DCT
4:21-cv-00836
YETI Coolers LLC v. Discover Home Products LLC
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: YETI Coolers, LLC (Delaware)
- Defendant: Discover Home Products, LLC (Missouri)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.
- Case Identification: 4:21-cv-00836, E.D. Mo., 07/09/2021
- Venue Allegations: Venue is based on Defendant being a Missouri company with principal places of business within the Eastern District of Missouri.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s soft-sided coolers, tote bags, and drink coolers infringe twenty-two of Plaintiff's utility and design patents related to the construction, features, and ornamental appearance of insulating containers.
- Technical Context: The case concerns the high-performance portable cooler market, where product differentiation often relies on durability, thermal efficiency, and distinctive product design.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention any prior litigation between the parties, Inter Partes Review proceedings concerning the patents-in-suit, or any relevant licensing history.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2014-02-07 | Priority Date for ’352, ’517, ’599, and ’716 Patents |
| 2014-09-23 | Priority Date for D787,187 Patent |
| 2015-02-27 | Priority Date for D732,348, D732,349, D732,350 Patents |
| 2015-06-23 | U.S. Patent No. D732,348 Issued |
| 2015-06-23 | U.S. Patent No. D732,349 Issued |
| 2015-06-23 | U.S. Patent No. D732,350 Issued |
| 2015-07-30 | Priority Date for D808,655 Patent |
| 2015-09-22 | U.S. Patent No. 9,139,352 Issued |
| 2016-02-05 | Priority Date for ’905, ’123, ’869, ’177, ’591, ’780 Patents |
| 2016-04-20 | Priority Date for ’885 Patent |
| 2017-05-23 | U.S. Patent No. D787,187 Issued |
| 2017-07-20 | Priority Date for ’997 Patent |
| 2017-10-17 | U.S. Patent No. D799,905 Issued |
| 2017-10-24 | U.S. Patent No. 9,796,517 Issued |
| 2017-10-31 | U.S. Patent No. D801,123 Issued |
| 2018-01-30 | U.S. Patent No. D808,655 Issued |
| 2018-02-13 | U.S. Patent No. D809,869 Issued |
| 2018-07-17 | U.S. Patent No. D822,997 Issued |
| 2018-08-14 | U.S. Patent No. 10,046,885 Issued |
| 2018-08-17 | Priority Date for ’812, ’813, ’815 Patents |
| 2019-09-17 | U.S. Patent No. D859,812 Issued |
| 2019-09-17 | U.S. Patent No. D859,813 Issued |
| 2019-09-17 | U.S. Patent No. D859,815 Issued |
| 2019-10-08 | U.S. Patent No. D862,177 Issued |
| 2019-10-15 | U.S. Patent No. 10,442,599 Issued |
| 2020-07-03 | Priority Date for ’570 Patent |
| 2020-09-22 | U.S. Patent No. D896,591 Issued |
| 2020-10-06 | U.S. Patent No. D897,780 Issued |
| 2020-12-01 | Priority Date for ’678 Patent |
| 2021-04-20 | U.S. Patent No. 10,981,716 Issued |
| 2021-05-11 | U.S. Patent No. D918,570 Issued |
| 2021-06-01 | U.S. Patent No. D920,678 Issued |
| 2021-07-09 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 9,139,352 - "Insulating Container"
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the general need for portable, non-rigid insulated containers for keeping food and beverages cool or warm (Compl. ¶2; ’352 Patent, col. 1:17-26). The background implies a need for coolers that are both portable and durable.
- The Patented Solution: The invention is an insulating container constructed with an outer shell, an inner liner, and a foam layer that is described as "floating freely" between them. This construction is combined with a waterproof closure to create a container that resists liquid leakage even when overturned (’352 Patent, Abstract; col. 4:41-45). The design aims to provide robust insulation in a flexible, soft-sided format.
- Technical Importance: This construction provides a method for creating durable, high-performance soft-sided coolers that are fully waterproof, a key feature in the premium cooler market.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶45).
- Claim 1 of the ’352 Patent includes the following essential elements:
- An insulating container comprising:
- an outer shell,
- an inner liner forming a storage compartment,
- a foam layer floating in between the outer shell and the inner liner, the foam layer providing insulation,
- an opening extending through the outer shell and the inner liner, and
- a closure adapted to substantially seal the opening, the closure being substantially waterproof so as to resist liquid from exiting the opening when the insulating container is in any orientation.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.
U.S. Patent No. 9,796,517 - "Insulating Container"
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the manufacturing process for non-rigid, insulated containers, suggesting a need for a repeatable method to create the specific multi-layer structure of a waterproof soft cooler (’517 Patent, col. 1:11-20).
- The Patented Solution: The patent claims a method of forming an insulating device through a series of specific assembly steps. This includes forming separate "cap" and body assemblies and then joining them. Key steps include forming inner liner and outer shell portions, securing them to a closure to create a "cap assembly," rolling rectangular foam to create a cylindrical foam body, inserting the foam into an outer shell portion, and inserting an inner liner into the foam assembly (’517 Patent, Abstract; col. 8:1-17).
- Technical Importance: This method provides a defined manufacturing pathway for producing soft-sided coolers with a consistent, multi-layered, and waterproof construction.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶52).
- Claim 1 of the ’517 Patent is a method claim with the following essential steps:
- forming an inner liner first portion and an outer shell first portion,
- securing the inner liner first portion and the outer shell first portion to a sealable closure to form a cap assembly,
- forming an inner liner second portion and securing it to the inner liner first portion to form an inner liner,
- forming an outer shell second portion,
- rolling a rectangular foam portion to form a first cylindrical foam portion and securing a foam base portion to it to form a foam assembly,
- inserting the foam assembly into the outer shell second portion,
- inserting the inner liner into the foam assembly, and
- securing the outer shell first portion to the outer shell second portion to form the outer shell.
- The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.
U.S. Patent No. 10,442,599 - "Insulating Containers"
- Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a method of forming an insulating device, focusing on a construction where an insulating layer is placed within an outer shell such that its bottom is unattached to the outer shell’s "bottom base support layer" (’599 Patent, Abstract). This addresses the assembly of a multi-component soft cooler.
- Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶59).
- Accused Features: The complaint alleges that the methods used to manufacture the Camp-Zero 20, 30, and 40 Can Soft Coolers infringe the ’599 Patent (Compl. ¶59).
U.S. Patent No. 10,981,716 - "Insulating Device"
- Technology Synopsis: This patent claims an insulating device with specific structural details, including an inner liner made of nylon fabric that is secured to the outer shell by a "weld" in a plane perpendicular to the bottom wall (’716 Patent, Abstract). It also specifies details of a lid assembly. This patent appears directed at the specific materials and connection methods used in a soft cooler's construction.
- Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶66).
- Accused Features: The complaint alleges that the Camp-Zero 12, 20, 30, and 40 Can Soft Coolers infringe the ’716 Patent (Compl. ¶66).
U.S. Patent No. 10,046,885 - "Spigot and Spigot Guard for an Insulating Container"
- Technology Synopsis: The patent describes a spigot assembly for a liquid-dispensing insulating container (’885 Patent, Abstract). It claims a specific mechanical structure for the spigot, including a body, a threaded valve rod, and a button configured to control fluid flow. This technology is relevant to larger "water cooler" style containers.
- Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶175).
- Accused Features: The complaint accuses the Camp-Zero 20 Premium Drink Cooler of infringement, which includes a spigot for dispensing liquids (Compl. ¶175; Compl. Illustration 27, p. 27).
Synopsis of Asserted Design Patents
- Plaintiff asserts sixteen design patents (D799,905; D801,123; D809,869; D862,177; D896,591; D897,780; D732,348; D732,349; D732,350; D787,187; D808,655; D822,997; D859,812; D859,813; D859,815; D918,570; D920,678). These patents cover the ornamental designs for various "insulating devices" and "bags" (Compl. ¶¶ 8, 25). The infringement allegations contend that the overall visual appearance of Defendant's Peak Series Soft Cooler, Camp-Zero soft coolers, and Camp-Zero CARRY-ALL Tote Bag are substantially the same as the patented designs to an ordinary observer (Compl. ¶¶ 74, 80, 86, 92, 98, 104, 110, 116, 122, 128, 134, 140, 146, 152, 158, 164, 170).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused products include the Camp-Zero 12, 20, 30, and 40 Can Soft Coolers; the Peak Series Soft Cooler; the Camp-Zero 35 Can Cooler; the Camp-Zero CARRY-ALL Tote Bag; and the Camp-Zero 20 Premium Drink Cooler (Compl. ¶42).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges these products are insulating containers designed for keeping contents cool (Compl. ¶¶ 45, 47). Visual evidence provided in the complaint depicts soft-sided, fabric-covered coolers with zippered tops, carrying handles, and attachment points. Illustration 20 shows an exemplary image of Discover's Camp-Zero 12 Can Soft Cooler, a cuboid-shaped soft cooler with a top zipper closure (Compl. p. 23). Illustration 26 depicts the Camp-Zero Tote Bag, which has an open-top tote bag form factor with external webbing for attachments (Compl. p. 26). The Camp-Zero 20 Premium Drink Cooler, shown in Illustration 27, is a hard-sided, upright container with a spigot near its base for dispensing liquids (Compl. p. 27). The complaint positions these products as direct competitors to Plaintiff's products (Compl. ¶41).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’352 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| an outer shell | The accused soft coolers include an outer shell. | ¶47 | col. 4:10-14 |
| an inner liner forming a storage compartment | The accused soft coolers include an inner liner that forms a storage compartment. | ¶47 | col. 4:10-14 |
| a foam layer floating in between the outer shell and the inner liner | The accused soft coolers include a foam layer that provides insulation and is positioned between the outer shell and inner liner. | ¶47 | col. 4:42-45 |
| an opening extending through the outer shell and the inner liner | The accused soft coolers include an opening extending through the outer shell and inner liner. | ¶47 | col. 4:38-39 |
| a closure adapted to substantially seal the opening, the closure being substantially waterproof...in any orientation | The accused soft coolers include a closure that substantially seals the opening and is substantially waterproof. | ¶47 | col. 5:19-25 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: A central issue may be the construction of the term "floating." The patent specification describes the foam layer as "not attached directly to the outer shell...or the inner liner" (’352 Patent, col. 4:42-45). The dispute may turn on whether the accused products' insulation layers meet this "floating" limitation or if they are attached or laminated in a way that falls outside the claim's scope.
- Technical Questions: The complaint makes a conclusory allegation that the accused coolers have a "foam layer floating in between" but provides no evidence regarding their internal construction (Compl. ¶47). A key factual question will be how the foam layer in the accused products is actually configured relative to the inner and outer layers.
’517 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a method of forming an insulating device comprising: forming an inner liner first portion and an outer shell first portion | The accused soft coolers are alleged to be formed by a method that includes forming these portions. | ¶54 | col. 8:31-33 |
| securing the inner liner first portion and the outer shell first portion to a sealable closure to form a cap assembly | The accused soft coolers are alleged to be formed by a method that includes this securing step. | ¶54 | col. 8:34-36 |
| ...forming an inner liner second portion and securing...to form an inner liner | The accused soft coolers are alleged to be formed by a method that includes this liner formation step. | ¶54 | col. 8:37-39 |
| ...forming an outer shell second portion | The accused soft coolers are alleged to be formed by a method that includes forming this portion. | ¶54 | col. 8:40-41 |
| rolling a rectangular foam portion to form a first cylindrical foam portion and securing a foam base portion...to form a foam assembly | The accused soft coolers are alleged to be formed by a method that includes this foam assembly process. | ¶54 | col. 8:41-45 |
| inserting the foam assembly into the outer shell second portion | The accused soft coolers are alleged to be formed by a method that includes this insertion step. | ¶54 | col. 8:46-47 |
| inserting the inner liner into the foam assembly | The accused soft coolers are alleged to be formed by a method that includes this insertion step. | ¶54 | col. 8:48-49 |
| securing the outer shell first portion to the outer shell second portion to form the outer shell | The accused soft coolers are alleged to be formed by a method that includes this final securing step. | ¶54 | col. 8:50-52 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Evidentiary Questions: The ’517 Patent claims a method of manufacture. The complaint alleges that the accused products are made by this method but provides no factual support detailing Defendant’s actual manufacturing process (Compl. ¶54). The central point of contention will be evidentiary: what proof, if any, will be developed to show that Defendant actually performs the specific sequence of claimed steps, such as "rolling a rectangular foam portion"?
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
- The Term: "a foam layer floating in between the outer shell and the inner liner" (’352 Patent, Claim 1)
- Context and Importance: This term is the core of the structural invention claimed in the ’352 Patent. Its definition will be critical to determining infringement. Practitioners may focus on this term because its scope will determine whether various methods of attaching or positioning an insulation layer (e.g., spot-welding, partial lamination) are covered by the claim.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification states, "the insulating layer 502 can be a free floating layer that is not attached directly to the outer shell 501 or the inner liner 500" (’352 Patent, col. 4:42-45). This language may support an interpretation that requires the foam layer to be completely unattached to either the inner or outer layers.
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The complaint does not provide sufficient detail for analysis of intrinsic evidence that may support a broader interpretation.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint does not assert separate counts for indirect or contributory infringement.
- Willful Infringement: The prayer for relief includes a conclusory allegation that Defendant's activities were willful (Compl. p. 66, ¶1(xxx)). The complaint does not plead specific facts, such as pre-suit notification or copying, to establish a basis for pre-suit knowledge or egregious conduct that might support a willfulness finding.
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A primary issue will be one of evidentiary proof for method claims: For the asserted method patents (e.g., ’517, ’599), what evidence can Plaintiff produce to demonstrate that Defendant’s accused products are manufactured using the specific, multi-step processes recited in the claims? The complaint provides only conclusory allegations on this point.
- A second core issue will be one of definitional scope for apparatus claims: For the asserted apparatus patents (e.g., ’352, ’716), can key claim terms such as "foam layer floating in between" and securing an inner liner "by a weld" be construed to read on the undisclosed internal construction of the accused coolers? The resolution of these terms will likely be dispositive for the apparatus patent claims.
- A third key question will be the application of the design patent infringement test: For the sixteen asserted design patents, would an ordinary observer, familiar with the prior art, be deceived into believing the accused coolers and bags are the same as the patented designs? This will require a visual, holistic comparison of the products against each patented design.