DCT
3:24-cv-01345
Sandboni Inc v. All Terrain Bars LLC
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Sandboni, Inc. (Florida)
- Defendant: All Terrain Bars LLC (California) and Ronald Burgess (California)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: THE WEBB LAW FIRM
- Case Identification: 3:24-cv-01345, S.D. Cal., 07/30/2024
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Southern District of California because Defendants have a regular and established place of business in the district where they allegedly manufacture and sell the infringing products.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s "Sand Bar" mobile vending cart infringes a patent related to the design and function of a motorized vending cart.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns self-propelled, battery-powered vending carts designed with an integrated power system to operate appliances, enabling mobile commerce in diverse environments such as beaches, parks, and other off-pavement locations.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff first became aware of the accused products in November 2022. It further states that Plaintiff notified Defendants of the alleged infringement in 2023 and again in May 2024, but the parties failed to resolve the matter, leading to this lawsuit.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2016-08-25 | '400 Patent Priority Date |
| 2020-07-07 | '400 Patent Issue Date |
| 2022-11-01 | Earliest Alleged Infringing Activity by Defendants |
| 2024-07-30 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 10,703,400 - "Motorized Vending Cart," issued July 7, 2020
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent's background section identifies several deficiencies in prior art vending carts. These include being manually pushed, which causes operator fatigue; using fuel-burning engines, which are expensive, heat-generating, and unsafe for indoor use; being limited to specific products; and being unsuitable for use on soft surfaces like sand ('400 Patent, col. 1:28-41).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a self-contained, motorized vending cart platform. It integrates a drive base with drive motors, a battery bank, and a power inverter to supply electricity to various appliances. This system is housed within a vending cart body that also includes a thermally insulated container, providing a versatile, mobile, and self-powered solution for vending food and beverages in locations without access to grid power ('400 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:13-30). The overall structure is depicted in Figure 1, which shows the cart body (100) housing internal components and supporting a vending section (101) with an appliance (780).
- Technical Importance: The patented design sought to provide a mobile vending platform capable of traversing difficult terrain, such as sand, while safely powering commercial appliances without reliance on a generator, thereby expanding the operational range and versatility of mobile vendors ('400 Patent, col. 2:5-9).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1.
- The essential elements of independent claim 1 are:
- A drive base;
- One or more drive motors mounted to the drive base to rotate wheels;
- A thermally insulated container mounted to the drive base;
- A power inverter mounted to the drive base;
- A battery bank electrically connected to the drive motors and the power inverter;
- A vending cart body that partially surrounds the container and motors, and which defines a cooler opening and a vending section;
- A control panel to control the drive motors; and
- An appliance mounted to the vending section and electrically connected to the power inverter.
- The complaint also asserts dependent claims 2-6 (Compl. ¶30).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
The "Sand Bar" Mobile Bar and Mobile Bar Business Package (the "Accused Products") (Compl. ¶10).
Functionality and Market Context
The complaint describes the Accused Products as "motorized vending carts with thermally insulated containers and appliances" (Compl. ¶27). The allegations state that Defendants manufacture these carts in the Southern District of California and have sold at least 60 units (Compl. ¶¶1, 32). The complaint asserts that but-for this infringement, Plaintiff would have made these sales, claiming lost profits exceeding $750,000 (Compl. ¶32). No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'400 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a drive base; | The complaint alleges the Accused Products include a drive base. | ¶29 | col. 5:41-43 |
| one or more drive motors mounted to the drive base and configured to rotate a plurality of wheels; | The complaint alleges the Accused Products include one or more drive motors mounted to the drive base and configured to rotate a plurality of wheels. | ¶29 | col. 5:49-51 |
| a thermally insulated container mounted to the drive base; | The complaint alleges the Accused Products include a thermally insulated container mounted to the drive base. | ¶29 | col. 5:44-48 |
| a power inverter mounted to the drive base; | The complaint alleges the Accused Products include a power inverter mounted to the drive base. | ¶29 | col. 7:60-62 |
| a battery bank mounted to the drive base and including one or more batteries, the battery bank in electrical connection with the one or more drive motors and the power inverter; | The complaint alleges the Accused Products include a battery bank that is mounted to the drive base and is in electrical connection with the drive motor(s) and power inverter. | ¶29 | col. 7:26-29 |
| a vending cart body mounted to the drive base and at least partially surrounding the thermally insulated container and the one or more drive motors, the vending cart body defining: a cooler opening permitting access to the thermally insulated container; and a vending section; | The complaint alleges the Accused Products include a vending cart body with a cooler opening and a vending section, mounted to the drive base and at least partially surrounding the container and motor(s). | ¶29 | col. 5:8-12; col. 6:8-11 |
| a control panel electrically connected to and configured to control the one or more drive motors; | The complaint alleges the Accused Products include a control panel electrically connected to and configured to control the drive motor(s). | ¶29 | col. 7:40-43 |
| an appliance mounted to the vending section of the vending cart body and electrically connected to the power inverter. | The complaint alleges the Accused Products include an appliance mounted to the vending section and electrically connected to the power inverter. | ¶29 | col. 8:1-9 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: The complaint’s infringement allegations are conclusory, tracking the language of the claim without providing specific details about the accused product's design. This raises the question of whether the components of the "Sand Bar" cart technically satisfy the specific definitions of the claimed elements. For example, a dispute may arise over whether the defendant's power system constitutes a "power inverter" as distinct from other types of power supplies.
- Technical Questions: A primary technical question will be evidentiary: what proof will Plaintiff offer to show that the accused "Sand Bar" cart has the specific electrical architecture required by the claim? Specifically, evidence may be needed to demonstrate that the "battery bank" is electrically connected to both the "drive motors" and the "power inverter," and that the "appliance" is in turn connected to that "power inverter," as claimed.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "appliance"
Context and Importance: The presence of an integrated, powered "appliance" is a central feature distinguishing the invention from a simple transport cart. The definition of this term is critical, as a narrow construction could place the accused product outside the scope of the claims if its features do not qualify. Practitioners may focus on this term because its scope will determine what types of devices satisfy this limitation.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: Claim 1 itself uses the general term "an appliance" without further limitation, which may suggest any device that performs a function and is mounted to the vending section could suffice.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly provides an exemplary list of appliances, such as "a snow cone machine, a blender, a popcorn maker, a toaster, a frozen beverage dispenser, and a coffee maker" ('400 Patent, col. 2:31-34). Dependent claim 2 recites this exact list. This may support an argument that "appliance" should be construed as being limited to electrically powered food or beverage preparation devices.
The Term: "vending section"
Context and Importance: This term defines the specific location where the "appliance" is mounted, making it a key structural limitation of the cart body. The dispute could turn on whether the accused product has a structurally distinct "vending section" or merely a generic work surface.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent does not provide an explicit definition, which could support an argument that any area of the cart body used for vending activities meets the limitation.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The figures and description show a specific
vending section 101that is "recessed in the vending cart body 100" and includes "cutouts for mounting a sink 782, a faucet 783, or other sanitation components" ('400 Patent, col. 5:9-14). This may suggest the term requires a dedicated, purpose-built area rather than any flat surface on the cart.
VI. Other Allegations
Indirect Infringement
The complaint mentions inducement in its introductory section (Compl. ¶1), but the sole infringement count (Count I) is for direct infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) (Compl. ¶31). The complaint does not plead specific facts to support a claim for indirect infringement, such as allegations of providing instructions or manuals encouraging an infringing use by third parties.
Willful Infringement
The complaint includes a specific count for willful infringement (Count II) (Compl. ¶¶34-40). It alleges that Defendants had actual knowledge of the '400 Patent and their infringement since at least 2023, based on direct communications from the Plaintiff (Compl. ¶¶13, 19, 36). The complaint further alleges that Defendants continued to manufacture and sell the Accused Products despite this knowledge (Compl. ¶¶24, 37).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of claim construction: can the term "appliance", which is illustrated in the patent with specific, electrically powered food-preparation machines, be construed broadly enough to read on the features of the accused "Sand Bar" cart? The resolution of this and other key terms like "vending section" will be pivotal in determining the scope of the patent.
- A key evidentiary question will be one of technical proof: as the complaint offers only conclusory allegations, the case will likely depend on whether Plaintiff can present sufficient evidence to prove that the accused product’s internal components and electrical configuration map onto every element of the asserted claim, particularly the specific connections between the battery bank, power inverter, and appliance.