DCT
3:19-cv-01704
Max BLU Tech LLC v. Singulus Tech Inc
Key Events
Complaint
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Max Blu Technologies, LLC (Texas)
- Defendant: Singulus Technologies, Inc. (Connecticut)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Whitmyer IP Group LLC
- Case Identification: 3:19-cv-01704, D. Conn., 10/30/2019
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant has a regular and established place of business in the District of Connecticut, has its principal place of business in Connecticut, and has allegedly committed acts of infringement in the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s Blu-ray disc production systems infringe six patents related to methods for optical disc mastering and the resulting physical structures of replica optical discs and manufacturing stampers.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns high-precision manufacturing processes for optical data storage media, such as Blu-ray discs, which are critical for mass-producing high-density data storage formats.
- Key Procedural History: The asserted patents stem from a family of applications tracing priority back to 1998. The complaint notes that U.S. Patent No. 7,352,685 was subject to a Certificate of Correction, and U.S. Reissued Patent No. RE44,633 was issued following a reexamination proceeding. Plaintiff alleges Defendant had knowledge of the patents-in-suit as of May 2019.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1998-04-06 | Earliest priority date for all Patents-in-Suit |
| 2008-04-01 | U.S. Patent No. 7,352,685 Issues |
| 2009-10-13 | U.S. Patent No. 7,600,992 Issues |
| 2010-02-16 | Certificate of Correction issues for U.S. Patent No. 7,352,685 |
| 2010-09-21 | U.S. Patent No. 7,801,016 Issues |
| 2013-11-26 | U.S. Patent No. 8,593,931 Issues |
| 2013-12-10 | U.S. Reissued Patent No. RE44,633 Issues |
| 2014-04-22 | U.S. Patent No. 8,705,334 Issues |
| 2019-10-30 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 7,352,685 - "Reverse Optical Mastering for Data Storage Disk Replicas," Issued April 1, 2008
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background describes a fundamental trade-off in conventional optical disc manufacturing. To create deeper grooves for reliable laser tracking, the "lands" (the flat top surfaces between grooves) must become narrower and more rounded. This compromises the quality of the lands, which are needed for recording user data, especially in high-density formats where tracks are packed closely together (’685 Patent, col. 3:7-18). This constrains designers from independently specifying the desired land width and groove depth (’685 Patent, col. 3:23-28).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a "reverse" mastering process where a photosensitive layer on a master substrate is exposed and developed so that the material in the groove areas is completely etched away down to the underlying smooth substrate (’685 Patent, Abstract). This technique uses the substrate itself to define a wide, flat, and smooth groove bottom, while the initial thickness of the photosensitive material independently determines the groove depth (’685 Patent, col. 4:43-61). This process decouples the relationship between groove depth and land width, allowing for the creation of masters that produce replicas with both deep grooves and wide lands (’685 Patent, Fig. 6).
- Technical Importance: This approach enabled the design of higher-density optical discs by allowing manufacturers to optimize both tracking performance (via deep grooves) and data-writing surface area (via wide, flat lands) simultaneously, overcoming prior art limitations (’685 Patent, col. 12:51-56).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent Claim 1, as well as dependent claims 2-4, 7, 9, and 19-35 (Compl. ¶ 25).
- Independent Claim 1 is a product-by-process claim directed to a replica disk with the following essential elements:
- Made from a replication process involving a master disk, a first-generation stamper, and a second-generation stamper.
- Comprises a replica substrate with a surface relief pattern of adjacent lands and grooves.
- The pattern has a track pitch less than 425 nanometers.
- The grooves extend down into the substrate.
- The land tops are wider than the groove bottoms.
U.S. Patent No. 7,801,016 - "Reverse Optical Mastering for Data Storage Disk Replicas," Issued September 21, 2010
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: As with the related ’685 Patent, this patent addresses the design trade-off in conventional optical disc mastering between achieving deep grooves for tracking and wide lands for data storage, a problem exacerbated by the move to higher-density formats (’016 Patent, col. 3:5-14).
- The Patented Solution: The solution is materially identical to that described in the ’685 Patent: a mastering process that fully removes photosensitive material down to the master substrate to form flat-bottomed grooves (’016 Patent, Abstract). This method allows the final replica disc's groove depth to be controlled by the photoresist thickness, while the groove bottom width is controlled by the laser exposure, decoupling the two parameters (’016 Patent, col. 4:45-64).
- Technical Importance: The technical importance is the same as for the ’685 Patent, enabling the production of optical media with characteristics suitable for high-density data storage that were difficult to achieve with conventional methods (’016 Patent, col. 8:19-25).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent Claim 1 and dependent Claim 3 (Compl. ¶ 33).
- Independent Claim 1 is directed to a replica disk with the following essential elements:
- A replica substrate with a surface pattern defined by lands and "interrupted grooves" (pits).
- The pattern defines a track pitch less than 425 nanometers.
- The tops of the lands define widths between 25 percent of the track pitch and 140 nanometers.
- The grooves define depths between 20 and 120 nanometers.
Multi-Patent Capsules
U.S. Patent No. 8,593,931, "Replica Disk for Data Storage," Issued November 26, 2013
- Technology Synopsis: This patent, part of the same family, also addresses the need for high-density optical media. It claims a replica disk defined by specific physical dimensions, including track pitch and groove/pit depths, consistent with the structures enabled by the reverse mastering process (Compl. ¶ 41; ’931 Patent, Abstract).
- Asserted Claims: At least independent Claim 1 and dependent claims 2-4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, and 14 (Compl. ¶ 41).
- Accused Features: The physical characteristics of Blu-ray recordable media created by Defendant’s replication machines are alleged to infringe (Compl. ¶ 41).
U.S. Reissued Patent No. RE44,633, "Reverse Optical Mastering for Data Storage Disk Replicas," Issued December 10, 2013
- Technology Synopsis: As a reissue of a patent in the family, this patent covers the same core reverse mastering technology. It claims a replica disk with specific structural and dimensional limitations, such as land top widths and groove depths, that result from this manufacturing process (Compl. ¶ 49; RE44,633 Patent, Abstract).
- Asserted Claims: At least independent Claims 1 and 14, and dependent claims 2-4, 15, 16, 18, and 19 (Compl. ¶ 49).
- Accused Features: The physical characteristics of Blu-ray recordable media created by Defendant’s replication machines are alleged to infringe (Compl. ¶ 49).
U.S. Patent No. 8,705,334, "Replica Disk for Data Storage," Issued April 22, 2014
- Technology Synopsis: This patent continues the theme of claiming a replica disk by its physical structure. The claims are directed to a disk with a specific track pitch and pit depth ranges, which are characteristic features of high-density media manufactured using advanced mastering techniques (Compl. ¶ 57; ’334 Patent, Abstract).
- Asserted Claims: At least independent Claims 1, 10, and 18 (Compl. ¶ 57).
- Accused Features: The physical characteristics of Blu-ray recordable media created by Defendant’s replication machines are alleged to infringe (Compl. ¶ 57).
U.S. Patent No. 7,600,992, "Reverse Optical Mastering for Data Storage Disk Stamper," Issued October 13, 2009
- Technology Synopsis: Unlike the other asserted patents that claim the final replica disk, this patent is directed to an intermediate tool in the manufacturing process: the "stamper." It claims a second-generation stamper, created from a master disk, that has the inverse surface pattern (wide, flat-bottomed grooves) used to mold the final replica disks with their characteristic wide, flat lands (’992 Patent, Abstract; col. 13:4-10).
- Asserted Claims: At least independent Claims 1 and 11, and dependent claims 2-3 and 13 (Compl. ¶ 65).
- Accused Features: The replication machines provided to customers are alleged to infringe by making and using stampers with the claimed physical characteristics to create Blu-ray media (Compl. ¶ 65).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The Blueline II and Blueline III Blu-ray disc production systems (Compl. ¶ 18).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges these are disc production and replication systems that Defendant sells, advertises, and provides to its customers (Compl. ¶ 18). The core of the infringement allegation is that these systems are used by Defendant’s customers to create Blu-ray recordable media, and it is the physical characteristics of these resulting media (and the intermediate stampers) that allegedly embody the patented inventions (Compl. ¶¶ 25, 65). The complaint supports its allegations with references to lab analyses of representative Blu-ray discs allegedly created with the accused systems (Compl. ¶ 19, Exs. I, J).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
U.S. Patent No. 7,352,685 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A replica disk made from a replication process that includes creation of a master disk, creation of a first-generation stamper from the master disk and creation of a second-generation stamper from the first-generation stamper... | The Accused Products are replication machines that create Blu-ray media using a multi-generational stamper process. | ¶25 | col. 11:6-14 |
| a replica substrate having a first major surface and a second major surface, the first major surface including a surface relief pattern defined by adjacent lands and grooves... | The Blu-ray discs created by the Accused Products have a substrate with a surface pattern of lands and grooves. | ¶25 | col. 13:49-53 |
| the surface relief pattern having a track pitch less than 425 nanometers... | The Blu-ray discs are alleged to possess the claimed physical characteristics, including this track pitch. | ¶25 | col. 13:51-52 |
| wherein the land tops are wider than the groove bottoms. | The Blu-ray discs are alleged to possess this specific dimensional relationship between their lands and grooves. | ¶25 | col. 13:55-56 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: Claim 1 is a product-by-process claim. While infringement is typically determined by the final product's structure, the process limitations may be argued to inform the meaning of structural terms. A question for the court may be how, if at all, the "second-generation stamper" process limitation affects the construction of the structural term "land tops are wider than the groove bottoms."
- Technical Questions: A primary evidentiary question will be whether the lab analyses referenced in the complaint (Compl. Exs. I, J) can demonstrate that Blu-ray discs manufactured by Defendant's systems meet all structural limitations of Claim 1, particularly the relative dimension that "land tops are wider than the groove bottoms."
U.S. Patent No. 7,801,016 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A replica disk comprising: a replica substrate including a first major surface... including a surface pattern defined by lands and interrupted grooves... | The Blu-ray discs created by the Accused Products have a substrate with a surface pattern of lands and pits, which are alleged to be "interrupted grooves." | ¶33 | col. 3:39-42 |
| wherein the surface pattern defines a track pitch that is less than 425 nanometers... | The Blu-ray discs are alleged to have a track pitch within this specified range. | ¶33 | col. 14:7-8 |
| wherein tops of the lands define widths between 25 percent of the track pitch and 140 nanometers... | The land tops of the Blu-ray discs are alleged to have widths falling within this specific calculated range. | ¶33 | col. 14:10-12 |
| and wherein the grooves define depths between 20 and 120 nanometers. | The groove/pit depths of the Blu-ray discs are alleged to fall within this specified nanometer range. | ¶33 | col. 14:13-15 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central question may be whether the "pits" of a standard Blu-ray disc meet the claim definition of "interrupted grooves." The patent specification uses both terms, and their interchangeability could be a point of dispute (’016 Patent, col. 1:40-41).
- Technical Questions: The infringement analysis for this claim appears to depend entirely on measurements. A key question will be whether the physical dimensions of the discs produced by Defendant's systems, as measured in the lab analyses, provably fall within the specific nanometer ranges required by the claim for land width and groove depth.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "land tops are wider than the groove bottoms" (’685 Patent, Claim 1)
- Context and Importance: This relative dimension is a key structural feature that allegedly distinguishes the invention from prior art, where efforts to create deep grooves resulted in narrow, rounded lands. Practitioners may focus on this term because proving this specific geometric relationship is essential to the infringement case for the ’685 patent.
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The plain language of the claim suggests a straightforward geometric comparison of the width of the highest surface of a land to the width of the lowest surface of an adjacent groove.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly emphasizes that the invention creates "wide, flat smooth lands with sharp corners" as a direct result of the reverse mastering process, where the groove bottom is defined by the optically polished master substrate (’685 Patent, col. 8:40-42). A party may argue that the term should be construed to require the specific flat-topped geometry enabled by the invention, not just any structure that happens to meet the relative width ratio.
The Term: "stamper" (’992 Patent, Claim 1)
- Context and Importance: The infringement theory for the ’992 patent rests on the defendant's systems making or using an infringing "stamper," an intermediate manufacturing tool, rather than just the final product. The definition of this component is therefore critical.
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent describes a stamper in the context of conventional multi-generational electroforming and molding processes, suggesting the term should be given its generally understood meaning in the field of optical disc manufacturing (’992 Patent, col. 11:45-56).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claims require a "second-generation stamper" with specific features like "stamper groove bottoms [that] are wider than the stamper land tops" (’992 Patent, Claim 1). This structure is the inverse of the final replica disk. A party may argue that "stamper" must be limited to a tool possessing this exact inverse topography, which is a unique artifact of the disclosed reverse mastering process.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges induced infringement for all six patents. The factual basis is that Defendant allegedly provides its Blueline II and III systems with the specific intent that its customers use them to create Blu-ray discs (and the necessary stampers) that have the patented physical characteristics. The complaint alleges this intent is evidenced by Defendant's marketing, user instructions, and support for the accused products (e.g., Compl. ¶ 26, 34, 42).
- Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged based on Defendant’s purported knowledge of the patents-in-suit "as early as May of 2019," prior to the filing of the complaint. The complaint alleges that Defendant continued its accused activities despite this knowledge (e.g., Compl. ¶ 26, 34, 42).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A central issue will be one of evidentiary proof and metrology: can Plaintiff’s technical evidence, such as the lab analyses referenced in the complaint, definitively prove that the Blu-ray discs manufactured using Defendant's systems meet the specific, nanometer-scale dimensional limitations (e.g., track pitch, land/groove width, depth) recited in the asserted claims?
- The case may also turn on a question of infringement liability: where the accused products are manufacturing systems and the patents claim end-products (replica disks) or intermediate tools (stampers), can Plaintiff successfully establish indirect infringement by proving Defendant's customers are direct infringers and that Defendant possessed the requisite knowledge and specific intent to induce that infringement?
- A key legal question will be one of claim scope: can structural claim terms such as "land tops are wider than the groove bottoms" be read broadly to cover any disc with that geometric property, or will they be construed more narrowly to require the specific flat-topped, sharp-cornered topography that is the unique result of the "reverse mastering" process detailed in the patent specifications?