2:17-cv-06998
Ingrid Isabel LLC v. La Reve
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Ingrid & Isabel, LLC (California)
- Defendant: La Reve, a business organization, form unknown; David Ghods (a/k/a David Goldberg), an individual; David Goldberg, an individual; and Stanzino, Inc. (collectively, "Defendants") (California)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Carr & Ferrell LLP
- Case Identification: 2:17-cv-06998, C.D. Cal., 09/21/2017
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper because Defendant Stanzino, Inc. is a California corporation with its principal place of business and a regular and established place of business within the district, and the individual defendants are believed to reside in the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ "Maternity Belly Band for Pregnancy" product infringes four patents related to a stretchable, tube-like garment designed to accommodate a woman's changing body shape during and after pregnancy.
- Technical Context: The technology operates within the maternity apparel market, offering a clothing accessory intended to extend the utility of a woman's existing wardrobe and improve the fit of maternity wear.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff provided Defendants with written notice of the patents-in-suit on April 7, 2017, approximately five months before filing the lawsuit; this event forms the basis for the willfulness allegations.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2003-04-25 | Earliest Priority Date for '775, '852, '177, and '216 Patents |
| 2003-11-01 | Plaintiff began marketing its Bella Band product |
| 2007-02-27 | U.S. Patent No. 7,181,775 Issued |
| 2010-03-16 | U.S. Patent No. 7,676,852 Issued |
| 2012-06-05 | U.S. Patent No. 8,191,177 Issued |
| 2012-10-02 | U.S. Patent No. 8,276,216 Issued |
| 2017-04-07 | Plaintiff provided written notice of patents to Defendants |
| 2017-09-21 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 7,181,775 - "Maternity Garment"
- Issued: February 27, 2007
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent describes the difficulty women face during pregnancy and postpartum in finding clothes that fit properly, noting that both normal clothes and specialized maternity wear can be ill-fitting, bulky, or awkward at various stages. (’775 Patent, col. 1:11-28).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a method of using a stretchable, "generally cylindrical" band, similar to a tube top, that is worn around the torso. The band is stretched over the unfastened top of pre-pregnancy pants or skirts that have become too tight, holding them in place and concealing the open zipper or button to provide a "neat, fitted appearance without lumpiness." (’775 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:29-41). The patent explains this "transforms bulky and cumbersome fabric to appear as well-fitted apparel." (’775 Patent, col. 3:15-17).
- Technical Importance: This method provided a single, versatile accessory to extend the wearability of a woman's existing wardrobe and bridge the transitional stages of pregnancy, potentially minimizing the expense and hassle of acquiring multiple sizes of specialized clothing. (’775 Patent, col. 1:11-28, col. 2:46-51).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent method claim 1 (Compl. ¶23).
- Essential Elements of Claim 1:
- Providing a band of flexible, stretchable, generally cylindrical material sized to be worn around a pregnant woman's torso at the waist.
- The woman wearing the band stretched over pants/skirt that are too tight, have been left unfastened, and placing the band over the upper portion to cover the unfastened end.
- The band thereby holds the unfastened pants/skirt closely against the torso, retaining them in place and creating a neat, fitted appearance.
U.S. Patent No. 7,676,852 - "Maternity Garment"
- Issued: March 16, 2010
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent identifies the same general problem as the ’775 Patent, but also highlights the specific scenario where a woman is in the "transition stage" (e.g., 18-26 weeks) and "cannot fill most maternity garments," leading to a "bulky, awkward or unattractive appearance." (’852 Patent, col. 1:40-53).
- The Patented Solution: The patent claims a method of using a similar flexible band, but for the opposite problem: managing clothes that are too loose. The method involves wearing the band garment over oversized maternity pants or a skirt to "flatten such upper edge against the body of the woman," thereby holding the loose garment in place and eliminating bulkiness. (’852 Patent, Claim 4; col. 2:42-45).
- Technical Importance: This method offered a solution for the specific "in-between" stage of pregnancy, allowing a woman to wear standard-sized maternity clothes earlier and more comfortably by using the band to gather and smooth excess fabric. (’852 Patent, col. 1:40-53).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent method claim 4 (Compl. ¶32).
- Essential Elements of Claim 4:
- Providing a band garment of flexible, stretchable, generally cylindrical fabric sized to be worn with tension around a pregnant woman's torso at the waist.
- The band garment being stretched and worn over a skirt or pants that are "loose and non-engaging of the belly" to hold them in place by flattening the upper edge against the body.
- The band being worn during a period when the woman "is too small to fill maternity clothing."
- The band being positioned such that "most of the height of the band resides over the pants or skirt," with an upper portion extending above the pants/skirt to engage the body.
U.S. Patent No. 8,191,177 - "Maternity Garment"
- Issued: June 5, 2012 (Compl. ¶11)
Technology Synopsis
This patent claims a method for accommodating body changes during pregnancy and postpartum. The method involves using a "cylindrical, band-shaped maternity garment" made from a smooth knit fabric, which is worn over unfastened pre-pregnancy clothes to hold them in place and create a fitted appearance, allowing continued use of clothes that would otherwise be too tight (Compl. ¶40, ¶41).
Asserted Claims
Independent method claim 1 (Compl. ¶41).
Accused Features
The "Maternity Belly Band for Pregnancy" product is accused of being the "cylindrical, band-shaped maternity garment" provided for the purpose of practicing the claimed method (Compl. ¶42).
U.S. Patent No. 8,276,216 - "Maternity Garment"
- Issued: October 2, 2012 (Compl. ¶12)
Technology Synopsis
Unlike the other asserted patents, this patent claims a garment itself, defined by specific physical parameters. The claimed garment is a cylindrical band with a center front height of 9 to 16 inches, a fabric density of 190-330 gm/m², and a composition of 75-95% nylon with a corresponding percentage of spandex (Compl. ¶51). The patent also describes an optional silicone strip to hold the band in place (Compl. ¶49).
Asserted Claims
Independent apparatus claim 1 (Compl. ¶51).
Accused Features
The "Maternity Belly Band for Pregnancy" is alleged to be a garment that literally meets the claimed physical characteristics, including being a cylindrical band with a specific height, a fabric density within the claimed range, and a fabric blend of "90% nylon and an inversely corresponding percentage of spandex" (Compl. ¶52).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
"Maternity Belly Band for Pregnancy" (Compl. ¶9).
Functionality and Market Context
The complaint describes the accused product as a "clothing accessory that allows women to minimize the amount of different-sized clothes needed during the course of pregnancy and post-pregnancy" (Compl. ¶15). Functionally, it is a "flexible band that is worn around the torso and holds pants in place while unbuttoned" (Compl. ¶15). Plaintiff alleges the product is also marketed to "help transition into regular clothes after the baby arrives" (Compl. ¶42). The product is allegedly offered for sale and sold through Defendants' websites (Compl. ¶18). An example of Defendants' marketing for the accused product, referenced as Exhibit "E" in the complaint, is cited as evidence for how the product is used (Compl. ¶24).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
U.S. Patent No. 7,181,775 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A method for accommodating changes... comprising: providing a band of flexible, stretchable material, generally cylindrical in shape and in a size so as to be expanded and stretched to be worn around a pregnant woman's torso approximately at the waist, and | Defendants provide "a maternity band of flexible, stretchable material, generally cylindrical in shape" for wear around the torso. | ¶24 | col. 3:8-14 |
| the pregnant woman's wearing the band stretched over pants or a skirt which has become too tight... by wearing the pants or skirt unfastened at an upper end, and stretching and placing the band over an upper portion and upper edge of the pants or skirt such that the band covers the unfastened upper end, | The accused product is provided "to hold a woman's pants that are too tight in place while wearing them unfastened." | ¶24 | col. 2:30-34 |
| whereby the band holds the upper end of the pants or skirt closely against the torso, retaining the pants or skirt in place and providing a neat, fitted appearance without lumpiness. | The accused product is alleged to "smooths the look of the open button or zipper," which implies it holds the pants in place and provides a neat appearance. | ¶24 | col. 2:35-37 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: The asserted claim is a method claim performed by the end-user. The case against Defendants will depend on proving inducement. A key question is whether Defendants' marketing and instructions, as referenced in Exhibit E, specifically direct or encourage users to perform all steps of the claimed method.
- Technical Questions: Does the accused product, when used as instructed, actually result in "a neat, fitted appearance without lumpiness"? Defendants may argue their product achieves a different result or that this claimed outcome is subjective and not met.
U.S. Patent No. 7,676,852 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 4) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A method for a pregnant woman to adapt... comprising: providing a band garment of flexible, stretchable fabric, generally cylindrical in shape and in a size so as to be expanded and stretched to be firmly but comfortably worn with tension around the body of a pregnant woman approximately at the waist, | Defendants provide a "maternity band... composed of flexible stretchable fabric that can be expanded and stretched to be firmly, but comfortably worn with tension." | ¶33 | col. 3:8-14 |
| the band garment stretched and worn over a skirt or pants that are loose and non-engaging of the belly... to hold the skirt or pants in place... by stretching and placing the band over and upper portion and upper edge of the pants or skirt so as to flatten such upper edge against the body... | The accused product is alleged to be "worn over loose fitting maternity clothes to keep them in place." | ¶33 | col. 2:42-45 |
| the band worn during a period of pregnancy when the woman cannot wear normal pre-pregnancy clothing but is too small to fill maternity clothing, | The complaint alleges the band can be used "through the pregnancy," including over "loose fitting maternity clothes," which maps to the transitional period described in the claim. | ¶33 | col. 1:40-44 |
| where in most of the height of the band resides over the pants or skirt, while an upper portion of the height of the band extends above the upper edge of the pants or skirt and engages against the body or under clothing. | The complaint alleges the band is worn "over" loose clothing, but does not provide specific factual allegations detailing this precise positioning. | ¶33 | col. 2:64-67 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: A central question will be whether Defendants' marketing instructs users to perform the specific method of wearing the band over too-loose maternity clothes, as distinct from the too-tight pre-pregnancy clothes of the ’775 Patent.
- Technical Questions: What evidence does the complaint provide that the accused product, as instructed to be used, meets the positional limitation that "most of the height of the band resides over the pants or skirt"? This specific geometric arrangement may become a point of dispute.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "band" / "band garment"
Context and Importance
This term defines the central physical article of the invention. Its scope is critical because if the accused product is not a "band" or "band garment," there can be no infringement. Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction will determine whether products with different shapes, seams, or fasteners fall within the claims.
Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation
The claims describe the shape as "generally cylindrical," which suggests some deviation from a perfect cylinder is contemplated ('775 Patent, col. 5:24-25). The specification explicitly states the garment "may be seamless (or it can be seamed)" ('775 Patent, col. 4:25-26), supporting a construction that is not limited to seamless tubes.
Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation
The figures consistently depict a simple, unadorned, seamless-appearing tube of fabric ('775 Patent, Fig. 1). Defendants may argue that the term should be limited to this illustrated embodiment and exclude products with prominent seams, panels, or non-tubular construction.
The Term: "approximately at the waist"
Context and Importance
This phrase defines the location where the band is worn. Its construction is important for determining whether the accused method of use infringes, as the product could potentially be worn at various positions on the torso (e.g., hips, under the bust).
Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation
The word "approximately" inherently provides some flexibility. Plaintiff will likely argue it means in the general vicinity of the waist, sufficient to perform the function of holding up pants or gathering loose fabric, as described in the patent.
Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation
The patent figures show the band placed directly over the waistband of the pants, in the conventional location of the waist ('775 Patent, Fig. 4). A defendant could argue that "at the waist" should be construed more narrowly to this specific location, and that wearing the product significantly higher or lower on the torso would not be an infringing use.
VI. Other Allegations
Indirect Infringement
The complaint alleges that Defendants actively induce infringement and are liable for contributory infringement of the method claims in the '775, '852, and '177 patents (Compl. ¶26, ¶35, ¶44). The factual basis for inducement appears to be Defendants' marketing and sale of the accused product, including materials (referenced as Exhibit E) that allegedly instruct or encourage end-users to perform the patented methods (Compl. ¶24, ¶33, ¶42).
Willful Infringement
The complaint alleges that Defendants' infringement has been and continues to be "deliberate and willful" (Compl. ¶28, ¶37, ¶46, ¶56). The allegation is based on continued infringement after receiving actual notice of the patents-in-suit via written notice on April 7, 2017 (Compl. ¶16).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A central issue for three of the four patents will be one of induced infringement: does the evidence, including Defendants' marketing materials, show that Defendants specifically instructed or encouraged customers to use the accused band in two distinct, patented ways: first, to hold up too-tight unfastened pants (the '775 and '177 patent methods), and second, to manage too-loose maternity clothes (the '852 patent method)?
- For the '216 patent, the case will likely turn on a factual battle of the experts: does the accused "Maternity Belly Band for Pregnancy," as sold, possess the specific physical properties recited in claim 1, including the precise fabric density (gm/m²) and nylon/spandex composition percentages?
- A key legal question will be one of definitional scope: how will the court construe the term "band garment"? The outcome will determine whether the claims cover only the simple, tube-like structure shown in the patent figures or can extend to products with different constructions, potentially impacting the entire infringement analysis.