DCT
5:25-cv-01419
Xennial IP LLC v. Waterh Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Xennial IP LLC (Ohio)
- Defendant: Waterh Inc. (Canada)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: SAND, SEBOLT & WERNOW CO., LPA
- Case Identification: 5:25-cv-01419, N.D. Ohio, 10/14/2025
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper on the basis that the defendant is a foreign corporation not resident in the United States and may therefore be sued in any judicial district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s smart water bottles infringe a patent related to systems and methods for automatically tracking fluid consumption and syncing that data with a remote device.
- Technical Context: The technology operates in the consumer health and wellness market, where "smart" devices automate the tracking of fitness and biometric data for user convenience.
- Key Procedural History: The filing is an Amended Complaint. The complaint does not reference any prior litigation, licensing history, or administrative patent challenges involving the asserted patent.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2015-03-13 | ’886 Patent Priority Date |
| 2021-11-16 | ’886 Patent Issue Date |
| 2025-10-14 | Amended Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 11,172,886 - Hydration System and Method Thereof
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 11,172,886, "Hydration System and Method Thereof," issued November 16, 2021 (’886 Patent). (Compl. ¶10).
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section identifies a need for a water bottle that can automatically calculate water consumption and sync that data with remote health tracking devices, such as fitness trackers or smartphone applications, to eliminate the need for manual user entry. (’886 Patent, col. 2:1-7).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a "communicative sports water bottle" that integrates a sensor to detect fluid levels, movement, or dispensation. (’886 Patent, col. 2:9-15). This sensor is coupled with "fluid information logic" and "data transmission and reception logic" to create digital data about fluid consumption and wirelessly send it to a remote device like a smartphone or activity tracker, as depicted in the system diagram of Figure 3. (’886 Patent, Fig. 3; col. 2:15-20).
- Technical Importance: The technology aimed to automate a key data entry point—hydration—within the rapidly growing ecosystem of personal health monitoring devices and applications. (’886 Patent, col. 1:43-51).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent Claim 1. (Compl. ¶¶12, 30).
- The essential elements of Claim 1 include:
- A bottle body with a fluid chamber and a first display.
- A sensor for determining fluid amount, fluid dispensation, or physical movement.
- Fluid information logic to create digital data from the sensor.
- Data transmission and reception logic to send data to, and receive data from, a remote device, including logic to monitor wireless packets and decide when to sync.
- A remote device that is a health activity tracker with a second display for showing hydration information.
- Network connectivity (e.g., Bluetooth) between the bottle and the remote device.
- A record of information for a previous period, displayable on either the first or second display.
- A detachable cap that carries the sensor.
- Cap sensor placement-specific algorithms to determine hydration data.
- Adaptive filtering logic to cancel out excessive movements of the cap.
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The "WaterH Boost Smart Water Bottle" and "WaterH Boost Lite Smart Water Bottle" (collectively, the "Accused Products"). (Compl. ¶15).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges the Accused Products are smart water bottles that use an "advanced algorithm" to track a user's fluid intake based on flow and bottle angle. (Compl. ¶17, p. 6). The products are alleged to connect via Bluetooth to a remote device, such as a smartphone, which runs a companion application. (Compl. ¶21, p. 10). This application displays hydration data and can sync with other health platforms like Apple Health and Fitbit. (Compl. ¶20, p. 8). A screenshot provided in the complaint shows the Accused Product’s cap, which houses a display. (Compl. ¶16, p. 5).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
11,172,886 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a bottle body having a base and an upwardly extending sidewall therein defining a fluid chamber and a first display coupled to the bottle body | The Accused Products are comprised of a bottle body that defines a fluid chamber and include a display on the cap. A product image shows the bottle body and display. (Compl. p. 5). | ¶16 | col. 3:42-47 |
| a sensor determining one or more of the following an amount of fluid in the fluid chamber, an amount of fluid being dispensed from the fluid chamber, and a physical movement of the bottle body | The Accused Products allegedly use an "advanced algorithm" that "tracks your intake based on flow and bottle angle," which the complaint characterizes as the claimed sensor. A marketing image describes this functionality. (Compl. p. 6). | ¶17 | col. 3:48-53 |
| fluid information logic electronically coupled with the sensor creating digital data associated with fluid in the chamber | The Accused Products are alleged to possess logic that creates digital data related to fluid intake, which is then displayed on the companion app. (Compl. p. 7). | ¶18 | col. 3:58-61 |
| data transmission and reception logic configured to send the digital data to a remote device ... wherein the data transmission and reception logic monitors wireless input sources for incoming wireless packets and analyzes any received packers in order to detect a source ... and decide whether to sync | The Accused Products allegedly transmit digital data to a remote device (smartphone app) via a Bluetooth connection. | ¶19 | col. 11:36-47 |
| wherein the remote device is an electronic device executing a health activity tracker, the remote device including a second display that displays information associated with one of more of the following: the amount of fluid in the chamber... a reminder notification... | The Accused Products sync with a smartphone app that functions as a health activity tracker and displays various hydration metrics, such as the amount of fluid dispensed over time. | ¶20 | col. 5:5-20 |
| network connectivity electronically connecting the data transmission and reception logic and the remote device, wherein the network connectivity is selected from a group comprising of: Bluetooth connection, wireless internet connection... | The Accused Products are alleged to connect to the remote device via Bluetooth. A marketing image highlights the product's Bluetooth capability. (Compl. p. 10). | ¶21 | col. 5:26-29 |
| a cap repeatably attachable and detachable from the bottle body, and wherein the sensor is carried by the cap | The Accused Products allegedly feature a removable cap that contains the sensing technology. A product image shows the cap detached from the bottle body. (Compl. p. 12). | ¶23 | col. 4:13-17 |
| adaptive filtering logic executed during the previous period to cancel out excessive movements of the cap | The Accused Products allegedly include logic to ignore movements that are not "drinking events," as evidenced by photographs showing the consumption reading remaining unchanged after the bottle is moved. | ¶¶25-26 | col. 6:44-47 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: A central issue may be whether the defendant's "advanced algorithm track[ing]... intake based on flow and bottle angle" (Compl. p. 6) constitutes a "sensor" as required by the claim. The defense could argue that a "sensor" implies a discrete physical component that directly measures fluid (such as a flow meter), whereas the accused system appears to use software to interpret data from general-purpose motion detectors. The question for the court will be whether the claim term’s scope can encompass a software-driven inferential system.
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges "adaptive filtering logic" based on photographs showing that incidental movement of the bottle does not alter the consumption reading on the app (Compl. pp. 14-17). A key factual question will be whether this observed behavior results from the specific filtering logic described in the patent (e.g., distinguishing rhythmic swaying from a drinking event) or from a more generic function like data smoothing or a slow application refresh rate.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "sensor"
- Context and Importance: The definition of "sensor" is critical. If the accused product's algorithm-based system, which relies on inputs like bottle angle, does not fall within the scope of this term, the infringement case may fail. Practitioners may focus on this term because it appears to be a point of mismatch between the claim language and the accused product's described operation.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself is functional, requiring a sensor that is capable of "determining" fluid amount, dispensation, or movement, without specifying the mechanism. (’886 Patent, col. 14:43-48). The specification also refers to general motion sensors like accelerometers, which require interpretation and are not direct fluid-measurement devices. (’886 Patent, col. 9:12-14).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification provides an example of a "flow meter in cap 30" as a type of sensor. (’886 Patent, col. 5:52-53). A defendant may argue that this and other physical examples narrow the term's scope to components that directly measure fluid properties, rather than software that infers fluid consumption from movement data.
The Term: "adaptive filtering logic... to cancel out excessive movements of the cap"
- Context and Importance: This limitation requires a specific technical function, not just generic data processing. The defendant may argue its system does not perform this specific claimed function.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the purpose of this logic as preventing data collection during "repeated or rhythmic swaying... such as when clipped to a back pack or held in a hand while walking." (’886 Patent, col. 5:48-51). This functional description could support a construction covering any algorithm that distinguishes incidental motion from intentional drinking motions.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification discusses a specific "three mode approach" for motion (active, fluid movement, and inactive) as part of its algorithmic determinations. (’886 Patent, col. 6:49-56). The defense could argue that the term requires this specific multi-mode logic, not just standard signal smoothing or noise cancellation.
VI. Other Allegations
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that the defendant has known of its infringement "at least as of the service of the present Complaint." (Compl. ¶29). This allegation provides a basis for post-suit willfulness and a claim for enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284, which is requested in the prayer for relief. (Compl. p. 19).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of definitional scope: Can the term "sensor", as used in the patent, be construed broadly enough to read on a system that allegedly uses an "advanced algorithm" to infer fluid intake from "flow and bottle angle," or is its meaning limited by the specification to more direct physical measurement devices like flow meters?
- A key evidentiary question will be one of functional operation: Does the accused product’s software perform the specific "adaptive filtering logic to cancel out excessive movements" as claimed, or is the observed stability in its consumption readings (Compl. pp. 14-17) a result of unrelated technical features, such as standard data smoothing or communication latency?