Wash World Inc. v. Belanger Inc., FKA Piston OPW Inc.

131 F.4th 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2025) · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · March 24, 2025 · No. 23-1841

Summary

This Federal Circuit opinion resolves a patent infringement appeal concerning the '041 patent for a vehicle spray washer system. The court holds that the appellant forfeited claim construction arguments for two terms but preserves a third, which it resolves on the merits by agreeing with the district court's implicit construction. Finally, the court orders remittitur of approximately $2.6 million in damages due to insufficient evidence for convoyed sales lost profits.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Writing for the Court
Stark, Circuit Judge; Lourie, Circuit Judge; Prost, Circuit Judge
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decision date
March 24, 2025
Docket number
23-1841
Procedural posture
Wash World appealed a final judgment finding that its Razor EDGE car wash system infringed Belanger's patent and awarding Belanger lost profits and reasonable royalties. Wash World challenged claim constructions, infringement, and the damages award.
Standard of review
Denial of judgment as a matter of law is reviewed de novo under Seventh Circuit law, viewing the evidence and reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and asking whether a rational jury could have found for the prevailing party. Denial of a new trial or remittitur is reviewed for abuse of discretion. Claim construction based on intrinsic evidence is reviewed de novo under Federal Circuit law.
Precedential value
Published and precedential
Parties
Wash World Inc. v. Belanger Inc., FKA Piston OPW Inc.
Disposition
vacated

Topics

patent infringementdamagesappellate procedureremediesstandard of review

Practice areas

patent lawpatent infringementpatent damagesappellate procedureclaim construction

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Wash World forfeited its appellate claim-construction arguments concerning the terms "outer cushioning sleeve" and "predefined wash area" by advancing materially different constructions on appeal.
  2. Whether claim 7's term "dependingly mounted from" requires a direct connection between the spray arm and the carriage.
  3. Whether the evidence supported lost-profits damages for nonpatented convoyed sales.
  4. Whether Wash World preserved its request for remittitur of approximately $2.6 million in damages.

Holdings

  1. Wash World forfeited its appellate construction because the proposed requirement that the sleeve be soft and resilient was materially different from the construction it presented to the district court.
  2. Wash World forfeited the materially different construction it advanced on appeal.
  3. Claim 7 is not limited to direct connections; a spray arm may be indirectly mounted to the carriage through an intervening structure.
  4. Belanger was not entitled to lost profits for the unpatented components because the evidence did not establish that those components and the patented product formed a functional unit.
  5. Wash World preserved its remittitur argument, and the damages judgment had to be reduced by $2,577,848.

Key quotations

Doing so, we agree with the district court that claim 7 is not limited to direct connections between the spray arm and the carriage and, instead, permits the presence of intervening structures. (131 F.4th at 1368-69)
To prove entitlement to lost profits for convoyed sales, a patentee must prove that the unpatented products and the patented product together constitute a “functional unit,” such that they are “analogous to components of a single assembly or . . . parts of a complete machine.” (131 F.4th at 1371)
As Belanger has not directed us to any other evidence of a functional relationship between Belanger’s car wash and the listed additional components, we conclude that there is no evidence in the record that could support awarding damages for convoyed sales. (131 F.4th at 1374)

Factual background

Belanger owns the '041 patent, which covers a spray-type car wash system with lighted spray arms. Wash World manufactured the Razor EDGE system, which used a single lighted spray arm called a LumenArch mounted to a trolley connected to a carriage and enclosed in a plastic covering. A jury found that the Razor EDGE infringed claim 7 and dependent claims 11-14, awarding $9.8 million in lost profits and $260,000 in royalties.

Procedural history

Wash World sought a declaratory judgment of noninfringement after Belanger sent a cease-and-desist letter. Belanger counterclaimed for infringement and damages. The district court declined to construe disputed terms, denied Wash World's summary-judgment motion, entered judgment after a jury found infringement and awarded $9.8 million in lost profits plus $260,000 in royalties, and denied Wash World's post-trial motions. The Federal Circuit affirmed the infringement judgment, vacated the damages portion, and remanded with instructions to reduce the damages award by $2,577,848.

Remand instructions

Affirm the judgment of infringement. Vacate the damages portion of the judgment and remand with instructions for the district court to remit the damages award by $2,577,848 and enter judgment for Belanger in the amount of $7,482,152. Each party shall bear its own costs.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…