DCT

6:20-cv-00293

L&L Candle Co LLC v. The

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 6:20-cv-00293, W.D. Tex., 04/15/2020
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendants have placed infringing products into the stream of commerce through established distribution channels with the knowledge that such products are sold in the Western District of Texas.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ electronic flameless candles infringe five U.S. patents related to technologies for realistically simulating the kinetic movement and appearance of a candle flame.
  • Technical Context: The technology resides in the home décor and safety products market, specifically concerning flameless candles that use electronic and mechanical components to create a more realistic flame effect than simple flickering lights.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint describes the asserted patents as stemming from two separate innovation lineages that were later combined. The '660 patent originated from work by Disney Enterprises, Inc. ("Disney") engineers for the Haunted Mansion attraction. The '402, '971, and '471 patents originated from innovations by Shenzhen Liown Electronics Co. Ltd. ("Liown"). In 2017, Disney's successor-in-interest (Luminara) and Liown formed the joint venture L&L Candle Company LLC, to which they assigned their respective patents. The '718 patent stems from a later application filed by L&L itself.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2008-09-30 '660 Patent Priority Date
2010-06-28 '718 Patent Priority Date
2011-06-27 '402, '971, '471 Patents Priority Date
2013-10-08 '660 Patent Issue Date
2016-06-14 '402 Patent Issue Date
2016-12-06 '971 Patent Issue Date
2016-12-20 '471 Patent Issue Date
2020-01-14 '718 Patent Issue Date
2020-04-15 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 8,550,660 - "Kinetic Flame Device"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the difficulty of realistically simulating a solitary candle flame, noting that prior attempts resulted in "relatively poor imitations" and that traditional candles create safety issues due to flame and heat (Compl. ¶59; ’660 Patent, col. 1:29-37).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention uses a two-stage mechanical system to create chaotic, realistic motion. An electromagnetic coil creates a time-varying magnetic field that perturbs a first, lower pendulum. This first pendulum is magnetically coupled to a second, upper pendulum, causing it to move as well. A "flame silhouette element" attached to the second pendulum is illuminated by a light source, and its complex kinetic movement convincingly reproduces the appearance of a flickering flame ('660 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:42-67).
  • Technical Importance: This approach uses the physics of interacting pendulums to generate a "random flame effect" rather than relying on pre-programmed or simple repetitive motions, thereby creating a more convincing and less artificial simulation (Compl. ¶59).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts "one or more claims" of the '660 patent (Compl. ¶79). Independent claim 1 is representative and includes the following essential elements:
    • An apparatus comprising a housing with an interior space having first and second stages.
    • A drive mechanism for generating a time varying electromagnetic field.
    • A first pendulum member pivotally mounted in the first stage, comprising first and second magnets on its ends.
    • A second pendulum member pivotally mounted in the second stage, comprising a magnet proximate to the second magnet of the first pendulum member.
    • A flame silhouette element extending from the second pendulum member.
    • A light source for transmitting light onto the flame silhouette element.

U.S. Patent No. 9,366,402 - "Electronic Lighting Device and Method for Manufacturing Same"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent seeks to create a "visual experience of true fire" in an electronic candle while simultaneously "simplifying manufacturing" to reduce costs for the consumer home-goods market (Compl. ¶63).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention describes an electronic candle where a light-emitting diode (LED) is mounted within the candle body and projects light onto a flame-shaped component above. The design simplifies manufacturing by integrating a "cradle" into the sidewall of the device's enclosure to serve as the installation location for the LED, reducing part count and assembly complexity (Compl. ¶63; ’402 Patent, col. 4:5-21).
  • Technical Importance: This integrated design approach aimed to lower the manufacturing cost of realistic flameless candles, a key factor for success in the mass consumer market (Compl. ¶63).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts "one or more claims" of the '402 patent (Compl. ¶98). Independent claim 1 is representative and includes the following essential elements:
    • An electronic lighting device comprising an enclosure with a through hole on its upper surface.
    • The enclosure comprising at least two connectable elements that form a cavity and a "cradle on its sidewall" forming an installation location.
    • A flame component movably supported on the enclosure with a portion exposed above the upper surface.
    • At least one light-emitting element contained within the enclosure's interior and positioned in the cradle.

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 9,512,971

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,512,971, "Electronic Lighting Device and Method for Manufacturing Same," issued December 6, 2016 (Compl. ¶64).
  • Technology Synopsis: The patent relates to an electronic candle that creates a "visual experience of true fire" by projecting blinking light from an LED onto a flame-shaped component. It also discloses simplifying manufacturing by using a "cradle" that forms an installation location for the LED (Compl. ¶67).
  • Asserted Claims: "one or more claims" (Compl. ¶159).
  • Accused Features: The flameless candle products, such as the "Mirage and Mirage Gold products," are alleged to incorporate the patented technology (Compl. ¶158).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 9,523,471

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,523,471, "Electronic Lighting Device and Method for Manufacturing Same," issued December 20, 2016 (Compl. ¶68).
  • Technology Synopsis: The patent describes an electronic candle using a pivoting, flame-shaped component that extends from inside the candle. It simplifies manufacturing by using a "notch in the sidewall" of the device to retain the light-emitting diode that projects light onto the pivoting component (Compl. ¶71).
  • Asserted Claims: "one or more claims" (Compl. ¶178).
  • Accused Features: The flameless candle products, such as the "Everlasting Glow, Hudson 43, and Oasis products," are alleged to incorporate the patented technology (Compl. ¶177).

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 10,533,718

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,533,718, "Electronic Lighting Device," issued January 14, 2020 (Compl. ¶72).
  • Technology Synopsis: The patent relates to an electronic candle that creates a visual experience of true fire by projecting blinking light from a light source onto a flame-shaped component. It simplifies manufacturing by using a "light source holding surface that is part of the enclosure" to support the light-emitting diode (Compl. ¶75).
  • Asserted Claims: "one or more claims" (Compl. ¶215).
  • Accused Features: The flameless candle products, such as the "Everlasting Glow, Hudson 43, and Oasis products," are alleged to incorporate the patented technology (Compl. ¶214).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The complaint accuses a wide range of electronic, flameless candle products sold by numerous defendants. Exemplary product lines identified include, but are not limited to, the "Everlasting Glow," "Hudson 43," "Oasis," "Mirage," "Mirage Gold," "Mikasa," "Scott Living," "Sharper Image," and "DW Home" products (Compl. ¶¶ 78, 84, 90, 170, 238).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint alleges the accused products generally consist of a plastic or wax shell containing electronic components (Compl. ¶52). A flame-shaped sheet protrudes from the top surface and is illuminated by one or more internal LEDs to create the visual effect of a glowing flame (Compl. ¶52). The complaint alleges that the appearance of flickering motion is created either by altering the light's properties (duration, brightness, direction) or by physically moving the flame-shaped sheet using internal components such as electromagnets (Compl. ¶¶ 53-54).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint does not provide claim charts or detailed infringement contentions for any specific product. The following charts are based on the general description of accused product functionality provided in the complaint.

'660 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
an apparatus, comprising: a housing having an interior space... The accused products include a plastic or wax shell. ¶52 col. 5:60-62
a drive mechanism operable for generating a time varying electromagnetic field... The accused products contain electric components, including electromagnets, that generate motion effects. ¶54 col. 6:1-3
a first pendulum member pivotally mounted in the interior space... The complaint alleges the accused products use internal components to physically move a flame sheet. ¶53-54 col. 6:15-17
a second pendulum member pivotally mounted in the interior space... The complaint alleges the accused products use internal components to physically move a flame sheet. ¶53-54 col. 6:49-51
a flame silhouette element extending from the second pendulum member... A flame-shaped sheet protrudes upward from the top surface of the accused products. ¶52 col. 6:55-57
a light source adapted to selectively transmit light onto the flame silhouette element. One or more lights or LEDs inside the shell shine their light onto the flame-shaped sheet. ¶52 col. 6:58-60

'402 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
an electronic lighting device comprising: an enclosure provided with a through hole on an upper surface thereof; The accused products include a shell with a top surface from which a flame-shaped component protrudes. ¶52 col. 3:51-53
...the enclosure comprises at least two enclosure elements operably configured to connect to form the enclosure...and a cradle on its sidewall forming an installation location... The complaint does not provide sufficient detail for analysis of this element. col. 4:5-15
a flame component movably supported on the enclosure... A flame-shaped sheet protrudes upward and is allegedly capable of physical movement. ¶52-53 col. 3:53-55
at least one light-emitting element contained entirely within an interior of the enclosure and positioned such that...light...is projected...onto at least one surface of the first portion of the flame component... One or more lights or LEDs inside the shell shine their light up through the top of the shell onto the flame-shaped sheet. ¶52 col. 4:21-28

Identified Points of Contention

  • Structural Questions: A primary question for the '660 patent will be whether the accused products, which are generally alleged to use "electromagnets that can move physical objects" (Compl. ¶54), actually practice the specific two-stage, magnetically-coupled pendulum system required by the claims. The complaint does not provide evidence of such a two-stage structure.
  • Scope Questions: For the '402 patent and its relatives ('971, '471, '718), a central issue may be the scope of terms like "cradle," "notch," and "light source holding surface." The complaint does not allege facts showing the accused products use these specific, integrated mounting structures, which are tied to the patents' stated benefit of simplifying manufacturing (Compl. ¶¶ 63, 67, 71, 75).

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

The Term: "pendulum member" ('660 Patent, Claim 1)

  • Context and Importance: The '660 patent's inventive concept relies on the kinetic interaction between a "first pendulum member" and a "second pendulum member." The construction of this term will be critical to determining whether the accused products, described generally as having a single moving "flame-shaped sheet" (Compl. ¶52), can infringe a claim requiring two distinct pendulum structures.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the pendulum member as an "elongate body such as a thin planar design" which could be argued to encompass a variety of moving flame-like structures ('660 Patent, col. 6:29-31).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claims explicitly require a "first" and a "second" pendulum member. The figures and detailed description consistently depict two physically separate, pivotally mounted components that are magnetically, not physically, coupled, suggesting two distinct bodies are required ('660 Patent, Fig. 1, Abstract).

The Term: "cradle" ('402 Patent, Claim 1)

  • Context and Importance: This term is central to the '402 patent's stated purpose of "simplifying manufacturing" (Compl. ¶63). Whether infringement exists may turn on whether the Defendants' products incorporate a structure meeting this limitation, as opposed to a generic bracket or mounting point for the LED.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language requires a "cradle on its sidewall forming an installation location," which could be argued to cover any structure on an internal wall that holds the LED ('402 Patent, Claim 1).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification describes the cradle with high specificity as being formed by "left and right notches" that are "concaved inwardly and inclined at a certain angle" to form the installation location as an integral part of the enclosure itself ('402 Patent, col. 4:5-15). This suggests a more limited scope than any generic mounting hardware.

VI. Other Allegations

The complaint does not contain specific allegations to support claims of indirect or willful infringement.

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

  1. Structural Correspondence: A core issue for the '660 patent will be one of structural correspondence: does the generalized "physically moving the sheet" functionality alleged in the complaint (Compl. ¶53) meet the specific claim requirement for a two-stage, magnetically-coupled "first pendulum member" and "second pendulum member," or is there a fundamental mismatch in the claimed and accused mechanical structures?
  2. Definitional Scope: For the '402, '971, '471, and '718 patents, a key issue will be definitional scope: can terms central to the manufacturing-simplification objective, such as "cradle," "notch," and "light source holding surface," be construed broadly enough to read on the internal LED mounting structures of the accused products, for which the complaint provides no structural detail?
  3. Pleading Sufficiency: An overarching procedural question concerns pleading sufficiency: given the large number of defendants and accused product lines, and the absence of specific factual allegations mapping claim elements to any single accused product, does the complaint provide sufficient notice of infringement to survive a motion to dismiss under the standards set by Iqbal and Twombly?

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.