PTAB

IPR2020-00689

TY Inc v. SoftBelly's Inc

Key Events

Petition

petition Intelligence

Title: Display Screen Cleaning Tool
Brief Description: The ’831 patent discloses a stuffed, doll-like figure designed for cleaning display screens. The novelty asserted is the construction of the figure from a combination of two different fabric types: one strip of "optical grade fabric" for cleaning and another strip of "nonoptical grade fabric material."

Prior Art Relied Upon: Ogawa (Japanese Utility Model Application Publication No. H5-51237).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Ogawa, which was not considered during prosecution or reexamination, teaches every limitation of claim 15. Ogawa discloses a multi-fabric, stuffed toy cleaning tool in the shape of an animal (e.g., alligator, pig, whale). The tool is constructed from a "grip part" made of a regular woven or knit textile material (a non-optical grade fabric) and a "wipe part" made of a woven or knit microfiber fabric (an optical grade fabric). Petitioner contended this structure directly maps to the claimed doll-like figure comprising both optical and non-optical grade fabric strips sewed together, filled with stuffing material, to form an inner chamber.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Ogawa (Japanese Utility Model Application Publication No. H5-51237) and Masahiro (Japanese Laid Open Patent Disclosure Publ'n H8-103406).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner asserted that to the extent Ogawa does not explicitly teach using its tool to clean a display screen, Masahiro remedies this. Masahiro teaches a wiping cloth made from nonwoven silk fabric specifically designed for cleaning display screens and removing smudges. The combination of Ogawa's two-fabric stuffed toy form factor with Masahiro's specified use for screen cleaning renders the claim obvious.
- Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would combine Ogawa and Masahiro to enhance Ogawa’s general-purpose cleaning tool with the specific, improved display screen cleaning properties taught by Masahiro. This would involve the simple substitution of one known wiping material (Ogawa's microfiber) for another known wiping material (Masahiro's silk) to achieve the predictable result of a screen-cleaning toy.
- Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have a reasonable expectation of success because Masahiro teaches its silk material is superior to microfiber for cleaning glass surfaces. Therefore, applying Masahiro's fabric to Ogawa's tool would predictably result in a tool with improved cleaning capabilities for display screens.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Ogawa (Japanese Utility Model Application Publication No. H5-51237) and Cherk (Patent 3,748,779).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Claim 16 depends from cancelled claim 11 and adds the limitation of a "soft-bellied under-stuffed doll-like figure." Petitioner argued that while Ogawa teaches a stuffed figure, Cherk explicitly discloses a partially-filled, or "under-stuffed," toy animal. Cherk teaches that under-stuffing enables the toy to increase its surface area contact for greater stability and makes it easier for a user to grasp and manipulate.
- Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would be motivated to modify Ogawa’s stuffed cleaning tool with Cherk's known technique of partial stuffing for several predictable benefits. These benefits included making the tool easier to grip for cleaning, improving its stability when not in use, and increasing the cleaning surface area contact, thereby enhancing its cleaning properties.
- Expectation of Success: The combination involved applying a known technique (partial stuffing from Cherk) to a known device (the cleaning tool of Ogawa) to improve its functionality. This application would yield predictable results, leading a POSITA to a reasonable expectation of success.
Additional Grounds: Petitioner asserted an additional obviousness challenge against claim 16 based on the combination of Ogawa, Masahiro, and Cherk, relying on similar theories of combination.

Petitioner argued for a specific construction of the term "an optical grade fabric having substantially non-abrasive characteristics." Based on the patent specification and the Patent Owner's own statements and expert declarations during reexamination, Petitioner proposed this term should be construed to mean "a material that sufficiently minimizes scratching and surface gloss loss when using the material to wipe a display screen, and such material includes microfiber or chamois." This construction was central to mapping Ogawa's disclosure of microfiber directly onto the claim language.

Petitioner argued against discretionary denial under §325(d), asserting that the petition relies on prior art that is materially different from that previously considered by the USPTO. The core reference, Ogawa, is a foreign patent document that was never before the Examiner or the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI). Petitioner emphasized that Ogawa allegedly teaches the exact feature—combining optical and non-optical grade fabrics in a single plush toy—that the BPAI previously identified as the basis for the patentability of claims 15 and 16 over the prior art of record. Petitioner also noted that the ’831 patent had never been subject to a prior IPR petition.

Petitioner requested the institution of an inter partes review and the cancellation of claims 15 and 16 of the ’831 patent as unpatentable.