Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Wonderland Nurserygoods Co., Ltd. v. Thorley Industries, LLC

United States District Court, Third Circuit

December 16, 2013

WONDERLAND NURSERYGOODS CO., LTD., Plaintiff,
v.
THORLEY INDUSTRIES, LLC, d/b/a 4MOMS, Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

NORA BARRY FISCHER, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Wonderland Nursery Goods Co. ("Wonderland") brings this action against Defendant Thorley Industries, LLC d/b/a 4MOMS ("Thorley") for the alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8, 047, 609 (the "'609 Patent") (filed Dec. 3, 2010), (Docket No. 1-2 at 2). The '609 Patent is entitled "Infant Rocking Chair and Driving Device for Driving the Same." Id. Presently pending before the Court is Thorley's Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity of Claims 12, 13, 19, and 20 of the '609 Patent under the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112. (Docket No. 101 at 13). Thorley does not challenge Claim 14 under § 112. Id.

Thorley filed its instant Motion on July 1, 2013, (Docket Nos. 100-02), Wonderland filed its Opposition on July 29, 2013, (Docket Nos. 132-33), and Thorley filed its Reply on August 14, 2013, (Docket No. 136-37). On August 26, 2013, the Court heard oral argument on said Motion, (Docket Nos. 143-45).[1] Upon consideration of the parties' positions, and for the following reasons, Thorley's Motion is DENIED.

Confidential Draft

II. BACKGROUND

The '609 Patent is an invention directed at "infant rocking chairs, " more specifically "a driving device for driving a seat body of an infant rocking chair to move back and forth as well as up and down."[2] See '609 Patent col. 1 ll.15-19, (Docket No. 1-2 at 19). The '609 Patent discloses that "conventional infant rocking chairs" produce only "back-and-forth" or "up-and-down" motion, whereas a "curved swinging motion in which a back-and-forth motion is combined with an up-and-down motion" is preferable to "impart greater comfort to the infant." Id. col. 1 ll.21-27, (Docket No. 1-2 at 19).

Although Thorley challenges four claims, the essential issue concerns whether the specification of the '609 Patent sufficiently describes the "motion mechanisms" claimed in the invention. (Docket No. 101 at 12). Thorley asserts that every example of a motion mechanism disclosed in the specification of the '609 Patent includes both a "guide path unit" and a "movable member, " whereas the claims of the '609 Patent do not include either of these terms. (Docket No. 136 at 7). Wonderland asserts that the specification of the '609 Patent does not require a "guide path unit" and a "movable member" in all cases. (Docket No. 132 at 13-14).

Claim 12, which is representative for the issues in dispute, is reproduced below:

An infant rocking chair comprising:
a seat body;
a bottom seat;
a base disposed between said seat body and ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.