DCT

2:24-cv-00706

Kortek Industries Pty Ltd v. Chengdu Meross Technology Co Ltd

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

Case Timeline

Date Event
2011-02-16 Earliest Priority Date for all Patents-in-Suit
2016-10-11 U.S. Patent No. 9,465,377 Issues
2017-03-07 U.S. Patent No. 9,590,427 Issues
2018-03-20 U.S. Patent No. 9,923,376 Issues
2019-10-01 U.S. Patent No. 10,429,869 Issues
2020-12-08 U.S. Patent No. 10,862,313 Issues
2023-02-07 U.S. Patent No. 11,574,535 Issues
2024-08-29 Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 9,465,377 - "Wireless power, light and automation control," issued October 11, 2016

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent’s background describes conventional Wi-Fi-based home automation systems that rely on a central wireless Access Point (AP). This architecture creates a single point of failure; if the AP is disabled for any reason, "the entire home automation system fails" (U.S. Patent No. 9,465,377, col. 1:47-53).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a power control device (e.g., a smart plug) that establishes a direct, two-way, peer-to-peer wireless communications link with a controller, such as a smartphone (’377 Patent, Abstract; Fig. 2). This eliminates the need for a central AP for operational control. The device is claimed to be versatile, capable of either "simulating a Wi-Fi access point" to connect with legacy Wi-Fi controllers or "negotiating" a group owner role to connect with modern Wi-Fi Direct-capable controllers (’377 Patent, col. 3:12-24).
  • Technical Importance: This approach creates a more robust and decentralized control architecture for IoT devices, removing the single point of failure associated with a central router or AP (’377 Patent, col. 1:53-56).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶28).
  • The essential elements of claim 1 are:
    • A power control device for controlling an electrical apparatus.
    • A microprocessor with memory.
    • A power control circuit configured to vary the supply of electricity based on a command from the microprocessor.
    • A wireless communications transceiver for two-way, peer-to-peer communication with a controller.
    • The microprocessor is configured to open the peer-to-peer link by either:
      • Simulating a Wi-Fi access point if the controller is a legacy Wi-Fi device; or
      • Negotiating with the controller to assume a group owner role if the controller is a Wi-Fi Direct device.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.

U.S. Patent No. 9,590,427 - "Adaptable wireless power, light and automation system," issued March 7, 2017

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: As with the related ’377 Patent, this patent addresses the reliability issues of home automation systems that depend on a central wireless AP (U.S. Patent No. 9,590,427, col. 1:47-53).
  • The Patented Solution: The patent claims a method for remotely controlling an electrical apparatus by establishing a direct peer-to-peer wireless link between a controller and a power control device (’427 Patent, Abstract). The method includes the steps of opening this link (either by the device acting as an AP or by negotiating a Wi-Fi Direct role), displaying the device's status on the controller, transmitting a command, and varying the electricity supply accordingly (’427 Patent, col. 4:5-24).
  • Technical Importance: This patent claims the process of direct, peer-to-peer device control, complementing the device claims of other patents in the family and covering the actions taken by a user and the system when operating as intended.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶40).
  • The essential steps of method claim 1 are:
    • Opening a secure, two-way, peer-to-peer wireless communications link between a controller and a power control device.
    • The "opening" step includes either assigning a Wi-Fi access point role to the power control device or negotiating a Wi-Fi Direct group owner role.
    • Displaying a status of the power control device on the controller's user interface.
    • Transmitting a command from the controller to the device.
    • Receiving the command at the device.
    • Varying the supply of electricity to the electrical apparatus in accordance with the command.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.

Multi-Patent Capsules

  • U.S. Patent No. 10,862,313, "Adaptable Wireless Power, Light and Automation System," issued December 8, 2020

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a controller for a household appliance that is adaptable in its communication method. The controller can be changed from a peer-to-peer communication mode to a non-peer-to-peer (WLAN) mode based on instructions from a personal controller, like a smartphone, allowing it to function either directly or as part of a broader home network (U.S. Patent No. 10862313, Abstract; claim 1).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶52).
    • Accused Features: The accused Meross products are alleged to possess the capability to be configured and controlled via wireless communication (Compl. ¶20).

  • U.S. Patent No. 10,429,869, "Wireless power, light and automation control," issued October 1, 2019

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a power control device that establishes a peer-to-peer link by "simulating a network access point." A key feature is that the device is configured to always send a discovery message to initiate contact with a controller, distinguishing it from devices that may passively wait for a connection (U.S. Patent No. 10429869, claim 1).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶64).
    • Accused Features: The accused Meross products are alleged to utilize WiFi communications for control, which involves the transmission of discovery messages (Compl. ¶20).

  • U.S. Patent No. 9,923,376, "Adaptable wireless power, light and automation system," issued March 20, 2018

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a method for providing both peer-to-peer (e.g., Wi-Fi Direct) and non-peer-to-peer (WLAN) access. A key element of the claimed method is maintaining the security of the WLAN by denying a controller connected via the peer-to-peer link access to the broader WLAN, thus isolating guest or direct connections from the main network (U.S. Patent No. 9923376, claim 12).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 12 (Compl. ¶76).
    • Accused Features: The accused Meross products are alleged to use standard WiFi protocols for setup and control, which form the basis of the infringement allegations (Compl. ¶20).

  • U.S. Patent No. 11,574,535, "Adaptable Wireless Power, Light and Automation System for Household Appliances," issued February 7, 2023

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims an "integrated appliance controller" where the control circuitry is built directly into a household appliance rather than being a separate plug-in unit. The controller is adaptable, capable of changing between a peer-to-peer and a non-peer-to-peer (WLAN) communication mode based on user instructions (U.S. Patent No. 11574535, Abstract; claim 1).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶88).
    • Accused Features: The complaint accuses a range of Meross products, including smart air purifiers and garage door openers, which may contain integrated control systems (Compl. ¶20).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The accused instrumentalities are Defendant's "WiFi-enabled products," including "Meross-branded smart plugs, smart switches, smart LED light bulbs, lamps and light strips, smart air purifiers, garage door openers, and power controls" (Compl. ¶20).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges these products are part of the "Internet of Things" (IoT) ecosystem and function by allowing users to remotely monitor and control the power supplied to electrical equipment (Compl. ¶¶21, 25). Functionality is provided through local wireless networks or cloud platforms, enabling users to control these devices via applications on smartphones or other controllers (Compl. ¶21). The complaint points to a general Amazon search result page for Meross products as evidence of their availability in the United States (Compl. ¶20).

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint references claim chart exhibits (G, H, I, J, K, L) that were not included with the filed document (Compl. ¶¶38, 50, 62, 74, 86, 98). The following charts are constructed based on the narrative infringement theory implied by the complaint and the public understanding of the accused products' functionality.

U.S. Patent No. 9,465,377 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a power control device for controlling an electrical apparatus The accused Meross smart plugs, switches, and other products that control the flow of electricity to an appliance or light. ¶20 col. 3:12-16
comprising a microprocessor having a memory; a power control circuit...; and a wireless communications transceiver The internal electronic components of the accused products, which include a microcontroller, a relay or other switching circuit, and a WiFi radio chip. ¶20 col. 7:38-43
the microprocessor is configured to open a peer-to-peer wireless communications link with the controller by either: simulating a Wi-Fi access point if the controller is a legacy Wi-Fi device... During initial setup, the accused Meross devices allegedly create their own temporary WiFi network, which functions as a simulated access point, allowing a user's smartphone to connect directly to the device for configuration. ¶20 col. 3:19-24
or negotiating with the controller as to which of the microprocessor or the controller will assume a group owner role if the controller is a Wi-Fi Direct device The accused products' alleged use of standard WiFi protocols includes the capability to negotiate roles consistent with Wi-Fi Direct specifications when communicating with compatible controllers. ¶20 col. 3:21-24
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A central question may be whether the phrase "controlling an electrical apparatus" through a peer-to-peer link covers the initial, one-time setup process. A defendant could argue the claims are directed at the device's normal operational mode, which for the accused products involves communicating through a central home router, not a persistent peer-to-peer link. The plaintiff's case may depend on construing the claim to read on the functionality of the device during its initial configuration phase.
    • Technical Questions: What evidence does the complaint provide that the accused products "vary the supply of electricity" during the alleged peer-to-peer setup mode? A defendant may argue that power control commands are only sent during normal operation via a WLAN, and that the setup-mode link is used exclusively for network configuration, not for performing the claimed power control functions.

U.S. Patent No. 9,590,427 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
opening a secure two-way, peer-to-peer wireless communications link between a wireless controller and a power control device A user, following Defendant’s instructions, connects their smartphone (the controller) directly to the temporary WiFi network broadcast by a Meross device. ¶42 col. 4:6-10
the opening... including: assigning a Wi-Fi access point role to the power control device The Meross device creates its own WiFi network during setup, thereby allegedly performing the step of assigning itself an access point role for the user's smartphone to connect to. ¶20 col. 4:12-15
displaying on a user interface of the wireless controller a status of the power control device The Meross mobile application, running on the user's smartphone, displays the connection status and other information about the Meross device. ¶42 col. 4:15-17
transmitting a command with the wireless controller... to vary the supply of electricity The user, via the Meross app, transmits a configuration command or a test command to the Meross device while connected directly during setup. ¶42 col. 4:18-22
varying the supply of electricity to the electrical apparatus in accordance with the command The Meross device's internal power control circuit responds to a user command by connecting or disconnecting mains power to the attached appliance. ¶20 col. 4:22-24
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Divided Infringement: This method claim involves steps performed by both the user (e.g., "transmitting a command") and the accused device (e.g., "varying the supply of electricity"). This raises the question of whether any single party performs all the claimed steps. The plaintiff alleges inducement, suggesting Defendant instructs users to perform the steps necessary to complete the infringing method (Compl. ¶41). A court may need to determine if the defendant directs or controls the user's actions to such an extent that the user's conduct is attributable to the defendant for the purpose of direct infringement.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "simulating a Wi-Fi access point" (’377 Patent, claim 1)
  • Context and Importance: The plaintiff's infringement theory appears to rely on the accused products' creation of a temporary WiFi network during initial setup. The viability of this theory will depend on whether this transient, configuration-focused network functionality meets the legal definition of "simulating a Wi-Fi access point" for the purpose of controlling power, as recited in the claim. Practitioners may focus on this term because it is central to mapping the accused products' setup process onto the patent's claims for operational control.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification provides a functional definition, stating that "simulating an access point" refers to a role "in which a discovery message is sent in order to initiate contact with another device" (’377 Patent, col. 3:25-29). This language could support an interpretation where any device that actively broadcasts a network for another to join is "simulating an access point," regardless of duration or purpose.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's background repeatedly criticizes the reliance on a central AP for operational control (e.g., "if it becomes disabled... the entire home automation system fails") (’377 Patent, col. 1:47-53). A defendant may argue that the term must be construed in this context, requiring the "simulated" AP to serve as a replacement for the central AP during the actual, ongoing control of the device, not just for a preliminary setup task.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges both induced and contributory infringement for all six patents-in-suit. The inducement allegations are based on Defendant providing "information and technical support to its customers, including product manuals, brochures, videos, demonstrations, and website materials encouraging its customers to purchase and instructing them to use Defendant's Accused Products" in an infringing manner (e.g., Compl. ¶¶30, 42).
  • Willful Infringement: For each patent, the complaint alleges that Defendant's infringement has been willful, based on knowledge acquired "since at least the date of this Complaint" (e.g., Compl. ¶¶31, 43). This asserts post-filing knowledge as the basis for willfulness and potential enhanced damages.

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

  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can the claim limitation "simulating a Wi-Fi access point" for the purpose of "controlling an electrical apparatus" be construed to cover the transient, configuration-only network created by the accused IoT devices during their initial setup? The outcome may depend on whether the claims are interpreted to cover only the device's primary operational mode or any mode in which all claim elements can be met, however briefly.
  • A related evidentiary question will be one of operational mismatch: the patents-in-suit describe an invention intended to bypass the single point of failure of a central network router for operational control, whereas the accused products are designed to operate primarily through such a router. The case may turn on whether the plaintiff can demonstrate that the accused products' setup mode, which appears to align with the patent's peer-to-peer architecture, performs the claimed power control functions in a manner sufficient to constitute infringement.
  • For the asserted method claims, a key legal question will be divided infringement: given that the end-user performs certain claim steps (e.g., transmitting a command from a controller) while the accused device performs others (e.g., varying the electricity supply), the court will need to analyze whether the defendant's control over the entire system, including its instructional materials, is sufficient to attribute the user's actions to the defendant and find infringement by a single entity.