DCT
1:22-cv-00094
J&M Mfg Co Inc v. Kinze Mfg Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: J&M Manufacturing Co., Inc. (Ohio)
- Defendant: Kinze Manufacturing, Inc. (Iowa)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Simmons Perrine Moyer Bergman PLC
- Case Identification: 1:22-cv-00094, N.D. Iowa, 11/14/2022
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper because the Defendant is an Iowa corporation with its principal place of business in Iowa and therefore "resides" in the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s grain carts infringe a patent related to an inclined, folding unloading auger with an askewed, tilting flow control spout designed to facilitate the complete filling of semi-trailers.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns high-capacity grain carts used in modern agriculture to efficiently transfer harvested grain from a combine to a semi-trailer for transport.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff provided Defendant with actual notice of the patent-in-suit via email on January 10, 2022, following conversations between executives. Defendant is alleged to have responded on January 26, 2022, acknowledging review of the patent. Plaintiff's counsel allegedly sent an unanswered cease and desist letter on July 22, 2022. These allegations form the basis for the claim of willful infringement.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2012-03-20 | '598 Patent Priority Date |
| 2015-08-25 | '598 Patent Issue Date |
| c. 2021 | Alleged launch of Accused Devices |
| 2022-01-10 | Plaintiff allegedly provides Defendant a copy of the '598 Patent |
| 2022-01-26 | Defendant allegedly responds after reviewing the '598 Patent |
| 2022-07-22 | Plaintiff allegedly sends Defendant a cease and desist letter |
| 2022-11-14 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 9,113,598 - Grain Cart Having an Inclined Folding Unloading Auger Conveyor with an Askewed Flow Control Spout
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent's background describes the difficulty in completely filling the opposite corner portions of a rectangular semi-trailer when unloading grain from a conventional grain cart, which can result in inefficient transport and may require manual labor to level the grain ('598 Patent, col. 1:40-57).
- The Patented Solution: The invention provides a flow control spout mounted to the end of the unloading auger's discharge spout ('598 Patent, col. 2:4-6). This flow control spout is supported for tilting movement on a horizontal axis and is movable by a remotely controllable actuator, allowing the operator to direct the grain stream laterally back and forth across the width of the trailer to fill and top off all four corner portions without manual intervention ('598 Patent, col. 2:7-14; Fig. 1).
- Technical Importance: The technology aims to increase the efficiency and completeness of grain transfer during harvesting by automating the process of fully loading large transport trailers, thereby maximizing payload and reducing labor ('598 Patent, col. 1:50-57).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2-3 (Compl. ¶32).
- Independent Claim 1 of the '598 patent includes the following essential elements:
- A grain cart with a frame, hitch, and a container for grain.
- An elongated inclined auger unloading conveyor with a lower section to receive grain and an upper section supported for folding movement.
- The upper section's housing includes a discharge spout projecting laterally at an "askewed angle."
- The discharge spout supports a flow control spout for tilting movement on a substantially horizontal axis.
- The horizontal axis is "askewed" with respect to the auger's axis but extends "substantially parallel" to a side wall of said container.
- A "remotely controllable actuator" is connected to tilt the flow control spout.
- The purpose of the tilting is for "uniformly filling and topping off the semi-trailer with grain including the filling of all four corner portions."
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused products are Kinze's "Harvest Commander Grain Carts," including the Kinze 1421, 1521, 1721, 1321, and 1121 Grain Cart models (Compl. ¶34). The complaint's infringement chart focuses on the Kinze 1421 Grain Cart as an exemplary device (Compl. ¶33).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges the accused grain carts are large-capacity agricultural implements used for transferring grain (Compl. ¶33). A key accused functionality is a folding unloading auger that terminates in a "tip spout" (Compl. ¶34). Visual evidence in the complaint depicts this spout being connected to an actuator and capable of tilting, allegedly to direct the flow of grain during unloading (Compl. p. 13). The complaint shows a photograph of the accused auger in an extended discharge position over a semi-trailer, illustrating its operational context (Compl. p. 11).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'598 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| said housing of said upper section of said auger conveyor... including a discharge spout projecting laterally at an askewed angle from said housing, | The Kinze 1421's upper auger housing has a discharge spout that allegedly projects at an askewed angle. A photograph shows this spout, labeled 'O' (Compl. p. 12). | ¶33 | col. 3:25-30 |
| said discharge spout supporting a flow control spout for tilting movement on a substantially horizontal axis askewed with respect to an axis of said auger within said upper section, with said horizontal axis extending substantially parallel to a side wall of said container, | The accused discharge spout supports a flow control spout, labeled 'P', which tilts on what is alleged to be a substantially horizontal axis that is parallel to the container's side wall. | ¶33 | col. 3:32-38 |
| said control spout movable on said horizontal axis in a vertical plane spaced forwardly of said front wall of said container and perpendicular to said side wall... between a downwardly projecting first position and a laterally outwardly projecting second position, | The accused control spout is alleged to be movable between downward and outward positions. The complaint includes a photo with arrows indicating this range of motion (Compl. p. 13). | ¶33 | col. 3:38-42 |
| a remotely controllable actuator connected to tilt said flow control spout... for uniformly filling and topping off the semi-trailer... including the filling of all four corner portions of the rectangular semi-trailer. | The accused cart includes an actuator, labeled 'Q', which is connected to the flow control spout, labeled 'P', allegedly for the purpose of tilting it to fill a semi-trailer. A photograph depicts this mechanism (Compl. p. 13). | ¶33 | col. 3:42-49 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: The claim requires the spout's horizontal tilt axis to be "askewed" with respect to the auger axis while also being "substantially parallel" to the container's side wall. The determination of whether the accused device's specific geometry satisfies both of these spatial relationships simultaneously will likely be a central point of dispute.
- Technical Questions: A key functional limitation requires the tilting spout to be "for uniformly filling and topping off the semi-trailer... including the filling of all four corner portions." The infringement analysis may turn on evidence of whether the accused product is designed for and capable of achieving this specific, comprehensive filling outcome, as opposed to providing more general directional control of the grain stream.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "askewed angle"
Context and Importance: This term, which lacks a precise numerical definition in the patent, is used to define the orientation of the discharge spout relative to the auger housing. Its construction is critical because infringement will depend on whether the specific angle of the accused device's spout is found to be "askewed" within the meaning of the claim.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification does not provide a specific angular range, instead stating the spout is welded in a position "askewed relative to the axis of the housing" ('598 Patent, col. 3:27-29). This may support a construction where any non-parallel or non-perpendicular orientation qualifies.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figure 7 shows a distinct, visually significant angle. Parties may argue that the term implies an angle sufficient to enable the claimed function of filling the corners of a trailer, a purpose highlighted in the patent's background ('598 Patent, col. 1:40-45).
The Term: "for uniformly filling and topping off the semi-trailer with grain including the filling of all four corner portions"
Context and Importance: This phrase, appearing in the body of claim 1, ties the claimed structure (the tilting spout and actuator) to a specific purpose and result. Practitioners may focus on this term because the infringement inquiry will require an assessment of the accused product's capability and function, not just its structure.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A party could argue this language describes the intended capability of the device, not a guarantee of perfect results in every use case. The patent abstract and summary frame this function as the core of the invention ('598 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:9-14).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's background explicitly identifies the problem of incomplete filling of corner portions as the motivation for the invention ('598 Patent, col. 1:40-57). This may support a narrower construction requiring the device to be specifically designed and demonstrably capable of achieving this comprehensive filling task.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint does not include separate counts for induced or contributory infringement, focusing instead on allegations of direct infringement by making, using, selling, and offering for sale the accused devices (Compl. ¶¶34-35).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful and deliberate infringement and seeks enhanced damages (Compl. ¶39; Prayer for Relief C, E). The factual basis for this allegation is pre-suit knowledge, based on alleged communications between the parties in January 2022, during which Plaintiff allegedly provided Defendant a copy of the '598 Patent and Defendant acknowledged its review (Compl. ¶¶23-24).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of claim construction: what is the required scope of the geometric term "askewed angle"? The case may turn on whether the court construes this term to cover a broad range of non-parallel orientations or a narrower set of angles sufficient to achieve a specific functional result, and whether the accused product's geometry falls within that scope.
- A second central question will be one of functional capability: does the accused grain cart's tilting spout meet the claim limitation of being "for uniformly filling and topping off the semi-trailer including the filling of all four corner portions"? The dispute will likely focus on the evidentiary burden required to prove this functional purpose, distinguishing between a general-purpose directional spout and a system specifically designed to achieve the comprehensive filling outcome described in the patent.