3:25-cv-00809
Viscosoft Inc v. Shaoxing Spring Home Textile Co Ltd
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Viscosoft, Inc. (North Carolina)
- Defendant: Shaoxing Spring Home Textile Co., Ltd. (China)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Allen Stahl & Kilbourne, PLLC
- Case Identification: 3:25-cv-00809, W.D.N.C., 10/17/2025
- Venue Allegations: Venue is asserted on the basis that the Defendant is a foreign company with no place of business in the United States.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s mattress toppers infringe a design patent for the ornamental appearance of a mattress topper.
- Technical Context: The dispute concerns the ornamental design of bedding products, a consumer goods category with a significant e-commerce presence.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint does not reference any prior litigation, patent office proceedings, or licensing history related to the patent-in-suit.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2019-01-29 | U.S. Patent No. D969,522 Priority Date |
| 2022-11-15 | U.S. Patent No. D969,522 Issues |
| 2025-10-17 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Design Patent No. D969,522 S - "Mattress Topper"
- Patent Identification: U.S. Design Patent No. D969,522 S, entitled "Mattress Topper," issued on November 15, 2022 (’522 Patent).
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: Design patents protect ornamental appearance rather than functional solutions. The patent itself does not articulate a technical problem, as its purpose is to claim a novel, non-obvious ornamental design for an article of manufacture (D969522 Patent, Claim). The complaint, however, describes the design as including "an anti-slip design on the bottom" and "adjustable straps to secure the mattress topper" (Compl. ¶11).
- The Patented Solution: The patent claims the ornamental design for a mattress topper as depicted in its figures (D969,522 Patent, Claim). The claimed design consists of several distinct visual features: a top surface with a uniform stippled pattern (D969,522 Patent, FIG. 1, FIG. 7); a bottom surface with a different, more complex repeating pattern (D969,522 Patent, FIG. 6); and adjustable straps located at each corner, which are shown extending diagonally inward on the bottom surface and including a buckle mechanism (D969,522 Patent, FIG. 8).
- Technical Importance: The design provides a distinctive overall visual appearance for a mattress topper, differentiating it from other products in a competitive consumer market (Compl. ¶11).
Key Claims at a Glance
- Design patents contain a single claim. The asserted claim is for "The ornamental design for a mattress topper, as shown and described" (D969,522 Patent, col. 1:57-58).
- The core ornamental elements shown in the patent drawings include:
- A top surface having a grid of small, spaced-apart circles.
- A bottom surface having a repeating pattern of interlocking oval or chain-like shapes.
- Adjustable straps originating from each of the four corners on the bottom surface.
- A specific diagonal orientation and buckle design for the corner straps.
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
The "Chun Yi Accused Products" are mattress toppers sold by Defendant Shaoxing Spring Home Textile Co., Ltd. (Compl. ¶14).
Functionality and Market Context
The complaint alleges that the accused products are mattress toppers of various sizes and thicknesses sold in the United States exclusively through e-commerce channels, including Amazon.com (Compl. ¶4-5, ¶14). The products are allegedly stored in and distributed from Amazon warehouses in the U.S. via the "Fulfillment by Amazon" program (Compl. ¶6). The complaint provides photographs of the accused mattress topper, including a view of its bottom surface with corner straps (Compl. ¶16).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
The standard for design patent infringement is whether an "ordinary observer," familiar with the prior art, would be deceived into thinking the accused design is the same as the patented design. The complaint alleges that the accused products embody a design that is "substantially the same" as the patented design (Compl. ¶17).
D969,522 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from the single design claim) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| The overall ornamental design for a mattress topper, as shown and described. | The overall appearance of the accused mattress toppers, which allegedly creates the same visual impression as the patented design in the eye of an ordinary observer. | ¶17 | col. 1:57-58 |
| The ornamental design of the bottom surface, including a repeating texture and diagonally-oriented adjustable corner straps. | The accused products feature a bottom surface with a repeating pattern and adjustable straps at each corner that are configured in a similar manner to the patented design, as depicted in product photographs. | ¶16, ¶17 | col. 1:65-67 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: The primary question will be whether the overall visual impression of the accused products is substantially the same as that of the ’522 Patent design. The analysis will focus on the combination of the bottom surface pattern and the specific configuration of the corner straps.
- Technical Questions: While the analysis is visual, a factual question may arise regarding the level of similarity in the specific repeating patterns on the bottom surfaces of the patented design and the accused product. The complaint asserts substantial similarity by placing images side-by-side (Compl. ¶17).
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
In design patent cases, claim construction is not a verbal exercise but a visual one, focused on the scope of the design as depicted in the patent's drawings. The claim itself—"The ornamental design for a mattress topper, as shown and described"—does not contain technical terms requiring construction in the manner of a utility patent. The scope of the claim is defined by the visual appearance of the mattress topper shown in Figures 1-8 of the ’522 Patent. The central dispute will not turn on the definition of a word but on a comparison of the accused product's appearance to the patented design as a whole.
VI. Other Allegations
Indirect Infringement
The complaint does not allege induced or contributory infringement. It asserts direct infringement under 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(a) and 289 (Compl. ¶15).
Willful Infringement
The complaint alleges that Defendant "has willfully and knowingly infringed" the ’522 Patent (Compl. ¶15). The pleading does not, however, allege specific facts to support pre-suit knowledge of the patent, such as receipt of a notice letter.
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
The resolution of this dispute will likely depend on the answers to two central questions:
- A core issue will be one of visual comparison: will an ordinary observer, giving the attention that a typical purchaser of bedding products would, be deceived into believing the accused mattress topper is the same as the design claimed in the ’522 Patent? The analysis will likely focus on the similarity of the products' overall appearance, particularly the combination of the bottom surface texture and the corner strap design.
- A key evidentiary question will be the impact of the prior art: how will the landscape of pre-existing mattress topper designs, which will be developed during discovery, inform the scope of the patented design and the perspective of the hypothetical "ordinary observer" in determining infringement?