DCT
1:18-cv-01283
Allsop Inc v. Ambient Lighting Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Allsop, Inc. (Washington)
- Defendant: Ambient Lighting, Inc. (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Lowe Graham Jones
- Case Identification: 1:18-cv-01283, W.D. Wash., 04/10/2017
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant operates a national e-commerce website, directs sales efforts to customers in the Western District of Washington, and offers shipping to the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s solar-powered decorative lanterns infringe patents related to the design and construction of solar-powered collapsible lighting apparatuses.
- Technical Context: The technology involves self-contained, solar-powered lighting units designed to be collapsible for efficient shipping and storage, and then expanded for decorative outdoor use.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint states that on March 8, 2017, Plaintiff’s counsel sent a letter to Defendant providing notice of the alleged infringement. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office records for the ’461 patent note a terminal disclaimer, which may limit the patent's term to that of an earlier patent in the family.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2006-02-06 | Priority Date for '044 and '461 Patents |
| 2012-06-05 | U.S. Patent No. 8,192,044 Issued |
| 2014-02-25 | U.S. Patent No. 8,657,461 Issued |
| 2017-03-08 | Plaintiff's Counsel Sends Notice of Infringement to Defendant |
| 2017-04-10 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 8,657,461 - "Solar-Powered Collapsible Lighting Apparatus" (Issued Feb. 25, 2014)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent identifies a need for decorative hanging lanterns that are not limited by proximity to electrical outlets and are not "large and therefore expensive and burdensome to ship, transport and store" ('461 Patent, col. 1:26-29).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a self-contained lighting apparatus featuring a solar cell, a battery, and a light source integrated into a single housing, which is attached to a collapsible shade ('461 Patent, Abstract). This design allows the entire lantern to be flattened for shipping and storage, and then easily expanded for use, providing flexibility in placement without needing external power ('461 Patent, col. 2:29-34).
- Technical Importance: The invention provides an all-in-one, portable lighting solution suitable for outdoor settings where traditional powered lighting is impractical.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint does not specify asserted claims but alleges infringement of "one or more claims" (Compl. ¶1). Independent claim 16 is representative of the apparatus structure.
- Independent Claim 16:
- a lighting element assembly having a lighting element;
- a solar cell;
- a battery unit electrically coupled to the solar cell and to the lighting element assembly;
- a housing having a first section coupled to the solar cell, providing a compartment for the battery unit, with the lighting element positioned below a top of the housing and projecting from it; and
- a collapsible shade with a frame defining its shape, where the frame's upper portion is fastened to the housing and remains fastened when the shade is collapsed.
U.S. Patent No. 8,192,044 - "Solar-Powered Collapsible Lighting Apparatus" (Issued June 5, 2012)
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the same limitations of traditional hanging lanterns as its continuation, the ’461 patent: the need for external power and the difficulty of shipping large, non-collapsible items ('044 Patent, col. 1:19-32).
- The Patented Solution: The invention describes a solar-powered lantern with a specific housing construction. The housing is formed from two separable pieces—an upper and lower section—that are secured together to clamp the fabric of the collapsible shade in place ('044 Patent, col. 5:15-22). This two-part clamping mechanism is a key feature illustrated in the patent’s figures ('044 Patent, Fig. 5).
- Technical Importance: This design provides a specific mechanical solution for securely attaching a collapsible fabric shade to the power and lighting module.
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint does not specify asserted claims but alleges infringement of "one or more claims" (Compl. ¶2). Independent claim 1 is representative of the apparatus structure.
- Independent Claim 1:
- a lighting element assembly, a solar cell, and a battery unit;
- a housing with a recess for the solar cell, a compartment for the battery, an opening for the lighting element, and comprising an "upper section separably secured to a lower section"; and
- a "light-transmissible, fabric, collapsible shade" with an upper portion that is "clamped between the upper section and lower section of the housing."
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
The complaint identifies Defendant's "Collapsible Lantern" products, highlighting the "Coastal Blues 12" Solar Lanterns" (model LC003646) as an exemplary product and listing several other accused model numbers (Compl. ¶13-14).
Functionality and Market Context
The accused products are described as solar-powered lanterns featuring a collapsible shade, a lighting assembly with LEDs, a solar cell, and a battery (Compl. ¶16). The complaint alleges the housing is "formed in two sections secured together" and that the "collapsible shade is attached, clamped between the two sections of the housing" (Compl. ¶1, p. 5). A screenshot from Defendant's website shows the product marketed for outdoor use with an automatic dusk-to-dawn sensor (Compl. ¶4). This screenshot shows the "Coastal Blues 12" Solar Lanterns" available for purchase online (Compl. ¶4).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’461 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 16) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a housing having a first section coupled to the solar cell, said housing providing a compartment for receiving the battery unit, wherein the lighting element is positioned below a top of the housing and projects from the housing | The accused lanterns have a housing that "receives a solar cell and battery" and a lighting assembly with "LEDs [that] extend below the assembly and into the collapsible shade." | ¶16 | col. 2:57-65 |
| a collapsible shade including a frame defining a shade shape, the frame having an upper portion...fastened to the housing, the frame being collapsible together with the shade, the upper portion of the shade remaining fastened to the housing when collapsed | The accused lanterns include a "collapsible shade" that is "supported by a collapsible wire frame" and is "attached, clamped between the two sections of the housing." A close-up image shows the top of the lantern assembly. | ¶16; ¶15 | col. 7:21-31 |
’044 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a housing having...an upper section separably secured to a lower section | The accused product's housing is "formed in two sections secured together." An image shows the accused product for sale. | ¶16; ¶14 | col. 3:6-8 |
| a light-transmissible, fabric, collapsible shade having an upper portion defining an opening, the upper portion clamped between the upper section and lower section of the housing | "The collapsible shade is attached, clamped between the two sections of the housing..." | ¶1 (p. 5) | col. 5:19-22 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Scope Questions: A central question may be the distinction between the claim terms "fastened" (in the ’461 patent) and "clamped" (in the ’044 patent). The court may need to determine if the accused product's single attachment mechanism, which the complaint describes as "clamping," meets the distinct limitations of both patents, or if "fastened" requires a different or additional mode of connection.
- Technical Questions: The infringement case hinges on whether the accused lanterns are constructed as alleged. A key question of fact will be whether discovery and expert analysis confirm that the accused housing is indeed a two-part assembly that clamps the shade material between its sections, as required by claim 1 of the ’044 patent.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "clamped" (from ’044 Patent, Claim 1)
- Context and Importance: This term defines the specific method of attaching the shade to the housing and is central to the infringement theory for the ’044 patent. Practitioners may focus on this term because its definition will determine whether the accused product's attachment mechanism falls within the claim's scope.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent does not provide an explicit definition, which may support an argument for applying the term’s plain and ordinary meaning, covering any method of pressing or holding together.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification and figures consistently depict a specific structure where the upper portion of the shade is sandwiched between the upper (31) and lower (33) sections of the housing ('044 Patent, Fig. 5; col. 5:15-22). A party could argue this specific embodiment limits the term "clamped" to this configuration.
The Term: "fastened to the housing" (from ’461 Patent, Claim 16)
- Context and Importance: This term is used in the later-issued ’461 patent, which claims priority to the application for the ’044 patent where "clamped" was used. The choice of a different term raises questions of intended scope. The infringement allegation for the ’461 patent depends on the accused "clamping" mechanism also meeting the definition of "fastening."
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes various ways of connecting parts, such as rods inserted into cavities or screws, suggesting "fastened" could be a general term for attachment ('461 Patent, col. 3:5-7; col. 5:24-25).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: A party could argue that by using a different term than "clamped," the patentee intended a different meaning. However, the specification does not clearly delineate such a distinction, potentially making this a difficult argument without further evidence from the prosecution history.
VI. Other Allegations
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement based on Defendant's continued sales after receiving a notice letter from Plaintiff's counsel on March 8, 2017 (Compl. ¶17, 24, 33). This pre-suit notice is asserted as establishing Defendant's knowledge of the patents and its alleged infringement.
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of claim construction and scope: Can the accused product's single attachment mechanism, which the complaint describes as "clamping," be found to meet the potentially distinct requirements of both being "clamped" as recited in the ’044 patent and "fastened" as recited in the ’461 patent?
- A key evidentiary question will be one of technical correspondence: Will discovery confirm that the physical construction of the accused lanterns embodies the specific two-part housing and shade-attachment structure described in the patent claims and alleged in the complaint?
- The viability of the willfulness claim will likely depend on the specific content and clarity of the March 8, 2017 notice letter. The court will need to assess whether the letter provided notice sufficiently specific to give rise to a duty to investigate and avoid infringement, thereby making subsequent sales objectively reckless.