IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

____________________________________ 

) 

MYCHOICE, LLC, ) 

) 

Plaintiff, ) 

) Civil Action No. __________________ 

v. ) 

) 

TAIV, INC. ) 

) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

Defendant. ) 

 ) 

COMPLAINT 

Plaintiff MyChoice, LLC, for its complaint against Defendant Taiv, Inc., hereby states and 

alleges as follows: 

Nature of the Action 

1. This is an action for patent infringement. MyChoice, LLC is the owner of U.S. 

Patent No. 10,708,658 (the “’658 Patent”) entitled “Video Viewing Experience Enhanced Through 

Custom Curation,” which duly issued on July 7, 2020, to inventor Richard Theriault. A true and 

correct copy of the ’658 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”. Taiv, Inc. has made, used, 

offered for sale, sold, and imported in the United States products that infringe the ’658 Patent, and 

it has induced and contributed to its customers’ infringement of that patent.

The Parties 

2. MyChoice, LLC (“MyChoice”) is a limited liability company organized and 

existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and has a principal place of 

business at 5 Brooks Hill Road, Lincoln, Massachusetts 01773. Its Managing Member is Mr. 

Richard Theriault. Mr. Theriault assigned the ’658 Patent to MyChoice, including without 

Case 2:23-cv-00507-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/02/23 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1
2 

limitation, all rights to enforce and collect damages and remedies for infringement of the ’658 

Patent. 

3. Taiv, Inc. (“Taiv”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the 

Province of Manitoba, Canada and has a principal place of business at 195 McPhillips Street, 

Winnipeg, Province of Manitoba, Canada. 

Jurisdiction and Venue 

4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 

1338(a), as this action arises under the Acts of Congress relating to patents, namely, 35 U.S.C. §§ 

271, 281-285. This Court also has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 1332 as the action is between a citizen of the United States and an alien, and the amount 

in controversy, exclusive of interest and costs, exceeds the sum of $75,000.00. 

5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Taiv pursuant to the Long-Arm Statute of 

the State of Texas, Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 17.042. As explained in more detail below, 

Taiv’s business consists of a hardware/software system that allows bars and restaurants, almost all 

of which now have continuously operating TV screens viewable by their customers, to swap out 

network TV ads on those TV screens for ads from Taiv’s network of advertisers (Taiv’s “Custom 

Content Replacement System”). Taiv has employed and/or contracted with individuals in Texas to 

install, service, and maintain its Custom Content Replacement Systems throughout the state of 

Texas, including in this District, and likewise contracted with its customers in Texas regarding 

their use of the hardware, software, and services provided in connection with such systems.

6. At least as early as 2022, Taiv began promoting and selling its Customer Content 

Replacement System to bars, restaurants, and other businesses in Texas. Taiv’s sales team went 

door to door to sports bars and restaurants seeking to interest them in Taiv’s offering. By April 

2023, Taiv entered into contracts with the owners or managers of at least 67 sports bars and 

Case 2:23-cv-00507-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/02/23 Page 2 of 12 PageID #: 2
3 

restaurants in Texas. By way of example, those contracts provide that Taiv would install and 

maintain its hardware/software at their sports bar or restaurant in Texas and then pay them at their 

location in Texas. Again, these contracts called for Taiv’s performance at the location of the sports 

bar or restaurant in Texas; performance could not as a practical matter take place at any other 

location. Taiv maintained ownership of all the hardware, software, and “all intellectual property 

right” included in its Custom Content Replacement System installed at its customer’s locations in 

Texas. Taiv also agreed to provide free customer support including “on-site service” for any issues 

related to its hardware or software that it installed at its customers’ locations in Texas.

7. On information and belief, Taiv is now operating out of more than 130 sports bars 

and restaurants located in Texas. Taiv’s contracts with its customers in Texas provide that the 

contracts will “stay in effect until terminated.” Such contracts are sometimes known as 

“evergreen” contracts; they are perpetual unless affirmatively terminated. By such contracts, Taiv 

seeks to and does establish long-term business relationships with its sports bar and restaurant 

customers located in Texas. According to Taiv’s web site, 99.7% of Taiv’s customers have 

remained its customers. At each of the 130 or more locations in Texas where Taiv owns and 

operates its Custom Content Replacement System, it directly infringes the ’658 Patent, and induces 

and contributes to the infringement of that patent by its customers. Thus, Taiv is systematically 

and continuously committing torts in the State of Texas, including in this District. 

8. In addition, Taiv’s current web site is highly interactive. It exists on the worldwide-web and is available in the State of Texas at the web address of https://www.taiv.tv. On its 

web site it now offers a case study of the success of its relationship with its customer known as 

“Texas Lone-Star Taco” located in Houston, Texas. On its web site, Taiv also markets its services 

and provides that potential customers may contact it directly to make inquiries. The web site 

Case 2:23-cv-00507-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/02/23 Page 3 of 12 PageID #: 3
4 

states: “GET STARTED Interested? Let’s chat We’ll reach out within 1 business day Full Name 

Email Address Phone Number Business Name Business Address.” Its web site provides a sample 

address filling in these blanks of “1234 Main Street, New York NY 12345.” Based on its web site, 

once a potential customer in Texas contacts Taiv’s headquarters in Canada, one or more of Taiv’s 

salespeople and/or executives then arranges to contact that potential customer in Texas. If such 

contact results in an agreement: (1) the new customer located in Texas signs its contract with Taiv 

in Texas; (2) Taiv agrees to and does perform all the installation of its hardware/software 

equipment at the customer’s location in Texas; (3) Taiv arranges to perform all on-site service at 

the customer’s location in Texas; and (4) Taiv pays that customer at its location in Texas. 

9. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and (c)(3) 

as acts of infringement occurred in this District and Taiv is not a resident of the United States and 

therefore venue is proper in any judicial district of the United States. Section 1400(b) of Title 28 

does not govern venue determination as to foreign defendants in a patent infringement action. 

Brunette v. Mach. Works, Ltd. v. Kockum Indus., Inc. 406 U.S. 706 (1972) 

Factual Background 

10. MyChoice is a privately held media technology company. 

11. Through many years of research and trial and error, Mr. Theriault developed 

groundbreaking technology in the form of a system and method for replacing undesirable content 

in a media stream that provides viewers with an individualized viewing experience 

(“Individualized Content Replacement”). 

12. The details of this Individualized Content Replacement system and method include 

the following: (1) this system allows a television user who subscribes to the system to avoid 

viewing commercials by use of an on-site hardware and software component ultimately connected 

to a control unit that retrieves real-time viewable content and applies logic to switch from a 

Case 2:23-cv-00507-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/02/23 Page 4 of 12 PageID #: 4
5 

commercial to other preferred viewable content; and (2) the commercial-skipping function is 

available for both commercial and private home use by businesses that feature television viewing 

on site, typically consisting of sports entertainment. 

13. Mr. Theriault filed a patent application to protect his valuable Individualized 

Content Replacement technology with a patent. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office awarded 

Mr. Theriault a patent covering various aspects of his Individualized Content Replacement 

technology, specifically, the ’658 Patent. 

14. MyChoice has communicated with Taiv regarding its infringing Custom Content 

Replacement System. Taiv has actual knowledge of MyChoice’s ’658 Patent and its applicability 

to Taiv’s products and methods. 

15. For example, on or about August 4, 2022, Mr. Theriault sent a Linked-In 

communication to Mr. Noah Palansky, Taiv’s CEO, detailing MyChoice’s technology, attaching 

a copy of MyChoice’s ’658 Patent, stating directly that Taiv was infringing MyChoice’s patent, 

and attaching a detailed claims analysis showing the infringement. 

16. Also, on February 28, 2023, counsel for MyChoice sent a letter to Taiv directed to 

its Chief Executive Officer, namely, Mr. Noah Palansky, again describing MyChoice’s 

technology, giving the number of MyChoice’s ’658 Patent , and calling for a collaboration between 

MyChoice and Taiv. 

17. Upon information and belief, Taiv’s infringement of the ’658 Patent is intentional 

and willful. 

18. The following is a claim chart illustrating how Taiv’s systems and methods infringe 

at least Claim 1 of the ’658 Patent. 

Case 2:23-cv-00507-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/02/23 Page 5 of 12 PageID #: 5
6 

’658 Patent, Claim 1 Taiv 

A method of replacing undesirable 

content in a first media stream being 

received by an output device which 

transmits media to a display viewable 

by a user, the first media stream 

containing primary content having a 

primary content attribute, the method 

comprising the steps of: 

https://www.taiv.tv/venues 

“How it Works”: 

“Our cable box [OUTPUT DEVICE] addon connects to your existing system to 

make the content [FIRST MEDIA 

STREAM] more relevant and interesting 

[ATTRIBUTES]to your customers” 

detecting in real-time, by a 

monitoring station, the undesirable 

content in the first media stream, 

wherein the undesirable content 

corresponds to a user preference 

indicating undesirability, the user 

preference indicating undesirability 

associated with the user and stored in 

a system database; 

https://techcrunch.com/2020/03/16/nomute-necessary-taiv-replaces-live-tv-adsat-bars-with-custom-content/ 

“Taiv installs hardware [MONITORING 

STATION] at the restaurant that sits 

between the live feed and the TV, 

analyzing the image so that it can instantly 

understand [IN REAL TIME] that a 

commercial has come on 

[UNDESIRABLE CONTENT], and 

switch over to custom content before 

anyone even notices.” 

selecting substitute content, by the 

monitoring station, wherein the 

substitute content has a plurality of 

substitute content attributes, at least 

one of the plurality of substitute 

content attributes associated with the 

primary content attribute and the 

primary content attribute associated 

with a first user preference indicating 

desirability, and at least one of the 

plurality of substitute content 

attributes directly associated with a 

second user preference indicating 

desirability; 

https://www.taiv.tv/venues 

“How it Works”: 

“You can use any extra ad slots to 

advertise your own upsells, specials, and 

events. [SUBSTITUTE CONTENT] 

Optionally play music during commercial 

breaks to improve your atmosphere” 

[USER PREFERENCE INDICATING 

DESIRABILITY] 

responsive to detecting in real-time 

the undesirable content in the first 

media stream, transmitting, from the 

monitoring station, a first trigger 

signal, and directing the output 

device to a second media stream 

containing the substitute content; 

https://www.taiv.tv/venues 

“How it Works”: 

“...analyzing the image [FIRST MEDIA 

STREAM] so that it can instantly 

understand [DETECTING IN REAL 

TIME] that a commercial has come on 

[UNDESIRABLE CONTENT], and 

Case 2:23-cv-00507-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/02/23 Page 6 of 12 PageID #: 6
7 

switch over to custom content [SECOND 

MEDIA STREAM] before anyone even 

notices. Taiv is totally seamless so your 

customers won't notice anything different” 

further responsive to detecting in 

real-time the undesirable content in 

the first media stream, configuring, in 

the system database, an undesirable 

content attribute and associating the 

undesirable content attribute with the 

first media stream; 

https://www.ycombinator.com/ 

companies/taiv/jobs/iV709M2 

-full-stack-software-engineer-attaiv#:~:text=Cool%2C%20But%20 

How%20Does%20It,are%20perfect 

%20for%20that%20environment 

“we build our own hardware and use a 

heuristics-based computer vision approach 

for classification. We’re the first (and 

only) company in the world that can 

detect TV commercials accurately.”

wherein the output device 

switches from the first media 

stream to the second media 

stream in response to the first 

trigger signal; 

https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/

taiv/jobs/iV709M2-full-stack-softwareengineer-attaiv#:~:text=Cool%2C%20But%20How%

20Does%20It,are%20perfect%20for%20t

hat%20environment 

“When it cuts to commercial break, we 

dynamically insert ads that are perfect for 

that environment.”

after transmitting the first 

trigger signal, monitoring, by 

the monitoring station, the first 

media stream for an end to the 

undesirable content; 

Confirmed that TAIV system in use 

switches to alternate content at the 

beginning of a commercial break and 

alternate content runs through the 

end of commercial break and returns 

to regular programming [FIRST 

MEDIA STREAM] when commercial 

break is over, not before [AN END 

TO THE UNDESIRABLE 

CONTENT] 

See also Demo video: 

https://youtu.be/JjI_jZRoesY

responsive to detecting the end 

to the undesirable content in the 

first media stream, 

transmitting, from the 

monitoring station, a second 

Confirmed that TAIV system in use 

runs alternate content through the 

end of commercial break 

[UNDESIRABLE CONTENT] and 

returns to regular programming 

when commercial break is over, not 

Case 2:23-cv-00507-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/02/23 Page 7 of 12 PageID #: 7
8 

trigger signal to the output 

device; 

before [DETECTING THE END TO 

THE UNDESIRABLE CONTENT] 

further responsive to detecting 

the end to the undesirable 

content in the first media 

stream, changing, in the system 

database, the undesirable 

content attribute associated 

with the first media stream; 

and, 

https://www.ycombinator.com/compa

nies/taiv/jobs/iV709M2-full-stacksoftware-engineer-attaiv#:~:text=Cool%2C%20But%20Ho

w%20Does%20It,are%20perfect%20f

or%20that%20environment 

“we build our own hardware and use 

a heuristics-based computer vision 

approach for classification. We’re the 

first (and only) company in the world 

that can detect TV commercials 

accurately.”

wherein the output device 

switches from the second media 

stream to the first media stream 

in response to the second trigger 

signal. 

Confirmed that TAIV system in use 

switches from alternate content 

[SECOND MEDIA STREAM] back 

to regular programming [FIRST 

MEDIA STREAM] when commercial 

break is over. 

The claim chart above is provided solely for the purpose of satisfying the notice requirements of 

Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure. No part of the claim chart construes, or is 

intended to construe, the claims, specification, or prosecution history of the ’658 Patent. The claim 

chart does not represent MyChoice’s preliminary or final infringement contentions, and MyChoice 

reserves the right to modify its infringement positions as discovery progresses in this case. The 

claim chart does not limit, and is not intended to limit, MyChoice’s positions or contentions on 

claim construction, infringement, or validity. 

19. MyChoice complied with the notice provision of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 287 

by providing actual notice to Taiv of the ’658 Patent and its infringement thereof. 

Case 2:23-cv-00507-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/02/23 Page 8 of 12 PageID #: 8
9 

COUNT I: 

Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,708,658 

20. MyChoice incorporates by reference the allegations in all preceding paragraphs. 

21. Taiv has used, offered for sale, sold, and imported in the United States systems and 

methods that infringe every limitation of one or more claims of the ’658 Patent. 

22. As set forth above, Taiv’s systems and methods satisfy every limitation of at least 

Claim 1 of the ’658 Patent. 

23. Taiv has had actual knowledge of the ’658 Patent since at least as early as its issue 

date through the filing of this Complaint. Upon information and belief, Taiv was provided written 

notice of the ’658 Patent and its infringement thereof. On information and belief, Taiv had actual 

knowledge of that patent or was at least willfully blind as to its existence and had actual knowledge 

or was at least willfully blind that its actions would cause its employees, agents, partners, 

customers, users, and/or suppliers to infringe that patent. Taiv was also made aware of the ’658 

Patent and its infringement through the filing and service of this Complaint. 

24. On information and belief, since August 2022, and by no later than the filing and 

service of this Complaint, Taiv has induced infringement and continues to induce infringement of 

the ’658 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). 

25. On information and belief, Taiv makes, provides, uses, tests, distributes, sells, 

offers to sell, advertises, and/or imports its Custom Content Replacement System as part of Taiv’s 

knowing and intentional inducement of Taiv’s employees, agents, partners, customers, users, 

and/or suppliers to directly infringe one or more of the asserted claims of the ’658 Patent by 

directing, encouraging, instructing, supporting, and aiding those persons to make, use, sell, or offer 

to sell that system in a manner that infringes. On information and belief, Taiv acted with intent to 

cause direct infringement. Specifically, Taiv had actual knowledge of the ’658 Patent or was at 

Case 2:23-cv-00507-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/02/23 Page 9 of 12 PageID #: 9
10 

least willfully blind as to its existence and had actual knowledge or was at least willfully blind that 

its actions would cause its employees, agents, partners, customers, users, and/or suppliers to 

directly infringe. 

26. On information and belief, Taiv has taken active steps to induce infringement of 

the ’658 Patent, such as, the providing of instruction materials, engineering support, customer 

support, customer training, and other services for Taiv’s employees, agents, partners, customers, 

users, and/or suppliers regarding the features, functions, operation, and use of its Custom Content 

Replacement System. 

27. On information and belief, since August 2022, and by no later than the filing and 

service of this Complaint, Taiv has contributed to and continues to contribute to infringement of 

the ’658 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c). 

28. On information and belief, Taiv makes, provides, uses, tests, distributes, sells, 

offers to sell, advertises, and/or imports components of a location tracking system that constitute 

a material part of the invention claimed in the ’658 Patent, knowing the same to be especially made 

or especially adapted for use in an infringement of the patent, and not a staple article or commodity 

of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. 

29. MyChoice has been and continues to be damaged by Taiv’s infringement of the 

’658 Patent. 

30. On information and belief, since August 2022, and by no later than the filing and 

service of this Complaint, Taiv has willfully infringed the ’658 Patent. 

31. On information and belief, the conduct by Taiv in infringing the ’658 Patent renders 

this case exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285. 

Case 2:23-cv-00507-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/02/23 Page 10 of 12 PageID #:

10
11 

32. On information and belief, Taiv has had at least the following policies or practices 

that make its infringement of the ’658 Patent willful and make this an exceptional case: (1) not 

substantively investigating or responding to written notices of patent infringement; (2) not 

conducting sufficient due diligence to determine whether the company, business, and its Custom 

Content Replacement System were infringing, especially when notified of such infringement; and 

(3) continuing with infringing acts of promoting, selling, using, offering for sale, and selling its 

Custom Content Replacement System after receiving notice thereof. 

33. My Choice has been damaged and irreparably harmed by Taiv’s infringement of 

the ’658 Patent, which will continue unless and until permanently enjoined. 

Prayer for Relief 

MyChoice respectfully requests that the Court award the following relief: 

A. Enter judgment in favor of MyChoice and against Taiv that Taiv has infringed U.S. 

Patent No. 10,708,658; 

B. Enter judgment in favor of MyChoice awarding it damages adequate to compensate 

for the infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention 

of MyChoice, together with interest and costs as fixed by the court, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284; 

C. Enter judgment in favor of MyChoice, awarding it three times the amount of its 

actual damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284; 

D. Enter judgment in favor of MyChoice directing Taiv to pay MyChoice its 

reasonable attorney fees in connection with this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285; 

E. Enter judgment permanently enjoining Taiv from making, using, selling, offering 

to sell, or importing any products or services that infringe the patent-in-suit; and 

F. Award such other and further relief to MyChoice as the Court deems just and 

equitable. 

Case 2:23-cv-00507-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/02/23 Page 11 of 12 PageID #:

11
12 

Demand for Jury Trial 

Plaintiff MyChoice hereby demands a jury trial on all issues so triable. 

Dated: November 2, 2023 Respectfully submitted, 

/s / Michael C. Gilleran

Michael C. Gilleran (Mass. BBO No. 192210) 

Pro hac vice to be submitted 

michael.gilleran@fisherbroyles.com 

FISHERBROYLES, LLP 

75 State Street, Suite 100, PMB 4418 

Boston, Massachusetts 02109 

Direct: 781.489.5680

 Mobile: 339.237.1384 

LEAD ATTORNEY 

/s/Chris P. Perque/s/ 

Chris P. Perque 

Texas State Bar No. 24005828 

FisherBroyles, LLP 

2925 Richmond Ave., Suite 1200 

Houston, TX 77098 

Phone: 832.604.4417 

Facsimile: 832.377.5929 

Email: chris.perque@fisherbroyles.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

MyChoice LLC 

Case 2:23-cv-00507-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/02/23 Page 12 of 12 PageID #:

12