DCT

1:24-cv-03050

Trove Brands LLC v. Jia Wei Lifestyle Inc

Log In
Key Events
Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:24-cv-03050, D. Utah, 10/18/2023
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the District of Utah because the Defendant is an alien corporation and because a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s "Jia Wei Shaker Bottle" infringes a design patent and a utility patent related to beverage container lids that feature an integrated handle and flip-top spout.
  • Technical Context: The technology concerns the mechanical and ornamental design of lids for beverage containers, such as shaker bottles, aiming to combine a secure seal, a convenient drinking spout, and an integrated carrying handle.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff provided Defendant with notice of its patent rights prior to filing suit. A letter was allegedly sent to retailer Walmart on March 15, 2022, regarding the '830 Patent, which was then forwarded to the Defendant. A subsequent letter, including a draft of the complaint, was allegedly sent directly to the Defendant on January 20, 2023, asserting infringement of both patents-in-suit. These events may form the basis for the complaint's willfulness allegations.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2010-04-16 Earliest Priority Date ('830 and D'551 Patents)
2013-12-31 U.S. Design Patent No. D696,551 Issues
2014-04-15 U.S. Patent No. 8,695,830 Issues
2022-03-15 Plaintiff sends letter to Walmart re: '830 Patent infringement
2023-01-20 Plaintiff sends follow-up letter to Defendant re: infringement
2023-10-18 Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Design Patent No. D696,551 - “BOTTLE LID HAVING INTEGRATED HANDLE”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Design Patent No. D696551, titled “BOTTLE LID HAVING INTEGRATED HANDLE,” issued December 31, 2013.

The Invention Explained

As a design patent, the '551 Patent protects the unique, non-functional ornamental appearance of a bottle lid (Compl. ¶15). The claimed design consists of the overall visual impression created by the combination of its features, which include a circular base, an off-center circular spout, and an integrated pivoting assembly comprising a flexible loop handle and an overlapping flip-top cap that secures the handle and seals the spout (D’551 Patent, Figs. 1-5).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The patent contains a single claim for "The ornamental design for a bottle lid with an integrated handle, as shown and described" (D’551 Patent, Claim).

U.S. Patent No. 8,695,830 - “CONTAINER LID HAVING INDEPENDENTLY PIVOTING FLIP TOP AND HANDLE”

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8695830, titled “CONTAINER LID HAVING INDEPENDENTLY PIVOTING FLIP TOP AND HANDLE,” issued April 15, 2014.

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section identifies a design challenge in container lids: the trade-off between positioning a carrying handle in a convenient location and minimizing the risk that forces applied to the handle will unintentionally open the flip-top spout (’830 Patent, col. 1:12-18).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention solves this problem with a lid assembly where the handle and the flip top are mounted on a common axis but can pivot independently of one another (’830 Patent, col. 2:26-30). This is achieved by a specific structural arrangement where the pivot for the flip top is inserted between the two pivot points of the handle, effectively locking the handle onto the lid's mount while allowing both components to rotate freely and separately (’830 Patent, col. 3:26-34, Fig. 1).
  • Technical Importance: This configuration allows a user to carry a container by the handle without applying leverage or force to the flip top, thereby enhancing the security of the seal while providing the utility of an integrated handle (’830 Patent, col. 3:39-44).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claims 1, 12, and 20 (Compl. ¶41).
  • Independent Claim 1 recites the core combination for a lid, including the following essential elements:
    • A lid base with an opening
    • A mount with a first and second post
    • A handle with first and second ends, each having a pivot
    • A flip top for sealing the opening, having its own pivot
    • A specific relationship wherein the flip top pivot is "disposed between and engages" the ends of the handle
    • The functional result that the handle and flip top are "each independently pivotable relative to the lid" and "independently movable about a common axis"
  • The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims (Compl. ¶41).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The accused product is the "Jia Wei Shaker Bottle" (Compl. ¶28).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint describes the accused product as a shaker bottle with a lid that includes a flip-top spout and an integrated carrying handle (Compl. ¶28). A photograph in the complaint shows the accused bottle, which is sold under the "MAINSTAYS" brand, and depicts a lid with a loop-style handle and a flip cap that appear to be co-located on a single pivot structure (Compl. ¶28). The complaint alleges that Defendant manufactures, sells, and imports these bottles into the United States and that they are sold by major retailers such as Walmart (Compl. ¶¶ 17, 29).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

D'696,551 Infringement Allegations

The complaint alleges that the design of the Jia Wei Shaker Bottle Lid is "substantially the same" as the claimed design of the D'551 Patent, such that it would deceive an ordinary observer into purchasing the accused product believing it to be the patented one (Compl. ¶39). To support this, the complaint provides side-by-side visual comparisons of patent figures and photographs of the accused lid from multiple angles (Compl. p. 13). For example, a provided image directly compares Figure 1 from the patent, a side elevation view, with a photograph of the accused lid from a similar perspective, highlighting the alleged similarities in the overall shape, contours of the flip top, and configuration of the carrying handle (Compl. p. 13, Fig. 1).

  • Identified Points of Contention: The central question for the D’551 Patent will be whether the total ornamental appearance of the accused lid is substantially the same as the patented design in the eyes of an ordinary observer. The analysis will likely focus on the degree of similarity in the overall configuration, the specific shape and proportions of the handle and flip top, and whether any minor differences are sufficient to create a distinct visual impression.

'830 Infringement Allegations

The complaint alleges that the Jia Wei Shaker Bottles infringe at least Claims 1, 12, and 20 of the '830 Patent, referencing claim charts in an unattached exhibit (Compl. ¶41). Based on the patent and the visual evidence provided, the infringement theory for Claim 1 can be summarized as follows:

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a lid base having an opening for dispensing contents of the container The main body of the accused lid, which attaches to a bottle and includes a drinking spout. ¶28, p. 13 col. 2:60-63
a mount comprising a first post and a second post The two upright structures on the accused lid that house the pivot mechanism for the handle and flip top. ¶28, p. 13 col. 3:20-22
a handle comprising a first end with a first handle pivot and a second end with a second handle pivot The flexible loop-shaped carrying handle on the accused lid. ¶28, p. 13 col. 3:12-13
a flip top for sealing the opening...including a flip top pivot The cap on the accused lid that pivots to open and close the spout. ¶28, p. 13 col. 2:64-3:2
the flip top pivot is disposed between and engages the first end of the handle and the second end of the handle The pivot of the accused flip top is allegedly positioned between the pivot points of the accused handle, securing it to the mount. ¶41, p. 13 col. 3:26-29
the handle and the flip top are each independently pivotable relative to the lid The structure of the accused lid allegedly allows the handle and flip top to rotate separately around the same axis. ¶41, p. 13 col. 3:29-34
the handle and the flip top are each independently movable about a common axis The handle and flip top of the accused lid allegedly rotate around the same central axis defined by the mount. ¶41, p. 13 col. 2:27-28
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: The dispute may turn on the construction of key structural terms. A question for the court will be whether the accused product's assembly meets the specific spatial requirements of claim terms like "disposed between" and "sandwiched between" as described in the patent.
    • Technical Questions: A factual question will be whether the accused lid's handle and flip top are, in fact, "independently pivotable." The litigation may require evidence demonstrating the degree to which movement of one component affects the other, and whether that interaction falls within the scope of the claims.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "independently pivotable"
  • Context and Importance: This term appears in the independent claims of the ’830 Patent and captures the core functional advantage of the invention. The outcome of the infringement analysis will heavily depend on how much separation of movement is required for the handle and flip top to be considered "independent." Practitioners may focus on this term because it is a functional limitation that is not defined by a precise numerical or geometric standard.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the result of the structure as "enabling flip top 101 and handle 102 to remain independently pivotable" and gives an example: "flip top 101 can be pivoted around the axis of mount 104 without pivoting handle 102" (’830 Patent, col. 3:29-34). This language could support an interpretation where any ability for one part to move while the other remains stationary meets the limitation.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's background contrasts the invention with prior art where forces on a handle could unintentionally open the flip top (’830 Patent, col. 1:12-18). A defendant could argue that "independently pivotable" requires a complete lack of force transmission or functional interference between the handle and the flip top, a standard the accused product might not meet.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The formal counts in the complaint allege direct infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271 (Compl. ¶37). The complaint does not plead specific facts to support a separate claim for induced or contributory infringement, though the prayer for relief requests an injunction against "assisting or inducing" infringement (Compl. Prayer for Relief ¶G).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Defendant’s infringement was willful and deliberate (Compl. ¶36). This allegation is supported by claims that Defendant had actual knowledge of the patents as early as March 2022, following a notice letter sent to Walmart, and again in January 2023, via a letter sent directly to Defendant that included a draft of the complaint (Compl. ¶¶ 29-31, 42). The complaint further alleges that the accused products are "nearly identical copies" of Plaintiff's designs (Compl. ¶42).

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

This dispute combines a design patent claim based on visual appearance with a utility patent claim based on a specific mechanical structure. The case will likely present two central questions for the court:

  1. A core issue for the design patent will be one of visual identity: From the perspective of an ordinary observer, is the overall ornamental design of the accused Jia Wei lid substantially the same as the design claimed in the D'551 Patent, or are there sufficient visual differences in shape, proportion, and configuration to distinguish the two?
  2. A key evidentiary and claim construction question for the utility patent will be one of structural and functional correspondence: Does the physical assembly of the accused lid’s handle and flip top meet the specific structural limitations of the '830 Patent’s claims, particularly the requirement that the flip top pivot is “disposed between” the handle ends in a way that allows them to be "independently pivotable" as that term is defined by the patent?