DCT

3:24-cv-01814

Manehu Product Alliance LLC v. Transform Partners LLC

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 3:24-cv-01814, S.D. Cal., 10/09/2024
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper as Defendant is a California corporation that resides in the Southern District of California, maintains a "regular and established place of business" in the district, and has committed alleged acts of infringement within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s television wall mounts infringe nine patents related to mounting systems that allow a television to be lowered from a high position for improved viewing angles.
  • Technical Context: The technology concerns mechanical and motorized television mounts designed to solve the ergonomic problem of viewing televisions placed in high locations, such as over a fireplace.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff’s predecessor sent a notice letter to Defendant on May 4, 2018, regarding infringement of one asserted patent. It further alleges that Plaintiff sent a second notice letter regarding six other asserted patents on July 9, 2024, and that Defendant did not respond to either communication, which forms the basis for the willfulness allegations.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2010-06-04 Earliest Priority Date for all Patents-in-Suit
2014-05-13 U.S. Patent No. 8,724,037 Issued
2018-05-04 First Pre-Suit Notice Letter Allegedly Sent to Defendant
2019-04-09 U.S. Patent No. 10,257,460 Issued
2019-04-30 U.S. Patent No. 10,277,860 Issued
2019-05-07 U.S. Patent No. 10,281,080 Issued
2021-03-02 U.S. Patent No. 10,935,180 Issued
2022-05-31 U.S. Patent No. 11,346,493 Issued
2023-03-21 U.S. Patent No. 11,607,042 Issued
2023-12-19 U.S. Patent No. 11,849,246 Issued
2023-12-26 U.S. Patent No. 11,856,317 Issued
2024-07-09 Second Pre-Suit Notice Letter Allegedly Sent to Defendant
2024-10-09 Complaint Filed

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 8,724,037 - Mounting System

Issued May 13, 2014

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the challenge that televisions mounted in high locations, such as above a fireplace, are often much higher than a sitting viewer's eyes, which may not provide for comfortable viewing (U.S. Patent No. 10,257,460, col. 1:33-38).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a wall mount with a linkage assembly that allows a television to be held in a "low-profile stowed configuration" high on a wall and moved to an expanded, lowered position for viewing (U.S. Patent No. 10,257,460, col. 1:62-67). This movement, depicted in Figures 2 and 3 of the patent, is facilitated by a biasing mechanism, such as a counterbalance, to allow for controlled motion of the television (’460 Patent, Abstract; ’460 Patent, Figs. 2-3).
  • Technical Importance: This approach allows for the aesthetic placement of a large television in a high, out-of-the-way location without sacrificing an ergonomically comfortable viewing experience (Compl. ¶7).

Key Claims at a Glance

The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims" but does not identify specific asserted claims, referring instead to an exhibit not provided with the complaint (Compl. ¶24).

U.S. Patent No. 10,257,460 - Mounting System

Issued April 9, 2019

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the same problem as its parent ’037 Patent: achieving a comfortable viewing angle for televisions mounted in elevated positions (’460 Patent, col. 1:29-38).
  • The Patented Solution: This patent describes a mounting system with a linkage assembly and a specifically adjustable counterbalance mechanism. The adjustment mechanism features a carriage coupled to at least one piston, where the carriage "translates vertically along the fixed support bracket" to change the piston's length while the mount is stationary (’460 Patent, col. 12:34-44). This allows the counterbalancing force to be tuned for televisions of different weights, as shown in Figures 7 and 8 (’460 Patent, col. 8:51-64; ’460 Patent, Figs. 7-8).
  • Technical Importance: The invention provides a means to precisely adjust the mount’s balancing force to match varying television weights, which facilitates smooth and controlled movement for a range of different products (’460 Patent, col. 3:5-10).

Key Claims at a Glance

The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims" but does not identify specific asserted claims, referring instead to an exhibit not provided with the complaint (Compl. ¶28).

U.S. Patent No. 10,277,860 - Methods for Installing and Using Television Mounting Systems

Issued April 30, 2019

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims methods of using and installing a television mounting system. The claimed steps include coupling the mount above a mantel, adjusting a counterbalancing mechanism using a threaded member, and lowering the television below the top of the mantel while preventing contact (’860 Patent, col. 11:15-41).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint alleges infringement of "one or more of the claimed methods" but does not specify which claims are asserted (Compl. ¶31).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges infringement by inducing customers to use the accused television wall mounts and by selling products that have no substantial non-infringing use (Compl. ¶31).

U.S. Patent No. 10,281,080 - Adjustable Mounting Systems for Televisions

Issued May 7, 2019

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a television mounting apparatus with a "passive cam mechanism" that includes a cam and a cam follower. This mechanism is designed to automatically control the tilt of the television as the linkage assembly moves between the raised and lowered positions (’080 Patent, col. 4:9-21).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims" but does not specify which claims are asserted (Compl. ¶34).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses Defendant's television wall mounts of infringement (Compl. ¶34).

U.S. Patent No. 10,935,180 - Motorized Mounting Systems for Televisions

Issued March 2, 2021

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent relates to a motorized mounting system that includes an actuator assembly to automatically move the linkage assembly. The system also includes at least one "positioner" that contacts the linkage assembly to cause the display bracket to rotate as it moves toward the stowed position (’180 Patent, Abstract; ’180 Patent, col. 23:44-24:2).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims" but does not specify which claims are asserted (Compl. ¶38).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses Defendant's television wall mounts of infringement (Compl. ¶38).

U.S. Patent No. 11,346,493 - Motorized Mounting Systems for Televisions

Issued May 31, 2022

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent is directed to a motorized mounting system controlled by a controller with a processor and memory storing a "user-selected viewing position." The system is configured to automatically swivel the television while the motorized device raises or lowers the arm assembly (’493 Patent, Abstract; ’493 Patent, col. 23:54-24:12).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims" but does not specify which claims are asserted (Compl. ¶42).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses Defendant's television wall mounts of infringement (Compl. ¶42).

U.S. Patent No. 11,607,042 - Television Mounting Systems

Issued March 21, 2023

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a mounting system with a counterbalance mechanism that includes a threaded rod and a carriage. The threaded rod is rotatable to adjust the counterbalancing force, and its head is accessible to a user for adjustment (’042 Patent, col. 12:3-9).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims or processes" but does not specify which claims are asserted (Compl. ¶46).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses Defendant's television wall mounts of infringement (Compl. ¶46).

U.S. Patent No. 11,849,246 - Television Mounting Systems

Issued December 19, 2023

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent focuses on a mounting system with a linkage assembly and a spring device for counterbalancing. The system includes a slider member and a threaded member that can be rotated to move the slider and adjust the counterbalancing force provided by the spring device (’246 Patent, Abstract; ’246 Patent, col. 12:5-24).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims or processes" but does not specify which claims are asserted (Compl. ¶50).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses Defendant's television wall mounts of infringement (Compl. ¶50).

U.S. Patent No. 11,856,317 - Television Mounting Systems

Issued December 26, 2023

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a mounting system with a linkage assembly where a bottom portion of the television bracket is configured to be positioned rearwardly of an outer axis of rotation when the bracket moves toward the raised position. The invention also includes a counterbalance mechanism with a threaded member for adjustment (’317 Patent, Abstract; ’317 Patent, col. 16:1-13).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims or processes" but does not specify which claims are asserted (Compl. ¶54).
  • Accused Features: The complaint accuses Defendant's television wall mounts of infringement (Compl. ¶54).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The complaint identifies the accused instrumentalities as "television wall mounts" that are made, used, sold, and imported by Defendant Mount-It! (Compl. ¶15, 18, 24). Specific product models are not identified in the complaint.

Functionality and Market Context

The complaint alleges that the accused products "incorporate MantelMount's inventions" (Compl. ¶19), suggesting they are articulating mounts capable of lowering a television from an elevated installation point. It is alleged that Defendant sells these mounts throughout the United States via its own website and through Amazon.com (Compl. ¶18). No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint does not specify which claims of the asserted patents are infringed, instead referring to claim chart exhibits that were not provided with the filed complaint (Compl. ¶¶ 24, 28, 31, 34, 38, 42, 46, 50, 54). Therefore, a detailed claim-element-level analysis is not possible based on the provided documents. The general infringement theory is that Defendant’s television wall mounts practice the patented technologies for lowering and positioning a television, including the claimed linkage assemblies, counterbalance mechanisms, tilt features, and motorized components.

  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Technical Questions: Because the complaint does not provide technical details of the accused products, a primary factual question for the court will be to determine the precise mechanical and electrical operation of the accused mounts. The analysis will then focus on whether the specific construction and functionality of these mounts map onto the limitations recited in the asserted patent claims.
    • Scope Questions: The litigation may involve significant disputes over the scope of patent protection. A key question will be whether the features of the accused products fall within the scope of the claims as construed by the court, or if they represent non-infringing alternative designs.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

The complaint does not provide sufficient detail for an analysis of key claim terms, as it does not identify any specific claims or limitations that are alleged to be infringed.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement of infringement and contributory infringement of the ’860 Patent, which claims methods of using a television mount. The basis for this allegation is that Defendant induces its customers to practice the claimed methods and sells products that allegedly have no substantial non-infringing use (Compl. ¶31). The complaint does not specify the mechanism of inducement, such as through user manuals or advertising.
  • Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged for eight of the nine asserted patents. The allegations are based on alleged pre-suit knowledge of the patents. The complaint states that Defendant was notified of the ’037 Patent via a letter from Plaintiff's predecessor on May 4, 2018 (Compl. ¶20). It further alleges that Defendant was notified of the ’080, ’180, ’493, ’042, ’246, and ’317 patents via a second letter on July 9, 2024 (Compl. ¶21). Plaintiff alleges that Defendant continued its infringing activities despite these notices (Compl. ¶22).

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

  • A core issue will be one of infringement and apportionment: given the assertion of nine patents covering a range of distinct features (e.g., manual adjustment, motorization, passive tilt control, swivel mechanisms), a central question will be to determine which, if any, of these patented technologies are practiced by the accused products and how damages might be apportioned across the various alleged inventions.
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of willfulness: the court will examine Defendant’s conduct in response to the alleged notice letters of May 2018 and July 2024. The determination of whether Defendant’s continued sales constituted willful infringement will be critical to the potential for enhanced damages.
  • The case will likely turn on questions of patent validity: in defending against these allegations, the Defendant will likely challenge the validity of the asserted patents, forcing an examination of whether the claimed improvements over prior art television mounts are non-obvious and meet the other statutory requirements for patentability.