DCT

1:22-cv-10281

Shenzhen Chengront Technology Co Ltd v. Besign Direct

Log In
Key Events
Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:22-cv-10281, S.D.N.Y., 12/05/2022
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged based on Defendants’ regular transaction of business in the district, including selling products through an Amazon.com storefront and shipping the accused product to an address within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s Besign LSX3 Adjustable Laptop Stand infringes its design patent for a laptop stand.
  • Technical Context: The dispute concerns the field of computer accessories, specifically the ornamental and aesthetic design of adjustable stands used to hold laptop computers.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint does not reference any prior litigation, inter partes review proceedings, or licensing history related to the patent-in-suit.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2020-09-30 U.S. Patent No. D955,399 Priority Date
2022-06-21 U.S. Patent No. D955,399 Issued
2022-12-05 Complaint Filed

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Design Patent No. D955,399, titled “Laptop Stand,” issued on June 21, 2022 (the “'399 Patent”).

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: Design patents protect the novel, ornamental, and non-functional appearance of an article of manufacture. The '399 Patent addresses the challenge of creating a new and unique ornamental design for a laptop stand (Compl. ¶13; '399 Patent, Claim).
  • The Patented Solution: The patent claims the specific visual appearance of a laptop stand as depicted in its eight figures ('399 Patent, Figs. 1-8). The design consists of a flat, rectangular base with rounded corners, a central vertical support column, and an angled, U-shaped tray for holding a laptop. The tray features two raised lips at the front to secure the device. Portions of the design shown in broken lines, such as the underside of the base and parts of the height-adjustment mechanism, are explicitly disclaimed and do not form part of the protected design ('399 Patent, Description).
  • Technical Importance: The complaint characterizes the product category as "next generation technology laptop computer stands" (Compl. ¶11).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts the single claim of the '399 Patent (Compl. ¶13).
  • The claim is for: "The ornamental design for a laptop stand, as shown and described" ('399 Patent, Claim). In design patent litigation, the "elements" of the claim are the visual features of the design as a whole, depicted in the patent's drawings.

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The "Besign LSX3 Adjustable Laptop Stand" (Compl. ¶1).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint identifies the accused instrumentality as a laptop stand that Defendants manufacture, market, and sell in the United States, including through an Amazon.com storefront (Compl. ¶1, ¶5, ¶14). The central allegation regarding the product is that it is "virtually identical in appearance to the laptop stands claimed in the '399 patent" (Compl. ¶14). The complaint does not provide further technical details about the product's operation or specific features beyond its function as a laptop stand.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

Design patent infringement is determined by the "ordinary observer" test, which asks whether an ordinary observer, familiar with the prior art, would be deceived into purchasing the accused product believing it to be the patented design. The complaint alleges that this standard is met because the accused product is "virtually identical in appearance" to the design claimed in the patent (Compl. ¶14).

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

The complaint does not contain claim charts or visual side-by-side comparisons. The infringement allegation rests on the assertion of near-identical appearance between the accused product and the design shown in the figures of the '399 Patent. The central dispute will involve a visual comparison between the Besign LSX3 stand and the solid-line drawings of the '399 Patent.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

In design patent cases, claim construction focuses on the scope of the claimed design as a whole, rather than on discrete text-based terms.

  • The Term: "as shown and described"
  • Context and Importance: This phrase incorporates the patent's drawings as the definition of the claim. A critical aspect of construction will be determining the effect of the broken lines used in the patent's figures. Practitioners may focus on this issue because the use of broken lines explicitly disclaims the depicted subject matter, thereby limiting the scope of the protected design and defining what is and is not relevant for the infringement comparison.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claimed design covers any laptop stand that incorporates the overall visual impression created by the features shown in solid lines in Figures 1-8, irrespective of how unclaimed portions (shown in broken lines) may be implemented ('399 Patent, Figs. 1-8).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's description explicitly states, "The broken lines shown in the drawings depict portions of the laptop stand in which the design is embodied that form no part of the claimed design" ('399 Patent, Description). This language definitively limits the protected design to only the features shown in solid lines, and any infringement analysis must disregard the appearance of the features shown in broken lines.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Defendants’ infringement is "deliberate, willful, wanton, and intentional" based on the "virtually identical appearance" between the accused product and the patented design (Compl. ¶16). It further alleges, upon information and belief, that discovery will likely show Defendants acted with "full knowledge of the '399 patent" (Compl. ¶22). The complaint does not plead specific facts indicating when or how Defendants may have become aware of the patent.

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

  • A primary issue will be one of visual comparison: As the complaint lacks any images of the accused product, the foundational question is whether the Besign LSX3 Adjustable Laptop Stand is, in fact, "virtually identical" to the design claimed in the '399 patent. The outcome of the case will depend heavily on a side-by-side comparison of the accused product and the patent's drawings under the ordinary observer test.
  • A second key question will relate to willfulness: The complaint’s willfulness allegation is based on the asserted visual similarity and an "information and belief" pleading of knowledge. A central evidentiary challenge for the Plaintiff will be to prove that Defendants had actual knowledge of the '399 Patent prior to or during the period of alleged infringement to support a claim for enhanced damages.