DCT

2:25-cv-01052

Kortek Industries Pty Ltd v. Shenzhen Gosund Technology Ltd

Log In
Key Events
Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:25-cv-01052, E.D. Tex., 10/20/2025
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant is a foreign corporation, and upon information and belief, has committed acts of infringement in, and advertises, markets, or sells products in, the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s WiFi-enabled smart home devices infringe six patents related to wireless power, light, and automation control systems.
  • Technical Context: The patents relate to controlling electrical devices using peer-to-peer wireless communication (such as Wi-Fi Direct) between a controller (e.g., a smartphone) and a power control unit, a technology central to the modern Internet of Things (IoT) market.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint does not reference any prior litigation, licensing history, or post-grant proceedings involving the patents-in-suit.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2011-02-16 '377 and '869 Patent Priority Date
2011-11-07 '427, '313, '535, and '376 Patent Priority Date
2016-10-11 U.S. Patent No. 9,465,377 Issued
2017-03-07 U.S. Patent No. 9,590,427 Issued
2018-03-20 U.S. Patent No. 9,923,376 Issued
2019-10-01 U.S. Patent No. 10,429,869 Issued
2020-12-08 U.S. Patent No. 10,862,313 Issued
2023-02-07 U.S. Patent No. 11,574,535 Issued
2025-10-20 Complaint Filed

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

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

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: Conventional Wi-Fi based home automation systems typically rely on a central wireless Access Point (AP) to route communications between devices (U.S. Patent No. 10,429,869, col. 1:31-45). The patent specification notes that this architecture creates a single point of failure; if the AP becomes disabled, the entire automation system fails ('869 Patent, col. 1:50-54).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a power control device that establishes a direct, peer-to-peer wireless communications link with a controller, such as a smartphone, without needing a central AP ('869 Patent, col. 2:5-12, Fig. 2). The power control device is configured to initiate this connection, for example, by "simulating a Wi-Fi access point" to which a legacy Wi-Fi controller can connect, or by negotiating a group owner role with a Wi-Fi Direct-capable controller ('869 Patent, col. 3:24-34).
  • Technical Importance: This approach aimed to increase the reliability and simplify the setup of smart home systems by removing the dependency on a separate, constantly operating network hub.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶29).
  • Claim 1 of the related '869 Patent includes these essential elements:
    • A power control device for controlling an electrical apparatus via a peer-to-peer link with a controller.
    • A microprocessor having a memory.
    • A power control circuit to vary the supply of electricity based on a command from the microprocessor.
    • A wireless communications transceiver for two-way, peer-to-peer communication.
    • The microprocessor is configured to always send a discovery message to initiate contact with the controller.
    • The wireless control transceiver is configured to operate by simulating a network access point to establish the link.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.

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

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: A power control device may be useful in different network environments. A device limited to only peer-to-peer communication cannot be controlled remotely over the internet, while a device limited to only a standard network (WLAN) connection lacks the simplicity and security of a direct link (U.S. Patent No. 10,862,313, col. 2:1-11).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is an adaptable power control system with a wireless control module that can be configured to operate in two distinct modes: a "first mode" using a peer-to-peer communications standard (e.g., Wi-Fi Direct) and a "second mode" using a non-peer-to-peer standard (e.g., as a client on a standard Wi-Fi WLAN) ('313 Patent, Abstract). The system is designed to be changed from the first mode to the second upon receiving instructions from the personal controller ('313 Patent, col. 35:9-19).
  • Technical Importance: This dual-mode capability provides flexibility, allowing a single device to be used for simple, direct control or integrated into a larger, internet-connected home network.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶41).
  • Claim 1 of the related '313 Patent includes these essential elements:
    • A controller for controlling a light.
    • A wireless control module operable for wireless communication with a personal controller.
    • The microcontroller is configured in a first mode to operate using a peer-to-peer communications standard.
    • The microcontroller is configured in a second mode to operate using a non-peer-to-peer communications standard to connect to a WLAN access point.
    • The microcontroller is configured to change from the first mode to the second mode upon receiving instructions from the personal controller.
    • A power control circuit to vary the supply of electricity to the light based on instructions from the personal controller.
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.

Multi-Patent Capsules

  • U.S. Patent No. 10,862,313 ("the '313 patent"), "Adaptable Wireless Power, Light and Automation System," Issued Dec. 8, 2020

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a power control unit that can adapt its communication method. It can be configured to operate in a peer-to-peer mode for direct communication with a controller or in a non-peer-to-peer mode as a client on a standard Wi-Fi network, with the ability to switch between these modes based on user instruction (Compl. ¶53; '313 Patent, Abstract).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶53).
    • Accused Features: Defendant's WiFi-enabled products are accused of having this dual-mode communication capability (Compl. ¶53, 63).

  • U.S. Patent No. 10,429,869 ("the '869 patent"), "Wireless power, light and automation control," Issued Oct. 1, 2019

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent focuses on a power control device that establishes a direct, peer-to-peer wireless link with a controller, such as a smartphone, without requiring a central network access point. The device initiates contact by sending discovery messages and can simulate an access point to connect with legacy Wi-Fi devices (Compl. ¶65; '869 Patent, Abstract, col. 3:24-29).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶65).
    • Accused Features: Defendant's WiFi-enabled products are accused of practicing this method of establishing a direct peer-to-peer connection for control (Compl. ¶65, 75).

  • U.S. Patent No. 11,574,535 ("the '535 patent"), "Adaptable Wireless Power, Light and Automation System for Household Appliances," Issued Feb. 7, 2023

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes an integrated controller within a household appliance that is adaptable between peer-to-peer and non-peer-to-peer (WLAN) communication modes. This allows the appliance to be controlled directly by a personal controller or remotely through a network access point, with the ability to switch modes upon receiving instructions ('535 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶77).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶77).
    • Accused Features: Defendant's WiFi-enabled smart devices are alleged to incorporate this adaptable, dual-mode control system (Compl. ¶77, 87).

  • U.S. Patent No. 9,923,376 ("the '376 patent"), "Adaptable Wireless Power, Light and Automation System," Issued Mar. 20, 2018

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent concerns an adaptable power control system that can operate in either a peer-to-peer mode or a non-peer-to-peer (WLAN client) mode. The system is designed to switch between these modes upon receiving instructions from a personal controller, providing flexibility for direct or network-based control ('376 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶89).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶89).
    • Accused Features: Defendant's WiFi-enabled products are accused of containing this adaptable, dual-mode communication and control functionality (Compl. ¶89, 99).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The accused products are "WiFi-enabled devices," including, but not to, "Gosund-branded and 'Cuco-Smart'-branded smart plugs, smart wall sockets, smart power strips, smart switches, smart LED strip lights, and smart bulbs" (Compl. ¶21).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges these are devices that connect to a Wi-Fi network to allow for remote monitoring and control of power supplied to electrical equipment (Compl. ¶20, 22). The products are marketed and sold in the United States, including through online retailers such as Amazon.com (Compl. ¶20).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint states that attached exhibits contain claim charts detailing the infringement allegations for each patent-in-suit (e.g., Compl. ¶39, 51, 63, 75, 87, 99). These exhibits were not provided. The infringement theory for each patent is therefore summarized based on the complaint's narrative allegations.

  • '377 Patent Infringement Allegations

    • The complaint alleges that the Accused Products directly infringe at least claim 1 by providing a power control system that uses a peer-to-peer wireless link for communication between the device and a user's controller, such as a smartphone (Compl. ¶29). The core of the allegation is that the Accused Products create or simulate a direct network for control, consistent with the patent's goal of eliminating reliance on a central AP.
    • Identified Points of Contention:
      • Scope Questions: A central question may be whether the term "simulating a network access point," as described in the patent, reads on the initial setup or standard operation of a consumer Wi-Fi device.
      • Technical Questions: The analysis may turn on what evidence shows that the Accused Products establish a true "peer-to-peer wireless communications link" for control functions, as opposed to simply operating as a standard client on a user's existing Wi-Fi network.

  • '427 Patent Infringement Allegations

    • The complaint alleges that the Accused Products infringe at least claim 1 by providing an adaptable system that can operate in both a peer-to-peer communication mode and a non-peer-to-peer (WLAN client) mode, and can switch between them (Compl. ¶41).
    • Identified Points of Contention:
      • Scope Questions: A key issue may be whether the product's initial Wi-Fi setup process (often an ad-hoc or direct connection) constitutes a "first mode" of operation, and its subsequent connection to a home WLAN constitutes a "second mode," as contemplated by the claim.
      • Technical Questions: A factual question will likely be what evidence demonstrates that the Accused Products are configured to "change from the first mode to the second mode upon receiving instructions from the personal controller," which requires a specific, commanded mode-switching capability beyond initial setup.

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "simulating a network access point" (from asserted claim 1 of the '377 patent family, e.g., '869 Patent, col. 32:59-61).

    • Context and Importance: This term is critical because the accused products are typically network clients, not access points. Plaintiff's infringement theory may depend on construing the device's setup mode (where it may broadcast its own SSID for a smartphone to connect to directly) as "simulating an access point" for the purpose of establishing a peer-to-peer link.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes this role as one where a "discovery message is sent in order to initiate contact with another device," which could be argued to cover any broadcast from the device that allows a controller to find and connect to it ('869 Patent, col. 3:30-32).
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The context emphasizes replacing a conventional Wi-Fi network that "requires the provision of a wireless Access Point" ('869 Patent, col. 1:46-48). This may suggest that "simulating" an AP requires performing the broader functions of an AP, such as bridging and routing, rather than just broadcasting an SSID for initial configuration.

  • The Term: "change from the first mode to the second mode upon receiving instructions" (from asserted claim 1 of the '427 patent family, e.g., '313 Patent, col. 35:15-18).

    • Context and Importance: The patentability of this invention hinges on the adaptability and user-directed switching between communication modes. The infringement analysis will likely focus on whether the accused products perform this specific, commanded switching function or merely transition from a temporary setup mode to a permanent client mode once.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent states the user can "command the Wi-Fi Control Module to 'restart' at which time it will configure itself to only recognise the parameters which have been specified" for the new mode ('313 Patent, col. 5:10-14). This could be argued to cover any user-initiated process that results in a mode change.
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim language requires the change to occur "upon receiving instructions." This suggests an active, in-use command to switch, rather than a one-time configuration event. The specification distinguishes between the initial "power up" sequence (Fig. 5) and a "system restart" sequence to change modes (Fig. 6), which may support a narrower view that the "change" is a distinct, post-setup function.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: For all six patents, the complaint alleges induced and contributory infringement. The allegations are based on Defendant providing "product manuals, brochures, videos, demonstrations, and website materials" that allegedly instruct and encourage customers to use the Accused Products in a manner that directly infringes the patents-in-suit (e.g., Compl. ¶31, 43, 55, 67, 79, 91).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement for all patents, asserting that Defendant has known of its infringement "since at least the date of this Complaint" (e.g., Compl. ¶33, 45, 57, 69, 81, 93). This appears to be a claim for post-suit willfulness.

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

  1. A core issue will be one of definitional scope: Can the patent term "simulating a network access point," intended to describe a device creating its own peer-to-peer network, be construed to cover the temporary, direct-connect setup mode of a standard consumer IoT device that is ultimately designed to operate as a client on a separate network?
  2. A key evidentiary question will be one of functional operation: Does the complaint and subsequent discovery provide evidence that the accused smart devices possess the specific, adaptable, dual-mode architecture claimed in the patents, particularly the ability to receive and execute a command from a user to actively "change" from a peer-to-peer mode to a WLAN client mode after initial setup?