DCT
5:19-cv-01195
North Atlantic Imports LLC v. Nexgrill Industries Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: North Atlantic Imports, LLC (Utah)
- Defendant: NexGrill Industries, Inc. (California)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Stoel Rives LLP; One LLP
- Case Identification: 5:19-cv-01195, C.D. Cal., 06/27/2019
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper as Defendant is a registered California corporation that maintains a regular and established place of business in the district, resides in the district, and has committed alleged acts of infringement in the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s outdoor cooking griddles, featuring a rear grease management system, infringe patents related to griddle and cooking station designs that incorporate a rear-positioned trough for collecting grease.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns grease and byproduct management systems for outdoor flat-top griddles, a segment of the consumer barbeque and outdoor cooking market.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff's own commercial products (sold under the "BLACKSTONE" brand) have been marked "Patent Pending" since their launch and that Defendant's accused products "exactly copy" the patented grease management design.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2016-05-04 | Earliest Priority Date for ’588 and ’589 Patents |
| 2019-06-25 | ’588 Patent Issued |
| 2019-06-25 | ’589 Patent Issued |
| 2019-06-27 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 10,327,589 - Outdoor Cooking Station with Griddle, System and Method Thereof (Issued June 25, 2019)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the problem of grease and byproduct buildup on outdoor griddles, noting that conventional drain systems located on the side or front of the griddle are "unsightly" and can lead to spills and stains on the user's clothing ( Compl. ¶ 9; ’589 Patent, col. 1:50-59).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is an outdoor cooking station that integrates a griddle with a specific grease management system. This system features a trough at a "rear central portion" of the cooking surface with a sloped surface that directs grease and debris toward a "rear opening" in the splash guard, channeling it away from the user and into a collection container (’589 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:24-28). The complaint provides an image of Plaintiff's own product embodying this concept, showing a removable grease cup at the rear of the griddle (Compl. p.3).
- Technical Importance: This design relocates the grease management function to the rear of the cooking station, which is intended to improve aesthetics and cleanliness from the user's perspective compared to front or side-draining systems (’589 Patent, col. 1:52-59).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts claims 1-20 of the ’589 Patent (Compl. ¶ 18).
- Independent Claim 1, an apparatus claim, includes the following essential elements:
- An outdoor portable cooking station comprising a frame and a griddle
- The griddle includes a flat cooking surface and a splash guard
- The splash guard extends along the rear end of the cooking surface and defines a "rear opening therein"
- The griddle defines a "trough" at a "rear central portion" of the cooking surface
- The trough includes a "sloped surface extending downward toward the rear opening"
U.S. Patent No. 10,327,588 - Griddle Device, System, and Method (Issued June 25, 2019)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: Similar to the ’589 Patent, this patent addresses the unsightliness and potential for spills associated with grease collection systems on conventional griddles (’588 Patent, col. 1:44-53).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a griddle system featuring a trough defined by a "sloped surface" that is adjacent to the rear of the flat cooking surface. This sloped surface extends downward at an "acute angle" relative to the flat cooking surface, channeling grease toward a "rear opening" that is at least partially defined in the trough and the rear splash guard (’588 Patent, Claim 1). This configuration is designed to move grease "out of view of the user" (’588 Patent, col. 6:8-10).
- Technical Importance: The invention provides a specific geometric configuration for a rear-draining griddle top that can be used as a standalone device or integrated into a cooking station.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts claims 1, 3, 6-8, 10, 13-16, and 20 of the ’588 Patent (Compl. ¶ 29).
- Independent Claim 1, an apparatus claim, includes the following essential elements:
- A griddle system with a griddle having a flat cooking surface and a splash guard
- Adjacent to the rear end of the cooking surface, it "directly extends to a sloped surface to define a trough"
- The "sloped surface extends with an acute angle relative to the flat cooking surface"
- The trough's sloped surface extends downward to a "rear opening" that is at least partially defined in the trough and the rear splash guard
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
The accused instrumentalities are the "NexGrill Griddles," including but not limited to the "2-Burner NexGrill Grill with Griddle Top" and the "4-Burner NexGrill Grill with Griddle Top" (Compl. ¶ 13).
Functionality and Market Context
The complaint alleges the NexGrill Griddles are outdoor portable cooking stations that include a frame supporting a griddle. The griddle itself is alleged to have a flat cooking surface, a splash guard with a rear opening, and a trough at a "rear central portion" of the cooking surface with a sloped surface to manage grease (Compl. ¶ 18, 29). The complaint includes a marketing image of the accused 4-burner model and a detailed view showing grease being scraped from the griddle surface into a removable collection trough located at the rear (Compl. p.5). The products are allegedly promoted on Defendant's website and sold through retailers like Home Depot (Compl. ¶¶ 14-15).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’589 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| An outdoor portable cooking station configured to manage unwanted food byproduct, comprising: a frame... and a griddle... | The NexGrill Griddles are alleged to be outdoor portable cooking stations having a frame and a griddle (Compl. ¶ 18). | ¶18 | col. 2:48-52 |
| a flat cooking surface... | The accused griddles are alleged to include a "flat cooking surface" (Compl. ¶ 18). | ¶18 | col. 2:6-7 |
| a splash guard extending upward from the flat cooking surface... defining a rear opening therein... | The accused griddles are alleged to include a "splash guard having a rear opening" (Compl. ¶ 18). | ¶18 | col. 2:19-24 |
| a trough defined in the cooking surface at a rear central portion of the cooking surface... | The accused griddles are alleged to include a "trough at a rear central portion of the cooking surface" (Compl. ¶ 18). | ¶18 | col. 2:24-28 |
| the trough including a sloped surface extending downward toward the rear opening defined in the splash guard. | The accused trough is alleged to include "a sloped surface extending downward toward the rear opening" (Compl. ¶ 18). | ¶18 | col. 2:26-28 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: A central question may be whether the location of the trough in the NexGrill Griddles qualifies as a "rear central portion" as required by the claim. The parties may dispute the scope of "central," and whether a trough spanning a majority of the rear edge meets this limitation.
- Technical Questions: The analysis may focus on whether the accused product's grease drain is a "trough defined in the cooking surface" or a separate component attached to it, and if this structural difference is material to the claim language.
’588 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A griddle system... comprising: a griddle including an upper side and an underside, the upper side including a flat cooking surface... and a splash guard... | The NexGrill Griddles are described as a "griddle system" with a "flat cooking surface" and a "splash guard" (Compl. ¶ 29). | ¶29 | col. 2:56-61 |
| wherein the flat cooking surface, adjacent a length of the rear end of the cooking surface, directly extends to a sloped surface to define a trough... | The complaint alleges the accused griddles have "a sloped surface that extends... downward to a rear opening in the trough and rear splash guard" (Compl. ¶ 29). | ¶29 | col. 9:1-3 |
| such that the sloped surface extends with an acute angle relative to the flat cooking surface... | The complaint alleges the accused griddles have "a sloped surface that extends with an acute angle relative to the flat cooking surface" (Compl. ¶ 29). | ¶29 | col. 9:4-5 |
| the sloped surface of the trough extending downward to a rear opening at least partially defined in the trough and the rear splash guard. | The complaint alleges a "sloped surface" that extends "downward to a rear opening in the trough and rear splash guard" (Compl. ¶ 29). | ¶29 | col. 9:6-8 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: The term "acute angle" may be a key point of dispute. The court will need to determine if this term requires a specific range of angles or if it has a broader, more general meaning, and whether the accused product's geometry falls within that scope.
- Technical Questions: Evidence will be needed to establish whether the accused product's design features a surface that "directly extends" from the flat cooking surface to form the trough, or if there is an intermediate or transitional structure that might fall outside the claim's scope.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
For the ’589 Patent
- The Term: "rear central portion"
- Context and Importance: This term defines the location of the patented trough. Its construction is critical because infringement will depend on whether the trough on the NexGrill Griddle is located at what the patent means by a "rear central portion." Practitioners may focus on this term because visual evidence suggests the accused trough may span a significant length of the rear edge, raising the question of what "central" requires.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification does not provide a precise numerical or percentage definition for "central portion," which may support an interpretation that does not require perfect mathematical centering, but rather a general location away from the corners (’589 Patent, col. 2:24-26).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The figures, such as Figure 11A, depict a grease container and opening that appear to be located around the midpoint of the griddle's rear edge, which could be argued to limit the term to a more confined, centered area (’589 Patent, Fig. 11A).
For the ’588 Patent
- The Term: "acute angle"
- Context and Importance: This term defines the geometric relationship between the flat cooking surface and the sloped surface of the trough. The infringement analysis for the ’588 patent hinges on whether the angle of the accused product's grease drain meets this definition.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification does not define "acute angle" with any specific numerical range, suggesting it could be interpreted by its plain and ordinary geometric meaning (less than 90 degrees) (’588 Patent, col. 9:4-5).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figure 1A shows a specific embodiment with a particular curved transition leading to the sloped surface. A defendant might argue that the term "acute angle" should be read in the context of this depicted embodiment, potentially limiting its scope to a similar geometry (’588 Patent, Fig. 1A, col. 5:29-32).
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement of infringement for both patents, asserting that NexGrill, through "online videos and other sales and service interactions, actively and knowingly teaches purchasers and users of NexGrill Griddles to use the... Griddles in a manner that infringes" (Compl. ¶ 16, 21, 32). Contributory infringement is also alleged on the basis that the accused products have no substantial non-infringing use (Compl. ¶ 22, 33).
- Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged for both patents. The complaint bases this on the allegation that the "NexGrill Griddles exactly copy the grease management trough created and sold by NAI," that Plaintiff's own products were marked "Patent Pending" since launch, and that Defendant "did not make a good-faith effort to avoid infringement" (Compl. ¶ 25, 36).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
The resolution of this case will likely depend on the answers to a few central questions:
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can terms like "rear central portion" (’589 patent) and "acute angle" (’588 patent) be construed broadly enough to read on the specific design and geometry of the accused NexGrill Griddles, or does the patent language and its supporting figures imply a more limited, specific structure that the accused products do not possess?
- A second key issue will be one of intent: should the case proceed to damages, the willfulness claim will turn on whether Plaintiff can prove that Defendant's alleged "exact copy" of a "Patent Pending" product constitutes the "egregious" conduct necessary for enhanced damages, or whether Defendant can establish it had a good-faith belief of non-infringement or invalidity.