DCT

2:21-cv-02081

Canon Inc v. Easy Group LLC

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:21-cv-02081, C.D. Cal., 03/08/2021
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the Central District of California because Defendant is organized and resides in the district, has committed alleged infringing acts in the district, and maintains a regular and established place of business there.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s aftermarket toner supply containers, designed for use in Canon copy machines, infringe ten U.S. patents related to developer supply container and system technology.
  • Technical Context: The patents relate to the mechanical design of toner cartridges (developer supply containers), focusing on the interface between the consumable cartridge and the main printing apparatus to ensure proper mounting and prevent toner leakage.
  • Key Procedural History: Plaintiff notes that this district court action is related to a concurrent proceeding filed at the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), asserting the same patents against the same accused products. Such parallel litigation is a common strategy, with the ITC offering the potential for a faster exclusion order to block importation, while the district court can award monetary damages.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2011-06-06 Earliest Priority Date for all Asserted Patents
2019-02-19 U.S. Patent No. 10,209,667 Issues
2019-05-14 U.S. Patent No. 10,289,060 Issues
2019-05-14 U.S. Patent No. 10,289,061 Issues
2019-05-21 U.S. Patent No. 10,295,957 Issues
2019-11-26 U.S. Patent No. 10,488,814 Issues
2019-12-03 U.S. Patent No. 10,496,032 Issues
2019-12-03 U.S. Patent No. 10,496,033 Issues
2019-12-24 U.S. Patent No. 10,514,654 Issues
2019-12-31 U.S. Patent No. 10,520,881 Issues
2019-12-31 U.S. Patent No. 10,520,882 Issues
2021-03-08 Complaint Filed

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 10,209,667 - “Developer Supply Container and Developer Supplying System”

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section describes the problem of toner (“developer”) scattering or leaking when a supply container is mounted into or removed from an imaging apparatus like a copier (e.g., if an operator handles it incorrectly) (’667 Patent, col. 1:21-34). It also notes that conventional mechanisms for connecting the container to the apparatus's drive source can be complicated and costly (’667 Patent, col. 1:56-66).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a developer supply container with a specific mechanical interface to solve these problems. The container has a main body for holding toner and a "discharging body" that is rotatable relative to the main body and has a gear portion (’667 Patent, col. 119:35-41). The discharging body also features a "track" on each side that guides its connection to the receiving apparatus, ensuring a secure and properly sealed connection to prevent toner leakage during installation and operation (’667 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:1-4).
  • Technical Importance: This design aims to simplify the connection between the consumable toner cartridge and the main machine, potentially reducing manufacturing costs and improving reliability by preventing toner contamination (’667 Patent, col. 2:5-11).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶25).
  • The essential elements of independent claim 1 include:
    • A developer accommodating body configured to contain developer.
    • A developer discharging body in fluid communication with the accommodating body, being rotatable about a rotational axis and having a gear portion.
    • A track provided at each of opposite sides of the developer discharging body, with each track being positioned below a horizontal plane that includes the rotational axis.
    • Each track includes a first part extending from a first to a second position and a second part extending from the second position, where the second part is closer to the first position and has a surface facing upward.
    • A plane perpendicular to the rotational axis passes through the second part of the track.
  • The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims, including claims 3, 6-8, 11, 12, 14, 17-19, and 23 (Compl. ¶25).

U.S. Patent No. 10,289,060 - “Developer Supply Container and Developer Supplying System”

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The ’060 Patent addresses the same technical problems as the ’667 Patent: the risk of toner scattering during cartridge installation and the complexity of drive mechanisms connecting the cartridge to the main apparatus (’060 Patent, col. 1:12-66).
  • The Patented Solution: The solution is structurally similar to that of the ’667 Patent, involving a developer supply container with a rotatable body and a gear portion. The abstract and detailed description are substantially identical, focusing on a mechanical track system to ensure a proper and clean connection with the printer's receiving apparatus (’060 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:1-4). The specific geometry of the claimed track appears to be the primary point of distinction.
  • Technical Importance: Similar to the ’667 Patent, this invention aims to provide a cost-effective and reliable mechanical interface for a consumable toner cartridge, which is critical for user experience and machine longevity (’060 Patent, col. 2:5-11).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶33).
  • The essential elements of independent claim 1 include:
    • A developer accommodating body configured to contain developer.
    • A developer discharging body in fluid communication with the accommodating body, being rotatable about a rotational axis and having a gear portion.
    • A track provided at each of opposite sides of the developer discharging body, with each track being positioned below a horizontal plane that includes the rotational axis.
    • Each track includes a first part that extends from a first to a second position and a second part that extends from the second position.
    • The second part is closer to the first position and has a surface facing upward.
    • A plane perpendicular to the rotational axis passes through the second part of the track.
  • The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims, including claims 2, 6-8, 11, 12, and 16-18 (Compl. ¶33).

U.S. Patent No. 10,289,061 - “Developer Supply Container and Developer Supplying System”

Technology Synopsis

This patent, part of the same family, also discloses a developer supply container system. It focuses on the mechanical interaction between a track on the container's discharging body and the receiving apparatus to ensure proper alignment and prevent toner leakage.

Asserted Claims

Claims 1-3, 6-8, 11-14, 17-19, and 23 (Compl. ¶41).

Accused Features

The entire toner supply container, including its body, gear portion, and track/guide features (Compl. ¶41, ¶43).

U.S. Patent No. 10,295,957 - “Developer Supply Container and Developer Supplying System”

Technology Synopsis

This patent also relates to the mechanical interface of a toner cartridge. It claims a container with a rotatable discharging body and a track on each side having a specific geometric configuration relative to the container's rotational axis and discharge opening.

Asserted Claims

Claims 1, 2, 4, 7-9, 12-14, 16, 19-21, and 25 (Compl. ¶49).

Accused Features

The overall structure and mechanical interface of the accused toner supply containers (Compl. ¶49, ¶51).

U.S. Patent No. 10,488,814 - “Developer Supply Container and Developer Supplying System”

Technology Synopsis

This patent discloses a developer supply container with a rotatable discharging body and a track. The claims focus on the relationship between the track's position, the rotational axis, and a discharge passageway that is formed when the container is installed.

Asserted Claims

Claims 1, 4, 7-9, 12, 13, 16, 19-21, and 25 (Compl. ¶57).

Accused Features

The body, rotatable discharging portion, and guiding track of the accused toner supply containers (Compl. ¶57, ¶59).

U.S. Patent No. 10,496,032 - “Developer Supply Container and Developer Supplying System”

Technology Synopsis

This patent relates to a developer supply container with a rotatable discharging body. Its claims concern the specific geometry of a track that guides the container, including upper and lower sections and its orientation relative to a horizontal plane.

Asserted Claims

Claims 1, 4, 7-9, 12, 13, 16, 19-21, 25, 26, 29, 32-34, 37, 38, 41, 44-46, 49, 50, 53, 56-58, and 61 (Compl. ¶65).

Accused Features

The mechanical structure of the accused toner supply containers, particularly the body and its guiding track (Compl. ¶65, ¶67).

U.S. Patent No. 10,496,033 - “Developer Supply Container and Developer Supplying System”

Technology Synopsis

This patent claims a developer supply container with a non-rotatable accommodating body and a rotatable discharging body. The claims focus on the configuration of a track on the discharging body relative to the discharge opening.

Asserted Claims

Claims 1, 5, 8-10, 13, 14, 18, 21-23, and 26-28 (Compl. ¶73).

Accused Features

The accused toner supply containers, including their accommodating and discharging bodies and track system (Compl. ¶73, ¶75).

U.S. Patent No. 10,514,654 - “Developer Supply Container and Developer Supplying System”

Technology Synopsis

This patent discloses a developer supply container system with a shutter mechanism. The claims are directed to the track on the container and a shutter that is movably supported by the track, which opens and closes the discharge opening.

Asserted Claims

Claims 1, 3-5, 8, 10-12, 46, 48-50, 53, and 55-57 (Compl. ¶81).

Accused Features

The mechanical structure of the accused toner supply containers, including the body, track, and any shutter mechanism (Compl. ¶81, ¶83).

U.S. Patent No. 10,520,881 - “Developer Supply Container and Developer Supplying System”

Technology Synopsis

This patent claims a developer supply container where the discharging body is rotatable and has a track positioned below the rotational axis. The claims detail the shape of the track, including first and second parts that intersect at least two different directions.

Asserted Claims

Claims 1, 5, 8-10, 13, 14, 18, 21-23, and 25 (Compl. ¶89).

Accused Features

The overall mechanical design of the accused toner supply containers, particularly the guide track on the discharging body (Compl. ¶89, ¶91).

U.S. Patent No. 10,520,882 - “Developer Supply Container and Developer Supplying System”

Technology Synopsis

This patent also describes a developer supply container with a rotatable discharging body. The claims focus on the relationship between the track, the discharge opening, and a shutter that is movably supported by the track and integrally molded with a shutter support.

Asserted Claims

Claims 1, 6-8, 11, and 16-18 (Compl. ¶97).

Accused Features

The body, rotatable portion, track, and shutter mechanism of the accused toner supply containers (Compl. ¶97, ¶99).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The accused products are "toner supply containers" sold and/or imported by Defendant for use in various models of Canon imageRUNNER copy machines (Compl. ¶21). The complaint identifies non-limiting examples by their designations, including NCGPR55K, NCGPR55C, NCGPR55M, and NCGPR55Y, and uses model NCGPR55K as a representative example (Compl. ¶22, ¶23).

Functionality and Market Context

The accused products function as consumable cartridges that supply toner, also referred to as "developer," to Canon copiers (Compl. ¶21). These are aftermarket products designed to be compatible with original equipment manufacturer (OEM) machines, competing in the market for printer and copier consumables. The complaint provides a photograph of the accused NCGPR55K toner supply container, showing its cylindrical body and gear/coupling mechanism (Compl. p. 7).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint states that detailed claim charts for the ’667 and ’060 patents are attached as Exhibits 1 and 2, respectively (Compl. ¶27; Compl. ¶35). As these exhibits were not provided with the complaint, a detailed element-by-element analysis is not possible based on the filed document. The complaint alleges that each element of the asserted claims is literally present in the accused toner supply containers (Compl. ¶29; Compl. ¶37).

Identified Points of Contention

  • Structural Correspondence: The independent claims of the asserted patents recite highly specific mechanical structures with precise geometric and positional relationships (e.g., a "track" being positioned "below a horizontal plane that includes the rotational axis" and having parts with "a surface facing upward"). A central point of contention will be whether the physical structures of the accused cartridges correspond to these detailed claim limitations.
  • Functional Language: Some claims include functional language, such as a shutter being "movable...to form the discharge passageway." The dispute may involve whether the accused components actually perform the claimed function in the manner described.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

For the ’667 and ’060 Patents

  • The Term: "a track provided at each of opposite sides of the developer discharging body"
  • Context and Importance: This term is a core structural element of the independent claims of both lead patents. The infringement analysis for these patents will likely depend heavily on whether the guide structures on the accused cartridges meet the definition of a "track" as claimed. Practitioners may focus on this term because its detailed limitations regarding position ("below a horizontal plane"), components ("first part" and "second part"), and orientation ("surface facing upward") provide multiple potential grounds for a non-infringement argument.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification uses more general terms like "insertion guide 8e for guiding the developer supply container" which could suggest the term "track" should be interpreted more broadly to cover various guiding structures (’667 Patent, col. 11:22-24).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim language itself is highly specific, defining the track via multiple sub-parts and their geometric relationships. Furthermore, specific embodiments illustrated in figures such as FIG. 8(b) and FIG. 13(c), which show a very particular flange structure with engaging portions, could be used to argue that the term "track" should be construed narrowly to cover only structures similar to those explicitly disclosed (’667 Patent, FIG. 8(b), 13(c)).

VI. Other Allegations

Indirect Infringement

The complaint alleges inducement of infringement for all ten asserted patents. The factual basis alleged is that Defendant knowingly induces its customers to directly infringe by "promoting them for use in specific copy machines and/or providing customers with instructions for using them in those copy machines" (Compl. ¶26, ¶34, ¶42, ¶50, ¶58, ¶66, ¶74, ¶82, ¶90, ¶98).

Willful Infringement

The complaint does not contain an explicit count or allegation for "willful infringement." However, for each asserted patent, it alleges that Defendant "knowingly induces" infringement and states that "At the very latest, Defendant will be given notice of the...patent and its infringement thereof upon being served with or otherwise receiving this Complaint" (e.g., Compl. ¶26). This language may serve as a basis to argue for enhanced damages for any post-filing infringement.

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

  • A central issue will be one of structural correspondence: do the mechanical features of the accused aftermarket toner cartridges—specifically their guide rails, flanges, and shutter mechanisms—possess the precise geometric shapes, positions, and interrelationships required by the highly detailed limitations of the asserted claims?
  • A key procedural question will be the interplay with the parallel ITC action: how will the faster-paced ITC investigation, with its potential for an import ban, influence the strategy, discovery, and potential settlement timing of this district court case, which focuses on monetary damages?
  • With ten patents from the same family asserted, a significant challenge will be claim differentiation and scope: can Canon establish that the accused products infringe the distinct scope of numerous, similar-sounding claims across multiple patents, or will the analysis collapse into a dispute over a few core mechanical features, potentially raising questions of double patenting or redundancy?