Douglas Dynamics, LLC v. Buyers Products Co.
717 F.3d 1336
| Fed. Cir. | 2013Background
- Douglas sued Buyers for infringement of snowplow mounting patents; district court granted summary judgment of noninfringement of the '700 Patent (claim 45) and denied a permanent injunction on the '978 patent; jury found the '530 and '978 patents valid and infringed; court later held error in claim 45 construction and granted infringement finding and injunction, remanding for injunction; '530 patent expired, moot for injunction; court vacated and remanded ongoing royalties for '530 and '978; majority reverses grant of noninfringement and grants injunction, remands royalties; dissenting opinion would affirm denial of injunction under eBay factors and uphold noninfringement finding for claim 45
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Construction of 'connected to' in claim 45 | Douglas argues indirect connections satisfy 'connected to' | Buyers argues only direct connections meet claim terms | 'Connected to' includes indirect connections; infringement found for claim 45 |
| Infringement of claim 45 by Buyers’ products | Douglas contends accused products meet all limitations | Buyers contends noninfringement under direct-connection reading | Reversed district court; accused products infringe claim 45 as construed |
| Whether permanent injunction on the '978 patent is warranted | Douglas seeks permanent injunction to stop ongoing infringement | Buyers disputes irreparable harm and market impact | Injunction granted; irreparable harm shown and balance/public factors favor injunction |
| Ongoing royalty for the '530 and '978 patents | Douglas seeks ongoing royalty for continued use | Buyers argues royalties may be limited by margins | Vacated and remanded for new pre-injunction ongoing royalty rate; '530 expired, injunction moot |
Key Cases Cited
- Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (claim construction uses ordinary meaning, consider entire patent; avoid importing limitations from specification)
- eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, 547 U.S. 388 (S. Ct. 2006) (permanent injunction requires four-factor test)
- Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 632 F.3d 1292 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (invalidates 25% rule of thumb in determining royalties)
- Golight, Inc. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 355 F.3d 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (royalty framework not limited to profit margins)
- ActiveVideo Networks, Inc. v. Verizon Commc'ns, Inc., 694 F.3d 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (monetary harm may be adequate where ongoing royalties are appropriate)
- Searfoss v. Pioneer Consolidated Corp., 374 F.3d 1142 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (guides interpretation of 'connected' and direct connection principles)
- Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc. v. U.S. Surgical Corp., 93 F.3d 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (interpreting claim terms in light of specification)
- i4i Ltd. P’ship v. Microsoft Corp., 598 F.3d 831 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (eBay standard applied to injunctive relief)