Hyper has also continued its commitment to the sport by sponsoring riders, teams, as well as being the series title sponsor for several major events. Plaintiff’s approach hews more closely to precedent, especially that of this district. As acknowledged by Judges Young and Woodlock, however, in Reddy and DePaoli, it would be well within the Court’s discretion to provide some verbal construction at a reduced level of detail than that proposed by defendant. At our webstore, we offer hyper bicycles frames, known for their quality and durability. Founded in 1990, Hyper Bicycles has been dedicated to producing high-performance bikes that meet the needs of riders of all levels and styles. The question in this case, therefore, is primarily the “level of detail” to be used in describing the claimed design, i.e. whether the Court should advert to the illustrations in the design patent or undertake an element-by-element description thereof.
After parting ways with longtime bike sponsor Felt earlier this week, Scotty Cranmer announced on Saturday that he was joining New Jersey based brand hyper bike. In analyzing a patent infringement action, the Court must 1) determine the meaning and scope of the patent claims asserted to be infringed and 2) compare the properly construed claims to the infringing device. Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 52 F.3d 967, 976 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (en banc), aff’d, 517 U.S. 370, 116 S.Ct. The first step, known as claim construction, is an issue of law for the court to decide.
Consequently, the preferable course for a district court ordinarily will be not to attempt to “construe” a design patent by providing a detailed verbal description of the claimed design. Defendant rejoins that a verbal construction of claims explicitly excluding functional elements, as it has proposed, is more appropriate. It observes that the Federal Circuit in Egyptian Goddess stated that it may be helpful for the court to point out various features of the claimed design as they relate to the accused design and the prior art. 543 F.3d at 680. It then cites Lanard Toys, Ltd. v. Dolgencorp, LLC, a case in which the Federal Circuit, reviewing the verbal construction of a design patent, approvingly concluded that the lower court had followed the Egyptian Goddess standard “to a tee”. Defendant submits that Lanard controls the present case, or at least provides more authoritative guidance than DePaoli and Reddy. The element-by-element approach to claim construction proposed by defendant, while perhaps not specifically proscribed, invites the kind of myopic, restrictive approach to the infringement analysis which the Federal Circuit has found to be “untethered from the ordinary observer inquiry” and therefore error.
“Finish Line has everything a cyclist needs for taking care of their bike and making sure it performs at its peak potential. These products range from bicycle chain lubricants to drivetrain degreasers, from bike washes, specialty brushes and chain cleaning tools, to fluorinated bearing greases and specialty suspension and brake fluids.” Resting on Reddy and DePaoli, plaintiff requests that the Court reject defendant’s proposed construction and reserve any issues of functionality for a later time. Lu brings suit for two counts of patent infringement of United States patents numbers US D529,842 S (“the ’842 patent”) and US D556,642 S (“the ’642 patent”), each of which relates to the ornamental design of a bicycle. Plaintiff seeks judgment that Hyper Bicycles has infringed the two patents in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, damages to compensate plaintiff for the infringement, trebled under 35 U.S.C. § 284 due to the willfulness of the alleged infringement and attorney’s fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. On the performance side of things, the Ultra is fairly decent, packing a 250W hub-integrated motor. This motor is capable of propelling this electric two-wheeler to a top speed of 20 miles per hour with pedal assist.
The 32 years old brand is mainly known for the production of components, high-end competitive BMX frames. The founder, Clay Goldsmid, was himself a former BMX pro. After a great success in the BMX field and a first convincing experience in the mass market bike industry. The brand decided to enter the world of mountain biking with one of their first sponsored athletes during the BMX era, Eric Carter, hyper bicycles who had converted to mountain biking after a successful BMX career. “Park Tool has been manufacturing bicycle specific tools since 1963. Based out of St. Paul Minnesota, we are the world’s largest bicycle tool manufacturer. A long-term dedication to quality, innovation, and customer service has made Park Tool the first choice of professional and home bicycle mechanics around the world.”