark Office, is a “sham” or filed in bad faith.
3

6. Bumble’s petition also fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted
because it pleads causes of action sounding in tort when its causes of action arising from Match’s
alleged acquisition and use of Bumble confidential information sound in contract.
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Noerr-Pennington Doctrine)
7. Match pleads that the conduct alleged in Bumble’s complaint is protected by the
Noerr-Pennington doctrine.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Failure to Plead a Condition Precedent)
8. Match pleads that Bumble’s claims are barred by a failure to satisfy a condition
precedent. Bumble filed suit prior to complying with the specific procedures for dealing with
confidential information pursuant to a non-disclosure agreement entered into between Match
Group, Inc. and Worldwide Vision, Ltd.
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Failure to Mitigate Damages)
9. Match pleads that Bumble is barred from seeking some or all of its alleged
damages because it has failed to take actions to mitigate damages.
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Unclean Hands)
10. Match pleads that Bumble’s claims are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands.
Since Match initiated the federal court action, Bumble has declared in the press that it never
intended to be purchased by Match, yet Bumble engaged in negotiations with Match for just that
purpose, presumably to raise its valuation in the market.
4

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(No Injunctive Relief)
11. Match pleads that Bumble is not entitled to injunctive relief because Bumble
cannot show imminent injury and/or irreparable harm and Bumble has an adequate remedy at
law.
EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Lack of Subject-Matter Jurisdiction)
12. Match pleads that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Bumble’s
claims because they arise under patent law and such claims are subject to exclusive federal
jurisdiction.
RESERVATION OF DEFENSES
13. Match hereby reserves the right to assert any defenses, including affirmative
defenses, to any claims for relief by Bumble as discovery proceeds in this case.
MATCH GROUP LLC’S COUNTERCLAIMS AGAINST BUMBLE HOLDING, LTD

AND BUMBLE TRADING, INC.
I. THE PARTIES
14. Match Group, LLC (“Match”) is a Delaware Corporation with a principal
15. Bumble Trading, Inc. is a Delaware Corporation with a principal place of business
in Austin, Texas.
16. Bumble Holding, Ltd. is a corporation existing under the laws of the United
Kingdom with a principal place of business in London, United Kingdom.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

17. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Bumble because Bumble filed this
5

lawsuit in Dallas County.
18. This Court does not have jurisdiction over Match’s claims for patent infringement
and for declaratory judgment of patent validity. Match intends to remove this case shortly after
filing.
19. Subject to Match’s arguments concerning the exclusive forum selection clause in
the non-disclosure agreement between Match Group, Inc. and Worldwide Vision, Ltd., venue
will be proper in the Northern District of Texas because Bumble initiated this action in Dallas
County and the removal statute therefore provides for venue in that court. See 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1390(c); 1441(a); 1454(a).
III. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

incubator owned by Match’s ultimate parent company, IAC/InterActiveCorp (“IAC”). Sean
Rad, Justin Mateen, Jonathan Badeen, Joe Munoz, Chris Gulczynski, Whitney Wolfe-Herd, and
others formed the early Tinder team that conceived, designed, developed, and conducted initial
21. Chris Gulczynski’s position at Tinder was “Lead Designer” or “Chief Creative.”
Tinder app.
interface.
6

24. First released in September 2012 for iPhone devices, Tinder revolutionized online

Patent”), entitled “Matching Process System and Method,” in connection with other functional
innovations embodied in versions of the Tinder app. The ’023 Patent is attached as Exhibit B.
Patent”), entitled “Display Screen or Portion Thereof with a Graphical User Interface of a
Mobile Device,” issued September 26, 2017. The ’314 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit C.
FIRST COUNTERCLAIM: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF INFRINGEMENT AND

INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’811 PATENT
herein.
7

30. There is an actual controversy between Match and Bumble in light of Bumble’s
petition alleging that Match’s allegations of infringement of the ’811 Patent amounted to tortious
interference because they were frivolous and made in bad faith.
31. Bumble Holding, Ltd. and Bumble Trading, Inc. directly infringed the ’811 Patent
by making and using a system that practices the claims of Tinder’s patent.

platform;

potential match;
8







second user;
9


match;
the first user;

third user;
determining that the first user has expressed the negative preference
indication regarding the third user;

fourth user; and
10




first request;





11


interface to display to the first user the graphical representation of
the first potential match;


35. Bumble Holding, Ltd. is the listed distributing company for the Bumble app on
the Apple App Store and the Google Play Store. Bumble Trading, Inc. also markets and
distributes the Bumble app. Thus, Bumble Holding and Bumble Trading are directly infringing
the ’811 Patent by making and/or using the Bumble system.
36. In at least one version of the Bumble app,3 Bumble Holding and Bumble
Trading’s servers practice all of the limitations of these claims, as set forth in the example below.
For example, Bumble’s servers electronically receive a plurality of user online-dating profiles,

3
Bumble has recently redesigned its user interface. The analysis contained in this claim relates
to the prior version of the app. To the extent there are differences relevant to infringement
related to the new version of the Bumble app, Match will address those differences during the
course of serving infringement contentions, at the latest.
12

each profile comprising traits of a respective user and associated with a social networking
platform. When a Bumble app user downloads and initially accesses the application, the user
device is required to set up a Bumble account that is associated with the user’s Facebook
account:
profile comprising traits of respective users. For example, as of March 15, 2018, the Frequently
Asked Questions on Bumble’s website indicated that Bumble “use[s] Facebook to help build
your profile by importing your name, age, school, and/or occupation.” Today, Bumble’s FAQs
“suggests using Facebook to help build your profile by importing your name, age, etc.”
matching.
13

39. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of determining a set of potential matches
correspond with the determination of potential matches described in [¶ 78] above:
14

gesture:
42. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of, in response to determining that the first
15

potential match:
16

second user has expressed the positive preference indication regarding the first user.
45. In the event that the determination described in the immediately preceding
paragraph results in a mutual positive preference indication, Bumble determines to enable initial
communication between the first Bumble app user and the second Bumble app user. In the
same-gender case, either participant may communicate. In an opposite-gender case, Bumble
makes the determination to enable initial communication by allowing the female user to message
the male user.
46. Bumble’s servers also perform the step of, in response to determining to enable
17

left:
a positive preference indication regarding a fourth potential match of the set of potential matches
at least by determining that the first user performed the first swiping gesture associated with a
graphical representation of the fourth potential match on the graphical user interface, the fourth
potential match corresponding to a fourth user. A Bumble user may affirmatively select (or
reject) another Bumble app user by swiping gestures. Bumble makes a determination based on
18

this Bumble user indication (i.e., swipe right or swipe left). Bumble determines whether a first
Bumble app user has made a positive preference indication in the form of a first swiping gesture.
52. Bumble Holding and Bumble Trading indirectly infringe the ’811 Patent by
inducing infringement by others, such as end-user customers, by, for example, encouraging and
instructing end-user customers to install and use the Bumble app in the United States.
53. Bumble Holding and Bumble Trading took the above actions intending to cause
infringing acts by others.
54. Bumble was also aware of the ’811 Patent. For example, on a February 7, 2018
earnings call, Match Group, Inc. CEO Mandy Ginsberg discussed the ’811 Patent.
55. That same day, the online publication Axios indicated that it had reached out to
58. Bumble also has admitted knowledge of the ’811 Patent at least by suing Match
19

for making allegations concerning the patent.
others would infringe the ’811 Patent but took deliberate steps to avoid confirming that it was
the Bumble app for interacting with Bumble’s servers. Bumble’s end-users directly infringed
infringing system.
20

example, as discussed above, Bumble is and has been aware of the ’811 Patent. Bumble
designed its app to mirror Tinder and its swipe functionality specifically to compete with Tinder
and avoid a barrier to entry in the market by mimicking Tinder’s swipe functionality in
SECOND COUNTERCLAIM: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF SUBJECT MATTER

ELIGIBILITY OF THE ’811 PATENT.
63. In its petition, Bumble alleges that the ’811 Patent is “facially invalid” for
allegedly failing to recite subject matter eligible for patenting.
petition alleging that the ’811 Patent is invalid.
out to improve the user interface functionality in dating and other matchmaking apps. The use of
a swipe on a graphical representation of a user to denote positive and of a different swipe on the
graphical representation to denote negative, in connection with a mutual opt-in matchmaking
app, was a non-conventional, concrete improvement in how touch screen user interfaces interact
with users sifting through and making binary choices, such as indicating positive or negative
preferences related to potential matches. Although the general gesture of swiping may have been
known in the prior art, the specific application to a graphical representation of a user in the
specific matchmaking context claimed, in order to make binary choices expressing a preference
or lack thereof regarding potential matches, was unknown and unconventional.
21

permitted to communicate unless and until a match is made, user profiles are specifically
“online-dating profiles” and those profiles must be “associated with a social networking
platform,” a type of platform that is itself computer-specific. The claims further describe various
actions of a graphical user interface that provide certain information at certain times in response
to certain types of inputs. This is not conventional post-solution activity in order to monopolize
an abstract idea of matchmaking or even mutual opt-in matchmaking. Instead, these limitations
recite a particularly advantageous computer embodiment of a matchmaking process that also
solves computer-specific problems related to the ease of creating fake accounts and profiles, the
“conventional.”
THIRD COUNTERCLAIM: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF INFRINGEMENT AND

INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’314 PATENT
herein.
22

petition alleging that Match’s allegations of infringement of the ’314 Patent amounted to tortious
interference because they were frivolous and made in bad faith.
72. The ’314 Patent claims an ornamental aspect of Tinder’s app design related to
swiping left or right on cards containing photographs.
patent:
75. In at least one version of the Bumble app,4 Bumble infringes on this ornamental
design.
76. Bumble Holding infringes this design patent at least by making the design in the

4
23

United States by distributing the software code that generates the design on a user device, by
using the design in the United States via promotional materials, and by using the design in the
app to sell services related to the app.
into believing that Bumble’s design is the same as Match’s patented design.
time at Tinder. Gulczynski previously assigned his rights to the patent (and all other relevant
24

81. Additionally, Bumble has been aware of the ’314 Patent before the filing of this
lawsuit, at least as of when Match filed its complaint against Bumble Trading and as of when
Bumble Holding and Bumble Trading sued Match for allegations made in that complaint.
FOURTH COUNTERCLAIM: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-

FUNCTIONALITY OF THE ’314 PATENT
82. In its petition, Bumble alleges that the ’314 Patent is “invalid[]” because it is
“primarily functional rather than ornamental.”
petition alleging that the ’314 Patent is invalid.
84. The ’314 Patent is not invalid for reciting functional subject matter.
85. The ornamental expression of swiping on cards containing photographs at an
angle is plainly different than a claim reciting the functionality of all swipe right and swipe left
actions on an interface.
FIFTH COUNTERCLAIM: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF

INFRINGEMENT AND INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’023 PATENT
herein.
87. In at least one version of the Bumble app,5 Bumble directly infringes the ’023
Patent at least by making and using a system that practices the claims of Tinder’s patent.

5
25

88. For example, independent claim 3 of the ’023 Patent recites:
A system, comprising:
present a graphical representation of a first item of information of a

plurality of items of information, the first item of information comprising
a graphical representation of a first online dating profile associated with a
first user, wherein the interface is further operable to present the graphical
representation of the first item of information of the plurality of items of
information as a first card of a stack of cards;
detect a gesture associated with the graphical representation of the first

item of information, the gesture corresponding to a positive preference
indication associated with the first item of information, the positive
preference indication associated with the first item of information
comprising an expression of approval for the first user associated with the
first online dating profile, wherein the processor is further operable to
detect a right swiping direction associated with the gesture;
store the positive preference indication associated with the first item of
information in response to detecting the gesture; and
the interface further operable to:
automatically present a graphical representation of a second item of

information of the plurality of items of information in response to the
processor detecting the gesture, the second item of information comprising
a graphical representation of a second online dating profile associated with
a second user; and
automatically remove the graphical representation of the first item of

information in response to detecting the gesture.
89. Bumble Holding, Ltd. is the listed distributing company for the Bumble app on
the Apple App Store and the Google Play Store. Bumble Trading, Inc. also markets and
distributes the Bumble app. Thus, Bumble Holding and Bumble Trading are directly infringing
the ’023 Patent by using the Bumble app in the United States and by distributing the Bumble app
to end users in the United States.
90. A user device running the Bumble app comprises the claimed system. The
26

Bumble app comprises an interface. When in operation, the app presents a graphical
representation of a first item of information of a plurality of items of information, the first item
of information comprising a graphical representation of a first online dating profile associated
with a first user. Specifically, the app presents a graphical representation of a first online dating
profile at least by showing a picture of a user associated with an online dating profile:
91. Bumble’s interface is further operable to present the graphical representation of
the first item of information (i.e., the graphical representation of the online dating profile) as a
first card of a stack of cards. Specifically, Bumble’s graphical interface presents dating profiles
in a stacked, card-based format:
27

92. User devices compatible with the Bumble app include processors.
93. When the Bumble app is downloaded and installed, those processors are operable
to detect a gesture associated with the graphical representation of the first item of information,
the gesture corresponding to a positive preference indication associated with the first item of
information, the positive preference indication associated with the first item of information
comprising an expression of approval for the first user associated with the first online dating
profile. Specifically, when the Bumble app is operating on a device, it detects a gesture—a right
swiping gesture—performed on the graphical representation of the online dating profile to
indicate a positive preference for the user associated with that profile:
94. As shown above, the code comprising the Bumble app, when downloaded,
28

installed, and operating on a user device renders the device’s processor operable to detect a right
swiping direction associated with the positive preference indication gesture.
95. The code comprising the Bumble app also renders the device’s processor operable
to store that positive preference indication associated with the first item of information in
response to detecting the gesture. Specifically, after the app detects that a user has swiped right
on the graphical representation of the dating profile, it stores data in memory indicating a
positive preference before transmitting that data to Bumble’s servers.
96. Bumble’s app also comprises an interface that automatically presents a graphical
representation of a second item of information of the plurality of items of information in
response to the processor detecting the gesture, the second item of information comprising a
graphical representation of a second online dating profile associated with a second user. In the
Bumble app, in response to the processor detecting the positive indication gesture, the Bumble
app automatically presents the entire graphical representation of a second online dating profile
associated with a second user:
97. As shown above, the Bumble app also automatically removes the graphical
29

representation of the first item of information in response to detecting the gesture.
100. If Bumble did not know that the actions it has encouraged and continues to
encourage constitute infringement of the ’023 Patent, Bumble nevertheless subjectively believes
there was and is a high probability that others have and will infringe the ’023 Patent but has
taken and is taking deliberate steps to avoid confirming that it is actively inducing infringement
by others.
operating Bumble’s app. These software components are, for example, the Bumble app, and the
download package that contains the Bumble app. Bumble’s end-users directly infringed the ’023
Patent by, for example, installing and using the Bumble app in the United States to use the
Bumble system in the United States. These software components are known by Bumble to be
especially made or adapted for use in Bumble’s infringing system.
subjectively believes there was and is a high probability that these components were especially
made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of the ’023 Patent and that these
components are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-
30

infringing use but has taken and is taking deliberate steps to avoid confirming the same.
103. Bumble’s infringement of the ’023 Patent is and has been willful at least as April
30, 2018 and the filing of Match’s First Amended Complaint in Match, LLC v. Bumble Trading,
Inc., 18-cv-0080 (W.D. Tex.). At that point, Bumble at a minimum knew or had reason to know
of certain facts which would lead a reasonable person to realize their actions were unreasonably
risky with respect to infringement of the ’023 Patent. And Bumble designed its app to mirror
Tinder and its swipe functionality specifically to compete with Tinder and avoid a barrier to
entry in the market by mimicking Tinder’s swipe functionality in connection with an online
matchmaking app.
out to improve the user interface functionality in online dating apps. Far from claiming the
general concept of matchmaking or even mutual opt-in matchmaking on a computer or over the
Internet, the ’023 Patent recites a new, innovative interface design that reflects a non-
conventional, concrete improvement in graphical interfaces for online dating.
106. For example, claim 3 recites multiple specific, concrete aspects related to an
improved interface. The claim requires that the graphical representation of a dating profile be
represented as the first card of a stack of cards, that the system be operable to detect a gesture
corresponding to a positive preference indication of the dating profile, that the interface be
operable to detect a right swiping direction associated with that positive preference gesture, that
a graphical representation of a second online dating profile is automatically presented in
31

response to detecting the positive preference gesture, and that the graphical representation of the
first data profile is automatically removed.
107. As with the ’811 Patent, the requirements of this claim reflect a non-conventional,
concrete improvement in how touch screen user interfaces interact with users sifting through and
making binary choices. Even if the general gesture of swiping was known in the prior art, the
specific application of a right swipe gesture to indicate a positive preference on a card-based
online dating interface was unknown and unconventional and provides specific, concrete
improvements to the interface.
efficiencies to user interaction revolutionized the world of online dating
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for the entry of a judgment from this Court:
1. Judgment in Defendant’s favor and against Plaintiffs on all counterclaims and
defenses alleged herein;
2. A preliminary and/or permanent injunction restraining Plaintiffs, and their agents,
acting in concert with them, from directly or indirectly violating Defendant’s utility patent rights
or design patent rights;
3. A declaratory judgment that Bumble infringes the ’811 Patent;
4. A declaratory judgment that the ’811 Patent is subject matter eligible under 35
U.S.C. § 101.
5. A declaratory judgment that Bumble infringes the ’314 Patent.
32

6. A declaratory judgment that the ’314 Patent is non-functional.
7. A declaratory judgment that Bumble infringes the ’023 Patent;
a. Damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284, including enhancement and including
b. Damages under 35 U.S.C. § 289, including Bumble’s total profit and revenue
realized and derived from its infringement of the ’314 Patent and in an amount not
less than a reasonable royalty.
9. For Defendant’s reasonable attorney’s fees;
12. If an injunction is not granted, that Defendant be awarded an ongoing licensing
fee; and
Defendant demands a trial by jury on all issues triable of right by a jury.
33

DATED: September 26, 2018 Respectfully submitted,

Bradley W. Caldwell
John F. Summers
Dallas, Texas 75201
Telephone: (214) 888-4848
Facsimile: (214) 888-4849
ATTORNEYS FOR
DEFENDANT/COUNTER-PLAINTIFF
MATCH GROUP, LLC
34

Exhibit A

Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1-16 IFiled 09/26/18
lllll llllllll Ill lllll lllll lllllPage 37111111111111111111111111111111111
lllll lllll of 97 PageID 252
US009733811B2
c12) United States Patent (IO) Patent No.: US 9,733,811 B2

Rad et al. (45) Date of Patent: Aug. 15, 2017
(54) MATCHING PROCESS SYSTEM AND (2013.01); G06Q 10110 (2013.01); G06Q
METHOD 30102 (2013.01); G06Q 50101 (2013.01);
G06Q 50110 (2013.01)
(71) Applicant: TINDER, INC., West Hollywood, CA (58) Field of Classification Search
(US) CPC ........... G06F 17/30867; G06F 17/3053; G06F
17/30386
(72) Inventors: Sean Rad, Los Angeles, CA (US); See application file for complete search history.
Todd M. Carrico, Melissa, TX (US);
Kenneth B. Hoskins, Plano, TX (US); (56) References Cited
James C. Stone, Addison, TX (US);
Jonathan Badeen, North Hollywood, U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
CA (US)
6,480,885
Bl 11/2002 Olivier
7,917,448
B2 3/2011 Smola et al.
(73) Assignee: Tinder, Inc., West Hollywood, CA (US) 8,060,463
Bl 11/2011 Spiegel
8,180,804
Bl* 5/2012 Narayanan et al. .......... 707/798
( *) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer, the term ofthis 8,566,327
B2 * 10/2013 Carrico ............. G06F 17/30657
patent is extended or adjusted under 35 705/319
U.S.C. 154(b) by 121 days. 2005/0021750 Al 1/2005 Abrams
2005/0027707 Al* 212005 Syed ...................... G06Q 30/02
7071999 .009
(21) Appl. No.: 14/059,192 2006/0059147 Al 3/2006 Weiss et al.
(Continued)
(22) Filed: Oct. 21, 2013
(65) Prior Publication Data OTHER PUBLICATIONS

US 2014/0074824 Al Mar. 13, 2014 USPTO, Non-final Office Action dated Aug. 25, 2011 for U.S. Appl.
No. 12/339,301, filed Dec. 19, 2008 in the name of Todd M. Carrico,
Related U.S. Application Data 14 pages.
(63) Continuation-in-part of application No. 12/339,301, (Continued)
filed on Dec. 19, 2008, now Pat. No. 8,566,327.
(Continued) Primary Examiner - Yuk Ting Choi
(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm - Baker Botts L.L.P.
(51) Int. Cl.
G06F 17130 (2006.01) (57) ABSTRACT
G06F 310484 (2013.01) A method for profile matching includes receiving a plurality
G06Q 10110 (2012.01) of user profiles, each user profile comprising traits of a
G06Q 30102 (2012.01) respective user. The method includes receiving a preference
G06Q 50110 (2012.01) indication for a first user profile of the plurality of user
G06Q 50100 (2012.01) profiles. The method also includes determining a potential
G06F 310482 (2013.01) match user profile of the plurality of user profiles based on
G06F 310488 (2013.01) the preference indication for the first user profile. The
(52) U.S. Cl. method also includes presenting the potential match user
CPC ........ G06F 3104842 (2013.01); G06F 310482 profile to a second user.
(2013.01); G06F 310488 (2013.01); G06F
17130554 (2013.01); G06F 17130657 9 Claims, 11 Drawing Sheets
•. ··10
88

US 9, 733,811 B2
Page 2
Related U.S. Application Data USPTO, Final Office Action dated Jan. 6, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No.
12/339,301, filed Dec. 19, 2008 in the name of Todd M. Carrico, 15
(60) Provisional application No. 61/793,866, filed on Mar. pages.
15, 2013. Request for Continued Examination Transmittal and Amendment
Filed with Request for Continued Examination filed May 7, 2012
(56) References Cited for U.S. Appl. No. 12/339,301, filed Dec. 19, 2008 in the name of
Todd M. Carrico, 17 pages.
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS USPTO, Non-final Office Action dated Oct. 2, 2012 for U.S. Appl.
No. 12/339,301, filed Dec. 19, 2008 in the name of Todd M. Carrico,
2006/0085419 Al 412006 Rosen 10 pages.
200610106780 Al 512006 Dagan
Response to Office Action Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.111 filed Dec.
2007/0073687 Al 3/2007 Terrill et al.
2007/0073803 Al 3/2007 Terrill et al. 31, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/339,301, filed Dec. 19, 2008 in the
2008/0196094 Al* 8/2008 Benschop G06Q 20/10 name of Todd M. Carrico, 13 pages.
726/5 USPTO, Final Office Action dated Mar. 7, 2013 for U.S. Appl. No.
2008/0294624 Al 1112008 Kanigsberg et al. 12/339,301, filed Dec. 19, 2008 in the name of Todd M. Carrico, 12
2008/0301118 Al 12/2008 Chien et al. pages.
200910106040 Al 412009 Jones Response to Office Action Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.116 and
2010/0125632 Al* 5/2010 Leonard . G06Q 10/10 Certification and Request for Consideration Under the After Final
709/204 Consideration Pilot Program 2.0 filed Jun. 6, 2013 for U.S. Appl.
2011/0087974 Al* 4/2011 Kulas ............................ 715/760 No. 12/339,301, filed Dec. 19, 2008 in the name of Todd M. Carrico,
2011/0196927 Al* 8/2011 Vance ........................... 709/204 14 pages.
2012/0088524 Al* 412012 Moldavsky . G06Q 30/02 USPTO, Notice of Allowance and Fees Due dated Jun. 19, 2013 for
455/456.3 U.S. Appl. No. 12/339,301, filed Dec. 19, 2008 in the name of Todd
2014/0040368 Al* 2/2014 Janssens ....................... 709/204 M. Carrico, 12 pages.
2014/0074824 Al* 3/2014 Rad. G06Q 50/01
PCT Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report
707/722
and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or
the Declaration with attached PCT International Search Report and
OTHER PUBLICATIONS Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority in Inter-
national Application No. PCT/US08/87706, dated Feb. 10, 2009, 8
Response to Office Action Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.111 filed Nov. pages.
23, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 12/339,301, filed Dec. 19, 2008 in the
name of Todd M. Carrico, 12 pages. * cited by examiner

U.S. Patent Aug. 15, 2017 Sheet 1 of 11 US 9,733,811 B2
100
MATCHING
srnvrn
20
20
·-···--··········---···-----------~------l:::____________________________
10 .................-"'......................................................... ...
..............."'"'•"••···.··-.--.---··•"''•·····....... ......
-------- ''6'""
Ptrn···'+J",...-·--£.
1-T:J+ d
tl"' "1""1":
[. c.ru"J"-· 28
"
0
0
_ft>f(J. JB
FIG. JC

U.S. Patent Aug. 15, 2017 Sheet 2of11 US 9,733,811 B2
FIG. JD
·-----------------------------·····----·--···--------------------------.---.·--···········--
SEARCH RESULTS
i-------~----------------------·····················--------~--------------------.------------------------
11. Jane ooe/31a [·;;;;;;~:r33

31 )1 2. Jane Roef 31 b r~;;lr 33 il(~)l--·"'34
I.•
3 Jane Boe'- 31 c
0
0
[VE;;:J . 33
!L::CJ
fi'JG. JE
··················---·~-
/;.:::::r:;,--\
( /l:~~J.t..~:. \ \ ,Jane Doe
l ! ~-<'~ i <~") t \
;' 1 ·\ .. i 11
/' .- I·it.,.,_;; 'I\. !\w«----.-.-.-.-----=:--·---"-·:·--.-.-'
Contact l.....·-- ·35
'"
\ \ ..,_ ,- . I i ) .,,,,...
i \ y,,~:;::·1 i / / i .,,...,..~
,,..,----(/\'\\\fl---,~-- . \
!.· l
l k' \'
L. .t ..~:vS01 _ _ _. . .J
\i
Bom: i O/Oi /75

Hometown: Dallas, TX
Likes: Cl1oco!ate, ro!lerblatHng
Dislikes: Body odor. arrogance, football
FIG. JF

. ._________
,.,._,.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""m•~~---•-••••--•••••
SEARCH RESULTS
"'"'"'""""""..._..._..._.._.._..._..._ •••••••••••••••••••••• nHu"'"'~~........_....,...._..,._.,.,.,.,"'""''" ......_..._..._..._..._ •••
f Jane Doe
12a -,, :
'"'-!
31 I ~lane Boe
! _Jane Loe
Hl\RRY'S SE.A.RCH RESULTS

I
I
FIG. 2
[ .lane Doe
l
31 ~Ii_. Jane Boe
I Jane Loe I
l
i2
'-.,,,
----·----···-···----~------------:L.--------------------·------·--m·---------------------------------------------------
~< ~~ le~---------
113
/:;::.:}~
/[tfikt~)\
L~;:i~~~~~~:~~;~I CN~~~~~~,
r·-----m·:;. r1anci1;:---;~m-------1 [r_T~~:t~~?~~:?,;;";;~;n;r:
Ir· 1\if~\f~> '§:Y~iii~?!J '9\'&~li'f0Wfu~1Z~:t?Li!;.;3

.. :' \' ~ \ Physical Compatlbillty: High
11 P1G. 3
,."'"..L ..\li:~L........ J.
1 intellectual Compatibility: High
Age --~~-'.~-~~--S'..~~pt1Hbi Iity:_..r::~-~~-:::_~-~~-IY.._~i-~-~-------------m----------
Gend~;/~g~o;••k;: ,. l·~::?:~~~~;~;~!·~,~~:~~:ic,·~;~~~E,~::i
'-- I and mentioned ''Play-doh'' in your proiiles.
!\.------------------------------------------------ lu'>.">_ _ .,.,.,°""""""'""""'""""""""""•.•.•••••••••••••••··•••••••••»•,...,.....,..... _ _._• .,..._.,'""""""""""""·""••••••

20 50
30 52
)
tJ [~]
FIG. 4

. . .-~10
;,.•'
c:::::::::)
.........---·10
tinder
[
/ .. 88
(iZ) (-i~) (~?)

................... ................... ,.,,....,......
............................................................... " ................................
.-··---.....
( Q)......................
I
,,...·l
OHHHHOH•O•>••>•>••••>••·············""""'
FJCl. 7
tinder tinder
. -···88
Its a matc/1!
c~:)
~...................................................................v-.....
J
F7G. 8

,..-·1002
GENERATE USER POOL
i /,..., 1004
DISPLAY USER POOL
i / . 1006
RECEIVE USER PREFERENCE
0'''"'''""'""'""'"'"~'__{_,1_0i_2--~
.. .......---~•.--.J~ 1014
~ ALLOW COMMUNICATION
STORE FIRST
USER S PREFERENCE
1
i ·-1016
~""""""""""""""""""""'"'""""'"'"{........................
DO NOT ALLOW
COMMUNICATION
FIG. 10

,.,.1102
RECEIVE PAIR OF USER
IDENTIFIERS
mmmmmmmmmm~• ~ t•• 11 06 (-1i08

~-........................................i.............................................. ..
ALLOW DO NOT ALLOW

COMMUNICATION COMMUNICATION
F7G. 11

~? Sent Matches
............................................ ~~~-~---------------------------·--····--·······
---········································-~-·---------------------··----··-------·······················--·----·
1204·~
(~~-=··-······~··--···~--______)
John Stiles
Richard Miles
._,_ ___ ..............................................
._., -.~--··----~·-------------------·····
FJ(J. 12A

~ Sent Matches
(.,...................................................................................................................................................... ~..,., --· 1204

\..,Q Search. ___/ .)
..... ·-·1202
FIG. 12B

,,. -~------~-~------"""'
( <s-......Matchmaker
.................
)
.......
~ Sent Matches
1206-
1202·---
FIG . .12C

----------------------- ........................................................
,<_...................... --·-1 ~---~-~---~~
(___ Recent ____j A-Z
..........................-................................ ~~-~~
............................................ -~---------------------------------------·········
·--~-~-------------------·····················----·---!
FIG. 12D

US 9,733,811 B2
1 2
MATCHING PROCESS SYSTEM AND compnsmg traits of a respective user. It also comprises
METHOD receiving a preference indication for a first user profile of the
plurality of user profiles. It further comprises determining a
RELATED APPLICATION potential match user profile of the plurality of user profiles
based on the preference indication for the first user profile.
This application is a continuation-in-part of Ser. No.
The method also comprises presenting the potential match
12/339,301, entitled "MATCHING PROCESS SYSTEM
AND METHOD," filed Dec. 19, 2008. user profile to a second user.
This application claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. §119(e) to Receiving a preference indication for a first user profile
U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/793,866, entitled may include receiving from a third user a recommendation
10
"SOCIAL MATCHING SYSTEM AND METHOD," filed of the first user profile for the second user. It may also
Mar. 15, 2013. include receiving from the second user a preference indica-
tion for the first user profile. The method may further include
TECHNICAL FIELD determining a score of a third user profile of the plurality of
user profiles as a potential match for the second user. It may
This invention relates generally to computer matching 15
also include altering the score of the third user profile based
systems and more particularly to a matching process system
and method. on the preference indication for the first user profile.
In another embodiment, a method for profile matching
BACKGROUND comprises receiving a plurality of user profiles, each user
20 profile comprising traits of a respective user. The method
Networking architectures have grown increasingly com- further comprises receiving a request for matches from a
plex in communications environments. In recent years, a first user, the first user associated with a first user profile.
series of protoc ols and configurations have been developed The method also comprises scoring the plurality of user
in order to accommodate a diverse group of end users having profiles for potential matching with the first user based on
various networking needs. Many of these architectures have
25 comparisons of the plurality of user profiles with the first
gained significant notoriety because they can offer the
user profile. It also comprises identifying a second user
benefits of automation, convenience, management, and
enhanced consumer selections. profile of the plurality of user profiles as a potential match
Certain network protocols may be used in order to allow for the first user based on the scoring. The method further
an end user to conduct an on-line search of candidates to fill comprises identifying commonality between a third user
a given vacancy. These protocols may relate to job searches, 30 profile of the plurality of user profiles and the second user
person finding services, real estate searches, or on-line profile. In addition, the method comprises presenting to the
dating. While some believe that on-line dating is simply a first user the third user profile as a potential match for the
matter of matching supply and demand, there is statistical first user.
and empirical evidence to suggest that successful on-line Depending on the specific features implemented, particu-
dating entails far more. 35 lar embodiments may exhibit some, none, or all of the
For example, people having similar and/or compatible following technical advantages. Various embodiments may
character traits and values should be matched together. be capable of dynamically updating match search results
However, effectively linking two participants together can based on user activity. Some embodiments may be capable
prove to be a challenging endeavor. Coordinating a relation- of enhancing match search results by reducing the impact of
ship between two like-minded individuals can be a signifi- 40 restrictive user preferences. In addition, some embodiments
cant chore, as there are a number of obstacles and barriers may provide the ability to evaluate the attractiveness of
that must be overcome. potential matches. Various embodiments may be capable of
One problem that has arisen is that matching services are importing user profiles from other social-networking sys-
limited to searching for matches only within their own
tems. Some embodiments may be capable of generating the
platform. Thus, only people who have gone through the
45 pool of users based on both explicit and implicit criteria
process of signing up for the service are searched for a
match. One solution to this problem is to have users register derived from other social networking systems. Other tech-
in multiple services. This is problematic because it can be nical advantages will be readily apparent to one skilled in the
expensive and time consuming for users. Further, the user art from the following figures, description and claims.
must then visit all of the services to monitor the search
progress: this inefficiency may cause users to give up on the 50 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
search process.
Another problem is that the search results of these ser- Reference is now made to the following description taken
vices contain many irrelevant entities to the searcher. This in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein
costs the user of the service time and may deter them from like reference numbers represent like parts, and which:
continuing through all of the search results. 55 FIG. lA is an overview of one embodiment of the
Another problem is that large numbers of unwanted matching system;
communication requests can become a nuisance to the user. FIG. 13 shows the contents of the terminal from FIG. lA;
Too many nuisance requests may deter the user from further FIG. lC shows the contents of the matching server from
use of the system. Users with the most attractive profiles are FIG. lA;
oftentimes the ones that receive the most unwanted atten- 60 FIG. lD is a diagram of a database from FIG. lC showing
ti on. If the users with the most attractive profiles cease to use one embodiment of how a matching server stores a pool;
the system, the quality of the user pool deteriorates, FIG. lE is a diagram of the display from FIG. 1B showing
one embodiment of the presentation of search results to a
SUMMARY user;
65 FIG. lF is a diagram of the display from FIG. lB showing
In one embodiment, a method for profile matching com- one embodiment of the presentation of details of a match
prises receiving a plurality of user profiles, each user profile result entity to a user;
US 9,733,811 B2
3 4
FIG. 2 is a diagram depicting how a user may recommend browsing), component, or element capable of accessing one
an entity to another user, in accordance with a particular or more elements within system 100. Interface 16, which
embodiment; may be provided in conjunction with the items listed above,
FIG. 3 is a diagram of the display from FIG. lB depicting may further comprise any suitable interface for a human user
how the user may be made aware of fate characteristics the such as a video camera, a microphone, a keyboard, a mouse,
user shares with a match result entity, in accordance with a or any other appropriate equipment according to particular
particular embodiment; configurations and arrangements. In addition, interface may
FIG. 4 is a diagram depicting how two platforms may be be a unique element designed specifically for communica-
searched for a match, in accordance with a particular tions involving system 100. Such an element may be fab-
embodiment; 10 ricated or produced specifically for matching applications
FIG. 5 is a flow chart indicating how a result list may be involving a user.
generated, in accordance with a particular embodiment; Display 12, in one embodiment, is a computer monitor.
FIG. 6 shows one embodiment of the matching system Alternatively, display 12 may be a projector, speaker, or
displaying to a user the profile information of a second user; other device that allows user 14 to appreciate information
FIG. 7 is a diagram of the display from FIG. 6 showing 15 that system 100 transmits.
the effect of a left swipe gesture; Network 24 is a communicative platform operable to
FIG. 8 is a diagram of the display from FIG. 6 showing exchange data or information emanating from user 14.
the effect of a right swipe gesture; Network 24 could be a plain old telephone system (POTS).
FIG. 9 shows the matching system displaying a match of Transmission of information emanating from the user may
a first user and a second user, in accordance with a particular 20 be assisted by management associated with matching server
embodiment; 20 or manually keyed into a telephone or other suitable
FIG. 10 is a flowchart depicting a method for enabling electronic equipment. In other embodiments, network 24
communication between two users of the matching system could be any packet data network offering a communications
of FIG. 1 based on a mutual expression of approval, in interface or exchange between any two nodes in system 100.
accordance with a particular embodiment; 25 Network 24 may alternatively be any local area network
FIG. 11 is a flowchart depicting a method for enabling (LAN), metropolitan area network (MAN), wide area net-
communication between two users of the matching system work (WAN), wireless local area network (WLAN), virtual
of FIG. 1 based on a user suggested matching proposal, in private network (VPN), intranet, or any other appropriate
accordance with a particular embodiment; and architecture or system that facilitates communications in a
FIGS. 12A-D depict embodiments of a user interface. 30 network or telephonic environment, including a combination
of any networks or systems described above. In various
DETAILED DESCRIPTION embodiments, network connections 22 may include, but are
not limited to, wired and/or wireless mediums which may be
Referring to FIG. lA, one embodiment of a matching provisioned with routers and firewalls.
system is shown. FIG. lA is a simplified block diagram of 35 Matching server 20 is operable to receive and to commu-
a system 100 for facilitating an on-line dating scenario in a nicate information to terminal 10. In some embodiments,
network environment. In other embodiments, system 100 matching server 20 may comprise a plurality of servers or
can be leveraged to identify and to evaluate suitable candi- other equipment, each performing different or the same
dates in other areas (e.g. hiring/employment, recruiting, real functions in order to receive and communicate information
estate, general person searches, etc.). Users 14 interact with 40 to terminal 10. Matching server 20 may include software
a matching server 20 through terminals 10. FIG. lB is a and/or algorithms to achieve the operations for processing,
diagram showing, in one embodiment, the contents of ter- communicating, delivering, gathering, uploading, maintain-
minal 10. Terminal 10 comprises interface 16 (so that user ing, and/or generally managing data, as described herein.
14 may be able to interact with terminal 10) and display 12. Alternatively, such operations and techniques may be
FIG. lC is a diagram showing, in one embodiment, the 45 achieved by any suitable hardware, component, device,
contents of matching server 20. Matching server 20 com- application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), additional
prises memory 26 and at least one CPU 28. Memory 26 may software, field programmable gate array (FPGA), server,
store multiple databases, such as databases 26a and 26b. processor, algorithm, erasable programmable ROM
Terminal 10 and matching server 20 are communicatively (EPROM), electrically erasable programmable ROM (EE-
coupled via network connections 22 and network 24. 50 PROM), or any other suitable object that is operable to
Users 14 are clients, customers, prospective customers, or facilitate such operations.
entities wishing to participate in an on-line dating scenario In some embodiments, user 14, using terminal 10, include
and/or to view information associated with other participants user 14 submitting information to matching server 20 about
in the system. Users 14 may also seek to access or to initiate user 14 as well as characteristics user 14 is seeking to be
a communication with other users that may be delivered via 55 matched with. Such information may include a user handle,
network 24. Users 14 may review data (such as profiles, for which may be a combination of characters that uniquely
example) associated with other users in order to make identifies user 14 to matching server 20. In various embodi-
matching decisions or elections. Data, as used herein, refers ments, matching server 20 may be configured to collect this
to any type of numeric, voice, video, text, or script data, or information; for example, matching server 20 may be con-
any other suitable information in any appropriate format that 60 figured to ask user 14 to respond to a series of questions.
may be communicated from one point to another. Matching server 20 may be configured to receive the infor-
In one embodiment, terminal 10 represents (and is inclu- mation submitted by user 14 and create a profile for user 14
sive of) a personal computer that may be used to access based on that information, storing the profile in memory 26.
network 24. Alternatively, terminal 10 may be representative As an example only, consider a case where user 14 is
of a cellular telephone, an electronic notebook, a laptop, a 65 interested in participating in an on-line dating scenario. User
personal digital assistant (PDA), or any other suitable device 14 can access the Internet via terminal 10, travel to a web
(wireless or otherwise: some of which can perform web site managed by matching server 20, and begin, the regis-
US 9,733,811 B2
5 6
tration process. As part of the registration process, matching in another embodiment, matching server 20 may provide
server 20 may ask user 14 a series of questions which user with a way to directly contact the entity, such as sending
identifies characteristics about user 14. Thus, matching a message or providing voice or video communication
server 20 may ask about the height, weight, age, location, between user 14 and the entity. Even further, matching
and ethnicity ofuser 14. It may also ask about the birthplace, server 20 may be configured to allow user 14 to express a
parents, eating habits, activities, and goals of user 14. negative preference for the entity through dislike button 36.
Matching server 20 may further use the registration process In one embodiment, when, for example, dislike button 36 is
to discover what user 14 may be looking for in a match, such utilized by user 14, matching server 20 may remove the
as age, weight, height, location, ethnicity, diet, education, entity from result list 31; in another embodiment, the entity
etc. Further, matching server 20 may ask user 14 to indicate 10 may be removed from pool 30 of users from which matches
how important certain factors are when looking for a match. are identified.
For example, matching server 20 may allow the user to As an example only, consider that user 14 has submitted
indicate which characteristics in a potential match are a a search request to matching server 20. Matching server 20
necessity. In another example, matching server 20 may ask, may search through pool 30, identify results, and commu-
"How important is it that your match does not smoke?" 15 nicate result list 31 to user 14 which would contain other
Matching server 20 may also allow the user to indicate that users for whom matching server 20 had created a profile and
certain characteristics are not important search criteria. For who were identified through a search and selection process.
example, when asking user 14 about what height or weight Next, user 14 may be interested in learning more about Jane
user 14 is seeking in a match, matching server 20 may be Doe, entity 31a; thus, user 14 would click view button 33
configured to receive "not important" as a response. In vet 20 associated with Jane Doe. Matching server 20 would receive
another example, matching server 20 may allow user 14 to this request and respond by displaying Jane Doe's profile
rate which factors are important on a numerical scale. For (stored in memory 26), as depicted in FIG. lF. Next, after
example, matching server 20 may ask user 14 the following: reading the profile, user 14 may be interested in contacting
"On a scale of 1-10, how important is it that your match has Jane Doe; hence, user 14 would click contact button 35.
the same education level as you?" In some embodiments, 25 Matching server 20 would respond by allowing user 14 enter
matching server 20 may specify that any number of ques- a message that matching server 20 would then communicate
tions or requested descriptions are necessary before regis- to Jane Doe.
tration may be concluded. As an example only, matching Matching server 20 may even further be configured to
server 20 may require that user 14 communicate the sex of allow user 14 to store a match result entity; in one embodi-
user 14 and the sex user 14 prefers to be matched with. After 30 ment, the system may be configured to allow user 14 to
concluding the registration process, matching server 20 may utilize favorite button 34 that will add the desired match
store the responses of user 14 as a profile. This same process result entity into another list. In another embodiment, uti-
may be repeated by several different users 14, causing lizing favorite button 34 will remove the associated match
matching server 20 to contain a plurality of profiles. result entity from result list 31.
FIG. lD depicts an embodiment in which matching server 35 As an example only, user 14 may decide that he would
20 has a database 26a which contains a pool 30. Each entry like to save Jane Doe's profile so that he can review it later.
in database 26a has a pool entity 30a along with information User 14 may click favorite button 34, and matching server
concerning that entity. In one embodiment, each pool entity 20 may respond by placing Jane Doe's profile into a separate
30a-e represents a user and their profile. In some embodi- list. Further, matching server 20 may also remove Jane Doe
ments, not all registered users are in pool 30. As discussed 40 from user's 14 result list 31. As a result, user 14 may see
further below, matching server 20 may use a selection another match result entity populate result list 31. This is
process for including stored profiles in pool 30. As depicted beneficial because it may focus user 14 on evaluating new
in FIG. lD, in this embodiment, the collection of users and entities rather than reevaluating previously-known entities
profiles forms pool 30 through which matching server 20 because the entities still appear in result list 31.
may perform various functions such as searches for matches. 45 In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
Matching server 20 may be configured to search through figured to generate pool 30 by default according to various
pool 30 and present matches to user 14. In FIG. lE, one characteristics and preferences of user 14 and other users of
embodiment of this presentation is depicted as occurring the system. Matching server 20 may also restrict entities
through display 12. In various embodiments, matches may from being included in pool 30 based on the status of the
be presented to user utilizing other communication schemes, 50 profile, or if user 14 has rejected or blocked an entity.
such as electronic messages (i.e., e-mail) or text messages Matching server 20 may also restrict entities from the pool
(i.e., utilizing SMS). In the depicted embodiment, a result that have blocked or rejected user 14. For example, match-
list 31 is presented to user 14. A match result entity 31a in ing server 20 may not allow profiles that are not in good
a result list 31 may be associated with a view button 33. standing to be included in pool 30. In other embodiments,
Using interface 16, user 14 may request that matching server 55 matching server 20 may be configured to generate pool 30
20 provide more information about an entity in result list 31 by first choosing seeds. Seeds include, but are not limited to,
by pressing the associated view button 33. Matching server profiles that user has sent a message to or profiles that user
20 may then communicate to user 14 more information 14 has expressed a preference for. Each seed is then com-
about that entity by retrieving the information from memory pared to other entities to determine which entities will be
26. In FIG. lF, one embodiment of information that match- 60 included in pool 30. Any suitable method can be used to
ing server 20 provides for user 14 is shown. Using display determine which entities are included in pool 30. For
12, user 14 views an entity from result list 31. Matching example, any characteristics or algorithms described herein
server 20 may also provide user 14 with the ability to contact may form the basis of such a determination. As another
the entity through a contact button 35. In one embodiment, example, a commonality score may be generated based on
when contact button 35 is utilized by user 14, matching 65 the comparison between each entity and the seed. In some
server 20 may provide user 14 with contact information of embodiments, this commonality score can be a measure of
the entity such as a telephone number or an e-mail address; how physically similar the users are to each other. This score
US 9,733,811 B2
7 8
may be generated based on the number of users that have alism. Such scales may provide the advantage of improved
expressed a positive preference for both the seed and the matching through deeper appreciation for the personality of
entity being compared. This score may also be generated entities in the system.
based on whether the seed and entity have been viewed In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
together in one session; further, the more times the seed and figured to analyze profile text for categories. It may search
entity have been viewed together, the larger the common- for a number of text strings and then associate the profile
ality score. The law of large numbers may allow for a vast with any number of categories. As an example only, match-
amount of such commonalties to be established over a few ing server 20 may add any profile to the Cat category whose
days. Testing has revealed that using such commonality text contains any of the following strings:
10 "cat" "cats" "cat." "cats." "cat," "cats,"
scoring methods has yielded at least one physical match for
Matching server 20 may be configured to make it more
80% of users whose profile has been viewed at least once,
likely that a profile will be in a result list if categories
and between and 1000 physical matches for 60% of users
associated with the profile are also categories found in the
whose profile has been viewed at least once. Matching user's profile who submitted the search request.
server 20 may be further configured to allow entities that 15 Matching server 20 may be configured to analyze one or
have a commonality score above a certain threshold to more portions of the text of an entity's profile and generate
become a part of pool 30. Matching server 20 may further a readability score that may be used in various ways, such
be configured to update pool 30. In some embodiments, as in the process of searching for matches for user 14. In
matching server 20 may do so by creating new seed entities some embodiments, matching server 20 may analyze factors
based on activity by user 14, such as indicating a preference 20 such as, but not limited to; average number of words per
for that entity. Further, matching server may then compare sentence, total number of words with greater than three
the chosen seed entity with other profiles stored in matching syllables, and total number of words in the profile. Matching
server 20 and determine whether those profiles will be server 20 may also concatenate all of the collected responses
included in pool 30 using a threshold score as described with a single space between them. It may further break the
above. At least one advantage realized by this embodiment 25 text into sentences, words, and syllables. From these statis-
is that user 14 is presented with updated potential matches tics, matching server 20 may also be configured to generate
which increases the likelihood of user 14 finding a suitable a readability score by, in one embodiment, taking the aver-
match. Another advantage present in certain embodiments is age of the Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease test, the Flesch
that these updated potential matches have a greater likeli- Kincaid Grade Level test, and the Gunning Fox score. Other
hood of compatibility with user 14 since they are chosen 30 embodiments may utilize any other combination of these or
based on their commonality with entities user 14 has other tests to determine a readability score. In some embodi-
expressed a preference for. ments, analyses may be used to determine the IQ of an
As an example only, consider the case in which user 14 entity, the grade level of the writing, or how nervous the
has registered, requested a search, and received from match- entity generally is. An advantage of this embodiment may be
ing server 20 results list 31. Then, user 14 decides to contact 35 that the system provides user 14 with a metric for determin-
Jane Doe and presses contact button 35. Aside from providing approximate intelligence of other users. The readability
ing user 14 with the ability to contact Jane Doe, matching score may be used, for example, in the matching process to
server 20 will designate Jane Doe's profile as a seed. identify potential matches.
Matching server 20 will then compare Jane Doe's profile to As an example only, the Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease
other profiles stored in memory 26 in order to identify other 40 score may be generated by first computing the following
users who may be similar to Jane Doe and thus be a good intermediate score:
match for user 14. In this example, matching server 20 will
generate a commonality score for each of these comparisons 206.835-(1,015*[Average Words per Sentence])-
(84.6*[Average Syllables per Word])
and compare these scores to a preset threshold. If the
commonality score is lower than the threshold, that profile 45 Then, the Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease score is determined
will not be added to pool 30. However, if the commonality by using the following table:
score is higher than the threshold, matching server 20 will
add this profile to pool 30. As an example, further assume
that the seed, Jane Doe, is being compared to another entity, Flesh Kincaid Reading Ease
Susan Smith. Based on the fact that both Susan and Jane 50 Intermediate Score Condition Score
have three users (Tom, Dick, and Harry) who have expressed <100 4
a positive preference for their profiles, matching server 20 <91
generates a commonality score of 100 for the comparison. In <81
<71 7
contrast, matching server 20 generated a commonality score
<66
of 50 for the comparison between the seed (Jane Doe) and 55 <61 9
yet another entity, Lucy Goosey. This was because only one <51 10
user (Bob) had indicated a positive preference toward both <31 13
<O 14
Lucy and Jane. Continuing the example, matching server 20
Else 15
is using a commonality threshold score of 70, which results
in including Susan's profile (whose commonality score was 60
greater than the threshold score) in pool 30 and excluding The Flesch Kincaid Grade Level may be computed accord-
Lucy's (whose commonality score was less than the thresh- ing to the following
old score). Thus, user 14 gets the benefit of having more
entities identified that may be good matches. (0.39*[Average Words Per Sentence])+(ll.8*[Aver-
age Syllables Per Word])-15.59
In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con- 65
figured to include behavioral scales. These may include The Gunning Fox score may be computed according to the
multi-item scales for materialism and gender-role tradition- following:
US 9,733,811 B2
9 10
([Average Words Per Sentence]+(([Nurnber Of as well as how many times that entity has been part of a
Words With More Than 3 Syllables ]/[Number result list in order to impute the level of physical attractive-
of Words In Entire Text])+l00))*0.4
ness. Matching server 20 may further be configured to
As indicated, any suitable tests may be utilized m any generate a score based on this data. Further, in some
suitable manner to determine a readability score. embodiments, matching server 20 may impute physical
In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con- attractiveness to an entity based on the imputed physical
figured to allow a user to interact with the result list of attractiveness scores of other entities. Matching server 20
another user. Matching server 20 may be configured to allow may compute an average of the imputed physical attractive-
a user to express a preference for entities within a result list ness scores of the other entities weighted by the common-
of another user, and to indicate to the other user of this 10 ality score between each of the other entities and the present
preference. Thus, a user may be able to get advice from a entity. Empirical data indicates that people are more likely
friend regarding what other users may constitute good to match with people of similar attractiveness. Thus, in many
matches for the user and thus be able to find a better match. embodiments, a user may obtain an advantage in that they
As an example only, consider FIG. lA and FIG. 2. Two are able to be presented with potential matches that, accord-
users 14, Harry and Sally, are connected to matching server 15 ing to one measurement, are as attractive as the user.
20 via terminals 10. Display 12a is used by Harry while As an example only, consider a registered user, Sally,
display 12b is used by Sally. Matching server 20 allows whose profile was created by matching server 20 in January.
Sally to view Harry's result list 31 on her terminal in display Since that time, matching server 20 has recorded the number
l2b. By pressing recommend button 37. Sally may indicate of times Sally's profile has appeared in any user's result list
a preference for one or more of the entities in result list 31. 20 31; assume that this has occurred 10 times. Further, match-
Assume Sally presses recommend button 37 associated with ing server 20 has also recorded the number of times a user
Jane Joe. After doing so, matching server 20 will notify has viewed Sally's profile by clicking view button 33
Harry of Sally's preference. On Harry's display 12a, match- associated with Sally's profile; assume that this has hap-
ing server 20 will cause notification 39 to appear, associating pened 5 times. In this manner, matching server 20 has
it with Jane Joe. Notification 39 will indicate to Harry that 25 constructed a ratio that represents the imputed physical
Sally has recommended Jane Los as a potential match. Harry attractiveness of Sally's profile. Still further, assume that
may find Sally's preference helpful in determining which Harry, a registered user, now submits a query. Matching
entities he should pursue further if, for example, he believes server 20 has evaluated the imputed physical attractiveness
Sally understands the type of person he is looking for. ratio of Harry's profile. When evaluating Sally's profile for
In one embodiment, matching server 20 may be config- 30 inclusion in result list 31 returned to Harry, matching server
ured to analyze the profiles of both user 14 and the entities 20 will compare the imputed physical attractiveness of
in pool 30 for keywords. Matching server 20 may be Sally's profile and Harry's profile. The more similar the
configured to search through the profile of user 14 for ratios associated with Harry and Sally's profiles are to each
keywords that relate to things such as activities and interests. other, the more likely it is that Sally's profile will be selected
Matching server 20 may generate a score for each entity in 35 by matching server 20 to be in Harry's result list 31. In
pool 30 based on a comparison between the list of keywords another example, assume that Sally's profile has not been
found in user's 14 profile and a similarly-generated list of registered long enough to generate a meaningful imputed
keywords of each entity in pool 30. In one embodiment, this physical attractiveness ratio. Matching server 20 may then
is accomplished by storing a list of words in memory 26, and generate an imputed physical attractiveness score based on
using it to identify keywords in the searched profiles. In 40 entities that Sally does have commonality scores with. This
some embodiments, identified keywords may be used as a computed average may be weighted by the strength of the
means of weighting various scores. As an example only, a commonality score between Sally and each entity with
profile that contains the word "God" may be weighted much whom she has a commonality score. Continuing the
differently than a profile which has merely indicated that example, assume that Sally has a commonality score of 5
their religious preference is Christian. In various embodi- 45 with Lucy and 10 with Julia. When matching server 20
ments, this may provide an advantage to user 14 in that user computes the Sally's average, it will give twice as much
14 is able to determine how similar he/she is with a potential weight to Julia's imputed physical attractiveness score than
match. In addition, the keyword analysis may be used by the to Lucy's.
system when searching and identifying matches for a user. In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
As an example only, consider two registered users, Harry 50 figured to make an entity in result list 31 more appealing to
and Sally, both of whom have profiles stored in matching user 14 by pointing out coincidences in the profile data that
server 20. Matching server 20 then analyzes each of these give user 14 a sense of fate with the entity. In one embodi-
profiles by comparing it to a list of predefined keywords. ment, matching server 20 may be configured to search for
Matching server 20 then associates each word that matched similar initials, birthplaces, birth dates, birth month, birth
the list of keywords with each profile. Now assume that 55 year, university, first names, last names, user handles, paren-
Harry performs a search. While fulfilling Harry's query, tal occupations, and keywords to identify users who may
matching server 20 evaluates Sally's profile for inclusion in give another user a sense of fate. In other embodiments,
Harry's result list 31. This evaluation includes comparing matching server 20 may use the fate characteristics as a
the list of keywords found in Harry's profile to the keywords metric in the matching process.
found in Sally's profile. The more keywords that Harry and 60 As an example only, assume that Harry is a registered user
Sally have in common, the more likely it will be that who has performed a search. After matching server 20
matching server 20 will include Sally's profile in Harry's returns a result list, Harry chooses to learn more about one
result list 31. of the entities in the result list and clicks view button 33.
In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con- Consider FIG. 3, which is only an example of information
figured to impute a level of physical attractiveness to an 65 that matching server 20 may return to Harry after clicking
entity in pool 30. Matching server 20 may be configured to view button 33. In Harry's display 12, matching server 20
monitor how frequent an entity in pool 30 has been viewed presents certain details about the profile. In particular,
US 9,733,811 B2
11 12
matching server 20 presents to Harry a fate notification 32 matching server 20 examines Sally's profile in pool 30, and
which points out specific similarities between the profile of determines that the stated locations of Harry's and Sally's
the entity and Harry's profile. Reading fate notification 32 profiles are 13 miles apart. Matching server 20 will give
gives Harry a sense of familiarity which enhances his Sally's profile a score as ifthe distance between them were
appreciation for the profile. only 10 miles. However, in yet another example. Sally's
In another example, fate characteristics may be used to profile may indicate that she lives 50 miles away from Harry.
decide whether a profile in pool 30 is included in user's 14 Yet, matching server 20 also notes that both Harry and Sally
result list 31. Assume that Harry is a registered user who has make $100,000 per year, have Master's degrees, and that
submitted a matching query to matching server 20. While Harry and Sally are one year apart in age (Harry is older).
determining which entities to include in Harry's result list, 10 Given these similarities, matching server 20 will give a score
matching server 20 considers two profiles; Sally and Roxy. to Sally's profile that is consistent with a 20 mile difference
Sally and Harry both have the same birth date, initials, and in location even though they are actually 50 miles apart. In
have parents that work in the same profession. In contrast. this manner, matching server 20 takes into account empirical
Roxy and Harry only share the same birth place. Matching data that shows that people searching for matches who
server 20 may be configured to award more points to Sally 15 indicate that they want to see matches who live close to them
than to Roxy based on these comparisons, making it more are still willing to pursue a potential match that lives far
likely that Sally's profile will be included in Harry's result away if the potential match fits very closely with the other
list. search criteria.
In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con- In another embodiment, matching server 20 may be
figured to evaluate the likelihood of contact between user 14 20 configured to evaluate the age difference between user 14
and an entity in pool 30. Matching server 20 may be and pool entity 30a using ranges as well as a sliding scale.
configured to compare demographic data between user 14 By way of example only, matching server 20 may be
and pool entity 30a. In another embodiment, matching configured to assign a high value to an age difference
server 20 may be configured to weigh the demographic between 0 and -5, while assigning a lower value to an age
similarities and differences based on the sex of user 14. The 25 difference between +2 and 0. An even lower value may be
demographic data may include, but is not limited to, age, assigned to an age difference between -6 and -8. Even lower
education, ethnicity, income, and location. values would be assigned incrementally as the age difference
As an example only, assume that Harry and Sally are increases outside of the ranges discussed. The higher the
registered users who have profiles in matching server 20. assigned value is, the more likely it will be that pool entity
Harry has submitted a search request to matching server 20. 30 30a will be included in result list 31. Yet another embodi-
While fulfilling this request, matching server 20 evaluates ment may apply this combination of ranges and a sliding
Sally's profile since her profile is in pool 30. As part of the scale but use different values and ranges depending on the
evaluation, matching server 20 looks at the differences sex of user 14.
between Harry and Sally's stated age, income, education, As an example only, consider a situation in which a
ethnicity, and location. In this example, Harry is 10 years 35 registered user, Harry, requests a search to be performed.
older than Sally, makes $10,000 more per year, and has a While fulfilling this request, matching server 20 evaluates
Master's degree while Sally has a bachelor's degree. Even Sally's profile, which was in pool 30. As part of the
with these disparities, matching server 20 will give Sally's evaluation, matching server 20 compares the ages of Harry
profile a high score which makes it more likely that Sally's and Sally, and determines that Harry is two years older than
profile will appear in Harry's result list. However, if it was 40 Sally; this determination leads to matching server 20 assign-
Sally who submitted the search, and matching server 20 was ing, in this example, points to Sally's profile. Matching
evaluating Harry's profile, a different score is possible. So, server 20 may also be configured to assign 50 points to
if it were Sally who was 10 years older, made $10,000 more Sally's profile had she been five years younger than Harry;
per year, and had a Master's degree while Harry had a but, if she had been up to two years older than Harry,
Bachelor's degree, matching server 20 would give a low 45 matching server 20 may have been configured to assign 40
score to Harry's profile, making it less likely that his profile points to her profile. Matching server 20 may be further
would appear in Sally's result list. Matching server 20 may configured to assign 30 points to Sally's profile if she was 6
be configured this way because empirical data has shown to 8 years younger than Harry. However, if Sally were more
that these demographic differences do not have an equiva- than 8 years younger than Harry, matching server 20 may be
lent effect on the choices men and women make regarding 50 configured to further decrease the number of points assigned
matches. to her profile: if she was 9 years younger, then 25 points; if
In another embodiment, matching server 20 may be she was 10 years younger, 20 points; if she was 11 years
configured to compare the locations of user 14 and pool younger, 15 points; etc. The more points assigned to Sally's
entity 30a in increments of ten miles. In yet another embodi- profile, the more likely it is that her profile will appear in
ment, matching server 20 may be configured to score the 55 Harry's result list. Thus, matching server 20 may be con-
location comparison in light of other factors; as an example, figured to assign a score based on age difference using a
matching system 20 may be configured to return a score combination of ranges and a sliding scale.
consistent with a 10 mile difference in location even though In another example, matching server 20 may assign scores
there is a 50 mile difference between user 14 and pool entity differently if it was Sally who was searching and if it was
30a if user 14 and pool entity 30a have the same income, 60 Harry's profile that was being evaluated. In this example,
education, and age. An advantage realized in several matching server 20 may be configured to assign Harry's
embodiments is that it better approximates how a user profile 50 points ifhe were between 1 and 5 years older than
evaluates entities. Entities that live further away are gener- her. If he were 6 to 8 years older than her, matching server
ally less appealing to a user; but, users may still be interested 20 may assign 45 points. If he were greater than 8 years
if the entity matches their preferences in other categories. 65 older than her, matching server 20 may assign points in the
As an example only, consider a registered user, Harry, following fashion: if he was 9 years older, 40 points would
who submits a search request. While fulfilling this request, be assigned; if he was 10 years older, 35 points would be
US 9,733,811 B2
13 14
assigned; etc. However, if he was up to two years younger server 20 may then examine Harry's profile to determine a
than Sally, matching server 20 may assign 50 points to his similar average. If Harry's profile has an average close to 6,
profile. If he were more than two years younger, matching it will be more likely that matching server 20 will include
server 20 may assign less points on a sliding scale: 45 points Sally's profile in Harry's result list. If Harry's profile
if he were 3 years younger, 40 points if he were 4 years average is lower than 6, it will be less likely that Sally's
younger, etc. The more points assigned to Harry's profile, profile will be included in Harry's result list. If Harry's
the more like it is that his profile will appear in Sally's result profile average is greater than 6, it will be even less likely
list. This example illustrates how matching server 20 may be that Sally's profile will be included in Harry's result list. The
configured to take the sex of user 14 into account when more Harry's profile average deviates from that of Sally's,
scoring based on age differences. 10 the less likely it will be that matching server 20 will present
In various embodiments, matching server 20 may be Sally's profile in Harry's result list.
configured to evaluate the attractiveness of an entity in pool In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
30 through collected feedback from other users. In one figured to analyze profile information and received activity
embodiment, matching server 20 may present an entity to information to construct "pairs" which link at least two
user 14, prompting user 14 to rate the attractiveness of the 15 profiles. These pairings may also be associated with a value
entity on a scale from 1-9. This range gives the advantage of that ascertains the quality of the pairing. For example, a
having a midpoint. Matching server 20 may further be pairing which results from one user viewing the profile of
configured to collect such responses and store them; in one another user may be assigned a value that is less than a
embodiment, matching server 20 may store the data in pairing which results from a first user viewing the profile of
memory 26, using a structure such as database 26b. Match- 20 a second user when the second user has also viewed the first
ing server 20 may further be configured to compute the user's profile. Matching server 20 may use these pairings in
average of such responses for the entity, and store this order to generate search results for entities within and
number as well. In various embodiments, these values may outside of the pairing. Each member of the pair may be used
be used in order to help in the matching process. Empirical as a seed entity for generating search results for users in
data indicates that people are more likely to match with 25 matching server 20. In various embodiments, an advantage
people of similar attractiveness. Thus, in various embodi- may be realized as matching server 20 analyzes many of
ments, users whose attractiveness rating are similar will be these pairs to develop dynamic results to users of the system,
more likely to appear in each other's result list. Further, a the results being potentially more relevant as matching
user may indicate that they only want profiles in their result server 20 leverages the interaction between users and pro-
list whose average attractiveness rating is higher than an 30 files to generate search results.
indicated threshold. Pairs may be formed from a variety of user activity
As an example only, assume registered user, Harry, uses received by matching server 20. This activity may include:
terminal 10, which in this example is Harry's personal profile views, mutual profile views, one-way double blind
computer, and establishes communication with matching communication, mutual double-blind communication,
server 20. In this example, this communication occurs by 35 declining double blind communication, one way wink,
Harry using a Web browser to access a Web page controlled mutual wink, expressing disinterest in response to receiving
by matching server 20. Sometime after visiting the Web a wink, one way favorite, and mutual favorite. Other suitable
page, matching server 20 may present Harry with an option activity may also be received by matching server 20 and
to rate the physical attractiveness of other users registered utilized as a basis for generating pairs.
with matching server 20. Using display 12 and interface 16, 40 For example, Harry may be a registered user who has
Harry may view profiles of registered users and rank them expressed a positive preference for Sally. Matching server
on a scale of 1-9 by entering the values using interface 16; 20 may be configured to generate a pair which includes
in this example, interface 16 comprises a mouse and/or a Harry and Sally. Matching server 20 may utilize this pair
keyboard. After submitting this rating, matching server 20 when providing search results to other users. Betty may have
will associate it with the profile and store it. Matching server 45 requested matches, and Betty may be similar to Sally.
20 will also allow other users to rate profiles, thereby Matching server 20 may present Harry in Betty's result list
collecting a plurality of rankings for profiles. Matching as a result of the pairing between Harry and Sally. Further.
server 20 may use this data when trying to find matches for Jim may have executed a search and Jim may be similar to
users. One example of this is that matching server 20 may Harry. As a result of the pairing between Sally and Harry,
allow user 14 to specify that he/she is searching for profiles 50 matching server 20 may present Sally in Jim's list of search
which have an average rating of 6 or above. In tum, results.
matching server 20 may populate user's 14 result list from In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
the pool only with profiles whose average rating is at 6 or figured to encourage user 14 to interact with entities in pool
above. Another example of how matching server 20 may use 30. For example, matching server 20 may present a list of
this data involves making it more likely that an entity will 55 limited entities from pool 30 to user 14, but not present other
appear in a user's result list if the entity and that user have entities to user 14 unless user 14 interacts with the already
a similar average attractiveness rating. So, if a user has an presented entities. Possible interaction with these entities
average rating of 6, then an entity with an average rating of may include viewing more information regarding the entity,
5 may be more likely to appear in the user's result list than expressing a positive or negative preference for the entity,
an entity with an average rating of 2. 60 and choosing to contact the entity. Other suitable forms of
In another example, assume that Harry is a registered user interaction may also be utilized. For example, matching
and has requested a search. While fulfilling this request, server 20 may prompt the user with a question about the list
matching server 20 evaluates Sally's profile. As part of this of entities, such as asking whether or not the user likes the
evaluation, matching server 20 notices that Sally's profile entity. Responses to such prompts may include "yes,"
contains feedback from other users ranking the attractive- 65 "maybe," "no," "remove," and "remove other." The pre-
ness of Sally's profile. Matching server 20, in this example, sented entities may be chosen using a variety of methods.
averages that data; Sally's profile average is 6. Matching For example, the presented entities may be chosen based on
US 9,733,811 B2
15 16
various scoring algorithms as described above. In addition, In another embodiment, matching server 20 may be
presented entities may be chosen using predictive analysis, configured to allow users of social networking platform to
such as logistical regression. Other techniques may be used interact with matching server 20 using social networking
to determine the presented entities. For example, entities that platform 50. This level of integration provides the advantage
have been presented previously may be excluded. As of users not having to learn and sign up for a different
another example, entities that have been blocked by user 14 platform.
may also be excluded. In various embodiments, a combina- Social networking platform 50, in one embodiment, may
tion of these techniques as well as others may be used to be a service which stores profiles of its users. This service
determine the limited number of entities presented to user may be further configured to provide access to the stored
14. 10 profiles. In one embodiment, social networking platform 50
For example, Harry may be a registered user of the may also allow other services to interact with users of social
matching system. Matching server 20 may be configured to networking platform 50 through social networking platform
present to Harry a list of five entities that Harry must interact 50.
with. Once Harry has interacted with these entities, match- In one embodiment, matching server 20 may be config-
ing server 20 may present five more entities for Harry to 15 ured to collect requests from users of social networking
interact with. Previously, Harry has blocked Sally, another platform 50 and perform a search through pool and set 52.
registered user of the system. As a result, matching server 20 Matching server 20 may further be configured to present the
may exclude Sally from being presented to Harry in the list results of this search from within social networking platform
of five entities. Further, Harry has already interacted with 50. Matching server 20 may further be configured to present
Betty, another registered user of the system: Harry sent a 20 entities in the search result from pool 30 as if they were
message to Betty utilizing matching server 20. As a result, entities of set 52; in one embodiment, matching server 20
Betty will be excluded from being presented to Harry in the may be configured to generate profiles of entities from pool
list of five entities. Matching server 20 may then choose two 30 into set 52. Thus, users of social networking platform 50
of the five entities using scoring algorithms described above. may view all of the entities in the search result, regardless
For example, matching server 20 may choose Alice and Amy 25 of their source (either from pool 30 or set 52), within the
to be presented in the list of five entities because Alice and environment of social networking platform 50.
Any have received high scores when their profiles were As an example only, consider two users: Harry, for whom
compared to Harry's profile. Matching server 20 may matching server 20 has created a profile, and Sally, who has
choose the remaining three entities using predictive analysis. a profile stored in social networking platform 50. From
According to this example, matching server 20 may use 30 within social networking platform 50, matching server 20
logistical regression to identify Carla. Christi, and Camela as presents to Sally the ability to perform a search which Sally
the other three entities to present to Harry. Thus, in this uses. The results of this search are presented to Sally within
example, Harry is presented with a list of five entities by social networking platform 50. In this example, Harry's
matching server 20. Matching server 20 may not present profile is displayed to Sally as a search result along with
another set of five entities until Harry has interacted with 35 other entities from set 52 though Harry's profile was from
these five entities. Harry may interact with these entities in pool 30. In this example, matching server 20 uses the
a variety of ways. For example, Harry may send a message algorithms discussed herein and searches through the pro-
to Alice and send a "wink" to Amy. In addition, Harry, may files stored in pool 30 and set 52. In order to display Harry's
choose to view more information about Carla's profile, but profile to Sally, matching server 20 creates a profile in set 52
express a negative preference towards Christi and Camela. 40 using the data stored in Harry's profile in pool 30. Sally is
After matching server 20 receives these types of interaction then able to interact with this newly created profile from
with the presented five entities, another set of five entities within social networking platform 50 in the same marmer as
may be presented to Harry. she is other entities in set 52.
In this example, matching server 20 may further he In another embodiment, matching server 20 may be
configured to process the user interaction provided by Harry. 45 configured to allow its users to interact with social network-
For example, matching server 20 may utilize Alice's profile ing platform 50 through matching server 20. In one embodi-
as a seed entity to generate other possible entities to present ment, matching server 20 supplements pool 30 with set 52.
to Harry since Harry sent a message to Alice. Thus, a benefit In yet another embodiment, entities from set 52 appear as
is from presenting a the five entities to Harry in that the entities of pool 30 to the user in their list of search results.
interaction between Harry and these entities may be utilized 50 In one embodiment, matching server 20 may be configured
by matching server 20 to generate other entities for matching to generate profiles within pool 30 from entities of set 52; the
to Harry. This serves as an example of how preferences may system may be configured to do so through capabilities
be identified based on user behavior. provided by social networking platform 50, such as an
In FIG. 4, one embodiment is disclosed wherein matching application prograniming interface.
server 20, with pool 30, may be configured to interact with 55 As an example only, consider two users: Harry, whose
another platform, such as social networking platform 50, profile is stored in matching server 20, and Sally, whose
containing a set 52 of users. Users 14 are communicatively profile is stored in social networking platform 50. Harry
coupled to matching server 20 and social networking plat- submits a search request to matching server 20. Matching
form 50. Matching server 20 may further be configured to server 20 may return result list 31 to Harry, which, in this
provide users of social networking platform 50 a service by 60 example, contains an entity representing Sally's profile.
which they may search for users within set 52 or within pool Matching server 20 may accomplish this by creating profiles
30 using the algorithms and processing of matching server in pool 30 that correspond to the profiles found in set 52.
20. Matching server 20 may even further be configured to Once these profiles have been imported into pool 30, match-
allow users of matching server 20 to search through pool 30 ing server 20 may then search through pool 30. While doing
and set 52. Matching server 20 may be configured to parse 65 so, matching server 20 applies the algorithms and scores
the profiles of the entities in set 52, collecting data and discussed herein. Thus, in this example, matching server 20
applying algorithms. has been configured to both search and apply scoring
US 9,733,811 B2
17 18
algorithms to entities in pool 30 and set 52. Further, in one -continued
example, Harry is not able to distinguish that Sally's profile
was originally stored in social networking platform 50. Number of Points for
Condition Ordering
Rather, matching server 20 presents Sally's profile in the
same manner as other profiles stored in pool 30. Thus, in this Sarne answer for "pets" +65536
example, Harry may use favorite button 34, view button 33, Sarne answer for politics +8192
Sarne answer for relationship +O
and contact button 35 when interacting with Sally's profile status
in the same manner as described above. Sarne answer for "romance" +512
One advantage present in various embodiments is that a Sarne answer for smoking +262144
10 preferences
user has a wider pool of entities to search through. Another Sarne answer for sports +8
advantage is that a user does not have to sign up with several interests
platforms to search through the users on those platforms. Sarne answer for "system" +4096
FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating one embodiment of how
result list 31 may be generated. At step 62, matching server 15 As an example only, consider a registered user, Harry,
20 generates pool 30, as described above. At step 64, who desires to perform a search. Before processing the
matching server 20 applies a filter to pool 30, removing request, matching server 20 may ask Harry what sex he is
certain entities; in various embodiments, this filter is based and what sex does he desire to be matched with; in this
on user's 14 own sex and the sex user 14 desires to be example, Harry responds that he is a male seeking a female.
matched with. At step 66, matching server 20 may be 20 After doing so, matching server 20 will generate pool 30 as
configured to apply algorithms to pool 30 that will generate described above. Next, matching server 20 will apply a filter
a plurality of scores for each entity in pool 30. In one to remove certain entities from pool 30. In this example, all
embodiment, these algorithms may include analyzing the males will be removed from pool 30 since Harry is seeking
text of the profiles of the entities in pool 30 to generate a a female. Further, all females seeking females will be
readability score, determining how attractive an entity of 25 removed from pool 30 since Harry is a male. In other
pool 30 is, or measuring how likely it is that user 14 will examples, other entities that are removed from pool 30
contact an entity of pool 30. At step 68, matching server 20 include entities that Harry has expressed a negative prefer-
may be configured to collect all of the scores from step 66; ence for before, or entities that have expressed a negative
in one embodiment, matching server 20 may use database preference for Harry. After pool 30 has been filtered, match-
26b to store all of these scores. At step 70, matching server 30 ing server applies a variety of scoring algorithms to the
20 may be configured to apply an ordering algorithm which entities remaining in pool 30. These algorithms may account
will determine the order in which entities in result list 31 are for various comparisons such as those based on readability,
presented to user 14. In one embodiment, this ordering likelihood to contact, fate, and keywords described above.
algorithm is based, in part, on the scoring algorithms applied Matching server 20 will then tabulate these scores, storing
at step 66. The ordering algorithm assigns points to each 35 them, in this example, in database 26b. Matching server 20
entity and orders them based on these values, constructing will then determine what order these entities are presented to
result list 31. An embodiment of this ordering algorithm is Harry by applying an ordering algorithm. Here, matching
surmnarized in the following table: server 20 assigns one ordering score to each entity by
examining the results of the scoring algorithms. After doing
40 so, matching server will present result list 31 to Harry, where
Number of Points for
Condition Ordering the order of the entities that appear in the result list is based
on the ordering algorithm. In this example, it is possible for
Readability score 1 point +33554432 result list 31 to change. Consider another user, Sally, who
higber than user
Match result entity has +16777216
appears in Harry's result list. If Harry decides to add he_r into
expressed a preference for 45 a separate list by using favorite button 34. Sally will be
the user removed from result list 31 (as described above). However.
Match result entity has been +8388608 Sally will also become a seed entity from which entities may
recommended by a friend of
the user
be added to pool 30 (as described above). Hence, matching
User has viewed the details +2097152 server 20 will update the pool, apply the filters, apply the
of match result entity 50 scoring algorithms, tabulate the results, apply the ordering
Match result entity has +1048576 algorithm, and update result list 31. As another example,~
commonality with an entity
user has expressed a
entity may update their profile which can change result list
preference for 31. For example, assume Sally's profile had an ordering
Both have the same ambition +128 algorithm score that placed her within the top 20 entities in
Both have the same beliefs +16384 55 result list 31. Sally then changes her profile which results in
Same answer for Build +64
Sarne answer for Car +1
keywords that match Harry's profile being added to her
Both have the same diet +4 profile. Matching server 20 will then update her scoring
Both have the same +131072 algorithms. In this example, the change in Sally's profile and
preference for drinking resulting increase in keyword matches with Harry's profile
alcohol
Sarne answer for Ethnicity +1024
60 significantly increased her score. This was then reflected in
Sarne answer for Fear +256 the ordering algorithm as it was also applied to the updated
Sarne answer for Hair +2 profile. Afterwards. Sally's profile is now placed within the
Sarne answer for Number of +524288 top 5 entities in result list 31.
children
Sarne answer for morning +32
In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
Sarne answer for "must have" +32768 65 figured to receive required characteristics from user 14
Sarne answer for "night out" +16 regarding a match. User 14 may be allowed to specify such
restrictions based upon any number of characteristics,
US 9,733,811 B2
19 20
including those described herein. For example, matching server 20 can use the authentication features provided by
server 20 may allow user 14 to specify that entities that social networking platform 50. For example, creating a user
indicate they have children should not be displayed. In profile on matching server 20 containing false information
another example, user 14 may specify that only entities becomes harder when the information must come from
between the ages of 20 and 30 should be present in result list another verifiable and peer monitored source such as social
31. In some embodiments, matching server 20 may imple- networking platform 50.
ment these restrictions in step 64 of FIG. 5 in other embodi- In some embodiments, matching server 20 may allow a
ments, however, matching server 20 may refuse to apply user 14 to propose a match between two of his connections
these restrictions to certain entities based on the character- within social networking platform 50. For example, Harry
istics of the entities. Any number of characteristics, includ- 10 may be friends with both Bob and Sally within social
ing those described herein, may form the basis upon which networking platform 50. Harry believes Bob and Sally are a
matching server 20 decides not to apply the restrictions good match and therefore instructs matching server 20 to
submitted by user 14. As an example only, matching server create a match between the two users in user profile pool 30.
20 may ignore the restrictions ifthe entity has a high enough Once matched, matching server 20 allows Harry and Sally
attractiveness rating. In another example, though user 14 has 15 to communicate with each other.
requested that no profiles which are located more than 50 In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
miles away should be present in result list 31, matching figured to apply a relevance algorithm which determines the
server 20 may include such profiles because those profiles content and order in which matching server 20 displays
have over 5 matching keywords, a high attractiveness rating, potential matches to user 14. A relevance algorithm may be
and have specified the same life goals as user 14. Thus, in 20 based on both explicit and implicit signals from user 14.
some embodiments, matching server 20 may refuse to apply Explicit signals include information entered by user 14 as
restrictions submitted by user 14 based on any combination part of its user profile, such as height, weight, age, location,
of characteristics or algorithms. income, and ethnicity. Explicit signals may also include
An advantage present in many embodiments is that information about the characteristics user 14 is seeking in a
through taking into account various factors when scoring 25 match, such as gender, hair color, eye color, or occupation.
potential matches and using only very few strict filters, a Explicit signals may also be entered by user 14 as part of a
large amount of result entities may be returned to the user. search request. For example, user 14 may request matching
A further advantage is that the ordering algorithm will put server 20 limit the pool of potential matches to those users
the most relevant search results first, saving the user time. within a fixed geographic region. Matching server 20 is
FIGS. 6-9 depict embodiments of a user interface pre- 30 operable to compare geographic positions associated with
sented to users of the matching system discussed above with the plurality of user profiles in user profile pool 30 with a
respect to FIGS. 1and4. According to some embodiments, geographic position associated with user 14. Explicit signals
users 14 interact with matching server 20 through interface may be imported from a social networking platform 50, such
16 presented by terminal 10. In addition to the embodiments as the number of shared entities in a social graph of user 14.
of interface 16 described above in relation to FIG. lA, 35 Implicit signals may be based on the behavior of user 14
interface 16 may also comprise a touch screen interface either within system 100 or other social networking plat-
operable to detect and receive touch input such as a tap or forms 50. For example, if user 14 has expressed disapproval
a swiping gesture. In some embodiments, matching server of a user profile in the past, matching server 20 may no
20 may import profiles from other social networking sys- longer present the disapproved of user profile to user 14 in
tems. This level of integration provides the advantage of 40 future searches. In various embodiments, matching server 20
users only having to update their profile information in one may be configured to evaluate the attractiveness of a user in
place. For example, when user 14 updates his profile within user profile pool 30 through collected feedback from other
social networking platform 50, matching server 20 is also users. For example, matching server 20 may rank a user
able to access the updated profile information. profile that receives more likes as more relevant than a user
In some embodiments, matching server 20 may further be 45 profile that receives fewer likes. In particular embodiments,
configured, as part of the user registration process, to link to matching server 20 may assign a higher relevance to a user
a user's existing profile within social networking platform profile if the other user has previously expressed a prefer-
50. Matching server 20 may be configured to parse the ence for user 14. As an example, user Harry may have
profiles of the users in set 52, e.g., collecting data and previously expressed a preference for user Sally. If Sally
applying algorithms. For example, matching server 20 may 50 requests a set of user profiles from matching server 20, and
use explicit signals from social networking platform 50 such Harry's user profile is included in the set, matching server 20
as common friends, common interests, common network, may assign Harry's user profile a higher relevance based on
location, gender, sexuality, or age to evaluate potential his expression of preference for Sally. This can result in
matches between users 14. Matching server 20 may also use Harry's profile being presented to Sally sooner than other-
implicit signals such as for whom a user 14 expresses 55 wise would have occurred. This may be advantageous in that
approval and disapproval. Implicit signals may also include it can increase the chances of a match without compromising
facial recognition algorithms to detect ethnicity, hair color, a user's feelings of privacy when expressing preferences for
eye color, etc., of profiles that user 14 has expressed interest potential matches. In some embodiments, matching server
Ill. 20 may be configured to use the fate characteristics as a
In particular embodiments, matching server 20 may have 60 metric in the relevance algorithm.
users 14 to link their user profiles to an existing profile In some embodiments, terminal 10 is operable to deter-
within social networking platform 50. Matching server 20 mine its own geographic location by a global positioning
may be configured to generate and add profiles to user satellite navigational system. Terminal 10 may also deter-
profile pool 30 from entities of set 52; the system may be mine its own geographic location using cellphone-based
configured to do so through capabilities provided by social 65 triangulation techniques. Wi-Fi based positioning system.
networking platform 50, such as an application program- Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) system, or network
ming interface. One advantage of linking is that matching addresses assigned by a service provider.
US 9,733,811 B2
21 22
FIG. 6 shows one embodiment of system 100 displaying suitable object across a screen of terminal 10. Other suitable
to a user the profile information of a second user. Matching gestures or marmers of interacting with terminal 10 may be
server 20 may be configured to search through its plurality used (e.g., tapping on portions of a screen of terminal 10).
of profiles and present suggested matches to user 14. In FIG. In some embodiments, matching server 20 creates a
6, one embodiment of this presentation is depicted as match between two users 14 after both users 14 have
occurring through the display of terminal 10. In this embodi- expressed a preference for each other's profiles using like
ment, a plurality of user profiles is presented to user 14. button 86 or the swiping gesture associated with like button
Using terminal 10, user 14 may request that matching server 86. When matching server 20 creates a match, it may also
20 present a subset of users from user profile pool 30 based provide the matched users with the ability to contact each
on specified search parameters. The display may show an 10 other through a contact button. In some embodiments, when
image of a suggested user and one or more aspects of the a match is created, matching server 20 may immediately (or
suggested user's profile information. In some embodiments, soon thereafter) present an option to users 14 that have been
the combination of image and one or more aspects of profile matched to engage in a communication session (e.g., a chat,
information is displayed as "card" 88 representing the an SMS message, an e-mail, a telephone call, a voice
suggested user. A set of suggested users may be displayed as 15 communication session, a video communication session).
stack of cards 88. User 14 may view information regarding This may be done in response to a first user 14 expressing
one suggested user at a time or more than one of the a preference for a second user 14 that has already expressed
suggested users at a time. User 14 may be presented with a a preference for the first user 14.
summary of information regarding a suggested user. The FIG. 9 shows one embodiment of matching system 100
summary may include one or more of: a picture, an icon, 20 displaying a match of a first user and a second user, in
name, location information, gender, physical attributes, hob- accordance with a particular embodiment. Matching server
bies, or other profile information. 20 may provide first user 14 and second user 14 with each
In some embodiments, terminal 10 may also display other's contact information such as a telephone number or
"information" button 84 which allows user 14 to request an e-mail address. Matching server 20 may also provide both
matching server 20 to retrieve and display more information 25 first and second users 14 with a way to directly contact the
about the presented user from user profile pool 30. In other, such as sending a message or providing voice or video
addition, user 14 may express approval or disapproval for a communication between the first and second user. In some
presented user. Expressing approval or disapproval can be embodiments, direct communication may be initiated by
accomplished through various methods. For example, ter- pressing "Send a Message" button 92. Alternatively, a user
minal 10 may display "like" button 86 (represented by a 30 may choose to continue browsing the set of presented users
green heart icon) and "dislike" button (represented by a red by pressing "Keep Playing" button 94.
"X" icon). Pressing like button 86 indicates to matching For example, user Harry may indicate a preference to
server 20 that user 14 approves of and is interested in communicate directly with user Sally by selecting like
communication with the presented user. Pressing dislike button 86. At this point. Sally is not aware that Harry
button 82 indicates that user 14 disapproves of and does not 35 expressed a preference for her. If Sally also requests match-
want to communicate with the presented user. The approval ing server 20 present her with a set of possible matches,
preference of user 14 is anonymous in that matching server Harry may appear in her set. Sally may select like button 86
20 does not inform users 14 whether other users have (or perform an associated swiping gesture) when viewing
expressed approval or disapproval for them. Harry's profile. Matching server 20 may then notify both
As an example, consider two registered users, Harry and 40 Harry and Sally that a match occurred. At this point, both
Sally, both of whom have profiles stored in matching server Harry and Sally are made aware that they each expressed
20. Harry is at a restaurant and requests matching server 20 approval of each other's profile. Matching server 20 then
to present him users within a one-mile radius of his location. enables Harry and Sally to directly communicate with each
Matching server 20 compares a geographic position associ- other (e.g., through a private chat interface).
ated with Sally with a geographic position associated with 45 In some embodiments, one advantage of a system dis-
Harry. If Sally is currently within the one-mile radius of closing preferences of profiles to users when mutual
Harry and matching server 20 determines her profile infor- approval has occurred is that a user can feel more secure in
mation matches Harry's preferences, matching server 20 their privacy knowing that their preferences will be dis-
will present Harry one or more aspects of Sally's profile closed to those that have expressed a preference for that user.
information. If other users also meet the search criteria, 50 As an example, a user can avoid embarrassment if their
matching server 20 will present one or more aspects of those expression of preference for a profile was not reciprocated.
users' profile information as well. Harry may request more This may lead to users more actively expressing their
information about Sally by pressing information button 84. preferences. Such increased activity can be used by the
Harry may also indicate his preference to communicate matching system to generate more potential matches or
directly with Sally by selecting like button 86. In another 55 better rankings of potential matches. In some embodiments,
example, Harry may expand his search to a twenty-five mile matching server 20 may be configured to allow direct
radius to meet people in his town, not just his immediate communication between users when there has been a mutual
vicinity. expression of preference. This may be advantageous
FIGS. 7 and 8 are diagrams of embodiments of the display because users can avoid browsing, deleting, or responding to
from FIG. 6 showing the effect of a left swipe gesture (FIG. 60 unwanted messages.
7) and the effect of a right swipe gesture (FIG. 8). In one FIG. 10 is a flowchart depicting a method for enabling
embodiment, users 14 may navigate through the set of communication between two users of the matching system
presented users by swiping through stack of cards 88. Users of FIG. 1 based on a mutual expression of approval, in
14 may also express approval of a presented user by per- accordance with a particular embodiment.
forming a right swipe gesture or express disapproval by 65 At step 1002, in some embodiments, matching server 20
performing a left swipe gesture. In some embodiments, user generates a set of user profiles in response to a request for
14 performs a swiping gesture by moving a finger or other matching from a first user 14. At step 1004, matching server
US 9,733,811 B2
23 24
20 presents the set of user profiles to first user 14. Matching 1202 displays a set of connections user 14 has with other
server 20 determines the contents and ordering of the set of users of, e.g., system 100 of FIG. 1. Connections may be
users profiles by using, e.g., the relevance algorithms based on prior matches created by matching server 20.
described above in the discussion of FIG. 4. For example, Connections may also be imported from another social
matching server 20 may only include user profiles whose networking platform 50. Search area 1204 enables user 14 to
contents indicate location within a specified geographical search for particular connections within system 100. In some
radius and order the presentation of those user profiles based embodiments, the search may be limited to just the connec-
on the number of mutual friends in common with first user tions displayed in connection list area 1202. Suggestion area
14. 1206 displays the connections that user 14 may use to form
At step 1006, in some embodiments, matching server 20 10 a suggested match.
receives an indication of the preference of first user 14 FIG. 12B illustrates suggestion area 1206 displaying a
regarding a presented user profile. Matching server deter- first selected user (i.e., "Jonathan Smith") of a proposed
mines if first user 14 expresses approval or disapproval of match between two users. User 14 identifies the first selected
the presented user profile at step 1008. If first user 14 user through a set of interactions with connection list area
disapproves of the presented user profile then a match is not 15 1202, search area 1204, and suggestion area 1206. For
made and, at step 1016, matching server 20 will not allow example, user 14 may locate a connection in connection list
communication between the two users. If first user 14 area 1202 by typing a user handle in search area 1204. User
expresses approval for the presented user profile at step 14 may then add the connection to suggestion area 1206. In
1008, then matching server 20 will check if second user 14 some embodiments, user 14 may drag the connection from
represented by the presented user profile has already 20 connection list area 1202 to suggestion area 1206.
expressed a preference for first user 14 at step 1010. If FIG. 12C illustrates suggestion area 1206 displaying a
matching server 20 detects a mutual expression of approval proposed match between two suggested users (i.e., "Jona-
then a match is made between first and second users 14. than Smith" and "Mary Major"). For example, user 14 may
Then, at step 1012, matching server 20 allows private locate a second connection in connect list area 1202 that user
communications between first and second users 14. If a 25 14 believes is a match for the first connection. User 14 may
mutual expression of approval is not detected at step 1010, add the second connection to suggestion area 1206. When
then matching server 20 stores the preference of first user 14 both connections are added to suggestion area 1206, match-
regarding the presented user profile for future comparison ing server 20 may create a match between the two users and
and continues to step 1016 where private communications allow communication between them.
are not yet allowed. 30 FIG. 12D illustrates an example communication interface
FIG. 11 is a flowchart depicting a method for enabling between users of the matching system. User 14 is presented
communication between two users of the matching system with chat box 1208 for each of the matches that exist for user
of FIG. 1 based on a matching proposal suggested by a user, 14. Users 14 may communicate with each other through chat
in accordance with a particular embodiment. At step 1102, box 1208. In some embodiments, users 14 may communi-
matching server 20 receives interactions from first user 14. 35 cate through SMS messages, e-mail, telephone calls, online
Interactions from first user 14 may include identification of voice communication sessions, and/or video communication
user profiles for two other users 14. For example, Harry is sess10ns.
connected to both Bob and Sally within social networking Modifications, additions, or omissions may be made to the
platform 50. Harry believes Bob and Sally are a good match methods described herein (such as those described above
for each other and generates a matching proposal requesting 40 with respect to FIGS. 5, 10 and 11) without departing from
matching server 20 to create a match between Bob and Sally. the scope of the disclosure. For example, the steps may be
At step 1104, in some embodiments, matching server combined, modified, or deleted where appropriate, and addi-
validates the suggested matching proposal between second tional steps may be added. Additionally, the steps may be
and third users 14. For example, matching server 20 verifies performed in any suitable order without departing from the
that Bob's profile indicates that he wants to be matched with 45 scope of the present disclosure.
a woman, and Sally's profile indicates that she wants to be Although several embodiments have been illustrated and
matched with a man. Matching server may also verify that described in detail, it will be recognized that substitutions
Sally has not previously expressed disapproval for Bob. If and alterations are possible without departing from the spirit
matching server 20 determines the suggested matching and scope of the appended claims.
proposal is valid, matching server 20 creates the match and 50
allows communication between the users 14 suggested to be What is claimed is:
matched at step 1106. If matching server 20 determines the 1. A computer implemented method of profile matching,
suggested matching proposal is not valid, matching server comprising:
20 does not create a match and does not allow communi- electronically receiving a plurality of user online-dating
cation between second and third users 14 at step 1108. In 55 profiles, each profile comprising traits of a respective
some embodiments, step 1104 may not be performed. For user and associated with a social networking platform;
example, if a matching proposal is suggested, then matching electronically receiving a first request for matching, the
server 20 may perform step 1106 with respect to the users first request electronically submitted by a first user
suggested to be matched. using a first electronic device;
FIGS. 12A-D depict embodiments of a user interface. In 60 determining a set of potential matches from the plurality
some embodiments, the interface allows user 14 of terminal of user online-dating profiles for the first user in
10 to enable communication between other users 14 by response to receiving the first request;
suggesting a matching proposal to matching server 20. causing the display of a graphical representation of a first
FIG. 12A illustrates one embodiment of an interface for potential match of the set of potential matches to the
proposing a match between two users. The interface is 65 first user on a graphical user interface of the first
divided into three sections: connection list area 1202, search electronic device, the first potential match correspond-
area 1204, and suggestion area 1206. Connection list area ing to a second user;
US 9,733,811 B2
25 26
determining that the first user expressed a positive pref- 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the set of potential
erence indication regarding the first potential match at matches for the first user comprises one or more potential
least by determining that the first user performed a first matches that are each associated with a geographic location
swiping gesture associated with the graphical represen- within a threshold distance of a geographic location asso-
tation of the first potential match on the graphical user ciated with the first user, the threshold distance being a
interface; stored value.
in response to determining that the first user expressed the 4. A non-transitory computer-readable medium compris-
positive preference indication regarding the first poten- ing instructions that, when executed by a processor, are
tial match, automatically causing the graphical user configured to:
10
interface to display a graphical representation of a electronically receive a plurality of user online-dating
second potential match of the set of potential matches profiles, each profile comprising traits of a respective
instead of the graphical representation of the first user and associated with a social networking platform;
potential match; electronically receive a first request for matching, the first
determining that the second user has expressed a positive 15
request electronically submitted by a first user using a
preference indication regarding the first user after first electronic device;
determining that the first user expressed the positive determine a set of potential matches from the plurality of
preference indication regarding the first potential user online-dating profiles for the first user in response
match; to receiving the first request;
determining to enable communication between the first 20 cause the display of a graphical representation of a first
user and the second user in response to determining that potential match of the set of potential matches to the
both the first user has expressed the positive preference first user on a graphical user interface of the first
indication regarding the second user and the second electronic device, the first potential match correspond-
user has expressed the positive preference indication ing to a second user;
regarding the first user; 25 determine that the first user expressed a positive prefer-
in response to determining to enable communication ence indication regarding the first potential match at
between the first user and the second user, causing the least by determining that the first user performed a first
graphical user interface to display to the first user both swiping gesture associated with the graphical represen-
the graphical representation of the first potential match; tation of the first potential match on the graphical user
determining that the first user expressed a negative pref- 30 interface;
erence indication regarding a second potential match of in response to the determination that the first user
the set of potential matches at least by determining that expressed the positive preference indication regarding
the first user performed a second swiping gesture the first potential match, automatically cause the
associated with a graphical representation of the second graphical user interface to display a graphical repre-
potential match on the graphical user interface, the 35 sentation of a second potential match of the set of
second swiping gesture different than the first swiping potential matches instead of the graphical representa-
gesture, the second potential match corresponding to a tion of the first potential match;
third user; determine that the second user has expressed a positive
determining to prevent communication between the first preference indication regarding the first user after
user and the third user in response to determining that 40 determining that the first user expressed the positive
both the first user has expressed the positive preference preference indication regarding the first potential
indication regarding the second user and the second match;
user has expressed the positive preference indication determine to enable communication between the first user
regarding the first user; and the second user in response to the determination
determining that the first user expressed a positive pref- 45 that both the first user has expressed the positive
erence indication regarding a third potential match of preference indication regarding the second user and the
the set of potential matches at least by determining that second user has expressed the positive preference indi-
the first user performed the first swiping gesture asso- cation regarding the first user;
ciated with a graphical representation of the third in response to the determination to enable communication
potential match on the graphical user interface, the 50 between the first user and the second user, cause the
third potential match corresponding to a fourth user; graphical user interface to display to the first user both
and the graphical representation of the first potential match;
determining to prevent communication between the first determine that the first user expressed a negative prefer-
user and the fourth user in response to determining that ence indication regarding a second potential match of
the fourth user has expressed a negative preference 55 the set of potential matches at least by determining that
indication regarding the first user. the first user performed a second swiping gesture
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: associated with a graphical representation of the second
in response to determining that both the first user has potential match on the graphical user interface, the
expressed the positive preference indication regarding second swiping gesture different than the first swiping
the second user and the second user has expressed the 60 gesture, the second potential match corresponding to a
positive preference indication regarding the first user, third user;
causing the display of a graphical notification, on the determine to prevent communication between the first
graphical user interface of the first electronic device, user and the third user in response to determining that
that a match exists between the first user and the second both the first user has expressed the positive preference
user, the graphical notification comprising a user inter- 65 indication regarding the second user and the second
face control enabling the text area to be presented to the user has expressed the positive preference indication
first user. regarding the first user;
US 9,733,811 B2
27 28
determine that the first user expressed a positive prefer- determine that the second user has expressed a positive
ence indication regarding a third potential match of the preference indication regarding the first user after
set of potential matches at least by determining that the determining that the first user expressed the positive
first user performed the first swiping gesture associated preference indication regarding the first potential
with a graphical representation of the third potential match; and
match on the graphical user interface, the third poten- determine to enable communication between the first user
tial match corresponding to a fourth user; and and the second user in response to the determination
determine to prevent communication between the first that both the first user has expressed the positive
user and the fourth user in response to determining that preference indication regarding the second user and the
the fourth user has expressed a negative preference 10
second user has expressed the positive preference indi-
cation regarding the first user;
5. The medium of claim 4, further comprising instructions
in response to the determination to enable communication
configured to, in response to the determination that both the
first user has expressed the positive preference indication between the first user and the second user, cause the
regarding the second user and the second user has expressed 15
graphical user interface to display to the first user both
the positiv~ preference indication regarding the first user, the graphical representation of the first potential match·
determine that the first user expressed a negative prefer~
cause the display of a graphical notification, on the graphical
user interface of the first electronic device that a match ence indication regarding a second potential match of
exists between the first user and the, se~ond user, the the set of potential matches at least by determining that
graphical notification comprising a user interface control 20
the first user performed a second swiping gesture
enabling the text area to be presented to the first user. associated with a graphical representation of the second
6. The medium of claim 4, wherein the set of potential
potential match on the graphical user interface, the
matches for the first user comprises one or more potential second swiping gesture different than the first swiping
matches that are each associated with a geographic location gesture, the second potential match corresponding to a
within a threshold distance of a geographic location asso- 25
third user;
ciated with the first user, the threshold distance being a determine to prevent communication between the first
stored value. user and the third user in response to determining that
7. A system for profile matching, comprising:
both the first user has expressed the positive preference
an interface operable to: indication regarding the second user and the second
electronically receive a plurality of user online-dating 30
user has expressed the positive preference indication
profiles, each profile comprising traits of a respective regarding the first user;
user ~d associated with a social networking platform; determine that the first user expressed a positive prefer-
electromcally receive a plurality of user online-dating ence indication regarding a third potential match of the
profiles, each profile comprising traits of a respective set of potential matches at least by determining that the
user and associated with a social networking platform; 35
first user performed the first swiping gesture associated
electronically receive a first request for matching, the first with a graphical representation of the third potential
request electronically submitted by a first user using a match on the graphical user interface, the third poten-
first electronic device; and tial match corresponding to a fourth user; and
a processor coupled to the interface and operable to: determine to prevent communication between the first
determine a set of potential matches from the plurality of 40
user and the fourth user in response to determining that
user online-dating profiles for the first user in response the fourth user has expressed a negative preference
to receiving the first request; indication regarding the first user.
8. The system of claim 7, the processor further operable
cause the interface to display a graphical representation of
a first potential match of the set of potential matches to to, in response to the determination that both the first user
the first user on a graphical user interface of the first 45
has expressed the positive preference indication regarding
~lectronic device, the first potential match correspond-
the second user and the second user has expressed the
posit~ve preference indication regarding the first user, cause
mg to a second user;
~he display of a graphical notification, on the graphical user
determine that the interface has received a positive pref-
erence indication from the first user regarding the first mterface of the first electronic device, that a match exists
potential match at least by determining that the first 50
between the first user and the second user, the graphical
user performed a first swiping gesture associated with notification comprising a user interface control enabling the
the graphical representation of the first potential match text area to be presented to the first user.
9. The system of claim 7, wherein the set of potential
on the graphical user interface;
automatically cause the interface to remove the presen- matches for the first user comprises one or more potential
tation of the first potential match from the graphical 55
matches that are each associated with a geographic location
user interface in response to detecting the gesture and within a threshold distance of a geographic location asso-
cause the interface to present, on the graphical user ciated with the first user, the threshold distance being a
interface, a second potential match of the set of poten- stored value.
tial matches to the first user; * * * * *

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION
PATENT NO. : 9,733,811 B2 Page 1 of 2
APPLICATION NO. : 14/059192
DATED : August 15, 2017
INVENTOR(S) : Sean Rad et al.
It is certified that error appears in the above-identified patent and that said Letters Patent is hereby corrected as shown below:
In the Claims
Column 25, Line 20, after "enable" insert --initial--.

Column 25, Line 28, after second reference of "user", delete "both".
Column 25, Line 31, after "regarding a", delete "second" and insert --third--.
Column 25, Line 34, after "of the", delete "second" and insert --third--.
Column 25, Line 37, after "the", delete "second" and insert --third--.
Column 25, Line 39, delete "determining to prevent" and insert --preventing--.
Column 25, Line 40, delete "in response to" and insert --after--.
Column 25, Line 41, delete "both".
Column 25, Line 41, delete "positive" and insert --negative--.
Column 25, Line 42, after "the", delete "second user and the second".
Column 25, Line 43, delete "user has expressed the positive preference indication".
Column 25, Line 44, delete "regarding the first" and insert --third--.
Column 25, Line 46, after "regarding a", delete "third" and insert --fourth--.
Column 25, Line 49, after "representation of the", delete "third" and insert --fourth--.
Column 25, Line 51, before "potential match", delete "third" and insert --fourth--.
Column 25, Line 53, delete "determining to prevent" and insert --preventing--.
Column 26, Line 51, after "first user", delete "both".
Column 26, Line 57, after "representation of the", delete "second" and insert --third--.
Column 26, Line 60, after "the", delete "second" and insert --third--.
Column 26, Line 62, delete "determine to".
Signed and Sealed this

Twenty-first Day of November, 2017
,,................... ....
_
.~......· ·~
(:;....//
Joseph Mata!
Peiforming the Functions and Duties of the
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and
Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office

CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION (continued) Page 2 of2
U.S. Pat. No. 9,733,811 B2
Column 26, Line 64, delete "positive" and insert --negative--.

Column 26, Line 65, delete "second user and the second".
Column 27, Line 2, delete "third" and insert --fourth--.
Column 27, Line 19, after "first user and the" delete",".
Column 27, Line 33, delete "electronically receive a plurality of user online-dating".
Column 27, Line 34, delete "profiles, each profile comprising traits of a respective".
Column 27, Line 35, delete "user and associated with a social networking platform;".
Column 28, Line 6, after "enable", insert --initial--.
Column 28, Line 12, after "enable", insert --initial--.
Column 28, Line 14, after "first user", delete "both".
Column 28, Line 20, after "representation of the", delete "second" and insert --third--.
Column 28, Line 23, after "gesture, the", delete "second" and insert --third--.
Column 28, Line 27, after "expressed the", delete "positive" and insert --negative--.
Column 28, Line 28, delete "second user and the second".
Column 28, Line 50, after "control enabling", delete "the" and insert --a--.

Exhibit B

lllll llllllll Ill lllll lllll lllllPage
lllll lllll67111111111111111111111111111111111
of 97 PageID 282
US009959023B2
c12) United States Patent (IO) Patent No.: US 9,959,023 B2

Rad et al. (45) Date of Patent: May 1, 2018
(54) MATCHING PROCESS SYSTEM AND (2013.01); G06Q 10110 (2013.01); G06Q
METHOD 30102 (2013.01); G06Q 50101 (2013.01);
G06Q 50110 (2013.01)
(71) Applicant: Tinder, Inc., West Hollywood, CA (US) (58) Field of Classification Search
CPC ............. H04L 67/306; G06F 17/30011; G06F
(72) Inventors: Sean Rad, Los Angeles, CA (US);
17/3053
Jonathan Badeen, North Hollywood,
CA (US) See application file for complete search history.
(73) Assignee: Match.Com, L.L.C., Dallas, TX (US) (56) References Cited
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS

( *) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer, the term ofthis
patent is extended or adjusted under 35 6,480,885 Bl 11/2002 Olivier
U.S.C. 154(b) by 0 days. days. 7,203,674 B2 * 4/2007 Cohen .................... G06Q 10/02
7071999 .003
(21) Appl. No.: 15/016,662 (Continued)
(22) Filed: Feb. 5, 2016

OTHER PUBLICATIONS
(65) Prior Publication Data Chegg® Blog, Chegg® Product Updates, "Introducing the Chegg
US 2016/0154569 Al Jun. 2, 2016 Flashcards App," http://blog.chegg.com/2012/02/03/introducind-
the-chegg-flashcards-app/, 10 pages, Dated Feb. 3, 2012 Printed
Related U.S. Application Data Feb. 5, 2016.
(63) Continuation of application No. 14/059,192, filed on (Continued)
Oct. 21, 2013, now Pat. No. 9,733,811, which is a
(Continued) Primary Examiner - Carol Choi
(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm - Baker Botts, L.L.P.
(51) Int. Cl.
G06F 17130 (2006.01) (57) ABSTRACT
G06F 310484 (2013.01) A method for profile matching includes receiving a plurality
G06Q 10110 (2012.01) of user profiles, each user profile comprising traits of a
G06Q 30102 (2012.01) respective user. The method includes receiving a preference
G06Q 50110 (2012.01) indication for a first user profile of the plurality of user
G06Q 50100 (2012.01) profiles. The method also includes determining a potential
G06F 310482 (2013.01) match user profile of the plurality of user profiles based on
G06F 310488 (2013.01) the preference indication for the first user profile. The
(52) U.S. Cl. method also includes presenting the potential match user
CPC ........ G06F 3104842 (2013.01); G06F 310482 profile to a second user.
(2013.01); G06F 310488 (2013.01); G06F
17130554 (2013.01); G06F 17130657 6 Claims, 11 Drawing Sheets
= ,.....--10
tinder

US 9,959,023 B2
Page 2
Related U.S. Application Data 2008/0294624 Al 11/2008 Kanigsberg et al.

2008/0301118 Al 12/2008 Chien et al.
continuation-in-part of application No. 12/339,301, 200910106040 Al 412009 Jones
filed on Dec. 19, 2008, now Pat. No. 8,566,327. 2011/0087974 Al * 4/2011 Kulas .................. G06F 3/04812
715/760
(60) Provisional application No. 61/793,866, filed on Mar. 2013/0179925 Al* 7/2013 Woods H04N 21142209
15, 2013. 725142
2014/0040368 Al* 212014 Janssens ............... H04L 67/306
(56) References Cited 709/204
2014/0074824 Al 3/2014 Rad et al.
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS 2014/0162241 Al* 612014 Morgia G06Q 30/02
434/362
7,401,098 B2 *7/2008 Baker ................. H04L 12/1818
7071999 .006 OTHER PUBLICATIONS
7,917,448 B2 3/2011 Smola et al.
8,060,463 Bl 1112011 Spiegel
PCT Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report
8,566,327 B2 10/2013 Carrico et al.
9,009,109 B2 * 412015 Tan ................... G06F 17/30699 and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or
705/26.l the Declaration with attached PCT International Search Report and
2005/0021750 Al 112005 Abrams Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority in Inter-
2006/0059147 Al 3/2006 Weiss et al.
national Application No. PCT/US 08/87706, dated Feb. 10, 2009, 8
2006/0085419 Al 412006 Rosen
200610106780 Al 512006 Dagan pages.
2007/0073687 Al 3/2007 Terrill et al.
2007/0073803 Al 3/2007 Terrill et al. * cited by examiner

U.S. Patent May 1, 2018 Sheet 1 of 11 US 9,959,023 B2
100
r' MATCHING
SEHVER
</;> 20
20
, ._. _., . . ._.,., . .,. ,.,.,. .,. . .,.,. ,.,.,.,.,., . . .,. ._. . ,. ,._. . _. . . _. .,.,. . . , .,.,. .,. . . .,. i!:~~. . . . ,.,., ._. ~.,.
u ................ .,..,,.""'..., .. ..,,..,....._.,
10 :.;,............. ~:--":'"'"'.':>~.. ~'"·~-:..:

.........................7................. .,,. .......:·-'"""
.. . ~''"'"""-'"'""'"'""""
1 DISPL~i.J
. ..
C [........."i'NrERFP:c'E--]·
---~
.F7CJ. JB
'.' ......................... __ fcP-~,''·28
"
0
<>
FIG, JC

- - -...
- ·.:~ ~.. ·~----·---~- .. "~:·····~t""""h ......................... '>....................,... ,......:-.. ~"'"'''"'''''
. NAME
oa
PROPERTY 1 ' PROPEHTY 2 o o o
I.
Jane Doe/" 3
1
Jane Roe-r30b
30 J~n~ Boe ...r 30c
0 0 <:.
,Jarn, Loe ---...._ d
1,,
. Jane Snoe--...,.
0
"'0
30
308
FIG. JD
SEARCH RESULTS
r
~-~--'""""''"""'"""""""""""""'""""'--~·"'"""·""w---.-------·------·--·-••
1. Jane Dcc/31a ~-33 ~,,,,,J,../. 34

31~ 2.JanoRoaI31b R . r 3 3
1· 3. Jane Boe:-..,
1
·• 0 "·i,j
.....
1c
ii'"'"B~". ....
li
~'""'
View -.,
33
"
Q
See More
F7G. JE
-------------···--···--·----·"'-""""'-------·'~"·"''''''""'""""'""""'"-'-·-""""'""'"'"''''·""""""
......1,1'.::I:~ ..· ,Jane Doe

/i(~'i;i <<!)\\ '["""~'""·"·•·•·•·•-•·•·'·""'-"""""·,·· _... 35
, 1. 1
·~- ') '\\
if l'1.<···:,_.;1 • i Contact ,.-· "'
1
1,,1~~k"i
. ~ .
f"'"71
!L~.f'-· :36
[___J__\,t~ _ :_l,.........11
Born: 10/01/75
Hometown: Dallas, 1X
Likes: C!1ocolate, rollerb!ading
Dislikes: Body odor. arrogance, foott)all
FICi. 1.F

U.S. Patent May 1, 2018 Sheet 3of11 US 9,959,023 B2
I
l
Hl\RRY'S SEARCH RESULTS

rFIG. 2
i 2b·"'/W'
I .ff'.'.'.'.',W.W,,.'X«««><'°'"°"'.t •'''
Jane Doe !ii~~Oo;>OO<"'"<'~
Recommend
U t
rR:.;~~-.;~·.,·';·;j·~.ci···.
U >f , , ,>f'
,/
37
l
'~. .
31
l
Jane Boe
Jarw Loe
. ~~
g-::'-·-·-·-·-·-·-·.:--•::O.•.:-.•.•:O-'"::*.-:-~~''""~~
l f-lecommend I
''
12


U.S. Patent May 1, 2018 Sheet 5 of 11 US 9 ,959 ,023 B2
. .....,.. ,.,... i 0
=
tinder
I
(~)Q)(~)
;.~ ..........•..,.............................................,........................ ................" .......,,......................
~
@)
Ff(}. 7
.•. /-10
= =
tinder tinder
.r92
~~) ·(i~
'~p '-~~ '-··+/
/(;}\ ---94
••-.;>-~>OH•••?••···--·····'"-"•"-"-'-"-"'-'-"-'-'-''- ........ ._._.................................................
(~)
·~.,._........,.,..,.,,....~..,..._.,.~h•u••"''""''-•>•>•»•••••''-"''- .............
/ (~)
FIG. 8 .F"JG. 9

,.,.,,-1002
.
GENERATE USER POOL
i /.,,.., 1004
DISPLAY USER POOL
i r" 1006
RECEIVE USER PREFERENCE
.---~-~·.)~~~1014
STORE FIRST
ALLOW COMMUNICATION USER'S PREFERENCE
J --1016
~ ......."..............................................l'...............,.........
DO NOT ALLOW
COMMUNICATION
FIG. 10

/"'"'1102
RECEIVE PAIR OF USER
IDENTIFIERS
/ ___/_, . .,. """'-..,~.,...1104
OK ./"_.,.•.-. VALIDATE "''~ NO
______ r·'
ALLOW
r1106 MATCH? . m•L!Q.~
DO NOT ALLOW
COMMUNICATION COMMUNICATION

~ Sent Matches
........................................
·-------~--~---·~---------·---·---------------------
,......................_................. "'---··------------"'·-------............,.......... ....

..,. .__. ..................
'1204·
FJ(J. 12A

~ Sent Matches
r~_. .................................................
m ......................................................, , ···--· 1204
~Q Searc~ ____)
FIG. 128

~ Sent Matches
1206-
Jonathan Mary Major Make a Match!

Smith
.,.<~ "''""w--ccc.;,.;,.""'""'''""'"''"''")
1204·-
( ~ Searctl
...........
~ , ____._....,,,•..r
1202·"-.
_FIG. I2C'

............................................. ~~--------
............................................-.---·--·--·----·--·······""""""""""".·.·.-·.. ··
'···---"'-"~~-~-----~.......................~·~""-""1
FIG. 12D

US 9,959,023 B2
1 2
MATCHING PROCESS SYSTEM AND ti on. If the users with the most attractive profiles cease to use
METHOD the system, the quality of the user pool deteriorates.
RELATED APPLICATIONS SUMMARY
This application is a continuation application of U.S. In one embodiment, a method for profile matching com-
patent application Ser. No. 14/059,192, entitled "MATCH- prises receiving a plurality of user profiles, each user profile
ING PROCESS SYSTEM AND METHOD," filed Oct. 21, comprising traits of a respective user. It also comprises
2013, currently pending; which (a) is a continuation-in-part receiving a preference indication for a first user profile of the
of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/339,301, entitled 10 plurality of user profiles. It further comprises determining a
"MATCHING PROCESS SYSTEM AND METHOD," filed potential match user profile of the plurality of user profiles
Dec. 19, 2008, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,566,327, issued Oct. 22, based on the preference indication for the first user profile.
2013; and (b) claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) to The method also comprises presenting the potential match
U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/793,866, entitled user profile to a second user.
"SOCIAL MATCHING SYSTEM AND METHOD," filed 15 Receiving a preference indication for a first user profile
Mar. 15, 2013. may include receiving from a third user a recommendation
of the first user profile for the second user. It may also
TECHNICAL FIELD include receiving from the second user a preference indica-
tion for the first user profile. The method may further include
This invention relates generally to computer matching 20 determining a score of a third user profile of the plurality of
systems and more particularly to a matching process system user profiles as a potential match for the second user. It may
and method. also include altering the score of the third user profile based
on the preference indication for the first user profile.
BACKGROUND In another embodiment, a method for profile matching
25 comprises receiving a plurality of user profiles, each user
Networking architectures have grown increasingly com- profile comprising traits of a respective user. The method
plex in communications environments. In recent years, a further comprises receiving a request for matches from a
series of protocols and configurations have been developed first user, the first user associated with a first user profile.
in order to accommodate a diverse group of end users having The method also comprises scoring the plurality of user
various networking needs. Many of these architectures have 30 profiles for potential matching with the first user based on
gained significant notoriety because they can offer the comparisons of the plurality of user profiles with the first
benefits of automation, convenience, management, and user profile. It also comprises identifying a second user
enhanced consumer selections. profile of the plurality of user profiles as a potential match
Certain network protocols may be used in order to allow for the first user based on the scoring. The method further
an end user to conduct an on-line search of candidates to fill 35 comprises identifying commonality between a third user
a given vacancy. These protocols may relate to job searches, profile of the plurality of user profiles and the second user
person finding services, real estate searches, or on-line profile. In addition, the method comprises presenting to the
dating. While some believe that on-line dating is simply a first user the third user profile as a potential match for the
matter of matching supply and demand, there is statistical first user.
and empirical evidence to suggest that successful on-line 40 Depending on the specific features implemented, particu-
dating entails far more. lar embodiments may exhibit some, none, or all of the
For example, people having similar and/or compatible following technical advantages. Various embodiments may
character traits and values should be matched together. be capable of dynamically updating match search results
However, effectively linking two participants together can based on user activity. Some embodiments may be capable
prove to be a challenging endeavor. Coordinating a relation- 45 of enhancing match search results by reducing the impact of
ship between two like-minded individuals can be a signifi- restrictive user preferences. In addition, some embodiments
cant chore, as there are a number of obstacles and barriers may provide the ability to evaluate the attractiveness of
that must be overcome. potential matches. Various embodiments may be capable of
One problem that has arisen is that matching services are importing user profiles from other social-networking sys-
limited to searching for matches only within their own 50 terns. Some embodiments may be capable of generating the
platform. Thus, only people who have gone through the pool of users based on both explicit and implicit criteria
process of signing up for the service are searched for a derived from other social networking systems. Other tech-
match. One solution to this problem is to have users register nical advantages will be readily apparent to one skilled in the
in multiple services. This is problematic because it can be art from the following figures, description and claims.
expensive and time consuming for users. Further, the user 55
must then visit all of the services to monitor the search BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
progress: this inefficiency may cause users to give up on the
search process. Reference is now made to the following description taken
Another problem is that the search results of these ser- in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein
vices contain many irrelevant entities to the searcher. This 60 like reference numbers represent like parts, and which:
costs the user of the service time and may deter them from FIG. lA is an overview of one embodiment of the
continuing through all of the search results. matching system;
Another problem is that large numbers of unwanted FIG. lB shows the contents of the terminal from FIG. lA;
communication requests can become a nuisance to the user. FIG. lC shows the contents of the matching server from
Too many nuisance requests may deter the user from further 65 FIG. lA;
use of the system. Users with the most attractive profiles are FIG. lD is a diagram of a database from FIG. lC showing
oftentimes the ones that receive the most unwanted atten- one embodiment of how a matching server stores a pool;
US 9,959,023 B2
3 4
FIG. lE is a diagram of the display from FIG. lB showing In one embodiment, terminal 10 represents (and is inclu-
one embodiment of the presentation of search results to a sive of) a personal computer that may be used to access
user; network 24. Alternatively, terminal 10 may be representative
FIG. lF is a diagram of the display from FIG. 1B showing of a cellular telephone, an electronic notebook, a laptop, a
one embodiment of the presentation of details of a match personal digital assistant (PDA), or any other suitable device
result entity to a user; (wireless or otherwise: some of which can perform web
FIG. 2 is a diagram depicting how a user may recommend browsing), component, or element capable of accessing one
an entity to another user, in accordance with a particular or more elements within system 100. Interface 16, which
embodiment; may be provided in conjunction with the items listed above,
FIG. 3 is a diagram of the display from FIG. lB depicting 10 may further comprise any suitable interface for a human user
how the user may be made aware of fate characteristics the such as a video camera, a microphone, a keyboard, a mouse,
user shares with a match result entity, in accordance with a or any other appropriate equipment according to particular
particular embodiment; configurations and arrangements. In addition, interface 16
FIG. 4 is a diagram depicting how two platforms may be may be a unique element designed specifically for commu-
searched for a match, in accordance with a particular 15 nications involving system 100. Such an element may be
embodiment; fabricated or produced specifically for matching applica-
FIG. 5 is a flow chart indicating how a result list may be tions involving a user.
generated, in accordance with a particular embodiment; Display 12, in one embodiment, is a computer monitor.
FIG. 6 shows one embodiment of the matching system Alternatively, display 12 may be a projector, speaker, or
displaying to a user the profile information of a second user; 20 other device that allows user 14 to appreciate information
FIG. 7 is a diagram of the display from FIG. 6 showing that system 100 transmits.
the effect of a left swipe gesture; Network 24 is a communicative platform operable to
FIG. 8 is a diagram of the display from FIG. 6 showing exchange data or information emanating from user 14.
the effect of a right swipe gesture; Network 24 could be a plain old telephone system (POTS).
FIG. 9 shows the matching system displaying a match of 25 Transmission of information emanating from the user may
a first user and a second user, in accordance with a particular be assisted by management associated with matching server
embodiment; 20 or manually keyed into a telephone or other suitable
FIG. 10 is a flowchart depicting a method for enabling electronic equipment. In other embodiments, network 24
communication between two users of the matching system could be any packet data network offering a communications
of FIG. 1 based on a mutual expression of approval, in 30 interface or exchange between any two nodes in system 100.
accordance with a particular embodiment; Network 24 may alternatively be any local area network
FIG. 11 is a flowchart depicting a method for enabling (LAN), metropolitan area network (MAN), wide area net-
communication between two users of the matching system work (WAN), wireless local area network (WLAN), virtual
of FIG. 1 based on a user suggested matching proposal, in private network (VPN), intranet, or any other appropriate
accordance with a particular embodiment; and 35 architecture or system that facilitates communications in a
FIGS. 12A-D depict embodiments of a user interface. network or telephonic environment, including a combination
of any networks or systems described above. In various
DETAILED DESCRIPTION embodiments, network connections 22 may include, but are
not limited to, wired and/or wireless mediums which may be
Referring to FIG. lA, one embodiment of a matching 40 provisioned with routers and firewalls.
system is shown. FIG. lA is a simplified block diagram of Matching server 20 is operable to receive and to commu-
a system 100 for facilitating an on-line dating scenario in a nicate information to terminal 10. In some embodiments,
network environment. In other embodiments, system 100 matching server 20 may comprise a plurality of servers or
can be leveraged to identify and to evaluate suitable candi- other equipment, each performing different or the same
dates in other areas (e.g. hiring/employment, recruiting, real 45 functions in order to receive and communicate information
estate, general person searches, etc.). Users 14 interact with to terminal 10. Matching server 20 may include software
a matching server 20 through terminals 10. FIG. lB is a and/or algorithms to achieve the operations for processing,
diagram showing, in one embodiment, the contents of ter- communicating, delivering, gathering, uploading, maintain-
minal 10. Terminal 10 comprises interface 16 (so that user ing, and/or generally managing data, as described herein.
14 may be able to interact with terminal 10) and display 12. 50 Alternatively, such operations and techniques may be
FIG. lC is a diagram showing, in one embodiment, the achieved by any suitable hardware, component, device,
contents of matching server 20. Matching server 20 com- application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), additional
prises memory 26 and at least one CPU 28. Memory 26 may software, field programmable gate array (FPGA), server,
store multiple databases, such as databases 26a and 26b. processor, algorithm, erasable programmable ROM
Terminal 10 and matching server 20 are communicatively 55 (EPROM), electrically erasable programmable ROM (EE-
coupled via network connections 22 and network 24. PROM), or any other suitable object that is operable to
Users 14 are clients, customers, prospective customers, or facilitate such operations.
entities wishing to participate in an on-line dating scenario In some embodiments, user 14, using terminal 10, regis-
and/or to view information associated with other participants ters with matching server 20. Registration may include user
in the system. Users 14 may also seek to access or to initiate 60 14 submitting information to matching server 20 about user
a communication with other users that may be delivered via 14 as well as characteristics user 14 is seeking to be matched
network 24. Users 14 may review data (such as profiles, for with. Such information may include a user handle, which
example) associated with other users in order to make may be a combination of characters that uniquely identifies
matching decisions or elections. Data, as used herein, refers user 14 to matching server 20. In various embodiments,
to any type of numeric, voice, video, text, or script data, or 65 matching server 20 may be configured to collect this infor-
any other suitable information in any appropriate format that mation; for example, matching server 20 may be configured
may be communicated from one point to another. to ask user 14 to respond to a series of questions. Matching
US 9,959,023 B2
5 6
server 20 may be configured to receive the information matching server 20 provides for user 14 is shown. Using
submitted by user 14 and create a profile for user 14 based display 12, user 14 views an entity from result list 31.
on that information, storing the profile in memory 26. Matching server 20 may also provide user 14 with the ability
As an example only, consider a case where user 14 is to contact the entity through a contact button 35. In one
interested in participating in an on-line dating scenario. User embodiment, when contact button 35 is utilized by user 14,
14 can access the Internet via terminal 10, travel to a web matching server 20 may provide user 14 with contact
site managed by matching server 20, and begin the regis- information of the entity such as a telephone number or an
tration process. As part of the registration process, matching e-mail address; in another embodiment, matching server 20
server 20 may ask user 14 a series of questions which may provide user 14 with a way to directly contact the entity,
identifies characteristics about user 14. Thus, matching 10 such as sending a message or providing voice or video
server 20 may ask about the height, weight, age, location, communication between user 14 and the entity. Even further,
and ethnicity ofuser 14. It may also ask about the birthplace, matching server 20 may be configured to allow user 14 to
parents, eating habits, activities, and goals of user 14. express a negative preference for the entity through dislike
Matching server 20 may further use the registration process button 36. In one embodiment, when, for example, dislike
to discover what user 14 may be looking for in a match, such 15 button 36 is utilized by user 14, matching server 20 may
as age, weight, height, location, ethnicity, diet, education, remove the entity from result list 31; in another embodiment,
etc. Further, matching server 20 may ask user 14 to indicate the entity may be removed from pool 30 of users from which
how important certain factors are when looking for a match. matches are identified.
For example, matching server 20 may allow the user to As an example only, consider that user 14 has submitted
indicate which characteristics in a potential match are a 20 a search request to matching server 20. Matching server 20
necessity. In another example, matching server 20 may ask, may search through pool 30, identify results, and commu-
"How important is it that your match does not smoke?" nicate result list 31 to user 14 which would contain other
Matching server 20 may also allow the user to indicate that users for whom matching server 20 had created a profile and
certain characteristics are not important search criteria. For who were identified through a search and selection process.
example, when asking user 14 about what height or weight 25 Next, user 14 may be interested in learning more about Jane
user 14 is seeking in a match, matching server 20 may be Doe, entity 31a; thus, user 14 would click view button 33
configured to receive "not important" as a response. In yet associated with Jane Doe. Matching server 20 would receive
another example, matching server 20 may allow user 14 to this request and respond by displaying Jane Doe's profile
rate which factors are important on a numerical scale. For (stored in memory 26), as depicted in FIG. lF. Next, after
example, matching server 20 may ask user 14 the following: 30 reading the profile, user 14 may be interested in contacting
"On a scale of 1-10, how important is it that your match has Jane Doe; hence, user 14 would click contact button 35.
the same education level as you?" In some embodiments, Matching server 20 would respond by allowing user 14 enter
matching server 20 may specify that any number of ques- a message that matching server 20 would then communicate
tions or requested descriptions are necessary before regis- to Jane Doe.
tration may be concluded. As an example only, matching 35 Matching server 20 may even further be configured to
server 20 may require that user 14 communicate the sex of allow user 14 to store a match result entity; in one embodi-
user 14 and the sex user 14 prefers to be matched with. After ment, the system may be configured to allow user 14 to
concluding the registration process, matching server 20 may utilize favorite button 34 that will add the desired match
store the responses of user 14 as a profile. This same process result entity into another list. In another embodiment, uti-
may be repeated by several different users 14, causing 40 lizing favorite button 34 will remove the associated match
matching server 20 to contain a plurality of profiles. result entity from result list 31.
FIG. lD depicts an embodiment in which matching server As an example only, user 14 may decide that he would
20 has a database 26a which contains a pool 30. Each entry like to save Jane Doe's profile so that he can review it later.
in database 26a has a pool entity 30a along with information User 14 may click favorite button 34, and matching server
concerning that entity. In one embodiment, each pool entity 45 20 may respond by placing Jane Doe's profile into a separate
30a-e represents a user and their profile. In some embodi- list. Further, matching server 20 may also remove Jane Doe
ments, not all registered users are in pool 30. As discussed from user's 14 result list 31. As a result, user 14 may see
further below, matching server 20 may use a selection another match result entity populate result list 31. This is
process for including stored profiles in pool 30. As depicted beneficial because it may focus user 14 on evaluating new
in FIG. lD, in this embodiment, the collection of users and 50 entities rather than reevaluating previously-known entities
profiles forms pool 30 through which matching server 20 because the entities still appear in result list 31.
may perform various functions such as searches for matches. In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
Matching server 20 may be configured to search through figured to generate pool 30 by default according to various
pool 30 and present matches to user 14. In FIG. lE, one characteristics and preferences of user 14 and other users of
embodiment of this presentation is depicted as occurring 55 the system. Matching server 20 may also restrict entities
through display 12. In various embodiments, matches may from being included in pool 30 based on the status of the
be presented to user 14 utilizing other communication profile, or if user 14 has rejected or blocked an entity.
schemes, such as electronic messages (i.e., e-mail) or text Matching server 20 may also restrict entities from the pool
messages (i.e., utilizing SMS). In the depicted embodiment, that have blocked or rejected user 14. For example, match-
a result list 31 is presented to user 14. A match result entity 60 ing server 20 may not allow profiles that are not in good
31a in a result list 31 may be associated with a view button standing to be included in pool 30. In other embodiments,
33. Using interface 16, user 14 may request that matching matching server 20 may be configured to generate pool 30
server 20 provide more information about an entity in result by first choosing seeds. Seeds include, but are not limited to,
list 31 by pressing the associated view button 33. Matching profiles that user 14 has sent a message to or profiles that
server 20 may then communicate to user 14 more informa- 65 user 14 has expressed a preference for. Each seed is then
tion about that entity by retrieving the information from compared to other entities to determine which entities will
memory 26. In FIG. lF, one embodiment of information that be included in pool 30. Any suitable method can be used to
US 9,959,023 B2
7 8
determine which entitles are included in pool 30. For Lucy's (whose commonality score was less than the thresh-
example, any characteristics or algorithms described herein old score). Thus, user 14 gets the benefit of having more
may form the basis of such a determination. As another entities identified that may be good matches.
example, a commonality score may be generated based on In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
the comparison between each entity and the seed. In some figured to include behavioral scales. These may include
embodiments, this commonality score can be a measure of multi-item scales for materialism and gender-role tradition-
how physically similar the users are to each other. This score alism. Such scales may provide the advantage of improved
may be generated based on the number of users that have matching through deeper appreciation for the personality of
expressed a positive preference for both the seed and the entities in the system.
entity being compared. This score may also be generated 10
based on whether the seed and entity have been viewed
figured to analyze profile text for categories. It may search
together in one session; further, the more times the seed and
for a number of text strings and then associate the profile
entity have been viewed together, the larger the common-
ality score. The law of large numbers may allow for a vast :-"ith any number of categories. As an example only, match-
amount of such commonalities to be established over a few 15
mg server 20 may add any profile to the Cat category whose
days. Testing has revealed that using such commonality text contains any of the following strings:
"cat" "cats" "cat." "cats." "cat," "cats,"
scoring methods has yielded at least one physical match for
80% of users whose profile has been viewed at least once Matching server 20 may be configured to make it more
and between 6 and 1000 physical matches for 60% of user~ likely that a profile will be in a result list if categories
whose profile has been viewed at least once. Matching 20
associated with the profile are also categories found in the
server 20 may be further configured to allow entities that user's profile who submitted the search request.
have a commonality score above a certain threshold to Matching server 20 may be configured to analyze one or
become a part of pool 30. Matching server 20 may further more portions of the text of an entity's profile and generate
be configured to update pool 30. In some embodiments, a readability score that may be used in various ways, such
matching server 20 may do so by creating new seed entities 25
as in the process of searching for matches for user 14. In
based on activity by user 14, such as indicating a preference some embodiments, matching server 20 may analyze factors
for that entity. Further, matching server 20 may then com- such as, but not limited to: average number of words per
pare the chosen seed entity with other profiles stored in sentence, total number of words with greater than three
matching server 20 and determine whether those profiles syllables, and total number of words in the profile. Matching
will be included in pool 30 using a threshold score as 30
server 20 may also concatenate all of the collected responses
described above. At least one advantage realized by this with a single space between them. It may further break the
embodiment is that user 14 is presented with updated text into sentences, words, and syllables. From these statis-
potential matches which increases the likelihood of user 14 tics, matching server 20 may also be configured to generate
finding a suitable match. Another advantage present in a readability score by, in one embodiment, taking the aver-
certain embodiments is that these updated potential matches 35
age of the Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease test, the Flesch
have a greater likelihood of compatibility with user 14 since Kincaid Grade Level test, and the Gunning Fox score. Other
they are chosen based on their commonality with entities embodiments may utilize any other combination of these or
user 14 has expressed a preference for. other tests to determine a readability score. In some embodi-
As an example only, consider the case in which user 14 ments, analyses may be used to determine the IQ of an
has registered, requested a search, and received from match- 40
entity, the grade level of the writing, or how nervous the
ing server 20 results list 31. Then, user 14 decides to contact entity generally is. An advantage of this embodiment may be
Jane Doe and presses contact button 35. Aside from provid- that the system provides user 14 with a metric for determin-
ing user 14 with the ability to contact Jane Doe, matching ing approximate intelligence of other users. The readability
server 20 will designate Jane Doe's profile as a seed. score may be used, for example, in the matching process to
Matching server 20 will then compare Jane Doe's profile to 45
identify potential matches.
other profiles stored in memory 26 in order to identify other As an example only, the Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease
users who may be similar to Jane Doe and thus be a good score may be generated by first computing the following
match for user 14. In this example, matching server 20 will intermediate score:
generate a commonality score for each of these comparisons
206.835-(1.015*[Average Words per Sentence])-
and compare these scores to a preset threshold. If the 50
(84.6*[Average Syllables per Word])
commonality score is lower than the threshold, that profile
will not be added to pool 30. However, if the commonality Then, the Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease score is determined
score is higher than the threshold, matching server 20 will by using the following table:
add this profile to pool 30. As an example, further assume
that the se~d, Jane Doe, is being compared to another entity, 55
Susan Smith. Based on the fact that both Susan and Jane Intermediate Flesh Kincaid
Score Condition Reading Ease Score
have three users (Tom, Dick, and Harry) who have expressed
a positive preference for their profiles, matching server 20 <100 4
generates a commonality score of 100 for the comparison. In <91
<81
contrast, matching server 20 generated a commonality score 60
<71 7
of 50 for the comparison between the seed (Jane Doe) and <66
yet another entity, Lucy Goosey. This was because only one <61 9
user (Bob) had indicated a positive preference toward both <51 10
<31 13
Lucy and Jane. Continuing the example, matching server 20 <O 14
is using a commonality threshold score of 70, which results 65 Else 15
in including Susan's profile (whose commonality score was
greater than the threshold score) in pool 30 and excluding
US 9,959,023 B2
9 10
The Flesch Kincaid Grade Level may be computed accord- Sally have in common, the more likely it will be that
ing to the following: matching server 20 will include Sally's profile in Harry's
(0.39*[Average Words Per Sentence])+(ll.8*[Aver- result list 31.
age Syllables Per Word])-15.59 In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
The Gunning Fox score may be computed according to the figured to impute a level of physical attractiveness to an
following: entity in pool 30. Matching server 20 may be configured to
monitor how frequent an entity in pool 30 has been viewed
([Average Words Per Sentence]+(([Nurnber Of
as well as how many times that entity has been part of a
Words With More Than 3 Syllables ]/[Number
of Words In Entire Text])+l00))*0.4 result list in order to impute the level of physical attractive-
lO ness. Matching server 20 may further be configured to
As indicated, any suitable tests may be utilized m any
generate a score based on this data. Further, in some
suitable manner to determine a readability score.
embodiments, matching server 20 may impute physical
figured to allow a user to interact with the result list of attractiveness to an entity based on the imputed physical
another user. Matching server 20 may be configured to allow 15
attractiveness scores of other entities. Matching server 20
a user to express a preference for entities within a result list may compute an average of the imputed physical attractive-
of another user, and to indicate to the other user of this ness scores of the other entities weighted by the common-
preference. Thus, a user may be able to get advice from a ality score between each of the other entities and the present
friend regarding what other users may constitute good entity. Empirical data indicates that people are more likely
matches for the user and thus be able to find a better match. 20 to match with people of similar attractiveness. Thus, in many
As an example only, consider FIG. lA and FIG. 2. Two embodiments, a user may obtain an advantage in that they
users 14, Harry and Sally, are connected to matching server are able to be presented with potential matches that, accord-
20 via terminals 10. Display 12a is used by Harry while ing to one measurement, are as attractive as the user.
display 12b is used by Sally. Matching server 20 allows As an example only, consider a registered user, Sally,
Sally to view Harry's result list 31 on her terminal in display 25 whose profile was created by matching server 20 in January.
l2b. By pressing recommend button 37, Sally may indicate Since that time, matching server 20 has recorded the number
a preference for one or more of the entities in result list 31. of times Sally's profile has appeared in any user's result list
Assume Sally presses recommend button 37 associated with 31; assume that this has occurred 10 times. Further, match-
Jane Loe. After doing so, matching server 20 will notify ing server 20 has also recorded the number of times a user
Harry of Sally's preference. On Harry's display 12a, match- 30 has viewed Sally's profile by clicking view button 33
ing server 20 will cause notification 39 to appear, associating associated with Sally's profile; assume that this has hap-
it with Jane Loe. Notification 39 will indicate to Harry that pened 5 times. In this manner, matching server 20 has
Sally has recommended Jane Loe as a potential match. Harry constructed a ratio that represents the imputed physical
may find Sally's preference helpful in determining which attractiveness of Sally's profile. Still further, assume that
entities he should pursue further if, for example, he believes 35 Harry, a registered user, now submits a query. Matching
Sally understands the type of person he is looking for. server 20 has evaluated the imputed physical attractiveness
In one embodiment, matching server 20 may be config- ratio of Harry's profile. When evaluating Sally's profile for
ured to analyze the profiles of both user 14 and the entities inclusion in result list 31 returned to Harry, matching server
in pool 30 for keywords. Matching server 20 may be 20 will compare the imputed physical attractiveness of
configured to search through the profile of user 14 for 40 Sally's profile and Harry's profile. The more similar the
keywords that relate to things such as activities and interests. ratios associated with Harry and Sally's profiles are to each
Matching server 20 may generate a score for each entity in other, the more likely it is that Sally's profile will be selected
pool 30 based on a comparison between the list of keywords by matching server 20 to be in Harry's result list 31. In
found in user's 14 profile and a similarly-generated list of another example, assume that Sally's profile has not been
keywords of each entity in pool 30. In one embodiment, this 45 registered long enough to generate a meaningful imputed
is accomplished by storing a list of words in memory 26, and physical attractiveness ratio. Matching server 20 may then
using it to identify keywords in the searched profiles. In generate an imputed physical attractiveness score based on
some embodiments, identified keywords may be used as a entities that Sally does have commonality scores with. This
means of weighting various scores. As an example only, a computed average may be weighted by the strength of the
profile that contains the word "God" may be weighted much 50 commonality score between Sally and each entity with
differently than a profile which has merely indicated that whom she has a commonality score. Continuing the
their religious preference is Christian. In various embodi- example, assume that Sally has a commonality score of 5
ments, this may provide an advantage to user 14 in that user with Lucy and 10 with Julia. When matching server 20
14 is able to determine how similar he/she is with a potential computes the Sally's average, it will give twice as much
match. In addition, the keyword analysis may be used by the 55 weight to Julia's imputed physical attractiveness score than
system when searching and identifying matches for a user. to Lucy's.
As an example only, consider two registered users, Harry In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
and Sally, both of whom have profiles stored in matching figured to make an entity in result list 31 more appealing to
server 20. Matching server 20 then analyzes each of these user 14 by pointing out coincidences in the profile data that
profiles by comparing it to a list of predefined keywords. 60 give user 14 a sense of fate with the entity. In one embodi-
Matching server 20 then associates each word that matched ment, matching server 20 may be configured to search for
the list of keywords with each profile. Now assume that similar initials, birthplaces, birth dates, birth month, birth
Harry performs a search. While fulfilling Harry's query, year, university, first names, last names, user handles, paren-
matching server 20 evaluates Sally's profile for inclusion in tal occupations, and keywords to identify users who may
Harry's result list 31. This evaluation includes comparing 65 give another user a sense of fate. In other embodiments,
the list of keywords found in Harry's profile to the keywords matching server 20 may use the fate characteristics as a
found in Sally's profile. The more keywords that Harry and metric in the matching process.
US 9,959,023 B2
11 12
As an example only, assume that Harry is a registered user 30a if user 14 and pool entity 30a have the same income,
who has performed a search. After matching server 20 education, and age. An advantage realized in several
returns a result list, Harry chooses to learn more about one embodiments is that it better approximates how a user
of the entities in the result list and clicks view button 33. evaluates entities. Entities that live further away are gener-
Consider FIG. 3, which is only an example of information ally less appealing to a user; but, users may still be interested
that matching server 20 may return to Harry after clicking if the entity matches their preferences in other categories.
view button 33. In Harry's display 12, matching server 20 As an example only, consider a registered user, Harry,
presents certain details about the profile. In particular, who submits a search request. While fulfilling this request,
matching server 20 presents to Harry a fate notification 32 matching server 20 examines Sally's profile in pool 30, and
which points out specific similarities between the profile of 10 determines that the stated locations of Harry's and Sally's
the entity and Harry's profile. Reading fate notification 32 profiles are 13 miles apart. Matching server 20 will give
gives Harry a sense of familiarity which enhances his Sally's profile a score as ifthe distance between them were
appreciation for the profile. only 10 miles. However, in yet another example, Sally's
In another example, fate characteristics may be used to profile may indicate that she lives 50 miles away from Harry.
decide whether a profile in pool 30 is included in user's 14 15 Yet, matching server 20 also notes that both Harry and Sally
result list 31. Assume that Harry is a registered user who has make $100,000 per year, have Master's degrees, and that
submitted a matching query to matching server 20. While Harry and Sally are one year apart in age (Harry is older).
determining which entities to include in Harry's result list, Given these similarities, matching server 20 will give a score
matching server 20 considers two profiles: Sally and Roxy. to Sally's profile that is consistent with a 20 mile difference
Sally and Harry both have the same birth date, initials, and 20 in location even though they are actually 50 miles apart. In
have parents that work in the same profession. In contrast, this manner, matching server 20 takes into account empirical
Roxy and Harry only share the same birth place. Matching data that shows that people searching for matches who
server 20 may be configured to award more points to Sally indicate that they want to see matches who live close to them
than to Roxy based on these comparisons, making it more are still willing to pursue a potential match that lives far
likely that Sally's profile will be included in Harry's result 25 away if the potential match fits very closely with the other
list. search criteria.
In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con- In another embodiment, matching server 20 may be
figured to evaluate the likelihood of contact between user 14 configured to evaluate the age difference between user 14
and an entity in pool 30. Matching server 20 may be and pool entity 30a using ranges as well as a sliding scale.
configured to compare demographic data between user 14 30 By way of example only, matching server 20 may be
and pool entity 30a. In another embodiment, matching configured to assign a high value to an age difference
server 20 may be configured to weigh the demographic between 0 and -5, while assigning a lower value to an age
similarities and differences based on the sex of user 14. The difference between +2 and 0. An even lower value may be
demographic data may include, but is not limited to, age, assigned to an age difference between -6 and -8. Even lower
education, ethnicity, income, and location. 35 values would be assigned incrementally as the age difference
As an example only, assume that Harry and Sally are increases outside of the ranges discussed. The higher the
registered users who have profiles in matching server 20. assigned value is, the more likely it will be that pool entity
Harry has submitted a search request to matching server 20. 30a will be included in result list 31. Yet another embodi-
While fulfilling this request, matching server 20 evaluates ment may apply this combination of ranges and a sliding
Sally's profile since her profile is in pool 30. As part of the 40 scale but use different values and ranges depending on the
evaluation, matching server 20 looks at the differences sex of user 14.
between Harry and Sally's stated age, income, education, As an example only, consider a situation in which a
ethnicity, and location. In this example, Harry is 10 years registered user, Harry, requests a search to be performed.
older than Sally, makes $10,000 more per year, and has a While fulfilling this request, matching server 20 evaluates
Master's degree while Sally has a bachelor's degree. Even 45 Sally's profile, which was in pool 30. As part of the
with these disparities, matching server 20 will give Sally's evaluation, matching server 20 compares the ages of Harry
profile a high score which makes it more likely that Sally's and Sally, and determines that Harry is two years older than
profile will appear in Harry's result list. However, if it was Sally; this determination leads to matching server 20 assign-
Sally who submitted the search, and matching server 20 was ing, in this example, 50 points to Sally's profile. Matching
evaluating Harry's profile, a different score is possible. So, 50 server 20 may also be configured to assign 50 points to
if it were Sally who was 10 years older, made $10,000 more Sally's profile had she been five years younger than Harry;
per year, and had a Master's degree while Harry had a but, if she had been up to two years older than Harry,
Bachelor's degree, matching server 20 would give a low matching server 20 may have been configured to assign 40
score to Harry's profile, making it less likely that his profile points to her profile. Matching server 20 may be further
would appear in Sally's result list. Matching server 20 may 55 configured to assign 30 points to Sally's profile if she was 6
be configured this way because empirical data has shown to 8 years younger than Harry. However, if Sally were more
that these demographic differences do not have an equiva- than 8 years younger than Harry, matching server 20 may be
lent effect on the choices men and women make regarding configured to further decrease the number of points assigned
matches. to her profile: if she was 9 years younger, then 25 points; if
In another embodiment, matching server 20 may be 60 she was 10 years younger, 20 points; if she was 11 years
configured to compare the locations of user 14 and pool younger, 15 points; etc. The more points assigned to Sally's
entity 30a in increments of ten miles. In yet another embodi- profile, the more likely it is that her profile will appear in
ment, matching server 20 may be configured to score the Harry's result list. Thus, matching server 20 may be con-
location comparison in light of other factors; as an example, figured to assign a score based on age difference using a
matching system 20 may be configured to return a score 65 combination of ranges and a sliding scale.
consistent with a 10 mile difference in location even though In another example, matching server 20 may assign scores
there is a 50 mile difference between user 14 and pool entity differently if it was Sally who was searching and if it was
US 9,959,023 B2
13 14
Harry's profile that was being evaluated. In this example, 5 may be more likely to appear in the user's result list than
matching server 20 may be configured to assign Harry's an entity with an average rating of 2.
profile 50 points ifhe were between 1 and 5 years older than In another example, assume that Harry is a registered user
her. If he were 6 to 8 years older than her, matching server and has requested a search. While fulfilling this request,
20 may assign 45 points. If he were greater than 8 years matching server 20 evaluates Sally's profile. As part of this
older than her, matching server 20 may assign points in the evaluation, matching server 20 notices that Sally's profile
following fashion: if he was 9 years older, 40 points would contains feedback from other users ranking the attractive-
be assigned; if he was 10 years older, 35 points would be ness of Sally's profile. Matching server 20, in this example,
assigned; etc. However, if he was up to two years younger averages that data; Sally's profile average is 6. Matching
10 server 20 may then examine Harry's profile to determine a
than Sally, matching server 20 may assign 50 points to his
similar average. If Harry's profile has an average close to 6,
profile. If he were more than two years younger, matching
it will be more likely that matching server 20 will include
server 20 may assign less points on a sliding scale: 45 points
Sally's profile in Harry's result list. If Harry's profile
if he were 3 years younger, 40 points if he were 4 years average is lower than 6, it will be less likely that Sally's
younger, etc. The more points assigned to Harry's profile, 15 profile will be included in Harry's result list. If Harry's
the more like it is that his profile will appear in Sally's result profile average is greater than 6, it will be even less likely
list. This example illustrates how matching server 20 may be that Sally's profile will be included in Harry's result list. The
configured to take the sex of user 14 into account when more Harry's profile average deviates from that of Sally's,
scoring based on age differences. the less likely it will be that matching server 20 will present
In various embodiments, matching server 20 may be 20 Sally's profile in Harry's result list.
configured to evaluate the attractiveness of an entity in pool In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
30 through collected feedback from other users. In one figured to analyze profile information and received activity
embodiment, matching server 20 may present an entity to information to construct "pairs" which link at least two
user 14, prompting user 14 to rate the attractiveness of the profiles. These pairings may also be associated with a value
entity on a scale from 1-9. This range gives the advantage of 25 that ascertains the quality of the pairing. For example, a
having a midpoint. Matching server 20 may further be pairing which results from one user viewing the profile of
configured to collect such responses and store them; in one another user may be assigned a value that is less than a
embodiment, matching server 20 may store the data in pairing which results from a first user viewing the profile of
memory 26, using a structure such as database 26b. Match- a second user when the second user has also viewed the first
ing server 20 may further be configured to compute the 30 user's profile. Matching server 20 may use these pairings in
average of such responses for the entity, and store this order to generate search results for entities within and
number as well. In various embodiments, these values may outside of the pairing. Each member of the pair may be used
be used in order to help in the matching process. Empirical as a seed entity for generating search results for users in
data indicates that people are more likely to match with matching server 20. In various embodiments, an advantage
people of similar attractiveness. Thus, in various embodi- 35 may be realized as matching server 20 analyzes many of
ments, users whose attractiveness rating are similar will be these pairs to develop dynamic results to users of the system,
more likely to appear in each other's result list. Further, a the results being potentially more relevant as matching
user may indicate that they only want profiles in their result server 20 leverages the interaction between users and pro-
list whose average attractiveness rating is higher than an files to generate search results.
indicated threshold. 40 Pairs may be formed from a variety of user activity
As an example only, assume registered user, Harry, uses received by matching server 20. This activity may include:
terminal 10, which in this example is Harry's personal profile views, mutual profile views, one-way double blind
computer, and establishes communication with matching communication, mutual double-blind communication,
server 20. In this example, this communication occurs by declining double blind communication, one way wink,
Harry using a Web browser to access a Web page controlled 45 mutual wink, expressing disinterest in response to receiving
by matching server 20. Sometime after visiting the Web a wink, one way favorite, and mutual favorite. Other suitable
page, matching server 20 may present Harry with an option activity may also be received by matching server 20 and
to rate the physical attractiveness of other users registered utilized as a basis for generating pairs.
with matching server 20. Using display 12 and interface 16, For example, Harry may be a registered user who has
Harry may view profiles of registered users and rank them 50 expressed a positive preference for Sally. Matching server
on a scale of 1-9 by entering the values using interface 16; 20 may be configured to generate a pair which includes
in this example, interface 16 comprises a mouse and/or a Harry and Sally. Matching server 20 may utilize this pair
keyboard. After submitting this rating, matching server 20 when providing search results to other users. Betty may have
will associate it with the profile and store it. Matching server requested matches, and Betty may be similar to Sally.
20 will also allow other users to rate profiles, thereby 55 Matching server 20 may present Harry in Betty's result list
collecting a plurality of rankings for profiles. Matching as a result of the pairing between Harry and Sally. Further,
server 20 may use this data when trying to find matches for Jim may have executed a search and Jim may be similar to
users. One example of this is that matching server 20 may Harry. As a result of the pairing between Sally and Harry,
allow user 14 to specify that he/she is searching for profiles matching server 20 may present Sally in Jim's list of search
which have an average rating of 6 or above. In tum, 60 results.
matching server 20 may populate user's 14 result list from In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
the pool only with profiles whose average rating is at 6 or figured to encourage user 14 to interact with entities in pool
above. Another example of how matching server 20 may use 30. For example, matching server 20 may present a list of
this data involves making it more likely that an entity will limited entities from pool 30 to user 14, but not present other
appear in a user's result list if the entity and that user have 65 entities to user 14 unless user 14 interacts with the already
a similar average attractiveness rating. So, if a user has an presented entities. Possible interaction with these entities
average rating of 6, then an entity with an average rating of may include viewing more information regarding the entity,
US 9,959,023 B2
15 16
expressing a positive or negative preference for the entity, form 50. Matching server 20 may further be configured to
and choosing to contact the entity. Other suitable forms of provide users of social networking platform 50 a service by
interaction may also be utilized. For example, matching which they may search for users within set 52 or within pool
server 20 may prompt the user with a question about the list 30 using the algorithms and processing of matching server
of entities, such as asking whether or not the user likes the 20. Matching server 20 may even further be configured to
entity. Responses to such prompts may include "yes," allow users of matching server 20 to search through pool 30
"maybe," "no," "remove," and "remove other." The pre- and set 52. Matching server 20 may be configured to parse
sented entities may be chosen using a variety of methods. the profiles of the entities in set 52, collecting data and
For example, the presented entities may be chosen based on applying algorithms.
various scoring algorithms as described above. In addition, 10 In another embodiment, matching server 20 may be
presented entities may be chosen using predictive analysis, configured to allow users of social networking platform 50
such as logistical regression. Other techniques may be used to interact with matching server 20 using social networking
to determine the presented entities. For example, entities that platform 50. This level of integration provides the advantage
have been presented previously may be excluded. As of users not having to learn and sign up for a different
another example, entities that have been blocked by user 14 15 platform.
may also be excluded. In various embodiments, a combina- Social networking platform 50, in one embodiment, may
tion of these techniques as well as others may be used to be a service which stores profiles of its users. This service
determine the limited number of entities presented to user may be further configured to provide access to the stored
14. profiles. In one embodiment, social networking platform 50
For example, Harry may be a registered user of the 20 may also allow other services to interact with users of social
matching system. Matching server 20 may be configured to networking platform 50 through social networking platform
present to Harry a list of five entities that Harry must interact 50.
with. Once Harry has interacted with these entities, match- In one embodiment, matching server 20 may be config-
ing server 20 may present five more entities for Harry to ured to collect requests from users of social networking
interact with. Previously, Harry has blocked Sally, another 25 platform 50 and perform a search through pool 30 and set 52.
registered user of the system. As a result, matching server 20 Matching server 20 may further be configured to present the
may exclude Sally from being presented to Harry in the list results of this search from within social networking platform
of five entities. Further, Harry has already interacted with 50. Matching server 20 may further be configured to present
Betty, another registered user of the system: Harry sent a entities in the search result from pool 30 as if they were
message to Betty utilizing matching server 20. As a result, 30 entities of set 52; in one embodiment, matching server 20
Betty will be excluded from being presented to Harry in the may be configured to generate profiles of entities from pool
list of five entities. Matching server 20 may then choose two 30 into set 52. Thus, users of social networking platform 50
of the five entities using scoring algorithms described above. may view all of the entities in the search result, regardless
For example, matching server 20 may choose Alice and Amy of their source (either from pool 30 or set 52), within the
to be presented in the list of five entities because Alice and 35 environment of social networking platform 50.
Amy have received high scores when their profiles were As an example only, consider two users: Harry, for whom
compared to Harry's profile. Matching server 20 may matching server 20 has created a profile, and Sally, who has
choose the remaining three entities using predictive analysis. a profile stored in social networking platform 50. From
According to this example, matching server 20 may use within social networking platform 50, matching server 20
logistical regression to identify Carla, Christi, and Camela as 40 presents to Sally the ability to perform a search which Sally
the other three entities to present to Harry. Thus, in this uses. The results of this search are presented to Sally within
example, Harry is presented with a list of five entities by social networking platform 50. In this example, Harry's
matching server 20. Matching server 20 may not present profile is displayed to Sally as a search result along with
another set of five entities until Harry has interacted with other entities from set 52 though Harry's profile was from
these five entities. Harry may interact with these entities in 45 pool 30. In this example, matching server 20 uses the
a variety of ways. For example, Harry may send a message algorithms discussed herein and searches through the pro-
to Alice and send a "wink" to Amy. In addition, Harry may files stored in pool 30 and set 52. In order to display Harry's
choose to view more information about Carla's profile, but profile to Sally, matching server 20 creates a profile in set 52
express a negative preference towards Christi and Camela. using the data stored in Harry's profile in pool 30. Sally is
After matching server 20 receives these types of interaction 50 then able to interact with this newly created profile from
with the presented five entities, another set of five entities within social networking platform 50 in the same manner as
may be presented to Harry. she is other entities in set 52.
In this example, matching server 20 may further be In another embodiment, matching server 20 may be
configured to process the user interaction provided by Harry. configured to allow its users to interact with social network-
For example, matching server 20 may utilize Alice's profile 55 ing platform 50 through matching server 20. In one embodi-
as a seed entity to generate other possible entities to present ment, matching server 20 supplements pool 30 with set 52.
to Harry since Harry sent a message to Alice. Thus, a benefit In yet another embodiment, entities from set 52 appear as
is from presenting a the five entities to Harry in that the entities of pool 30 to the user in their list of search results.
interaction between Harry and these entities may be utilized In one embodiment, matching server 20 may be configured
by matching server 20 to generate other entities for matching 60 to generate profiles within pool 30 from entities of set 52; the
to Harry. This serves as an example of how preferences may system may be configured to do so through capabilities
be identified based on user behavior. provided by social networking platform 50, such as an
In FIG. 4, one embodiment is disclosed wherein matching application prograniming interface.
server 20, with pool 30, may be configured to interact with As an example only, consider two users: Harry, whose
another platform, such as social networking platform 50, 65 profile is stored in matching server 20, and Sally, whose
containing a set 52 of users. Users 14 are communicatively profile is stored in social networking platform 50. Harry
coupled to matching server 20 and social networking plat- submits a search request to matching server 20. Matching
US 9,959,023 B2
17 18
server 20 may return result list 31 to Harry, which, in this -continued
example, contains an entity representing Sally's profile.
Matching server 20 may accomplish this by creating profiles Number of Points
Condition for Ordering
in pool 30 that correspond to the profiles found in set 52.
Once these profiles have been imported into pool 30, match- Both have the same +131072
ing server 20 may then search through pool 30. While doing preference for drinking
alcohol
so, matching server 20 applies the algorithms and scores Same answer for Ethnicity +1024
discussed herein. Thus, in this example, matching server 20 Sarne answer for Fear +256
has been configured to both search and apply scoring Sarne answer for Hair +2
10 Sarne answer for Number of +524288
algorithms to entities in pool 30 and set 52. Further, in one
children
example, Harry is not able to distinguish that Sally's profile Sarne answer for morning +32
was originally stored in social networking platform 50. Sarne answer for "must have" +32768
Rather, matching server 20 presents Sally's profile in the Sarne answer for "night out" +16
Sarne answer for "pets" +65536
same manner as other profiles stored in pool 30. Thus, in this
15 Sarne answer for politics +8192
example, Harry may use favorite button 34, view button 33, Sarne answer for relationship +O
and contact button 35 when interacting with Sally's profile status
in the same manner as described above. Sarne answer for "romance" +512
One advantage present in various embodiments is that a Sarne answer for smoking +262144
preferences
user has a wider pool of entities to search through. Another Sarne answer for sports +8
20
advantage is that a user does not have to sign up with several interests
platforms to search through the users on those platforms. Sarne answer for "system" +4096
FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating one embodiment of how
result list 31 may be generated. At step 62, matching server As an example only, consider a registered user, Harry,
20 generates pool 30, as described above. At step 64, who desires to perform a search. Before processing the
25
matching server 20 applies a filter to pool 30, removing
request, matching server 20 may ask Harry what sex he is
certain entities; in various embodiments, this filter is based
and what sex does he desire to be matched with· in this
on user's 14 own sex and the sex user 14 desires to be
example, Harry responds that he is a male seeking ; female.
matched with. At step 66, matching server 20 may be
configured to apply algorithms to pool 30 that will generate After doing so, matching server 20 will generate pool 30 as
a plurality of scores for each entity in pool 30. In one 30 described above. Next, matching server 20 will apply a filter
embodiment, these algorithms may include analyzing the to remove certain entities from pool 30. In this example, all
text of the profiles of the entities in pool 30 to generate a males will be removed from pool 30 since Harry is seeking
readability score, determining how attractive an entity of a female. Further, all females seeking females will be
pool 30 is, or measuring how likely it is that user 14 will removed from pool 30 since Harry is a male. In other
contact an entity of pool 30. At step 68, matching server 20 35 examples, other entities that are removed from pool 30
~ay be configured to collect all of the scores from step 66;
include entities that Harry has expressed a negative prefer-
m one embodiment, matching server 20 may use database ence for before, or entities that have expressed a negative
26b to store all of these scores. At step 70, matching server
preference for Harry. After pool 30 has been filtered, match-
20 may be configured to apply an ordering algorithm which ing server 20 applies a variety of scoring algorithms to the
will determine the order in which entities in result list 31 are 40 entities remaining in pool 30. These algorithms may account
~or ".arious comparisons such as those based on readability,
presented to user 14. In one embodiment, this ordering
algorithm is based, in part, on the scoring algorithms applied hkehhood to contact, fate, and keywords described above.
at step 66. The ordering algorithm assigns points to each Matching server 20 will then tabulate these scores, storing
entity and orders them based on these values, constructing them, in this example, in database 26b. Matching server 20
result list 31. An embodiment of this ordering algorithm is 45 will then determine what order these entities are presented to
surmnarized in the following table: Harry by applying an ordering algorithm. Here, matching
server 20 assigns one ordering score to each entity by
examining the results of the scoring algorithms. After doing
Number of Points so, matching server will present result list 31 to Harry, where
Condition for Ordering 50 the order of the entities that appear in the result list is based
on the ordering algorithm. In this example, it is possible for
Readability score 1 point +33554432
higher than user
result list 31 to change. Consider another user, Sally, who
Match result entity has +16777216 appears in Harry's result list. If Harry decides to add her into
expressed a preference for a separate list by using favorite button 34, Sally will be
the user 55 removed from result list 31 (as described above). However,
Match result entity has been +8388608
recommended by a friend of
Sally will also become a seed entity from which entities may
the user be added to pool 30 (as described above). Hence, matching
User has viewed the details +2097152 server 20 will update the pool, apply the filters, apply the
of match result entity scoring algorithms, tabulate the results, apply the ordering
Match result entity has +1048576
commonality with an entity
60 alg?rithm, and update result list 31. As another example, an
user has expressed a entity may update their profile which can change result list
preference for 31. For example, assume Sally's profile had an ordering
Both have the same ambition +128 algorithm score that placed her within the top 20 entities in
Both have the same beliefs +16384
Same answer for Build +64
result list 31. Sally then changes her profile which results in
Sarne answer for Car +1 65 keywords that match Harry's profile being added to her
Both have the same diet +4 profile. Matching server 20 will then update her scoring
algorithms. In this example, the change in Sally's profile and
US 9,959,023 B2
19 20
resulting increase in keyword matches with Harry's profile facial recognition algorithms to detect ethnicity, hair color,
significantly increased her score. This was then reflected in eye color, etc., of profiles that user 14 has expressed interest
the ordering algorithm as it was also applied to the updated Ill.
profile. Afterwards, Sally's profile is now placed within the In particular embodiments, matching server 20 may have
top 5 entities in result list 31. users 14 to link their user profiles to an existing profile
In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con- within social networking platform 50. Matching server 20
figured to receive required characteristics from user 14 may be configured to generate and add profiles to user
regarding a match. User 14 may be allowed to specify such profile pool 30 from entities of set 52; the system may be
restrictions based upon any number of characteristics, configured to do so through capabilities provided by social
10 networking platform 50, such as an application program-
including those described herein. For example, matching
ming interface. One advantage of linking is that matching
server 20 may allow user 14 to specify that entities that
server 20 can use the authentication features provided by
indicate they have children should not be displayed. In
social networking platform 50. For example, creating a user
another example, user 14 may specify that only entities profile on matching server 20 containing false information
between the ages of 20 and 30 should be present in result list 15 becomes harder when the information must come from
31. In some embodiments, matching server 20 may imple- another verifiable and peer monitored source such as social
ment these restrictions in step 64 of FIG. 5. In other networking platform 50.
embodiments, however, matching server 20 may refuse to In some embodiments, matching server 20 may allow a
apply these restrictions to certain entities based on the user 14 to propose a match between two of his connections
characteristics of the entities. Any number of characteristics, 20 within social networking platform 50. For example, Harry
including those described herein, may form the basis upon may be friends with both Bob and Sally within social
which matching server 20 decides not to apply the restric- networking platform 50. Harry believes Bob and Sally are a
tions submitted by user 14. As an example only, matching good match and therefore instructs matching server 20 to
server 20 may ignore the restrictions ifthe entity has a high create a match between the two users in user profile pool 30.
enough attractiveness rating. In another example, though 25 Once matched, matching server 20 allows Harry and Sally
user 14 has requested that no profiles which are located more to communicate with each other.
than 50 miles away should be present in result list 31, In some embodiments, matching server 20 may be con-
matching server 20 may include such profiles because those figured to apply a relevance algorithm which determines the
profiles have over 5 matching keywords, a high attractive- content and order in which matching server 20 displays
ness rating, and have specified the same life goals as user 14. 30 potential matches to user 14. A relevance algorithm may be
Thus, in some embodiments, matching server 20 may refuse based on both explicit and implicit signals from user 14.
to apply restrictions submitted by user 14 based on any Explicit signals include information entered by user 14 as
combination of characteristics or algorithms. part of its user profile, such as height, weight, age, location,
An advantage present in many embodiments is that income, and ethnicity. Explicit signals may also include
through taking into account various factors when scoring 35 information about the characteristics user 14 is seeking in a
potential matches and using only very few strict filters, a match, such as gender, hair color, eye color, or occupation.
large amount of result entities may be returned to the user. Explicit signals may also be entered by user 14 as part of a
A further advantage is that the ordering algorithm will put search request. For example, user 14 may request matching
the most relevant search results first, saving the user time. server 20 limit the pool of potential matches to those users
FIGS. 6-9 depict embodiments of a user interface pre- 40 within a fixed geographic region. Matching server 20 is
sented to users of the matching system discussed above with operable to compare geographic positions associated with
respect to FIGS. 1and4. According to some embodiments, the plurality of user profiles in user profile pool 30 with a
users 14 interact with matching server 20 through interface geographic position associated with user 14. Explicit signals
16 presented by terminal 10. In addition to the embodiments may be imported from a social networking platform 50, such
of interface 16 described above in relation to FIG. lA, 45 as the number of shared entities in a social graph of user 14.
interface 16 may also comprise a touch screen interface Implicit signals may be based on the behavior of user 14
operable to detect and receive touch input such as a tap or either within system 100 or other social networking plat-
a swiping gesture. forms 50. For example, if user 14 has expressed disapproval
In some embodiments, matching server 20 may import of a user profile in the past, matching server 20 may no
profiles from other social networking systems. This level of 50 longer present the disapproved of user profile to user 14 in
integration provides the advantage of users only having to future searches. In various embodiments, matching server 20
update their profile information in one place. For example, may be configured to evaluate the attractiveness of a user in
when user 14 updates his profile within social networking user profile pool 30 through collected feedback from other
platform 50, matching server 20 is also able to access the users. For example, matching server 20 may rank a user
updated profile information. 55 profile that receives more likes as more relevant than a user
In some embodiments, matching server 20 may further be profile that receives fewer likes. In particular embodiments,
configured, as part of the user registration process, to link to matching server 20 may assign a higher relevance to a user
a user's existing profile within social networking platform profile if the other user has previously expressed a prefer-
50. Matching server 20 may be configured to parse the ence for user 14. As an example, user Harry may have
profiles of the users in set 52, e.g., collecting data and 60 previously expressed a preference for user Sally. If Sally
applying algorithms. For example, matching server 20 may requests a set of user profiles from matching server 20, and
use explicit signals from social networking platform 50 such Harry's user profile is included in the set, matching server 20
as common friends, common interests, common network, may assign Harry's user profile a higher relevance based on
location, gender, sexuality, or age to evaluate potential his expression of preference for Sally. This can result in
matches between users 14. Matching server 20 may also use 65 Harry's profile being presented to Sally sooner than other-
implicit signals such as for whom a user 14 expresses wise would have occurred. This may be advantageous in that
approval and disapproval. Implicit signals may also include it can increase the chances of a match without compromising
US 9,959,023 B2
21 22
a user's feelings of privacy when expressing preferences for example, Harry may expand his search to a twenty-five mile
potential matches. In some embodiments, matching server radius to meet people in his town, not just his immediate
20 may be configured to use the fate characteristics as a vicinity.
metric in the relevance algorithm. FIGS. 7 and 8 are diagrams of embodiments of the display
In some embodiments, terminal 10 is operable to deter- from FIG. 6 showing the effect of a left swipe gesture (FIG.
mine its own geographic location by a global positioning 7) and the effect of a right swipe gesture (FIG. 8). In one
satellite navigational system. Terminal 10 may also deter- embodiment, users 14 may navigate through the set of
mine its own geographic location using cellphone-based presented users by swiping through stack of cards 88. Users
triangulation techniques, Wi-Fi based positioning system, 14 may also express approval of a presented user by per-
10 forming a right swipe gesture or express disapproval by
Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) system, or network
performing a left swipe gesture. In some embodiments, user
addresses assigned by a service provider.
14 performs a swiping gesture by moving a finger or other
FIG. 6 shows one embodiment of system 100 displaying
suitable object across a screen of terminal 10. Other suitable
to a user the profile information of a second user. Matching gestures or manners of interacting with terminal 10 may be
server 20 may be configured to search through its plurality 15 used (e.g., tapping on portions of a screen of terminal 10).
of profiles and present suggested matches to user 14. In FIG. In some embodiments, matching server 20 creates a
6, one embodiment of this presentation is depicted as match between two users 14 after both users 14 have
occurring through the display of terminal 10. In this embodi- expressed a preference for each other's profiles using like
ment, a plurality of user profiles is presented to user 14. button 86 or the swiping gesture associated with like button
Using terminal 10, user 14 may request that matching server 20 86. When matching server 20 creates a match, it may also
20 present a subset of users from user profile pool 30 based provide the matched users with the ability to contact each
on specified search parameters. The display may show an other through a contact button. In some embodiments, when
image of a suggested user and one or more aspects of the a match is created, matching server 20 may immediately (or
suggested user's profile information. In some embodiments, soon thereafter) present an option to users 14 that have been
the combination of image and one or more aspects of profile 25 matched to engage in a communication session (e.g., a chat,
information is displayed as "card" 88 representing the an SMS message, an e-mail, a telephone call, a voice
suggested user. A set of suggested users may be displayed as communication session, a video communication session).
stack of cards 88. User 14 may view information regarding This may be done in response to a first user 14 expressing
one suggested user at a time or more than one of the a preference for a second user 14 that has already expressed
suggested users at a time. User 14 may be presented with a 30 a preference for the first user 14.
surmnary of information regarding a suggested user. The FIG. 9 shows one embodiment of matching system 100
surmnary may include one or more of: a picture, an icon, displaying a match of a first user and a second user, in
name, location information, gender, physical attributes, hob- accordance with a particular embodiment. Matching server
bies, or other profile information. 20 may provide first user 14 and second user 14 with each
In some embodiments, terminal 10 may also display 35 other's contact information such as a telephone number or
"information" button 84 which allows user 14 to request an e-mail address. Matching server 20 may also provide both
matching server 20 to retrieve and display more information first and second users 14 with a way to directly contact the
about the presented user from user profile pool 30. In other, such as sending a message or providing voice or video
addition, user 14 may express approval or disapproval for a communication between the first and second user. In some
presented user. Expressing approval or disapproval can be 40 embodiments, direct communication may be initiated by
accomplished through various methods. For example, ter- pressing "Send a Message" button 92. Alternatively, a user
minal 10 may display "like" button 86 (represented by a may choose to continue browsing the set of presented users
green heart icon) and "dislike" button 82 (represented by a by pressing "Keep Playing" button 94.
red "X" icon). Pressing like button 86 indicates to matching For example, user Harry may indicate a preference to
server 20 that user 14 approves of and is interested in 45 communicate directly with user Sally by selecting like
communication with the presented user. Pressing dislike button 86. At this point, Sally is not aware that Harry
button 82 indicates that user 14 disapproves of and does not expressed a preference for her. If Sally also requests match-
want to communicate with the presented user. The approval ing server 20 present her with a set of possible matches,
preference of user 14 is anonymous in that matching server Harry may appear in her set. Sally may select like button 86
20 does not inform users 14 whether other users have 50 (or perform an associated swiping gesture) when viewing
expressed approval or disapproval for them. Harry's profile. Matching server 20 may then notify both
As an example, consider two registered users, Harry and Harry and Sally that a match occurred. At this point, both
Sally, both of whom have profiles stored in matching server Harry and Sally are made aware that they each expressed
20. Harry is at a restaurant and requests matching server 20 approval of each other's profile. Matching server 20 then
to present him users within a one-mile radius of his location. 55 enables Harry and Sally to directly communicate with each
Matching server 20 compares a geographic position associ- other (e.g., through a private chat interface).
ated with Sally with a geographic position associated with In some embodiments, one advantage of a system dis-
Harry. If Sally is currently within the one-mile radius of closing preferences of profiles to users when mutual
Harry and matching server 20 determines her profile infor- approval has occurred is that a user can feel more secure in
mation matches Harry's preferences, matching server 20 60 their privacy knowing that their preferences will be dis-
will present Harry one or more aspects of Sally's profile closed to those that have expressed a preference for that user.
information. If other users also meet the search criteria, As an example, a user can avoid embarrassment if their
matching server 20 will present one or more aspects of those expression of preference for a profile was not reciprocated.
users' profile information as well. Harry may request more This may lead to users more actively expressing their
information about Sally by pressing information button 84. 65 preferences. Such increased activity can be used by the
Harry may also indicate his preference to communicate matching system to generate more potential matches or
directly with Sally by selecting like button 86. In another better rankings of potential matches. In some embodiments,
US 9,959,023 B2
23 24
matching server 20 may be configured to allow direct some embodiments, step 1104 may not be performed. For
communication between users when there has been a mutual example, if a matching proposal is suggested, then matching
expression of preference. This may be advantageous server 20 may perform step 1106 with respect to the users
because users can avoid browsing, deleting, or responding to suggested to be matched.
unwanted messages. FIGS. 12A-D depict embodiments of a user interface. In
FIG. 10 is a flowchart depicting a method for enabling some embodiments, the interface allows user 14 of terminal
communication between two users of the matching system 10 to enable communication between other users 14 by
of FIG. 1 based on a mutual expression of approval, in suggesting a matching proposal to matching server 20.
accordance with a particular embodiment. FIG. 12A illustrates one embodiment of an interface for
At step 1002, in some embodiments, matching server 20 10 proposing a match between two users. The interface is
generates a set of user profiles in response to a request for divided into three sections: connection list area 1202, search
matching from a first user 14. At step 1004, matching server area 1204, and suggestion area 1206. Connection list area
20 presents the set of user profiles to first user 14. Matching 1202 displays a set of connections user 14 has with other
server 20 determines the contents and ordering of the set of users of, e.g., system 100 of FIG. 1. Connections may be
users profiles by using, e.g., the relevance algorithms 15 based on prior matches created by matching server 20.
described above in the discussion of FIG. 4. For example, Connections may also be imported from another social
matching server 20 may only include user profiles whose networking platform 50. Search area 1204 enables user 14 to
contents indicate location within a specified geographical search for particular connections within system 100. In some
radius and order the presentation of those user profiles based embodiments, the search may be limited to just the connec-
on the number of mutual friends in common with first user 20 tions displayed in connection list area 1202. Suggestion area
14. 1206 displays the connections that user 14 may use to form
At step 1006, in some embodiments, matching server 20 a suggested match.
receives an indication of the preference of first user 14 FIG. 12B illustrates suggestion area 1206 displaying a
regarding a presented user profile. Matching server 20 first selected user (i.e., "Jonathan Smith") of a proposed
determines if first user 14 expresses approval or disapproval 25 match between two users. User 14 identifies the first selected
of the presented user profile at step 1008. If first user 14 user through a set of interactions with connection list area
disapproves of the presented user profile then a match is not 1202, search area 1204, and suggestion area 1206. For
made and, at step 1016, matching server 20 will not allow example, user 14 may locate a connection in connection list
communication between the two users. If first user 14 area 1202 by typing a user handle in search area 1204. User
expresses approval for the presented user profile at step 30 14 may then add the connection to suggestion area 1206. In
1008, then matching server 20 will check if second user 14 some embodiments, user 14 may drag the connection from
represented by the presented user profile has already connection list area 1202 to suggestion area 1206.
expressed a preference for first user 14 at step 1010. If FIG. 12C illustrates suggestion area 1206 displaying a
matching server 20 detects a mutual expression of approval proposed match between two suggested users (i.e., "Jona-
then a match is made between first and second users 14. 35 than Smith" and "Mary Major"). For example, user 14 may
Then, at step 1012, matching server 20 allows private locate a second connection in connect list area 1202 that user
communications between first and second users 14. If a 14 believes is a match for the first connection. User 14 may
mutual expression of approval is not detected at step 1010, add the second connection to suggestion area 1206. When
then matching server 20 stores the preference of first user 14 both connections are added to suggestion area 1206, match-
regarding the presented user profile for future comparison 40 ing server 20 may create a match between the two users and
and continues to step 1016 where private communications allow communication between them.
are not yet allowed. FIG. 12D illustrates an example communication interface
FIG. 11 is a flowchart depicting a method for enabling between users of the matching system. User 14 is presented
communication between two users of the matching system with chat box 1208 for each of the matches that exist for user
of FIG. 1 based on a matching proposal suggested by a user, 45 14. Users 14 may communicate with each other through chat
in accordance with a particular embodiment. At step 1102, box 1208. In some embodiments, users 14 may communi-
matching server 20 receives interactions from first user 14. cate through SMS messages, e-mail, telephone calls, online
Interactions from first user 14 may include identification of voice communication sessions, and/or video communication
user profiles for two other users 14. For example, Harry is sess10ns.
connected to both Bob and Sally within social networking 50 Modifications, additions, or omissions may be made to the
platform 50. Harry believes Bob and Sally are a good match methods described herein (such as those described above
for each other and generates a matching proposal requesting with respect to FIGS. 5, 10 and 11) without departing from
matching server 20 to create a match between Bob and Sally. the scope of the disclosure. For example, the steps may be
At step 1104, in some embodiments, matching server 20 combined, modified, or deleted where appropriate, and addi-
validates the suggested matching proposal between second 55 tional steps may be added. Additionally, the steps may be
and third users 14. For example, matching server 20 verifies performed in any suitable order without departing from the
that Bob's profile indicates that he wants to be matched with scope of the present disclosure.
a woman, and Sally's profile indicates that she wants to be Although several embodiments have been illustrated and
matched with a man. Matching server 20 may also verify described in detail, it will be recognized that substitutions
that Sally has not previously expressed disapproval for Bob. 60 and alterations are possible without departing from the spirit
If matching server 20 determines the suggested matching and scope of the appended claims.
proposal is valid, matching server 20 creates the match and What is claimed is:
allows communication between the users 14 suggested to be 1. A method of navigating a user interface, comprising:
matched at step 1106. If matching server 20 determines the presenting, on a graphical user interface, a graphical
suggested matching proposal is not valid, matching server 65 representation of a first item of information of a plu-
20 does not create a match and does not allow communi- rality of items of information, the first item of infor-
cation between second and third users 14 at step 1108. In mation comprising a graphical representation of a first
US 9,959,023 B2
25 26
online dating profile associated with a first user, automatically present a graphical representation of a
wherein presenting the graphical representation of the second item of information of the plurality of items
first item of information of the plurality of items of of information in response to the processor detecting
information comprises presenting the first item of infor- the gesture, the second item of information compris-
mation as a first card of a stack of cards; ing a graphical representation of a second online
detecting a gesture associated with the graphical repre- dating profile associated with a second user; and
sentation of the first item of information, the gesture
corresponding to a positive preference indication asso- automatically remove the graphical representation of
ciated with the first item of information, the positive the first item of information in response to detecting
preference indication associated with the first item of 10 the gesture.
information comprising an expression of approval for 4. The system of claim 3, wherein the interface is further
the first user associated with the first online dating operable to present user interface controls such that ail user
profile, wherein detecting the gesture associated with interface controls configured to cause another item of infor-
the graphical representation of the first item of information of the plurality of items of information to be dis-
mation comprises detecting a right swiping direction 15 played are associated with performing an action on the first
associated with the gesture; item of information.
storing the positive preference indication associated with
the first item of information in response to detecting the 5. At least one non-transitory computer-readable medium
gesture; comprising a plurality of instructions that, when executed by
automatically presenting, on the graphical user interface, 20 at least one processor, are configured to:
a graphical representation of a second item of infor- present, on a graphical user interface, a graphical repre-
mation of the plurality of items of information in sentation of a first item of information of a plurality of
response to detecting the gesture, the second item of items of information, the first item of information
information comprising a graphical representation of a comprising a graphical representation of a first online
second online dating profile associated with a second 25 dating profile associated with a first user, wherein the
user; and plurality of instructions are configured to present the
automatically removing the graphical representation of graphical representation of the first item of information
the first item of information from the graphical user of the plurality of items of information as a first card of
interface in response to detecting the gesture. a stack of cards;
2. The method of claim 1, wherein presenting the graphi- 30
detect a gesture associated with the graphical representa-
cal representation of the first item of information of the tion of the first item of information, the gesture corre-
plurality of items of information comprises presenting user sponding to a positive preference indication associated
interface controls such that all user interface controls con-
with the first item of information, the positive prefer-
figured to cause another item of information of the plurality ence indication associated with the first item of infor-
of items of information to be displayed are associated with 35
mation comprising an expression of approval for the
performing an action on the first item of information. first user associated with the first online dating profile,
3. A system, comprising:
wherein the plurality of instructions are further config-
an interface operable to: ured to detect a right swiping direction associated with
present a graphical representation of a first item of the gesture;
information of a plurality of items of information, 40
the first item of information comprising a graphical store the positive preference indication associated with
representation of a first online dating profile associ- the first item of information in response to detecting the
ated with a first user, wherein the interface is further gesture;
operable to present the graphical representation of automatically present, on the graphical user interface, a
the first item of information of the plurality of items 45 graphical representation of a second item of informa-
of information as a first card of a stack of cards; tion of the plurality of items of information in response
a processor coupled to the interface and operable to: to detecting the gesture, the second item of information
detect a gesture associated with the graphical represen- comprising a graphical representation of a second
tation of the first item of information, the gesture online dating profile associated with a second user; and
corresponding to a positive preference indication 50 automatically remove the graphical representation of the
associated with the first item of information, the first item of information from the graphical user inter-
positive preference indication associated with the face in response to detecting the gesture.
first item of information comprising an expression of
6. The at least one non-transitory computer-readable
approval for the first user associated with the first
online dating profile, wherein the processor is further 55
medium of claim 5, wherein the plurality of instructions are
operable to detect a right swiping direction associ- further configured to present user interface controls such that
ated with the gesture; all user interface controls configured to cause another item
store the positive preference indication associated with of information of the plurality of items of information to be
the first item of information in response to detecting displayed are associated with performing an action on the
the gesture; and 60
first item of information.
the interface further operable to: * * * * *

Exhibit C

lllll llllllll Ill lllll llllll llllPage
lllll lllll94111111111111111111111111111111111
of 97 PageID 309
USOOD798314S
c12) United States Design Patent c10) Patent No.: US D798,314 S

Rad et al. (45) Date of Patent: ** Sep. 26, 2017
(54) DISPLAY SCREEN OR PORTION THEREOF D598,928 S * 8/2009 Hirsch ......................... Dl4/485
WITH A GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE OF D608,365 S * 1/2010 Walsh .......................... Dl4/485
A MOBILE DEVICE
D611,052 S * 3/2010 Bamford ...................... Dl4/485
D611,486 S * 3/2010 Hirsch ......................... Dl4/485
D615,549 S 512010 Caine et al.
(71) Applicant: Tinder, Inc., West Hollywood, CA (US) (Continued)
(72) Inventors: Sean Rad, Los Angeles, CA (US); FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
Jonathan Badeen, North Hollywood,
CA (US); Christopher Paul EM 001128185-0006 612009
Gulczynski, Los Angeles, CA (US) EM 001128185-0014 612009
(Continued)
(73) Assignee: Tinder, Inc., West Hollywood, CA (US)
OTHER PUBLICATIONS
(**) Term: 15 Years
Chegg Blog, Chegg Product Updates, "Introducing the Chegg
(21) Appl. No.: 29/560,811 Flashcards App", http://blog.chegg.com/2012/02/03/introducing-
the-chegg-flashcards-app/, 10 pages, Feb. 3, 2012.
(22) Filed: Apr. 11, 2016
(Continued)
Related U.S. Application Data
Primary Examiner - Melanie H Tung
(63) Continuation-in-part of application No. 29/465,628, Assistant Examiner - Bao-Yen Nguyen
filed on Aug. 29, 2013, now Pat. No. Des. 755,814. (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm - Baker Botts L.L.P.
(51) LOC (10) Cl. ............................................... 14-04
(52) U.S. Cl. (57) CLAIM
USPC ......................................................... Dl4/485 The ornamental design for a display screen or portion
(58) Field of Classification Search thereof with a graphical user interface of a mobile device, as
USPC ................................................. D14/485-495 shown and described.
CPC .... G06F 3/048; G06F 3/0481; G06F 3/04812;
G06F 3/04815; G06F 3/04817; G06F DESCRIPTION
3/0482; G06F 3/0483; G06F 3/0484;
G06F 3/044; G06F 3/0417 FIG. 1 is a front view of a first embodiment of a display
See application file for complete search history. screen with a graphical user interface of a mobile device;
and,
(56) References Cited FIG. 2 is a front view of a second embodiment of a display
screen with a graphical user interface of a mobile device.
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS The broken lines illustrating components of a web page are
D555,663 S 11/2007 Nagata et al. for illustrative purpose only and form no part of the claimed
D594,021 S * 612009 Ball ............................. Dl4/486 design.
D596,193 S * 712009 Shotel .......................... Dl4/486
D598,466 S * 8/2009 Hirsch ......................... Dl4/485 1 Claim, 2 Drawing Sheets

US D798,314 S
Page 2
(56) References Cited EM 002245928-0004 6/2013

EM 001379895-0009 9/2013
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS EM 002354191-0019 12/2013
EM 001399893-0007 6/2014
D628,210 S 11/2010 Luke et al. EM 002488163-0007 6/2014
D633,525 S 3/2011 Trabona et al. EM 002488163-0008 6/2014
D633,920 S * 3/2011 Luke . Dl4/486 EM 002464776-0003 7/2014
D636,785 S 412011 Brinda EM 002464776-0004 7/2014
D637,198 S * 512011 Furuya . Dl4/486 EM 002464776-0012 7/2014
D647,534 S 10/2011 Doll EM 001417455-0048 10/2014
D688,678 S * 8/2013 Osborne Dl4/486 EM 002774083-0003 10/2015
D697,934 S * 1/2014 Lee Dl4/486
D699,258 S * 2/2014 Jong Dl4/486 OTHER PUBLICATIONS
D701,520 S * 3/2014 Jung Dl4/486
D702,721 s 412014 Abratowski et al.
Internet Archive WayBackMachine, DesiCrush, http://www.
D702,729 S * 4/2014 Steele Dl4/492
D704,204 S * 5/2014 Rydenhag Dl4/486 desicrush.corn/, 2 pages, Oct. 24, 2012.
D709,089 S * 7/2014 Eilam Dl4/489 Chegg Blog, Chegg Product Updates, "Grab Your Book & Its
D711,397 S * 8/2014 Lawson Dl4/486 Digital Mate-Introducing Chegg's Textbook Solutions App", http://
D712,419 S * 912014 Song . Dl4/486 blog.chegg.corn/2013/01/30/smarten-up-your-ios-device-with-
D717,312 S * 11/2014 Matas Dl4/485 cheggs- ... , 7 pages, Jan. 30, 2013.
D725,125 S * 3/2015 Capela . Dl4/485 David Zax, "Your After-Work Linkedin Dates Just Got a Little Bit
D729,821 S * 512015 Ryan . Dl4/485
Hotter", http://www.fastcompany.com/303579 5/most-creative-
D730,383 s 512015 Brinda et al.
people/like-a-linkedin-powered-tinder-belinked-wants-you-to-
D732,073 s 6/2015 Adams
D732,074 s 6/2015 Adams hook-up-after-work, 7 pages, Sep. 16, 2014.
D736,790 S * 8/2015 Lim Dl4/485 "Odating-Free Dating App", Version 3.4, http://m.fsr.store.
D737,280 S * 8/2015 Lee Dl4/485 aptoide.corn/app/market/com.onedate.android/22/4940169/, 1 page,
D737,297 s 8/2015 Moon et al. Nov. 11, 2014.
D738,903 s 9/2015 Lee PRWeb, "SkaDate New Android App: Mixing Tinder and Old
D741,878 S * 10/2015 Leyden Dl4/485 School", http://www.prweb.com/releases/2015/02/prwebl2519835.
D741,895 s 10/2015 Nguyen htm, 3 pages, Feb. 2015.
D743,414 S * 11/2015 Shunock . Dl4/485 David John, "The Ttme Out London blog: your daily guide to city
D746,861 s 1/2016 Park et al. life, news and culture", "Three new dating apps hotter than
D750,105 S * 212016 Leighton . Dl4/485
Tinder", http:!/now-here-this. timeout.corn/2015/02/26/three-new-
D753,147 S * 4/2016 Kim . Dl4/485
D753,158 S * 412016 Mezzanotte Dl4/486 dating-apps-hotter-than-Tinder, 7 pages, Posted Feb. 26, 2015.
D755,814 S * 5/2016 Rad . Dl4/486 "8FACT-Facts You Don't Know" by Under9 Limited, https://
itunes.apple.corn/us/app/8fact-facts-you-dont-know/
id643521388?mt~8, 2 pages.
FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
Clover Dating App by Clover, Inc., https://itunes.apple.corn/us/app/
clover-dating-app/id771990977?mt~8, 3 pages, Feb. 22, 2016.
EM 001128185-0015 612009
EM 001227201-0011 212011
EM 001289748-0014 10/2011 * cited by examiner

U.S. Patent Sep.26,2017 Sheet 1 of 2 US D798,314 S
FIG. 1

U.S. Patent Sep.26,2017 Sheet 2 of 2 US D798,314 S
'
'
,, ''
'
:
'' :
,,'
' ,, ' .......... ,
'' / ' , __
'
' ' '•,
--- ,,_
---
'
i
',_ - --- -- - - -- - - ---- - - - - --- - -- -- -- ..... ------ - --- - - - - --- ---- - -- --- - --- - -- --
FIG. 2

Bumble Trading v. Match - Removal of State Court Case

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bumble Trading v. Match - Removal of State Court Case

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 3:18-cv-02578-L Document 1 Filed 09/26/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

BUMBLE TRADING, INC. and BUMBLE §

1. Match is a worldwide leader in online dating, with multiple popular brands of

2. “Bumble” is a mobile dating app owned by plaintiffs Bumble Trading, Inc.

the most widely downloaded dating app in America.

3. To protect its extraordinarily valuable intellectual property rights, on March 16,

30, 3018. Exhibit 2.

based on patent litigation is a compulsory counterclaim).

6. This dispute — which is centered on the validity of Match’s intellectual property

and trademark suit against Bumble Trading is currently pending.

(“Under § 1454, a defendant with a patent or copyright counterclaim is no longer bound by a

plaintiff’s well-pleaded state law complaint to litigate in state court.”).

based on patent declaratory judgment counterclaim).

GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL

A. This action is removable pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1454.

action is pending.” 28 U.S.C. § 1454(a) (emphasis added).

11. As noted, § 1454 provides an intellectual-property exception to the “well-pleaded

copyright infringement counterclaim); Van Steenburg v. Hageman, 2015 WL 1509940, at *6

patent laws). As a result, this action is removable pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1454.

frivolous intellectual property claims,” misappropriating confidential information, and disparaging

not well founded”).

B. This action is also removable pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441.

15. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) provides that, “[e]xcept as otherwise expressly provided by

arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.”

U.S. 251, 258 (2013).

made in good faith”).

judgments between state and federal courts”).

over patent law claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a).

the same case or controversy. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).

COMPLIANCE WITH REMOVAL PROCEDURES

is required for removal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(2).

Notice pursuant to Local Rule 81.1.

Dated: September 26, 2018

/s/ Bradley W. Caldwell

Rules of Civil Procedure on this 26th day of September, 2018:

/s/ Bradley W. Caldwell

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MATCH GROUP, LLC §

PLAINTIFF MATCH GROUP, LLC’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

stack of swipeable cards containing photographs of potential matches nearby. If a user is

is often described as the “Tinder generation.”

Bumble, founded by three ex-Tinder executives, copied Tinder’s world-changing, card-

swipe-based, mutual opt-in premise. As acknowledged by third-party publications upon its

intellectual property rights.

complaint to stop Bumble’s unlawful use of this intellectual property.

II. THE PARTIES

1. Plaintiff Match Group, LLC (“Match”) is a Delaware Corporation with a principal

place of business in Dallas, Texas at 8750 N. Central Expressway, Suite 1400.

2. Bumble Trading Inc. (“Bumble”) is a Delaware corporation with a principal place

of business at 1105 W 41st St., Austin, TX 78756.

3. Although Bumble Trading Inc. continues to conduct business in Texas, as of the

privileges under Section 171.309 of the Texas Tax Code.

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

in Austin, Texas, within the District.

Bumble’s Austin-based headquarters and Match’s Dallas-based headquarters.

9. Match also has a significant server deployment in the Waco area.

campus to promote the Bumble app amongst Baylor University students.

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

marketing efforts for the Tinder app.

swiping on Tinder became a cultural sensation.

B. Match’s Tinder-Related Intellectual Property

or around March 28, 2013.