DCT
3:18-cv-00073
Brentwood Industries Inc v. Stinger Equipment Inc
Key Events
Complaint
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Brentwood Industries, Inc. (Pennsylvania)
- Defendant: Stinger Equipment, Inc. (Kentucky)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A.; Panitch Schwarze Belisario & Nadel LLP
- Case Identification: 3:18-cv-00073, W.D. Ky., 02/05/2018
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the Western District of Kentucky because the Defendant is a Kentucky corporation and is therefore deemed to reside in the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s "Go Barrow 9000" wheelbarrow infringes a patent related to a wheelbarrow pan design that incorporates recessed depressions for fastener heads.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns mechanical improvements to material transport equipment, specifically the design of a wheelbarrow pan to prevent damage to fasteners and improve usability.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that Plaintiff sent a letter to Defendant on January 3, 2018, providing notice of the alleged infringement of the patent-in-suit. This event is cited as the basis for the willfulness allegation.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2006-01-11 | '204 Patent Priority Date |
| 2006-09-25 | '204 Patent Application Filing Date |
| 2010-01-05 | '204 Patent Issue Date |
| 2018-01-03 | Plaintiff sends notice of infringement to Defendant |
| 2018-02-05 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 7,641,204 - "Wheelbarrow with Bolt Head Depressions" (Issued Jan. 5, 2010)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: In conventional wheelbarrows, the bolts used to attach the pan to the undercarriage have heads that protrude into the pan's carrying space. These exposed bolt heads create an obstacle for scraping implements like shovels, which can lead to damage to the shovel, the bolt head, or the pan itself. ('204 Patent, col. 1:25-36).
- The Patented Solution: The invention creates recessed areas, or "depressions," in the pan at the fastening points. The head of the fastening mechanism is positioned within this depression, such that it sits below the main carrying surface of the pan. The patent describes this as creating a "depression plane" that is "generally continuous with the carrying surface," allowing a shovel to glide over the fastener location without impact. ('204 Patent, Abstract; col. 5:4-10).
- Technical Importance: This design sought to improve the durability of the wheelbarrow and the user's tools by eliminating a common point of impact and obstruction. ('204 Patent, col. 1:40-47).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claims 1, 17, and 25. (Compl. ¶17).
- Independent Claim 1 (Apparatus): A wheelbarrow comprising:
- an undercarriage;
- a wheel rotatably mounted to the undercarriage;
- a pan with a base wall and upright wall defining a carrying space and a carrying surface;
- a depression in the pan with a bottom wall and defining a "depression plane" that is "generally continuous with the carrying surface"; and
- a fastening mechanism with a head that is positioned within the depression, between the bottom wall of the depression and the depression plane.
- Independent Claim 17 (Apparatus): A wheelbarrow comprising, among other elements, a pan with "a first base depression and a base second depression formed at least partially in the transition portion" and "a first generally planar engagement surface defined between the first and second base depressions."
- Independent Claim 25 (Component): A pan for a wheelbarrow, comprising a depression "configured to receive a fastening mechanism" such that the fastener's head is positioned within the depression between its bottom wall and a depression plane.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
The Stinger Go Barrow 9000. (Compl. ¶16).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint identifies the Accused Product as a wheelbarrow offered for sale and sold through Defendant's website. (Compl. ¶16).
- The allegedly infringing features include a pan mounted to an undercarriage, where the pan contains "a depression having a bottom wall and defining a depression plane being generally continuous with a carrying surface." (Compl. ¶17). The complaint further alleges that a fastening mechanism mounts the pan to the undercarriage with its head positioned within this depression. (Compl. ¶17).
- No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’204 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a pan mounted to and supported by the undercarriage... | The Accused Product's features include a pan mounted to and supported by its undercarriage. | ¶17 | col. 3:2-4 |
| the pan including a base wall and an upright wall extending upwardly from the base wall, the base wall and upright wall defining a carrying space and a generally smooth, continuous carrying surface facing the carrying space... | The Accused Product's pan defines a depression plane "being generally continuous with a carrying surface." | ¶17 | col. 3:48-54 |
| a depression being formed in the pan, the depression having a bottom wall and defining a depression plane being generally continuous with the carrying surface... | The Accused Product includes a depression having a bottom wall and defining a depression plane. | ¶17 | col. 5:4-7 |
| a fastening mechanism having a head, the fastening mechanism mounting the pan to the undercarriage such that the head is positioned within the depression between the bottom wall of the depression and the depression plane. | The Accused Product has a fastening mechanism with a head that "mounts the pan to the undercarriage such that the head is positioned within the depression between the bottom wall of the depression and the depression plane." | ¶17 | col. 6:4-10 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: A central question for the court will be the proper construction of "depression plane being generally continuous with the carrying surface." The outcome of the dispute may turn on whether this requires a mathematically planar surface or allows for some degree of curvature or functional continuity, which the patent itself appears to contemplate. ('204 Patent, col. 6:37-40).
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges infringement of claim 17, which requires "a first base depression and a base second depression" and a "planar engagement surface defined between" them. ('204 Patent, col. 10:7-12). However, the narrative allegations in the complaint describe "a depression" in the singular. (Compl. ¶17). This raises the question of what evidence the complaint provides to support the presence of the dual-depression structure required by claim 17 in the Accused Product.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "depression plane being generally continuous with the carrying surface" (Claim 1)
Context and Importance
This term is the lynchpin of the inventive concept, as it defines the boundary that the fastener head must not cross to avoid obstruction. The interpretation of "generally continuous" will be critical to determining the scope of the claim and whether the geometry of the Accused Product infringes.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent's background describes the problem functionally as avoiding impact with a shovel. ('204 Patent, col. 1:30-36). This could support an interpretation where any surface that allows a tool to pass over the fastener without obstruction is "generally continuous." The specification also notes the plane "may have some curvature." ('204 Patent, col. 6:37-40).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification describes the depression plane as an "imaginary cap" that is "defined by the terminal edge 38c" of the depression. ('204 Patent, col. 5:64-67; Fig. 5). This language suggests a more defined geometric boundary that may be required for a finding of infringement.
The Term: "head is positioned within the depression between the bottom wall of the depression and the depression plane" (Claim 1)
Context and Importance
This limitation defines the location of the fastener head, which is the functional heart of the invention. Practitioners may focus on this term because the dispute will likely involve measuring the precise location of the fastener head in the Accused Product relative to the surrounding pan surface.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The purpose is to prevent a shovel from "slid[ing]... into the bolt head." ('204 Patent, col. 1:32-33). This could support a reading where only the top-most surface of the head needs to be at or below the depression plane to achieve the stated function.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description states that "the entire head 48 of each of the bolts or fasteners is preferably positioned between the bottom wall 38a of the depression 38 and the depression plane 40." ('204 Patent, col. 6:28-31). While the word "preferably" may preclude a strict limitation, the use of "entire head" provides a strong basis for an argument that the whole volume of the head must be recessed below the plane.
VI. Other Allegations
Indirect Infringement
The complaint alleges both contributory and induced infringement. It asserts that Defendant sells the Accused Product to distributors and customers with knowledge of their direct infringement, and that the product has no substantial non-infringing uses. (Compl. ¶¶ 18, 20). The allegation of inducement may be supported by reference to the "Stinger Equipment Go Barrow 9000 Operator's Manual," which could be argued to instruct end-users on infringing uses. (Compl. ¶16).
Willful Infringement
The complaint alleges willful infringement based on Defendant's continued infringement "At least since January 3, 2018," the date Plaintiff allegedly sent a notice letter to Defendant. (Compl. ¶¶ 19, 24).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of claim construction: can the term "depression plane being generally continuous with the carrying surface" be defined by its functional purpose of allowing a tool to pass unimpeded, or does it require a specific, measurable geometric relationship between the recessed fastener and the surrounding pan surface?
- A key evidentiary question will be one of factual correspondence: does the Accused Product's design incorporate the specific multi-depression structure recited in independent claim 17—namely, "a first base depression and a base second depression" with a "planar engagement surface" between them—or do the facts only support the singular "depression" described in the complaint's narrative and claimed more broadly in independent claims 1 and 25?