DCT
1:23-cv-04885
Dao Health v. Shenzhen Lutejiacheng Technology Co Ltd
Key Events
Amended Complaint
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Dao Health (California)
- Defendant: SHENZHEN LUTEJIANCHENG TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. (China)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Susman Godfrey LLP
- Case Identification: 1:23-cv-04885, N.D. Ill., 02/06/2025
- Venue Allegations: Venue is asserted on the basis that the Defendant is a foreign entity not resident in the United States and may therefore be sued in any judicial district. The complaint also alleges Defendant conducts substantial business in the district through online sales and distributors.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s Momcozy, Paruu, and PiBur brand wearable breast pumps infringe three patents related to compact, hands-free, and self-contained breast milk collection devices.
- Technical Context: The technology occupies the market for wearable breast pumps, which are designed to offer discretion and convenience by fitting entirely within a user's brassiere, allowing for hands-free operation.
- Key Procedural History: This action was initiated with a complaint filed on July 26, 2023. The present filing is a Fourth Amended Complaint, which adds allegations regarding new products Defendant launched after the initial suit was filed. The complaint alleges Defendant was aware of at least one patent-in-suit prior to the lawsuit, based on an Information Disclosure Statement filed with the USPTO.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2004-10-13 | Earliest Priority Date for ’915, ’772, and ’646 Patents |
| 2009-07-14 | ’915 Patent Issued |
| 2009-XX-XX | Plaintiff's Freemie® product line brought to market |
| 2012-02-21 | ’772 Patent Issued |
| 2014-04-22 | ’646 Patent Issued |
| 2018-XX-XX | Defendant allegedly began infringing activities |
| 2023-03-30 | Defendant allegedly became aware of ’772 Patent via IDS filing |
| 2023-07-26 | Initial Complaint Filed |
| 2023-08-04 | Launch of Accused Momcozy V1 and V2 Products |
| 2024-06-XX | Launch of Accused Momcozy Mobile Style M6 and Mobile Flow M9 Products |
| 2024-07-03 | Plaintiff discovered Defendant's sale of Paruu and PiBur branded products |
| 2025-02-06 | Fourth Amended Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 7,559,915 - "Breast Pump Device with Self-Contained Breast Milk Reservoir," issued July 14, 2009 (’915 Patent)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background describes conventional breast pumps as cumbersome, disruptive, and requiring users to partially undress, making it difficult for mothers to pump milk consistently, particularly in a workplace setting (’915 Patent, col. 2:11-28).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a compact, self-contained breast milk collection device designed to fit discreetly inside a standard brassiere. It integrates a funnel-shaped breast adaptor and a milk reservoir into a "single self-contained unit," eliminating the external bottles and hoses characteristic of earlier systems and allowing for hands-free operation when connected to a suction source (’915 Patent, col. 5:6-15; col. 7:36-40).
- Technical Importance: This integrated design offered a more discreet and convenient method for pumping breast milk, aiming to allow users to perform other tasks simultaneously without the need to disrobe (Compl. ¶14).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claims 11 and 16 (Compl. ¶62).
- Claim 11 requires:
- A funnel shaped breast adaptor adapted to receive a woman's breast.
- A reservoir with an internal volume to receive and store breast milk from the adaptor.
- The adaptor and reservoir forming a single unit adapted to fit within a brassiere.
- The internal volume being adapted to communicate with an external suction source for cyclical suction.
U.S. Patent No. 8,118,772 - "Breast Pump Device with Self-Contained Breast Milk Reservoir," issued February 21, 2012 (’772 Patent)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: In addition to the convenience issues addressed by the ’915 Patent, this patent addresses the technical problem of milk backflow into the vacuum pump mechanism, which can cause contamination and damage (’772 Patent, col. 5:64-6:6).
- The Patented Solution: The patent discloses a more advanced device that incorporates a distinct valve assembly positioned "between and surrounded by the adaptor and the reservoir." This assembly creates a "reduced volume" separate from the main reservoir and, in certain embodiments, uses a flexible bladder to isolate the milk pathway from the vacuum source, managing pressure cycles while preventing milk from entering the pump’s tubing (’772 Patent, Abstract; col. 8:50-58).
- Technical Importance: The introduction of a dedicated valve assembly between the adaptor and reservoir provided a mechanism to improve suction efficiency and protect the pump motor from contamination by expressed milk (Compl. ¶83).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claim 31 (Compl. ¶84).
- Claim 1 requires:
- A breast adaptor with a receiving end and an opposite end.
- A reservoir coupled with and enclosing the adaptor to form a single unit.
- A valve assembly "disposed between and surrounded by" the adaptor and reservoir, which alternately opens and closes fluid communication.
- The valve assembly creating a "reduced volume" that is less than the reservoir's interior volume.
U.S. Patent No. 8,702,646 - "Submersible Valve for a Breast Milk Collection Device with Self-Contained Reservoir," issued April 22, 2014 (’646 Patent)
Technology Synopsis
This patent details an improved valve system intended to increase the usable milk collection capacity of a wearable pump without increasing its physical size. It claims a "submersible" valve element, such as a duckbill valve, that extends into the reservoir and is designed to remain functional even when submerged in collected milk, preventing backflow under fluid pressure and allowing more of the reservoir's volume to be used (’646 Patent, col. 1:40-52; Abstract).
Asserted Claims
The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶104).
Accused Features
The complaint alleges that the accused devices contain a valve assembly with a valve element that extends into the reservoir and is adapted to become submerged in breast milk as the level rises, thereby infringing the ’646 Patent (Compl. ¶109).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
At least nineteen models of wearable breast pumps sold under the "Momcozy," "Paruu," and "PiBur" brand names are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶18). The complaint provides specific functional descriptions for models including the Momcozy S9 Pro, S12 Pro, M1, M5, M6, and M9 (Compl. ¶19-34).
Functionality and Market Context
The accused products are described as hands-free, wearable breast milk pumping and collection devices configured to be supported within a brassiere (Compl. ¶19, ¶25, ¶30). They generally comprise a funnel-shaped flange (adaptor) for engaging the breast, a milk collector (reservoir), and a valve assembly to control milk flow (Compl. ¶19-21, ¶26-27). The devices incorporate a source of "alternating vacuum force," typically from an attached, battery-powered pump housing, to express milk (Compl. ¶21, ¶25). The complaint alleges that many of the Paruu and PiBur models are "substantially similar in design, function, and operation" to the accused Momcozy products (Compl. ¶38, ¶40, ¶42).
Visual Evidence
No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'915 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 11) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a funnel shaped breast adaptor, said breast adaptor adapted to receive a woman's breast therein | The accused devices include a "funnel shaped breast adaptor" for receiving a woman's breast. | ¶66 | col. 7:12-14 |
| a reservoir, said reservoir having an internal volume, said internal volume adapted to receive and store breast milk produced from said woman's breast seated in said breast adaptor | The accused devices include a reservoir with an internal volume that receives and stores expressed breast milk. | ¶66 | col. 7:9-11 |
| said breast adaptor and said reservoir forming a single unit adapted to fit within said woman's brassiere | The accused devices' breast adaptors and reservoirs are alleged to form a single unit designed to be worn inside a brassiere. | ¶67 | col. 7:36-40 |
| said internal volume adapted to communicate with an external suction source, said external suction source adapted to cyclically provide suction force to said internal volume of said reservoir... | The reservoirs are adapted to communicate with a suction source (e.g., in a pump housing) that provides cyclical suction. | ¶68 | col. 8:40-42 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A potential issue for construction may arise from the term "external suction source." The patent figures depict tabletop pumps connected by hoses, whereas the accused devices often feature integrated motors attached to the collection unit housing. The dispute may turn on whether such an integrated motor is "external" to the claimed "internal volume of said reservoir."
'772 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a breast adaptor having a first receiving end adapted to fittingly and sealingly receive at least a portion of a woman's breast... | The accused devices comprise a breast adaptor with a receiving end for the breast. | ¶87 | col. 8:34-37 |
| a reservoir coupled with and enclosing the adaptor to form a single unit with the adaptor... | The accused devices have a reservoir coupled with the adaptor to form a single unit. | ¶88 | col. 8:41-43 |
| a valve assembly disposed between and surrounded by the adaptor and the reservoir, the valve assembly alternately opening and closing fluid communication... | The accused devices include a valve assembly located between and surrounded by the adaptor and reservoir that alternately opens and closes fluid communication. | ¶89 | col. 8:50-54 |
| the valve assembly creating a reduced volume... said reduced volume being less than said interior volume of said reservoir | The accused devices' valve assembly is alleged to create a reduced volume that is smaller than the reservoir's internal volume. | ¶90 | col. 8:55-58 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: The infringement analysis may focus on the phrase "valve assembly disposed between and surrounded by the adaptor and the reservoir." A question for the court could be whether the accused products, which may have a valve integrated into the adaptor or reservoir structure, meet this limitation requiring a structurally distinct assembly situated "between" the other two components.
- Technical Questions: A factual question will be whether the accused devices' valve mechanism actually creates a "reduced volume" that is functionally and structurally distinct from the main reservoir, as required by the claim.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "external suction source" (’915 Patent, Claim 11)
- Context and Importance: This term is critical because the accused products typically use integrated, battery-powered pump motors that are part of the wearable unit, contrasting with the physically separate, tabletop pumps depicted in several patent figures. The definition will determine if the patent's scope covers such all-in-one designs.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language requires the source to be external to the "internal volume of said reservoir," not necessarily external to the entire device housing. The specification’s reference to both "electric pump or manual pump" suggests the type of source is not narrowly limited (’915 Patent, col. 5:9-10).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figures 1, 6, and 7 of the ’915 Patent consistently depict the pump (12) as a separate unit connected by a long hose (50), which a party could argue defines the inventors' understanding of an "external" source.
The Term: "valve assembly disposed between and surrounded by the adaptor and the reservoir" (’772 Patent, Claim 1)
- Context and Importance: This phrase dictates the structural relationship of the invention's core components. Infringement hinges on whether the accused products contain three identifiable components in this specific spatial arrangement, or if their valve is merely an integrated feature of the adaptor or reservoir.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A party might argue that any component that performs the valving function and is physically located along the fluid path between the breast-contacting funnel and the main storage chamber meets the claim's requirement.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figures in the ’772 Patent, such as the exploded view in Fig. 17, illustrate the valve assembly (comprising parts 252, 254, 256) as a distinct, multi-part module that is physically separate from and installed between the adaptor (216) and reservoir (218). This could support an argument that the term requires a separable component, not just an integrated feature.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement of infringement, stating that Defendant provides product manuals, instructions, and marketing materials that direct end-users to operate the accused devices in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶76, ¶95, ¶111).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement based on both pre-suit and post-suit knowledge. Pre-suit knowledge of the ’772 Patent is alleged as of March 30, 2023, from an Information Disclosure Statement submitted to the USPTO (Compl. ¶47). Willfulness is further asserted based on Defendant's alleged continuation of infringement and its launch of numerous new accused products after the initial complaint was filed, which Plaintiff characterizes as a "whack-a-mole' approach" and a "disregard for U.S. patent law" (Compl. ¶49, ¶56).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of structural interpretation: Do the accused products, with their integrated components, contain a distinct "valve assembly disposed between... the adaptor and the reservoir" as required by the ’772 patent, or is their construction fundamentally different from the modular architecture disclosed in the patent's embodiments?
- A second key question will be one of definitional scope: Can the term "external suction source" in the ’915 patent be construed to cover the compact, on-device motors used in modern wearable pumps, or is its meaning limited by the patent's depiction of separate, off-device pump units?
- Finally, a central question for damages will be willfulness: Does Defendant's alleged conduct in launching multiple new product lines, including under different brand names, after the lawsuit was filed demonstrate the kind of egregious behavior that would justify an award of enhanced damages?