DCT
1:22-cv-06004
Houweling Intellectual Properties Inc v. Van der Hoeven Americas Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Houweling Intellectual Properties, Inc. (Delaware) and Beheer 141 B.V. (Netherlands)
- Defendant: Van Der Hoeven Horticultural Projects B.V. (Netherlands)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Benesch Friedlander Coplan & Aronoff; Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth
- Case Identification: 1:22-cv-06004, N.D. Ill., 07/03/2023
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper based on the defendant being subject to personal jurisdiction in the district as a result of business contacts and offers for sale of the accused products within the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiffs allege that Defendant’s ModulAIR line of commercial greenhouses infringes two patents related to advanced greenhouse climate control systems.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns systems for precisely managing the temperature, humidity, and airflow in large-scale agricultural greenhouses to optimize crop growth and yield.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges a significant history between the parties regarding the '617 Patent, including a 2016 Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding initiated by a group allegedly led by the Defendant. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office upheld most claims of the '617 Patent as patentable, a decision later affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. This history is asserted as a basis for pre-suit knowledge and willful infringement.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2006-06-29 | Earliest Priority Date ('617 and '668 Patents) |
| 2014-04-29 | U.S. Patent No. 8,707,617 Issued |
| 2016-01-01 | Alleged Notice of '617 Patent Infringement to Defendant (approx. "early as 2016") |
| 2016-12-14 | Inter Partes Review of '617 Patent Filed |
| 2020-01-01 | Defendant's U.S. Sales Campaign Allegedly Begins (approx. "at least 2020") |
| 2021-11-01 | Alleged Offer to Sell Accused Greenhouse to Bright Farms (approx. Nov/Dec 2021) |
| 2022-08-16 | U.S. Patent No. 11,412,668 Issued |
| 2022-10-31 | Alleged Notice of '668 Patent Infringement to Defendant |
| 2022-11-01 | Alleged Sale of Accused Greenhouses (approx. Nov/Dec 2022) |
| 2023-02-01 | Alleged Offer to Sell Accused Greenhouse to US Organic Farms (approx. "as recent as February 2023") |
| 2023-07-03 | Second Amended Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 8,707,617 - "Greenhouse and Forced Greenhouse Climate Control System and Method," issued April 29, 2014
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent describes the difficulty in precisely controlling the environmental conditions within a greenhouse, such as temperature and humidity, using conventional systems, which can limit crop health and yield ('617 Patent, col. 1:25-42).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a greenhouse with a climate control system housed in a "substantially enclosed end gable" that is adjacent to, but outside of, the main crop growing section. This system uses a series of vents and selectively movable louvers to manage airflow, allowing it to either draw in outside ambient air for cooling, recirculate internal air for temperature maintenance, or use a combination of both to achieve a desired climate ('617 Patent, Abstract; col. 5:14-20). The conditioned air is then distributed throughout the growing section.
- Technical Importance: This architecture provides a method for more granular and efficient climate management compared to traditional greenhouse designs that rely on simple roof vents, particularly in climates with extreme temperatures ('617 Patent, col. 7:14-23).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claims 1 and 17 (Compl. ¶22).
- Independent Claim 1 includes these essential elements:
- A growing section.
- A climate control system in a "substantially enclosed end gable" adjacent to and outside the growing section.
- The end gable has one or more vents and one or more "louvers selectively moveable" to control airflow.
- The system is arranged to control the environment by flowing ambient air, re-circulating internal air, or a combination of the two.
- Independent Claim 17 includes these essential elements:
- A "substantially enclosed growing section."
- A "substantially enclosed end gable" adjacent to and outside the growing section with vents and movable louvers.
- The end gable is arranged to perform specific functions: flow cool air to reduce temperature, flow warm air to increase temperature, and re-circulate air to maintain a desired temperature.
U.S. Patent No. 11,412,668 - "Greenhouse and Forced Greenhouse Climate Control System and Method," issued August 16, 2022
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent background describes the need to improve upon existing greenhouse designs to better regulate temperature, humidity, and CO2, and to protect crops from pests ('668 Patent, col. 1:22-43).
- The Patented Solution: This invention describes a greenhouse where the climate control system is located in a corridor separated from the growing section by a partition that "runs the entire length of one of the sides" of the greenhouse. This side corridor takes in and conditions air, which is then distributed uniformly to the crops via a plurality of tubes arranged at the bottom of the growing section ('668 Patent, Abstract; col. 10:11-41).
- Technical Importance: This side-corridor design allows for the creation of a large, stable buffer of conditioned air that can be distributed evenly along the full length of the growing area, which may be particularly advantageous for very large-scale greenhouse operations ('668 Patent, col. 9:43-56).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claims 1 and 14 (Compl. ¶22).
- Independent Claim 1 includes these essential elements:
- A climate control system and a growing section.
- The climate control system is separated by a partition that is "parallel to and runs the entire length of one of the sides" of the greenhouse.
- The climate control system has vents to draw in ambient air.
- The partition has a "partition vent" to allow air passage between the growing section and the climate control system (for recirculation).
- A plurality of tubes, in communication with the vents, are arranged at the bottom of the growing section to "uniformly distribute air."
- Independent Claim 14 includes similar elements but adds more specific geometric limitations, requiring the partition to run "from the floor" and for at least part of the climate control system to be "within the entire area formed by said walls of said greenhouse structure and said partition."
III. The Accused Instrumentality
- Product Identification: The accused instrumentality is Defendant's "ModulAIR" greenhouse system (Compl. ¶23).
- Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges that the ModulAIR greenhouse is a system that comprises a climate control section with a "configuration of vents, louvers and tubes allowing for the utilization of ambient air, recirculated air or a combination thereof" (Compl. ¶34, 44). The complaint provides a marketing image of the ModulAIR system, showing a cutaway view of a greenhouse with a distinct climate control corridor running alongside the growing area (Compl. p. 7). Plaintiffs allege that Defendant has engaged in a U.S. sales campaign since at least 2020, with specific sales and offers for sale in Illinois, Texas, Virginia, and Kansas (Compl. ¶23-25).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’617 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a climate control system comprising a substantially enclosed end gable adjacent to and outside said growing section | The accused greenhouses comprise a climate control section. | ¶34 | col. 5:15-18 |
| said end gable comprising one or more vents and one or more louvers selectively moveable to cooperate with said one or more vents to control air flow | The climate control section comprises a configuration of vents and louvers. | ¶34 | col. 6:14-40 |
| wherein said climate control system is arranged to control the environment... by flowing ambient air from outside..., re-circulating air from said growing section..., and a combination thereof | The accused system allows for the utilization of ambient air, recirculated air, or a combination thereof. | ¶34 | col. 6:54-58 |
’668 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| wherein said climate control system is separated by a partition from said growing section, wherein said partition is parallel to and runs the entire length of one of the sides of said greenhouse structure | The accused greenhouses comprise a climate control section. The provided image shows a climate control corridor running along the side of the growing area. | ¶44; p. 7 | col. 10:17-24 |
| wherein said partition comprises a partition vent to allow air to pass between said growing section and said climate control system | The complaint makes a general allegation that the product meets the claim limitations. | ¶44 | col. 10:30-34 |
| whereby a plurality of tubes are in communication with said one or more vents... wherein said tubes are arranged at the bottom of said growing section to uniformly distribute air | The accused system comprises tubes for air utilization. The provided image shows tubes extending from the side corridor into the growing area near the floor. | ¶44; p. 7 | col. 10:34-41 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A primary dispute regarding the '617 Patent may be whether the accused ModulAIR system's side-corridor architecture can be considered an "end gable" as required by the claims. The visual evidence provided in the complaint appears to show a structure along the length of the greenhouse, not at its end, raising the question of a potential mismatch with the claim language.
- Technical Questions: For the ’668 Patent, while the general architecture appears to align with the visual evidence, key questions may arise regarding specific technical requirements. For example, what evidence demonstrates that the accused partition "runs the entire length" of the structure or that it contains a "partition vent" that allows for recirculation in the manner claimed? The complaint does not provide specific evidence on these technical details.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "end gable" ('617 Patent, Claim 1)
- Context and Importance: The infringement case for the '617 Patent hinges on the definition of this term. Practitioners may focus on this term because the accused product's architecture, as depicted in the complaint's own visual evidence, appears to be a side corridor, not a structure at the end of the greenhouse.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification does not provide an explicit definition, which could support an argument that the term should not be limited to a specific location but rather to its function as a separate, adjacent housing for the climate control system.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent figures consistently depict the structure at the short end of the rectangular greenhouse (e.g., '617 Patent, Fig. 1, 3). The ordinary meaning of "gable" refers to the triangular wall section at the end of a pitched roof, which supports a construction that is both structurally and positionally limited.
The Term: "runs the entire length" ('668 Patent, Claim 1)
- Context and Importance: This term is critical for defining the scope of the claimed side-corridor structure in the '668 Patent. The infringement analysis will depend on whether the accused ModulAIR greenhouse partition meets this strict-sounding requirement.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A party might argue that the term should be interpreted to mean "substantially the entire length" to account for minor, immaterial breaks for structural elements or doorways, consistent with the overall purpose of providing uniform airflow.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim uses the specific word "entire" without qualification ('668 Patent, col. 10:19-20). This suggests an intent to claim a partition that is continuous from one end of a side wall to the other, and any significant interruption would place a structure outside the claim's scope.
VI. Other Allegations
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement for both patents. For the '617 Patent, willfulness is based on alleged pre-suit knowledge dating back to "at least as early as 2016" from notice letters and Defendant's alleged role in a 2016 IPR challenging the patent (Compl. ¶26, 27, 37). For the '668 Patent, willfulness is based on alleged knowledge as of its issuance date and specific notice "at least by October 31, 2022," followed by continued alleged infringing sales and offers for sale (Compl. ¶28, 47).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "end gable" in the '617 Patent, which the patent's own figures show at the short end of the structure, be construed to cover the longitudinal "side corridor" architecture of the accused ModulAIR system? The viability of the infringement claim on the '617 Patent appears to rest heavily on this determination.
- A key evidentiary question will be one of technical conformity: for the '668 Patent, does the accused ModulAIR system, as actually constructed and sold, meet the specific limitations of the claims? Discovery will likely focus on whether the separating partition "runs the entire length" and incorporates a "partition vent" that operates as claimed, details not fully substantiated in the complaint's initial pleading.
- Finally, a central question for damages will be willfulness: given the extensive history alleged, including prior notice letters and a contested IPR proceeding, the court will need to determine if Defendant's alleged infringement was willful, which could expose it to the risk of enhanced damages.