DCT
2:19-cv-03556
Funrise Inc v. Target Corp
Key Events
Complaint
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Funrise, Inc. (California); Honor Metro Limited (Marshall Islands)
- Defendant: Target Corporation (Minnesota)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: WEINTRAUB TOBIN CHEDIAK COLEMAN GRODIN LAW CORPORATION
- Case Identification: 2:19-cv-03556, C.D. Cal., 04/29/2019
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper based on Defendant Target Corporation having multiple physical retail stores, a regular and established place of business, and committing alleged acts of infringement within the Central District of California.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiffs allege that Defendant’s "Amazing Bubbles Light up Volcano Bubble Machine" toy infringes a patent related to an apparatus and method for continuously generating bubbles.
- Technical Context: The technology resides in the field of automated toy bubble machines, which aim to produce a high volume of bubbles with minimal user interaction.
- Key Procedural History: The asserted patent is a continuation of U.S. Application No. 14/245,767, which issued as U.S. Patent No. 9,339,737. The complaint does not mention any other prior litigation or administrative proceedings involving the patent-in-suit.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2014-03-20 | ’661 Patent Priority Date |
| 2017-09-12 | ’661 Patent Issue Date |
| 2019-04-29 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 9,757,661 - "Apparatus and Method for Generating Bubbles"
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent's background section identifies deficiencies in prior art automated bubble machines, noting they can be "messy, difficult and expensive to manufacture, and difficult to use" and that they often require a waiting period before bubbles are created, which may cause users to "become bored" (’661 Patent, col. 1:43-51).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a self-contained bubble machine that uses a motor to rotate a "bubble generating assembly." This assembly contains multiple "follower members" (arms with bubble-forming wands), which ride along a stationary, annular "cam surface." The cam surface features raised portions and lower "valley" portions. As the assembly rotates, the follower members are guided by the cam surface to dip into a trough of bubble solution when in a valley, and then are lifted into a raised position where an upward air stream from a fan blows through the wands to create bubbles (’661 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:1-24). This mechanical cycle of dipping and lifting is designed to be continuous.
- Technical Importance: This cam-and-follower mechanism provides a method for continuously loading bubble wands and moving them into an airstream without complex pumping systems, addressing the "messy" and "difficult to use" problems identified in the background (’661 Patent, col. 1:43-51).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent Claim 1 (’661 Patent, col. 20:50-22:2).
- The essential elements of independent Claim 1 include:
- A housing, a motor, and a fan device to generate an upward air stream.
- A rotatable bubble generating assembly, which itself comprises a body with a cavity and slots, a ring structure in the cavity, and multiple "follower members."
- Each follower member has an arm pivotably coupled to the ring structure and a bubble generating device (e.g., a wand) at its other end.
- A basin member, which comprises a trough for bubble solution, a feed reservoir that supplies the trough, and a "cam wall" with a raised portion and a recessed "valley portion."
- A functional limitation wherein, upon rotation, the follower members ride along the cam wall, causing them to repetitively transition between a "lowered position" (to get loaded with solution in the trough) and a "raised position" (to be aligned with the fan's air stream).
- A functional limitation wherein this transition occurs by the follower member rotating about a second axis.
- The complaint alleges infringement of "one or more claims," implying the right to assert additional claims may be preserved (Compl. ¶28).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
The "Amazing Bubbles Light up Volcano Bubble Machine" (referred to as the "Accused Product" or "Volcano") (Compl. ¶16).
Functionality and Market Context
The complaint alleges the Accused Product is an apparatus for generating bubbles, marketed as making "big bubbles and small bubbles" at a rate of "up to 100,000 bubbles in 10 minutes" (Compl. ¶31, p. 9). The complaint includes a photograph of the product's packaging, which highlights these features (Compl. ¶31, p. 9). The product is allegedly sold by Defendant Target in its retail stores and online (Compl. ¶18). The complaint further alleges that the Accused Product competes directly with Plaintiffs' products at a significantly lower price (Compl. ¶21).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
The complaint provides a detailed, image-based claim chart alleging that the Accused Product literally infringes each element of Claim 1 (Compl. ¶31).
'661 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a housing extending from a bottom end to a top end | The Accused Product has a volcano-shaped housing with a top and bottom end. | ¶31, p. 10 | col. 5:18-21 |
| a motor positioned in the housing | Photographs show a motor located inside the housing. | ¶31, p. 11 | col. 6:65-67 |
| a fan device positioned in the housing, the fan device operably coupled to the motor to generate an upward air stream | Photographs depict a fan assembly positioned in the housing and coupled to the motor. | ¶31, p. 12 | col. 7:15-24 |
| a bubble generating assembly positioned in the housing, the motor operably coupled to the bubble generating assembly to rotate the bubble generating assembly about a first axis... | Photographs illustrate a "bubble generating assembly" that is shown coupled to the motor. The complaint asserts this assembly rotates. | ¶31, p. 13 | col. 7:39-44 |
| a body comprising: an upper shell; a lower shell, the upper shell coupled to the lower shell to form a cavity... a plurality of slots in the body... and a ring structure positioned in the cavity | Photographs show the bubble generating assembly's body is comprised of upper and lower shells that form a cavity, with slots for passageways and an internal ring structure. | ¶31, pp. 14-18 | col. 13:36-54 |
| a plurality of follower members extending through the passageways... each of the follower members comprising: an arm... pivotably coupled to the ring structure... and a bubble generating device... | The Accused Product is alleged to have multiple "follower members," each with an arm and a bubble wand, extending through the body's slots. A photograph shows the arm pivotably coupled to the ring structure. | ¶31, pp. 19-21 | col. 12:50-53 |
| a basin member comprising: a trough for containing bubble solution... a feed reservoir... and a cam wall having a raised portion and a recess that forms a valley portion | Photographs identify a basin member with a trough, a feed reservoir, and a cam wall. The complaint specifically points out the alleged "raised portion" and "recess that forms a valley" on the cam wall. | ¶31, pp. 21-24 | col. 8:9-14 |
| wherein upon... rotation... each of the follower members ride along the cam wall and repetitively transition between: (1) a lowered position... loaded with bubble solution... and (2) a raised position... aligned with the air stream... | A photograph illustrates the "follower member" in a lowered position within the trough, which the complaint alleges is for loading bubble solution. Another image shows the follower member on a raised portion, allegedly to align with the air stream. | ¶31, p. 25 | col. 14:10-30 |
| wherein each of the follower members transition between the raised position and the lowered position by rotating about the second axis. | The complaint alleges, with a supporting photograph, that the follower members transition between positions by rotating about a second axis. | ¶31, p. 26 | col. 14:26-30 |
Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: The patent claims are highly detailed and mechanical. A central question will be whether the specific structures in the Accused Product meet the definitions of the claim terms. For example, does the accused "cam wall" possess the specific geometry of a "raised portion" and a "recess that forms a valley portion" as described and claimed in the patent (’661 Patent, col. 9:8-14)?
- Technical Questions: The infringement case relies heavily on static photographs. A key evidentiary question for the court will be whether Plaintiffs can prove the dynamic operation alleged in the complaint. For example, what evidence demonstrates that the "follower members" in the Accused Product actually "ride along the cam wall" to achieve the claimed repetitive transition between loading and blowing positions, or if they operate via a different, non-infringing mechanism?
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "cam wall having a raised portion and a recess that forms a valley portion"
Context and Importance: This term defines the core guiding mechanism of the invention. The interaction between the follower members and this specific cam wall structure is what allegedly causes the wands to dip into the solution and rise into the airstream. Infringement will depend on whether the accused product's internal guide structure meets this definition. Practitioners may focus on this term because its specific structural requirements are a likely point of dispute.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: Plaintiffs may argue that the term should be construed functionally to cover any wall or surface that guides the follower members through a cycle of lowered and raised positions, as this is the core purpose described (’661 Patent, col. 2:6-24).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification provides significant detail, describing the cam wall as an "annular structure" and identifying specific "first raised portion 140," "second raised portion 141," "first valley portion 142," and "second valley portion 143" (’661 Patent, col. 8:58-59, col. 9:8-14). A defendant would likely argue the term is limited to a structure possessing these distinct, separately identifiable features.
The Term: "pivotably coupled"
Context and Importance: This term describes the connection that allows the follower arms to move up and down. The nature of this coupling is essential for the transition between the lowered and raised positions. Whether the connection in the Accused Product is "pivotably coupled" in the manner claimed will be critical.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A plaintiff may argue for the plain and ordinary meaning: any connection that allows one part to pivot or rotate relative to another around a defined axis.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent discloses a specific embodiment where the follower arm has an "aperture" (222) that engages a "ring structure" (223), all of which is contained within a "slot" (226) in the body that constrains the movement (’661 Patent, col. 13:22-28, 13:50-58). A defendant may argue that "pivotably coupled" should be construed more narrowly to require a similar ring-and-slot mechanism or at least a connection that allows for rotation around a "second rotational axis B-B" as explicitly depicted (’661 Patent, Fig. 6, col. 13:58-62).
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint does not plead specific facts to support claims of induced or contributory infringement, focusing its allegations on direct infringement by the Accused Product itself (Compl. ¶¶ 28-29).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement based on Defendant's continuation of infringing acts "at least at all times after the filing of the Complaint" (Compl. ¶36). This asserts willfulness based on notice provided by the lawsuit itself, with no specific allegations of pre-suit knowledge.
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of structural and functional proof: The complaint presents a compelling visual case with static photographs, but the critical test will be whether discovery confirms the dynamic operation. Can Plaintiffs prove that the accused product's internal components function as a cam-and-follower system that "repetitively transition[s]" the bubble wands between lowered/loading and raised/blowing positions, precisely as required by Claim 1?
- A second central question will be one of definitional scope: Assuming a similar mechanism, the dispute may narrow to claim construction. Can the term "cam wall having a raised portion and a recess," which is described with significant geometric detail in the patent, be construed to read on the specific structure found inside the accused "Volcano" machine, or do differences in form and structure place the accused product outside the literal scope of the claims?