DCT
2:22-cv-00596
Therabody Inc v. Aduro Products LLC
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Therabody, Inc. (Delaware)
- Defendant: Aduro Products LLC (New Jersey); Jack Bracha (New York)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
- Case Identification: 2:22-cv-00596, C.D. Cal., 01/27/2022
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Central District of California because Defendants distribute, promote, market, and sell infringing products in the district, deriving substantial revenue from these activities.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s percussive massage gun infringes patents related to a distinctive triangular, multi-grip handle design for such devices.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns handheld percussive massage devices, a consumer electronics category prominent in the fitness and wellness markets for muscle therapy and recovery.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint states that the parties entered into a settlement agreement on December 9, 2021, to resolve a prior infringement claim concerning a different massage gun. This lawsuit alleges that a new product, launched after the settlement, infringes the same patent family and that its sale constitutes a breach of the settlement agreement. This history suggests a basis for pre-suit knowledge relevant to willfulness allegations.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2017-03-14 | Earliest Patent Priority Date ('448, '565, '722 Patents) |
| 2020-07-07 | '448 Patent Issued |
| 2021-02-16 | '565 Patent Issued |
| 2021-07-01 | Therabody alleges becoming aware of Aduro's first allegedly infringing product (approximate date) |
| 2021-11-02 | '722 Patent Issued |
| 2021-12-09 | Therabody and Aduro enter into a Settlement Agreement |
| 2021-12-22 | Therabody notifies Defendants of infringement by the new "Recovery Massage Gun Max Grip" |
| 2022-01-27 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 10,702,448 - "Percussive Massage Device and Method of Use"
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,702,448, "Percussive Massage Device and Method of Use," issued July 7, 2020 (Compl. ¶11).
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent background states that existing massage devices often provide "ineffective massages that are superficial and do not provide any real benefit," indicating a need for an improved device (’448 Patent, col. 1:30-32).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a percussive massage device featuring a unique housing with three distinct handle portions that cooperate to form a triangular handle opening. This ergonomic design allows a user to grasp the device from multiple angles, facilitating self-application of massage to various body parts, including those that are typically hard to reach. The core innovation is this multi-grip functionality enabled by the triangular structure. (’448 Patent, Abstract; Fig. 14).
- Technical Importance: The claimed triangular handle design provides an ergonomic solution to the challenge of effectively self-administering percussive therapy across the entire body with a single handheld device (Compl. ¶10).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 6 (Compl. ¶34).
- The essential elements of Claim 6 are:
- A housing with first, second, and third handle portions that define a handle opening.
- The first, second, and third handle portions define first, second, and third axes, respectively, which cooperate to form a triangle.
- The first, second, and third handle portions are "generally straight."
- A user can grasp any of the three handle portions independently.
- The device includes an electrical source, a motor, a switch, and a reciprocating push rod assembly.
U.S. Patent No. 10,918,565 - "Percussive massage device and method of use"
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,918,565, "Percussive massage device and method of use," issued February 16, 2021 (Compl. ¶13).
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: As a continuation of the same patent family, the ’565 Patent addresses the same problem of ineffective and superficial massages from conventional devices (’565 Patent, col. 1:31-33).
- The Patented Solution: The patent describes the same core invention as the ’448 Patent: a percussive massager with a triangular handle formed by three distinct grip portions. This design enhances ergonomic versatility, allowing users to comfortably and effectively target different muscle groups on their own. (’565 Patent, Abstract; Fig. 14).
- Technical Importance: The invention provides an ergonomic form factor that improves the usability and effectiveness of handheld percussive massagers for self-treatment (Compl. ¶10).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 6 (Compl. ¶49).
- The essential elements of Claim 6 are identical to those of Claim 6 of the ’448 Patent, reciting:
- A housing with first, second, and third handle portions defining a handle opening.
- The axes of the three handle portions cooperate to form a triangle.
- The three handle portions are "generally straight."
- A user can grasp any of the three handle portions independently.
- The device includes an electrical source, a motor, a switch, and a reciprocating push rod assembly.
U.S. Patent No. 11,160,722 - "Percussive Massage Device and Method of Use"
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,160,722, "Percussive Massage Device and Method of Use," issued November 2, 2021 (Compl. ¶15).
Technology Synopsis
- Belonging to the same patent family, the ’722 patent is also directed to improving upon ineffective massage devices (’722 Patent, col. 1:35-37). Its solution is embodied in a percussive massage device with a triangular handle formed by three portions, which provides enhanced ergonomics and allows users to self-massage difficult-to-reach areas of the body (’722 Patent, Abstract).
Asserted Claims
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 12 (Compl. ¶64).
Accused Features
- The complaint alleges that the accused product's housing, which includes first, second, and third handle portions with exterior edges that cooperate to define a triangle surrounding a handle opening, infringes the ’722 Patent (Compl. ¶¶66-67).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused product is the "Recovery Massage Gun Max Grip" (Compl. ¶5).
Functionality and Market Context
- The accused product is a handheld, electrically powered percussive massage device (Compl. ¶35). The complaint alleges it features a housing with a three-sided, triangular grip design surrounding a central opening, intended to allow for multiple grip positions (Compl. ¶¶36, 38). A photo of the product's packaging is included in the complaint (Compl. p. 5). The complaint alleges that Defendants market and sell the product through various channels, including Amazon.com, placing it in direct competition with Plaintiff's products (Compl. ¶21).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'448 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 6) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a housing, wherein the housing includes first, second and third handle portions that cooperate to at least partially define a handle opening | The accused product includes a housing with first, second, and third handle portions defining a handle opening. The complaint provides an annotated diagram identifying these portions (Compl. p. 7). | ¶36 | col. 2:59-62 |
| wherein the first handle portion defines a first axis, the second handle portion defines a second axis and the third handle portion defines a third axis, wherein the first, second and third axes cooperate to form a triangle | The axes of the three handle portions of the accused product are alleged to cooperate to form a triangle. | ¶37 | col. 2:1-3 |
| wherein the first handle portion is generally straight, wherein the second handle portion is generally straight, and wherein the third handle portion is generally straight | The complaint alleges that each of the three handle portions of the accused product is generally straight. | ¶38 | col. 2:21-23 |
| such that a user can grasp any of the first, second or third handle portions independently to use the percussive massage device | The complaint alleges the design allows a user to grasp any of the three handle portions independently. | ¶38 | col. 23:33-37 |
| an electrical source, a motor positioned in the housing, a switch for activating the motor, and a push rod assembly... | The accused product is alleged to include an electrical source, motor, switch, and a reciprocating push rod assembly. | ¶39 | col. 1:44-51 |
'565 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 6) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a housing, wherein the housing includes first, second and third handle portions that cooperate to at least partially define a handle opening | The accused product's housing has first, second, and third handle portions defining a handle opening, as shown in an annotated diagram (Compl. p. 10). | ¶51 | col. 2:63-65 |
| wherein the first handle portion defines a first axis, the second handle portion defines a second axis and the third handle portion defines a third axis, wherein the first, second and third axes cooperate to form a triangle | The complaint alleges that the axes defined by the three handle portions of the accused product cooperate to form a triangle. | ¶52 | col. 3:1-3 |
| wherein the first handle portion is generally straight, wherein the second handle portion is generally straight, and wherein the third handle portion is generally straight | Each of the three handle portions of the accused product is alleged to be generally straight. | ¶53 | col. 2:25-28 |
| such that a user can grasp any of the first, second or third handle portions independently to use the percussive massage device | The design of the accused product is alleged to permit a user to independently grasp any of the three handle portions. | ¶53 | col. 23:36-40 |
| an electrical source, a motor positioned in the housing, a switch for activating the motor, and a push rod assembly... | The complaint asserts the accused product contains the required internal components, including an electrical source, motor, switch, and push rod assembly. | ¶54 | col. 1:47-54 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: The infringement analysis may turn on the construction of "generally straight." The annotated diagrams provided in the complaint depict a product with some ergonomic curvature in its handle portions (Compl. pp. 7, 10). The question for the court will be whether these curved forms fall within the scope of the term "generally straight" as used and defined in the patents.
- Technical Questions: While the complaint alleges that a user can grasp each handle portion "independently," a potential point of dispute could arise if the placement of controls or the overall balance of the accused device makes one grip position functionally primary and the others secondary, raising the question of whether the grips are truly independent in practical use.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
- The Term: "generally straight"
- Context and Importance: This term appears in the asserted independent claims of both the ’448 and ’565 patents and is central to defining the patented shape. The outcome of the infringement analysis may depend heavily on whether the accused product's handle portions, which appear to have some curvature, meet this limitation.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specifications of both patents provide an explicit definition: ""Generally straight" means that the majority of the handle portion is straight, but can include rounded edges or corners where the different handle portions meet..." (’448 Patent, col. 2:23-27; ’565 Patent, col. 2:25-30). Plaintiff may argue this definition was expressly intended to cover ergonomic designs that are not perfectly linear.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: A defendant may point to patent figures like Figure 14, where the handle portions are depicted with distinct, linear axes (A1, A2, A3) forming a clear triangle (’448 Patent, Fig. 14). It could be argued that the specification’s allowance for "rounded edges or corners" applies only to the transitions between otherwise straight segments, not to a continuous curve along the length of a handle portion itself.
VI. Other Allegations
Indirect Infringement
- The complaint alleges both induced and contributory infringement. The inducement allegation is based on Defendants' marketing and promotion of the product for its intended use, with alleged knowledge of infringement since at least a December 21, 2021 email from Plaintiff's counsel (Compl. ¶¶40, 55). The contributory infringement allegation is based on the sale of the accused product, which is alleged to be a material part of the invention, especially made for infringing use, and not a staple article of commerce with substantial non-infringing uses (Compl. ¶¶41, 56).
Willful Infringement
- Willfulness is alleged based on Defendants' continuing infringing activities after receiving notice of infringement, including a specific notice email dated December 21, 2021 (Compl. ¶¶46, 61). The prior settlement agreement regarding an earlier product provides additional context that may support allegations of pre-suit knowledge of the patent portfolio (Compl. ¶19).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A central issue will be one of claim construction: how will the court define the scope of the term "generally straight"? The case will likely turn on whether this term, which the patent specification defines as allowing for "rounded edges or corners," is broad enough to read on the specific ergonomic curvatures of the accused product's handle design.
- A key factual question will be the impact of the parties' litigation history: the December 2021 settlement agreement concerning a prior product, followed by express notice regarding the new accused product, creates a record that may significantly influence the court's analysis of knowing infringement, willfulness, and any potential award of enhanced damages.