DCT
1:24-cv-00509
Scrub Daddy Inc v. 3M Co
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Scrub Daddy, Inc. (Pennsylvania)
- Defendant: 3M Company (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP
- Case Identification: 1:24-cv-00509, D. Del., 04/24/2024
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the District of Delaware based on Defendant 3M being a Delaware corporation and conducting regular business, including the sale of the accused products, within the state.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s Scotch-Brite Scrub & Drop Toilet Cleaning System infringes three patents related to scrubbing tools with dissolvable, flushable cleaning heads.
- Technical Context: The technology occupies the consumer cleaning products sector, focusing on toilet cleaning wands that use a disposable head to improve hygiene and convenience while aiming to reduce plastic waste.
- Key Procedural History: The patents-in-suit are all very recent, issuing in late 2023 and April 2024. The complaint alleges that Defendant had pre-suit knowledge of the first two asserted patents (’171 and ’242) via Plaintiff’s product marking. For the third patent (’643), knowledge is alleged as of the complaint's filing date. The ’242 and ’643 patents are continuations of the application that resulted in the ’171 patent.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2019-08-19 | Priority Date for ’171, ’242, and ’643 Patents |
| 2023-10-10 | U.S. Patent No. 11,779,171 Issued |
| 2024-04-02 | U.S. Patent No. 11,944,242 Issued |
| 2024-04-23 | U.S. Patent No. 11,963,643 Issued |
| 2024-04-24 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 11,779,171 - "Scrubbing Tool Having a Dissolvable Cleaning Head"
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,779,171 (“Scrubbing Tool Having a Dissolvable Cleaning Head”), issued October 10, 2023.
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section identifies the challenges associated with conventional cleaning tools that use disposable heads, namely the waste generated and the inconvenience of disposing of the used, soiled head (’171 Patent, col. 1:29-34).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a scrubbing tool system comprising a handle and a cleaning head that is “comprised entirely of a material configured to dissolve in water” after use (’171 Patent, Abstract). A key aspect of the solution is a connection mechanism where the handle's connector is configured to "pivot," allowing the head to move and follow the contours of the surface being cleaned, before being detached and dissolved (’171 Patent, col. 5:12-18; col. 8:59-9:9).
- Technical Importance: This design seeks to provide the convenience of a disposable cleaning head without the associated plastic waste or the mess of handling a non-dissolvable used part (’171 Patent, col. 3:12-20).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶37).
- Essential elements of Claim 1 include:
- A scrubbing tool with a handle comprising a first connector.
- A cleaning head comprising a second connector to mate with the first.
- The cleaning head is "comprised entirely of a material configured to dissolve in water" and contains a cleaning agent.
- The first connector is "configured to pivot" with respect to the handle, allowing the cleaning head to move during use.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.
U.S. Patent No. 11,944,242 - "Scrubbing Tool Having a Dissolvable Cleaning Head"
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,944,242 (“Scrubbing Tool Having a Dissolvable Cleaning Head”), issued April 2, 2024.
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: Like its parent, the ’242 Patent addresses the waste and disposal issues of traditional disposable cleaning heads (’242 Patent, col. 1:26-31).
- The Patented Solution: This patent focuses on the specific mechanical structure of the connection and the cleaning head itself. Claim 1 details a connection mechanism with a "cylindrical projection" having "one or more flexible rings" and a "non-flexible flange," plus a "release mechanism" for easy head removal (’242 Patent, col. 8:60-9:7). Claim 6 claims the cleaning head, which features an aperture designed to receive the handle's projection and form a "water-tight seal," preventing premature dissolution at the connection point (’242 Patent, col. 9:23-10:11; col. 4:55-68).
- Technical Importance: The invention aims to create a connection that is both robust enough for scrubbing and secure against water ingress, yet easily detachable by the user when cleaning is finished.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claims 1 and 6 (Compl. ¶64).
- Essential elements of Claim 1 include:
- A scrubbing tool with a handle and a connection mechanism.
- The mechanism's first connector comprises a "cylindrical projection," "one or more flexible rings," and a "non-flexible flange."
- The tool includes a "release mechanism" to remove the cleaning head.
- Essential elements of Claim 6 include:
- A cleaning head with a body made of a dissolvable material.
- The body has a back surface, an opposite cleaning surface, a side wall, and an aperture.
- The aperture is for receiving a portion of the handle and "forming a water-tight seal."
- The side wall's height is less than the cleaning surface's width.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.
U.S. Patent No. 11,963,643 - "Scrubbing Tool Having a Dissolvable Cleaning Head"
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,963,643 (“Scrubbing Tool Having a Dissolvable Cleaning Head”), issued April 23, 2024 (Compl. ¶28).
- Technology Synopsis: This patent covers a scrubbing tool with a cleaning head that is both dissolvable and shaped as a "tablet" (’643 Patent, col. 8:61-9:3). The invention solves the problem of used-head disposal by allowing the head to be dissolved in water after use (’643 Patent, col. 1:23-31). A key feature is that the handle and the attached cleaning head are configured to "move with respect to one another" during the cleaning operation (’643 Patent, Abstract).
- Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts at least independent claims 1 and 10 (Compl. ¶34, ¶96).
- Accused Features: The complaint alleges that the Scotch-Brite system's handle and its dissolvable "tablet" cleaning head infringe by being configured to move relative to one another during use (Compl. ¶¶ 104-105).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The Scotch-Brite™ Scrub & Drop Toilet Cleaning System and the corresponding Scotch-Brite™ Scrub & Drop Toilet Cleaning System Refill (collectively, the "Accused Products") (Compl. ¶14).
Functionality and Market Context
- The Accused Products comprise a reusable plastic handle and single-use, dissolvable cleaning heads, referred to as "tablets" (Compl. ¶41, ¶44). The system's stated operation involves attaching a tablet to the handle, scrubbing the inside of a toilet bowl, and then activating a release mechanism to drop the used tablet into the toilet water, where it is designed to dissolve and be flushed away (Compl. ¶44). An image from the Defendant's website shows the process of attaching the tablet to the handle (Compl. ¶41).
- The complaint cites Defendant's marketing materials, which position the product as a "breakthrough in bathroom cleaning" that is "mess-free" and creates "less plastic waste" compared to non-flushable scrubbers (Compl. ¶40, ¶41).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
11,779,171 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a handle for holding by a user... and comprising a first connector | The Accused Cleaning Tool Product includes an ergonomic handle with a connector at its end for attaching the cleaning tablet. | ¶41 | col. 4:11-16 |
| a cleaning head comprising a second connector configured to mate with the first connector | The accused cleaning tablet includes a connector (an aperture) configured to mate with the handle's first connector. | ¶42 | col. 4:41-51 |
| wherein the cleaning head is comprised entirely of a material configured to dissolve in water and wherein the material comprises a cleaning agent | The accused cleaning head is a "dissolving toilet bowl tablet" that is ejected into water to "watch it dissolve." The tablet is advertised as a "power-packed toilet cleaner." | ¶43, ¶44 | col. 3:19-39 |
| wherein the first connector is configured to pivot with respect to the handle such that the cleaning head is configured to move with respect to the handle | The handle of the Accused Cleaning Tool Product allegedly includes "flexible rings that are part of the first connector that pivot in relation to the handle during use." | ¶45, ¶46 | col. 5:12-18 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central dispute may arise over the term "pivot." The complaint's theory appears to equate the flexing of "flexible rings" with the claimed "pivot" function (Compl. ¶46). The question for the court will be whether the scope of "pivot" can read on flexing material, or if it requires a discrete mechanical joint (e.g., a ball joint or axle), which is also described in the patent's specification (’171 Patent, col. 5:17-18).
- Technical Questions: A factual question will be whether the accused cleaning head is truly "comprised entirely of" a dissolvable material. The infringement analysis will depend on whether the tablet contains any non-dissolvable structural elements, such as a plastic insert for the connector interface.
11,944,242 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a connection mechanism comprising a first connector... wherein the first connector comprises: a cylindrical projection..., one or more flexible rings..., and a non-flexible flange... | The complaint alleges the first connector of the Accused Cleaning Tool Product includes these three structural elements, based on screenshots from the product's website. | ¶69, ¶70 | col. 4:52-68 |
| a release mechanism configured to cause the cleaning head to be removed from the handle when activated | The product's marketing states that the user can "eject" the tablet into the water after scrubbing, which implies the existence of a release mechanism. | ¶71 | col. 5:21-39 |
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 6) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A cleaning head configured to be attached to a handle, the cleaning head comprising: a body comprised of a material configured to... dissolve when submerged in water... | The Accused Refill Product is a cleaning tablet advertised as being dissolvable in water. | ¶75, ¶76 | col. 3:19-30 |
| the body further comprising: a back surface, a cleaning surface opposite the back surface, a side wall..., and an aperture in the back surface... | The complaint provides an annotated screenshot of the Accused Refill Product that purports to identify each of these claimed structural features. | ¶78 | col. 2:35-37 |
| ...for receiving at least a portion of a projecting portion on the handle and forming a water-tight seal with the handle... | The complaint alleges that the aperture receives the handle's connector and forms a water-tight seal. The annotated image provided shows the aperture (Compl. ¶78). | ¶78 | col. 4:56-62 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Technical Questions: The existence of the specific structural elements of Claim 1 (flexible rings, non-flexible flange) on the accused handle is a factual question that may not be fully resolved by the provided marketing photos. Further, for Claim 6, whether the connection forms a "water-tight seal" is a functional limitation that will likely require evidence beyond the product's appearance, such as technical testing and expert analysis.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term:
"pivot"(’171 Patent, Claim 1)- Context and Importance: This term is critical to the infringement analysis of the ’171 Patent, as Plaintiff’s theory relies on flexible rings performing this function. Practitioners may focus on this term because its definition could either encompass the alleged functionality of the accused product or exclude it entirely.
- Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states the connection mechanism is "configured to allow the cleaning head 14 to pivot and flex with respect to the handle" (’171 Patent, col. 5:13-15). Plaintiff may argue that by listing "pivot and flex" together, the patentee considered them to be related concepts of movement.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification also provides concrete examples of pivoting mechanisms, such as "a ball joint or rotatable axle joint" (’171 Patent, col. 5:17-18). Defendant may argue these examples limit the term "pivot" to a more structured, mechanical rotation around a defined point, rather than general flexing.
The Term:
"water-tight seal"(’242 Patent, Claim 6)- Context and Importance: This functional term is a key limitation of the claimed cleaning head. The viability of the infringement allegation for Claim 6 depends on proving the accused product achieves this function.
- Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent explains the purpose of the connection is to "inhibit[] water from entering the connection area and dissolving the cleaning head" prematurely (’242 Patent, col. 4:62-65). A party could argue that a "water-tight seal" therefore only needs to be effective enough to prevent premature failure, not perfectly hermetic.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent describes the use of "flexible rings" that "may act as sealing gaskets to ensure a water-tight fit" (’242 Patent, col. 4:56-58). A party could argue that the term "gasket" implies a high standard of sealing performance that must be met.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges contributory infringement for all three patents based on Defendant’s sale of the Accused Refill Product (Compl. ¶¶ 55, 87, 114). The theory is that the refill tablet is a material part of the patented invention, is specially designed to work with the accused handle, and has no substantial non-infringing use (Compl. ¶¶ 58, 90, 117).
- Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged for all three patents. For the ’171 and ’242 Patents, the allegation is based on pre-suit knowledge, which Plaintiff claims Defendant had "at least because of Scrub Daddy's marking of its product" (Compl. ¶¶ 49, 79). For the more recently issued ’643 Patent, the allegation is based on knowledge "at least since the filing date of this Complaint" (Compl. ¶108).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of claim construction: can the term
"pivot,"which the patent illustrates with mechanical joints, be construed broadly enough to read on the alleged flexing of soft rings on the accused product's connector? The outcome of this question may be dispositive for the ’171 Patent. - A key evidentiary question will be one of structural and functional proof: does the accused handle’s connector possess the specific combination of a cylindrical projection, flexible rings, and a non-flexible flange as required by Claim 1 of the ’242 Patent, and does the assembled tool actually form the "water-tight seal" required by Claim 6? These factual disputes will likely require expert testimony and product analysis that goes beyond the marketing materials cited in the complaint.
- A third determinative issue will concern willfulness: did Defendant have pre-suit knowledge of the ’171 and ’242 patents through Plaintiff's product marking, as alleged? If proven, this could expose Defendant to a finding of willful infringement and the potential for enhanced damages.