DCT
2:21-cv-01390
Buckingham Mfg Co Inc v. Bashlin Industries Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Buckingham Manufacturing Co., Inc. (New York)
- Defendant: Bashlin Industries, Inc. (Pennsylvania)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP
- Case Identification: 2:21-cv-01390, W.D. Pa., 10/15/2021
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Western District of Pennsylvania because Defendant is a Pennsylvania corporation with its principal place of business in the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s "Flex-Fit" series of climbing belts infringes a patent related to adjustable work positioning body belts featuring multiple, distinct sets of D-ring attachment points.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns professional safety equipment, specifically body belts used by linemen and arborists for work positioning and fall protection on poles and other elevated structures.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff provided Defendant with notice of the patent and its alleged infringement via a cease and desist letter approximately one month prior to filing the lawsuit.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2017-02-28 | ’248 Patent Priority Date |
| 2021-03-16 | ’248 Patent Issue Date |
| 2021-09-14 | Plaintiff allegedly sent cease and desist letter to Defendant |
| 2021-10-15 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,946,248, "Adjustable Body Belt Having D-Rings/Attachments," issued March 16, 2021.
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section describes two primary issues with conventional linemen’s body belts: the "crowding" of a single pair of D-ring attachment points with numerous safety devices, and the imprecise fit provided by standard tongue-and-hole buckles, which can compromise safety and comfort for users whose size falls between the pre-set adjustments (’248 Patent, col. 1:52-65; col. 2:5-10).
- The Patented Solution: The invention claims to solve these problems by providing a body belt with multiple sets of D-rings (e.g., "primary" and "auxiliary") to better organize attached equipment, and by incorporating one or more "adjustability section[s]" that allow for fine-tuning the length and tightness of the belt straps beyond what traditional buckles permit (’248 Patent, Abstract; col. 8:15-24). The combination of a primary D-piece for standard positioning and a separate auxiliary D-piece with its own rings and adjustability is a central feature of the described embodiments (’248 Patent, col. 5:30-41).
- Technical Importance: This design aims to enhance lineman safety and efficiency by providing a more secure, customized fit and by creating distinct, less cluttered attachment points for a growing array of ancillary fall protection and positioning devices (’248 Patent, col. 2:11-21).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claims 3, 4, 6, and 7 (Compl. ¶12).
- Independent Claim 1 requires:
- A body belt assembly with a body portion and a first surface.
- A belt strap mechanically connected to the body portion.
- A "primary D-piece slidably connected" to the body portion.
- A primary pair of D-rings connected to the primary D-piece.
- A "first adjustability section" on the belt strap to adjust its length.
- An "auxiliary D-piece" also mechanically connected to the body portion.
- An auxiliary pair of D-rings connected to the auxiliary D-piece.
- A "second adjustability section" that is part of the auxiliary D-piece, is separate from the first, and allows adjustment of the "length of the auxiliary D-piece."
- The complaint expressly reserves the right to assert additional claims (Compl. ¶37).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The "88FFX4D Flex-Fit Climbing Belt product" ("Accused Product") (Compl. ¶14).
Functionality and Market Context
- The Accused Product is a climbing and work positioning belt for linemen and arborists (Compl. ¶15). The complaint highlights marketing materials that describe the product as "The ONLY Belt on the market that allows for adjustment of both the upper and lower D-Rings for a truly unique comfortable custom fit!" (Compl. ¶15, p.5 visual). The infringement allegations focus on the product's structure, which includes a main belt strap, a primary set of D-rings on a "D-piece," and an auxiliary set of smaller D-rings on a separate D-piece, both of which are alleged to be adjustable (Compl. ¶17-24).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
’248 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A body belt assembly, comprising: a body portion comprising a first surface; | The complaint identifies the padded back support of the Accused Product as the "body portion comprising a first surface." A photograph with an arrow pointing to the padded section is provided as evidence (Compl. p.6 visual). | ¶17 | col. 7:47-59 |
| a belt strap mechanically connected to the first surface of the body portion and extending along a first major axis and a first horizontal plane having a proximal end and a distal end; | The main waist strap of the Accused Product, which passes through the body portion, is identified as the claimed "belt strap." | ¶18 | col. 7:47-59 |
| a primary D-piece slidably connected to the first surface of the body portion and extending along the first major axis and the first horizontal plane; | The complaint alleges that the hardware component to which the primary D-rings are attached is the "primary D-piece" and that it is slidably connected to the body portion. An image points to this component on the Accused Product (Compl. p.8 visual). | ¶19 | col. 10:35-38 |
| a primary pair of D-rings, wherein the primary pair of D-rings are mechanically connected to the D-piece; | The large, primary D-rings on the Accused Product are identified as meeting this limitation. | ¶20 | col. 5:30-34 |
| wherein the belt strap comprises a first adjustability section... structured and/or configured to allow adjustment of the length of the belt strap; | The complaint identifies the buckle and hole system on the main belt strap as the "first adjustability section." | ¶21 | col. 8:15-24 |
| an auxiliary D-piece mechanically connected to the first surface of the body portion and extending along the same major axis and the same horizontal plane as the primary D-piece; | The hardware component holding the smaller, secondary D-rings is identified as the "auxiliary D-piece." An image shows this component running parallel to the primary D-piece (Compl. p.10 visual). | ¶22 | col. 5:30-36 |
| an auxiliary pair of D-rings mechanically connected to the auxiliary D-piece; | The smaller, secondary D-rings on the Accused Product are identified as the "auxiliary pair of D-rings." | ¶23 | col. 5:30-36 |
| wherein the auxiliary D-piece comprises a second adjustability section... structured and/or configured to allow adjustment of the length of the auxiliary D-piece. | The complaint alleges that an adjustment buckle on the strap holding the auxiliary D-piece constitutes a "second adjustability section." An arrow in a provided image points to this buckle (Compl. p.11 visual). | ¶24 | col. 8:15-24 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: The claim requires the primary D-piece to be "slidably connected" to the body portion. The patent specification discusses both "fixed" and "floating" D-piece embodiments (’248 Patent, col. 10:5-11, 10:35-42). A central question will be whether the connection mechanism of the Accused Product's primary D-piece allows for the kind of axial movement implied by the term "slidably connected."
- Technical Questions: Claim 1 requires that the "auxiliary D-piece comprises a second adjustability section" that adjusts the "length of the auxiliary D-piece." The complaint identifies an adjustment buckle on a webbed strap as this feature (Compl. ¶24). This raises the question of whether a buckle on a connecting strap can be considered to be comprised by the D-piece itself, and whether adjusting the strap's length is equivalent to adjusting the D-piece's length, as required by the claim.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
The Term: "slidably connected"
Context and Importance: The nature of the connection between the primary D-piece and the body portion is a key technical detail. Whether the accused product's connection is "slidable" will be a critical point of the infringement analysis, as this term defines the intended mobility of the main attachment points.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent does not provide an explicit definition. A party could argue that any connection that is not permanently fixed (e.g., stitched or riveted) and allows for some movement along an axis qualifies as "slidably connected."
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification describes an alternative embodiment where a D-piece is "configured to float," meaning it is "configured to move axially along its axis" with respect to the body portion (’248 Patent, col. 10:35-42). Practitioners may focus on this language to argue that "slidably connected" requires this specific "floating" or axial movement capability, as opposed to incidental shifting.
The Term: "auxiliary D-piece comprises a second adjustability section"
Context and Importance: This limitation is a complex and highly specific element at the end of claim 1. The interpretation of "comprises" will be pivotal—specifically, whether a component (the adjustability section) can be part of a "D-piece" if it is located on a strap that attaches to the D-piece hardware.
Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: Plaintiff may argue that "D-piece" should be interpreted functionally as the entire auxiliary attachment sub-assembly, including the hardware, D-rings, and associated connecting straps. Under this view, a buckle on the strap would be "comprised" by the D-piece assembly.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent figures consistently depict the "D-piece" (e.g., element 345) as a distinct piece of hardware to which straps and D-rings are attached, but not including the straps themselves (’248 Patent, FIG. 3, 4). A defendant could argue that the plain meaning requires the adjustability mechanism to be integral to the D-piece hardware, not a separate component on an associated strap.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint’s prayer for relief includes standard requests for enjoining inducement and contributory infringement, but the substantive allegations in Count One focus exclusively on direct infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) (Compl. ¶12; Prayer for Relief (b)).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Defendant had pre-suit knowledge of the ’248 Patent and its infringement as of September 14, 2021, due to a cease and desist letter (Compl. ¶40). The complaint alleges that Defendant's continued infringement after receiving this notice has been "knowing, intentional, and willful" (Compl. ¶40).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of claim construction: can the term "slidably connected," used to describe the primary D-piece, be met by the specific mechanical connection in the accused product, or does the claim require a specific "floating" configuration that the product may lack?
- A second pivotal issue will be a mixed question of claim construction and infringement: does the accused product's adjustment buckle, located on a strap connected to the auxiliary D-ring hardware, satisfy the claim requirement that the "auxiliary D-piece" itself "comprises" the adjustment mechanism for its own length? The case may turn on whether a D-piece is defined as only its core hardware or as the entire attachment sub-assembly.