Viscosoft, Inc. v. Hangzhou Heliang Network Technology Co., Ltd.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina granted Hangzhou Heliang Network Technology Co., Ltd.’s motion for judgment on the pleadings in a design patent infringement action involving a mattress topper. The court held that the accused design was plainly dissimilar from the patented design under the ordinary observer test and therefore could not plausibly infringe. The court also granted judicial notice of specified public patent documents, denied a motion to stay discovery as moot, and deferred ruling on sanctions pending a hearing.

Holdings

1. The accused mattress topper design does not infringe U.S. Patent No. D969,522 as a matter of law because an ordinary observer would not find the patented and accused designs substantially similar.
2. Although design-patent infringement is ordinarily a question of fact, a court may grant judgment on the pleadings or dismiss under Rule 12 when no reasonable factfinder could find infringement as a matter of law.
3. The court may take judicial notice of the patent-in-suit, its prosecution history, and the prior-art patents referenced on the face of the patent because they are public records.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the accused mattress topper design plausibly infringed U.S. Patent No. D969,522 under the ordinary-observer test.
2. Whether the design-patent infringement claims could be resolved on a Rule 12(c) motion despite infringement ordinarily presenting a question of fact.
3. Whether the court could take judicial notice of the patent-in-suit, its prosecution history, and prior-art patents referenced on the patent.
4. Whether sanctions should be imposed at that stage.

Disposition

other