DCT
5:17-cv-02123
Bragel Intl Inc v. Spicy Lingerie Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Bragel International, Inc. (California)
- Defendant: Spicy Lingerie, Inc. (California)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Wang IP Law Group, P.C.
- Case Identification: 5:17-cv-02123, C.D. Cal., 10/16/2017
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant resides in the Central District of California, has committed alleged acts of infringement in the district, and maintains a regular and established place of business there.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s line of adhesive, backless, and strapless bras infringes two patents related to adhesive bra cup and breast form enhancement technology.
- Technical Context: The technology at issue addresses the market for undergarments suitable for backless or strapless clothing, focusing on adhesive-based support and enhancement.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention any prior litigation, inter partes review proceedings, or licensing history related to the patents-in-suit.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2002-05-31 | U.S. Patent No. 7,144,296 Priority Date |
| 2002-08-02 | U.S. Patent No. 6,780,081 Priority Date |
| 2004-08-24 | U.S. Patent No. 6,780,081 Issued |
| 2006-12-05 | U.S. Patent No. 7144296 Issued |
| 2017-10-16 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 6,780,081 - "Backless, Strapless Bra" (Issued Aug. 24, 2004)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent describes a need for a backless, strapless bra that improves upon existing designs that used non-permanent adhesives (e.g., disposable double-sided tape) or extension tabs, which offered limited ability to enhance cleavage or provide push-up effects (’081 Patent, col. 1:21-37). It also notes the need for a "permanent and re-usable adhesive" that would not allow the bra to shift during use (’081 Patent, col. 1:40-44).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a pair of individual bra cups that adhere directly to the user's skin via a pressure-sensitive adhesive on their concave interior surface. The cups are joined by a central connector positioned between their inner sides, which allows the user to pull the cups together to create a customized degree of cleavage and support (’081 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:56-65). The adhesive is described as being reusable and having an adhesion force to the bra cup that is greater than its cohesion force to the user's skin, preventing residue upon removal (’081 Patent, col. 3:35-39).
- Technical Importance: This design sought to offer a more secure, reusable, and adjustable alternative to previous adhesive bras by combining self-supporting adhesive cups with a central connector for enhancement.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 4, 6, 11, and 12 (Compl. ¶51).
- Independent claim 1 recites the core elements of the invention:
- A pair of bra cups, each having a concave interior surface with a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer covering substantially the entire surface from edge to edge.
- A thermoplastic film material that supports the adhesive layer.
- A design wherein the cup is secured to the user solely by the adhesive layer.
- A connector positioned between the inner sides of the cups to adjoin them.
- The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims (Compl. ¶72).
U.S. Patent No. 7,144,296 - "Attachable Breast Form Enhancement System" (Issued Dec. 5, 2006)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent identifies a need for a breast form enhancement system that provides the benefits of a breast form while also being suitable for backless and strapless apparel (’296 Patent, col. 2:8-15). It also notes that known breast forms were often thicker at the bottom, which could undesirably "exaggerate the degree of sagging" for some users (’296 Patent, col. 2:25-27).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a system comprising a pair of breast forms, rather than simple cups, which contain "a volume of silicone gel encased between thermoplastic film material" (’296 Patent, Abstract; col. 5:10-12). Similar to the ’081 patent, these forms feature an adhesive interior surface for direct application to the skin and a central connector to join them, allowing for customized enhancement and cleavage (’296 Patent, col. 7:51-63).
- Technical Importance: This technology advanced the adhesive bra concept by integrating a gel-filled breast form for volume and shape enhancement into the two-cup, connectable, strapless, and backless design.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2 and 5 (Compl. ¶52).
- Independent claim 1 recites the key elements of the system:
- A pair of breast forms.
- Each form comprises a volume of silicone gel encased between thermoplastic film material.
- Each form has a concave interior surface with a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer.
- A connector is positioned between the inner sides of the forms to adjoin them.
- The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims (Compl. ¶72).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The complaint names a range of "Infringing Products," including "Sensual Freedom Lite Magic Invisible Bra," "Strapless Silicone Invisible Bra," and "Nude Freebra" (Compl. ¶4). The infringement allegations specifically target a product identified as "Style: EY-SL02" for the ’081 Patent and the "Nude Freebra" for the ’296 Patent (Compl. ¶39, 40).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges the accused products are "backless, strapless bras" sold on Defendant’s e-commerce website, www.SpicyLingerie.com (Compl. ¶41, 44). The provided photographic evidence indicates these products consist of two separate cups with an adhesive interior and a central clasp for connection, designed to be worn without back or shoulder straps (Compl. ¶51-52). A photograph in the complaint shows the "Pair of Bra Cups" of an accused product (Compl. ¶51, p. 12). The complaint does not contain specific allegations regarding the products' market share or commercial success beyond their sale by Defendant.
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’081 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a pair of bra cups... | The product is alleged to have a "Pair of Bra Cups." A photograph depicts two separate, connectable cups. | ¶51, p. 12 | col. 2:41-42 |
| a concave interior surface... wherein substantially the entire interior surface from edge to edge comprises a pressure sensitive adhesive layer disposed thereon for adjoining the bra cup to the user's breast | The product is alleged to have a "Concave Interior Surface" and an "Edge to Edge Pressure Sensitive Adhesive Layer." An image shows a glossy adhesive layer covering the entire interior of the cup. | ¶51, p. 12-13 | col. 3:8-15 |
| a thermoplastic film material supporting the pressure sensitive adhesive layer | The product is alleged to have a "Thermoplastic Film Layer." A photograph points to the material on the interior of the cup to which the adhesive is applied. | ¶51, p. 14 | col. 2:29-31 |
| an outer side facing towards the user's armpit, and an inner side facing opposite the outer side, wherein the bra cup is secured to the user's breast solely by the pressure sensitive adhesive layer | The product is alleged to be "Secured Solely by Pressure Sensitive Adhesive Layer." A photograph shows the product being applied to a user's hand, implying adhesion without other means of support. | ¶51, p. 14 | col. 2:27-29 |
| a connector adapted to adjoin the bra cups, wherein the connector is positioned between the inner sides of each of the bra cups | The product is alleged to have a "Connector" positioned between the "Inner Side" of each cup. Multiple photographs show a central plastic clasp mechanism joining the two cups. | ¶51, p. 15 | col. 2:18-20 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Technical Question: Claim 11 requires that the adhesive layer has an "adhesion force to the interior surface of the bra cups that is greater than a cohesion force to the user's skin." The complaint alleges this is implied by the product being reusable without leaving residue (Compl. ¶51, p. 17-18). Whether this functional outcome proves the specific force relationship required by the claim may be a central point of dispute requiring expert testing and testimony.
- Technical Question: Claim 12 requires the adhesive layer to be "permanently grown to the interior surface." The complaint supports this with a photograph labeled "Permanently Grown Pressure Sensitive Adhesive Layer" (Compl. ¶51, p. 18). The factual basis for this characterization—whether the adhesive is co-manufactured with the cup versus being applied later—and the legal meaning of "permanently grown" will likely be contested.
’296 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a pair of breast forms... | The accused "Nude Freebra" product is alleged to be a pair of breast forms. A photograph shows "Breast Form 1" and "Breast Form 2." | ¶52, p. 19 | col. 7:51-52 |
| a volume of silicone gel encased between thermoplastic film material | The product is alleged to contain "Silicone Gel (underneath)" a "Thermoplastic Film Material." A photograph shows the exterior film of the product with arrows indicating the presence of gel inside. | ¶52, p. 19 | col. 5:10-12 |
| a concave interior surface... having a pressure sensitive adhesive layer for securing the breast form | The product is alleged to have a "Concave Interior Surface" and an adhesive layer. A photograph shows the product being adhered to a hand to demonstrate its adhesive property. | ¶52, p. 19-20 | col. 4:15-18 |
| a connector adapted to adjoin the breast forms together, wherein the connector is positioned... | The product is alleged to have a "Connector Adapted to Adjoin the Breast Forms." Photographs show a central clasp positioned between the inner sides of the two forms. An image depicts these connectors as "Cooperatively Engaged" (Compl. ¶52, p. 21). | ¶52, p. 20 | col. 11:29-32 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Question: A primary issue for the ’296 Patent will be whether the accused "Nude Freebra" is a "breast form" containing a "volume of silicone gel" as required by claim 1, or if it is a non-gel-filled cup more akin to the device described in the ’081 Patent. The complaint's allegation rests on an assertion that may require dissection of the accused product to verify.
- Technical Question: Dependent claim 5 requires that the connector portions are "permanently attached to the breast forms." As with the ’081 Patent, the complaint supports this with a labeled photograph (Compl. ¶52, p. 22). The method and durability of this attachment will be a key factual question for proving infringement of this claim.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "permanently grown" (’081 Patent, claim 12)
- Context and Importance: This term appears in a dependent claim and is used to distinguish the invention from prior art that may have used less durable or separate adhesive layers. The method of affixing the adhesive is a key technical detail, and its construction will determine whether the accused product's manufacturing process falls within the claim's scope. Practitioners may focus on this term to dispute infringement based on the specific manufacturing process of the accused product.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification suggests "permanently grown" may be one of several methods of permanent application, stating the adhesive "can be permanently grown... or applied by the other methods" such as spray coating or hot melting (’081 Patent, col. 3:8-10, 26-29). This could support an interpretation covering any non-temporary application method.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification also refers to this method as a preferred embodiment: "the preferred pressure sensitive adhesive is permanently grown to a thermoplastic film" (’081 Patent, col. 2:29-31). This could support an argument that "grown" refers to a specific chemical or thermal process where the adhesive is formed in situ, rather than simply being a pre-made layer that is permanently glued on.
The Term: "breast form" (’296 Patent, claim 1)
- Context and Importance: The distinction between a "bra cup" (’081 Patent) and a "breast form" (’296 Patent) is central to the two-patent strategy. The infringement case for the ’296 Patent hinges on proving the accused product is a "breast form." The term’s construction is critical because claim 1 explicitly ties it to containing "a volume of silicone gel."
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states that breast forms "are intended to include all types of externally worn articles that can be worn to enhance or replace a user's breasts" and can include various materials like foam or rubber in addition to gel (’296 Patent, col. 3:62-col. 4:6). This language could support a broader, functional definition.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Independent claim 1 itself provides a narrow definition for the purpose of that specific claim by requiring "a volume of silicone gel encased between thermoplastic film material." The patent's abstract and detailed description consistently describe the invention in these terms (’296 Patent, Abstract; col. 5:10-14). This suggests that to infringe claim 1, an accused device must meet this specific structural requirement, regardless of any broader definition of "breast form" elsewhere in the specification.
VI. Other Allegations
Indirect Infringement
- The complaint makes a conclusory allegation of contributory infringement by stating the accused products "have no substantial, non-infringing use" (Compl. ¶50). It does not plead specific facts to support active inducement, such as referencing user manuals or advertising that instructs on an infringing use.
Willful Infringement
- The complaint alleges that Defendant’s infringement "is and has been willful" based on the allegation that Defendant "has had actual or constructive notice of the existence of the '081 Patent" and continued its alleged infringement (Compl. ¶55, 58). The complaint does not specify the basis for this alleged notice (e.g., a cease-and-desist letter or prior relationship).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
This case appears to center on fundamental questions of claim scope and evidentiary proof. The key issues for the court will likely be:
A core issue will be one of structural identity: can Plaintiff produce sufficient evidence to prove that the accused "Nude Freebra" contains a "volume of silicone gel" as required by claim 1 of the ’296 patent, or is it merely a shaped "bra cup" potentially covered only by the ’081 patent? The resolution of this factual question is critical to the viability of the ’296 patent assertions.
A second key issue will be one of evidentiary sufficiency for technical features: can Plaintiff prove, beyond labeled photographs and conclusory allegations, that the accused products meet specific technical limitations recited in the dependent claims, such as the adhesive being "permanently grown" (’081, cl. 12) or the connector being "permanently attached" (’296, cl. 5)? These infringement analyses will likely turn on expert testimony and detailed evidence regarding the accused products' material properties and manufacturing methods.