DCT
2:24-cv-07066
Dainese Spa v. Alpinestars USA Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Dainese S.p.A. (Italy)
- Defendant: Alpinestars USA Inc. (California) and Alpinestars S.p.A. (Italy)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: ADDYHART P.C.
- Case Identification: 2:24-cv-07066, C.D. Cal., 08/20/2024
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged based on Defendants committing acts of infringement in the district and Defendant Alpinestars USA Inc. having a regular and established place of business within the Central District of California.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s wearable airbag systems for motorcycle riders infringe a patent related to protective devices that use an inflatable casing within a breathable mesh structure.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns personal protective equipment, specifically wearable airbags for users of motorcycles or participants in other high-risk activities, which aim to combine impact safety with user comfort and ventilation.
- Key Procedural History: The patent-in-suit was assigned from D-AIR LAB S.R.L. to Plaintiff Dainese S.p.A. on June 14, 2024, four days before its issuance. The complaint alleges that Defendants had knowledge of the patent and its foreign equivalents prior to or soon after its issuance, forming the basis for a willfulness claim.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2019-12-13 | '065 Patent Priority Date |
| 2020-12-09 | '065 Patent PCT Application Filed |
| 2024-06-14 | '065 Patent Assigned to Plaintiff |
| 2024-06-18 | '065 Patent Issued |
| 2024-08-20 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 12,012,065 - "Protective Device and Method for Making Said Protective Device," Issued June 18, 2024
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent describes a problem with prior art wearable inflatable protectors, which can "create a sort of bag around the user's body that does not allow adequate passage of ventilation air" when in a deflated state (Compl. ¶24; ’065 Patent, col. 1:39-42).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a two-part system: an outer "mesh structure" that defines internal channels or "housings," and a separate inflatable "casing body" placed inside these housings. In its deflated state, the casing body occupies only a "first region" of the housing, leaving a "second region" empty. This unoccupied space within the mesh allows air to pass through for ventilation. Upon inflation, the casing body expands to fill the entire housing, with the mesh structure acting as a "containment cage" that controls the final shape of the inflated device (Compl. ¶25-26; ’065 Patent, col. 7:39-42, col. 8:52-59).
- Technical Importance: This design seeks to resolve the tension between providing comprehensive airbag protection and maintaining the breathability essential for comfort in performance apparel (Compl. ¶16; ’065 Patent, col. 1:50-56).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claims 1 and 18 (Compl. ¶28).
- Independent Claim 1 (Device Claim) requires:
- A protective device comprising a "mesh structure" with first and second mesh portions and "tie elements".
- The "tie elements" comprise "dividing walls" that define a plurality of "inner housings".
- A "casing body" is arranged in at least one "inner housing".
- The "casing body" is configured for a "deflated condition" where it occupies a "first space" and a "second space" lacks the casing body, and an "inflated condition" where it occupies the "second space".
- The "casing body" has multiple portions, each in a corresponding housing.
- In the "inflated condition", the portions inflate against the mesh and tie elements to form a "planar structure".
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The Alpinestars "Tech-Air 3" and "Tech-Air 10" systems, along with other similar designs, are the Accused Products (Compl. ¶29).
Functionality and Market Context
- The Accused Products are wearable airbag vests and undersuits designed for motorcycle riders (Compl. ¶32, ¶37). The complaint alleges they are manufactured with a "mesh housing structure" that contains a separate "inflatable member" (Compl. ¶32). This inflatable member is described as having "finger-like portions" that are inserted into corresponding channels within the mesh housing (Compl. ¶33, ¶39). An image in the complaint depicts the black mesh housing and the white inflatable member as two distinct components. (Compl. p. 9). The products are offered for sale in the U.S. through a dedicated website and third-party distributors (Compl. ¶30).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'065 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A protective device ... comprising a mesh structure comprising a first mesh portion and a second mesh portion and a plurality of tie elements, wherein said ... tie elements comprise dividing walls defining a plurality of inner housings between said first mesh portion and said second mesh portion; | The Accused Products include a "mesh housing structure" with "dividing walls that act as tie elements connected to the front and rear sides of the mesh housing." An annotated photograph identifies the "First Mesh Portion," "Second Mesh Portion," and "Dividing Wall." (Compl. p. 10). | ¶32-33 | col. 6:38-42 |
| wherein said protective device includes a casing body arranged at least in an inner housing of said plurality of inner housings, | The Accused Products contain an "inflatable member" or "casing body" with "finger-like portions" that are inserted into respective channels of the mesh housing. A photograph shows the white "inflatable member" partially separated from the black "mesh housing/structure." (Compl. p. 9). | ¶32, ¶34 | col. 7:17-21 |
| wherein said casing body is configured to assume a deflated condition and an inflated condition ... and wherein in the deflated condition, said casing body occupies a first space or first region, and wherein in the deflated condition a second region ... lacks a casing body, and wherein in the inflated condition said casing body occupies the second region... | In a deflated state, the inflatable member occupies a "first region" of the housing, leaving a "second free space" for ventilation. Upon inflation, the member expands to "occupy the second region and space" that was previously unoccupied. Annotated photographs illustrate this transition. (Compl. p. 11-12). | ¶34-35 | col. 8:52-59 |
| wherein said casing body comprises a plurality of portions each arranged in a corresponding inner housing... | The inflatable member has "a plurality of finger-like portions" which are "inserted into the respective channel of the mesh housing." (Compl. p. 10). | ¶33-34 | col. 9:1-4 |
| and wherein in the inflated condition, said portions of said casing body are inflated against said first mesh portion, said second mesh portion, and said tie elements so as to form a planar structure. | When inflated, the product's inflatable portions press against the mesh and dividing walls, and "the inflated system forms a planar structure." A photograph is provided to show this alleged planar structure. (Compl. p. 13). | ¶36 | col. 10:4-8 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A primary issue may be whether the accused products' "dividing walls" (Compl. ¶33), which appear to be integral parts of the mesh housing, meet the claim limitation of "tie elements." While Claim 1 recites that the "tie elements comprise dividing walls," the specification also provides examples of tie elements as discrete components like "threads, or pieces of fabric, or ribbons" ('065 Patent, col. 3:47-49). The relationship between "tie elements" and "dividing walls" will be a focus of claim construction.
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges that in the deflated state, each "finger-like portion is folded upon itself" inside a channel (Compl. ¶34). The court will need to determine if this specific "folded" configuration meets the claim requirement that the casing body "occupies a first space or first region" while leaving a distinct "second region or second space" that "lacks a casing body" ('065 Patent, col. 9:59-62).
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "tie elements"
- Context and Importance: This term is foundational to the claimed structure that separates the mesh layers and creates the ventilation channels. The infringement read depends on whether the accused product's integrated "dividing walls" are properly categorized as "tie elements." Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction could determine whether the patent covers monolithic mesh structures or is limited to structures where mesh layers are connected by distinct components.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: Claim 1 itself states, "wherein said tie elements comprise dividing walls" ('065 Patent, col. 9:49-51), suggesting dividing walls are a species of the genus "tie elements." The specification also gives a broad functional definition: "an element which is tensioned between the two mesh portions when the inflatable casing body is inflated" ('065 Patent, col. 3:43-45).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification provides examples such as "threads, or pieces of fabric, or ribbons" and "stitches or topstitching" ('065 Patent, col. 3:47-49, 53-54). A defendant may argue these examples imply that "tie elements" are separate components used to connect the mesh portions, rather than being integral to the mesh itself.
The Term: "casing body"
- Context and Importance: The "casing body" is the inflatable component that provides protection. The core of the invention lies in its relationship with the non-inflatable "mesh structure". The analysis will turn on whether the accused "inflatable member" functions as the claimed "casing body," which is described as being arranged in the mesh structure's housings.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent defines the casing body in broad, functional terms as "a flexible, preferably mono-layer, extensible body made of elastic material" ('065 Patent, col. 2:8-10) and notes it can have various shapes like a "hand or comb or tree shape" ('065 Patent, col. 10:25-26).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent consistently describes the casing body as being "housed in the inner area" and "disposed in one or more housings between the first mesh portion... and the second mesh portion" ('065 Patent, col. 2:3-6; col. 7:17-21). This language suggests a distinct, separate component placed within another, a characterization Plaintiff supports with a photograph showing the two parts separated (Compl. p. 9).
VI. Other Allegations
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement based on Defendants’ continued infringement after having pre-suit knowledge of the '065 Patent. This knowledge is alleged on the basis that Defendants "monitored the publication and issuance of patents in its industry" and would have been aware of the patent "prior to and/or soon after its issuance" (Compl. ¶31, ¶46).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "tie elements," which the patent specification exemplifies with discrete items like threads and ribbons, be construed to read on the integrated "dividing walls" that form the channels within the accused products' mesh housing? The outcome of this construction will be pivotal to the infringement analysis.
- A key question of structural interpretation will be whether the accused system—an "inflatable member" inserted into a "mesh housing"—is the same as the patent's "casing body arranged at least in an inner housing of said...mesh structure." The dispute may focus on the specific manner in which the deflated member occupies a "first region" while leaving a "second region" empty for ventilation, and whether the accused product's "folded" configuration is encompassed by the claims.