Indiana Intellectual Property Law News

August 5, 2021

Patent Office Issues 141 Patents to Indiana Citizens in July 2021

Patent No.	Title
D0926,292	Faucet
D0926,291	Faucet
D0926,144	Contact
D0926,104	Wheel chock
D0926,078	Buckle system
D0926,018	Knob
D0925,933	Banquette
11,074,802	Method and apparatus for automatic event prediction
11,074,674	Imaging noise reduction system and method
11,073,322	Modular heat transfer system
11,073,200	Embedded auxiliary oil system for gearbox protection
11,073,083	Particle separator
11,073,045	Turbine shroud assembly with case captured seal segment carrier
11,073,026	Turbine shroud assembly with multi-piece support for ceramic matrix composite material seal segments
11,072,162	Methods and apparatus for compensating for thermal expansion during additive manufacturing
11,072,096	Apparatuses and methods to mold complex shapes
11,071,831	Dose detection system module for medication delivery device
11,071,819	Valve drive unit with shape memory alloy actuator
11,071,666	Systems, methods, and devices for treatment of sleep disorders
11,071,636	Thoracic aorta stent graft with access region
11,071,535	Vascular anchoring introducer sheath
11,071,521	Internal ultrasound assembly with port for fluid injection
11,071,454	Identification of device location in healthcare facility
11,071,393	Apparatus for adding hospital bed functionality to an at-home bed
D0925,517	Communication console
D0925,306	Mattock tool
11,071,201	Method and apparatus for terminating an electrical cable to an integrated circuit
11,070,943	Systems and methods for identifying parties based on coordinating identifiers
11,070,290	System and method for using a solar cell in wireless communication
11,068,403	Data processing system for prefetching data to buffer entries and operating method of the data processing system
11,067,588	Medical analyte testing system and operating method therefor
11,067,509	Fluorescent microscope
11,067,029	Systems and methods for coupling a cylinder head to a cylinder block
11,067,015	Systems and methods for cylinder deactivation operation in response to route conditions
11,067,014	System and method for reducing engine knock
11,067,006	Gas turbine engine system with synchronization features for gearbox operation
11,066,973	Heating system for a tank header of aftertreatment system and method of heating a tank header
11,066,947	Turbine shroud assembly with sealed pin mounting arrangement
11,066,849	Adjustable decorative lockset rose assembly
11,066,460	Phage display vectors and methods of use
11,066,386	CGRP receptor antagonists
11,066,256	Grain bin powersweep with sump shaft aperture sealing cover plate assembly
11,066,249	Loading table roller brush assembly
11,066,247	Powersweep including gearbox shifter mechanism
11,066,051	Wheel sensors within vehicular brake assemblies
11,065,808	Methods and apparatus for compressing material during additive manufacturing
11,065,391	Automatic injection device with variable dosing
11,065,386	Automatic medication injection device with audible indication of injecting progress
11,065,368	Drug eluting graft constructs and methods
11,065,216	Compositions and methods for regulating body weight and metabolic syndromes
11,065,130	Expandable spinal implant system and method of using same
11,065,123	Compression resistant implants including an oxysterol and methods of use
11,065,103	Method and apparatus for fixation of an ACL graft
11,065,065	Spinal implant system and methods of use
11,064,987	Volumetric grafts for treatment of fistulae and related methods and systems
11,064,822	Snap together frame
RE048,635	ERK inhibitors
D0925,160	Cremation urn
D0925,032	Component for a drug delivery device
D0925,014	Handshower holder
D0925,008	Faucet handle
D0925,007	Faucet
D0924,983	Children’s ride-on vehicle
11,063,445	Multi-cell battery management device
11,062,707	Voice recognition for patient care environment
11,062,541	Automated architectural specification generation and hardware identification
11,061,482	Force sensitive input devices and methods
11,061,035	Charged mass labeling system
11,060,998	Nonlinear mass sensors based on electronic feedback
11,060,978	Methods of determining an analyte concentration in a body fluid sample having disturbance variables, as well as computer programs and devices therefor
11,060,959	Systems and methods for analyzing an analyte extracted from a sample using an adsorbent material
11,060,939	Diagnosing cylinder pressure sensor gain and offset
11,060,578	Conical spring washer, transmission system, and method of assembly thereof
11,060,468	Engine intake air system including CAC bypass and separate bypass heater, and high-efficiency spark-ignited direct injection liquid propane engine architectures including same
11,060,451	Fuel injector cleaning system, fluid, and method
11,060,434	Reductant injection in exhaust manifold
11,060,004	Adhesives and methods of making the same
11,059,504	Technologies for caddy assemblies
11,059,416	Electrochromic adaptive driving beam system and method
11,059,413	Retractable room actuation assembly for recreational vehicle
11,059,369	Diesel exhaust fluid tank venting system
11,059,359	Tonneau cover tie-down assembly
11,059,259	Composite core with reinforced plastic strips and method thereof
11,059,227	Print head for additive manufacturing
11,058,976	Valve-sensor assembly
11,058,805	Compositions and devices incorporating water-insoluble therapeutic agents and methods of the use thereof
11,058,554	Hard bearing inserter rings
11,058,495	Surgical system having assisted optical navigation with dual projection system
11,058,464	Interspinous process fixation devices, systems, instruments and methods of assembly and use
11,058,368	Distributed healthcare communication system
11,058,108	Stable high strength oil-in-water emulsions
11,058,092	Animal crate with swing or drop door
11,058,089	Soybean variety 5PVSQ69
11,058,055	Airflow for an agricultural harvesting combine
D0924,441	Beam
D0924,392	Component of a drug delivery device
D0924,391	Component for a drug delivery device
D0924,378	Non-return device valve member
D0924,371	Faucet
D0924,370	Faucet
D0924,366	Faucet
D0924,365	Faucet body
D0924,364	Faucet
D0924,358	Faucet sprayhead
D0924,170	Electrical connector
D0924,169	Electrical connector
D0924,035	Knob
D0923,965	Towel bar
11,057,722	Hearing aid for people having asymmetric hearing loss
11,057,240	Method and process for securing an executable image
11,056,838	Transceiver receptacle with EMI cage and bezel clips that provide high shielding effectiveness
11,056,329	ESI-MS via an electrokinetically pumped interface
11,055,386	Controlling user access to a medical system
11,054,318	System for nondestructive residual stress profiling using inductive sensing
11,054,114	Illuminating, spinning device
11,054,039	Seal runner support
11,053,962	Method and apparatus of plasma flow control for drag reduction
11,053,881	Hierarchical engine control systems and methods
11,053,830	Mixer for NOx sensor
11,053,828	Separately determining firing density and pumping density during firing density transitions for a lean-burn internal combustion engine
11,053,817	Turbine shroud assembly with ceramic matrix composite blade track segments and full hoop carrier
11,053,806	Brazed blade track for a gas turbine engine
11,053,801	Gas turbine engine composite vane assembly and method for making the same
11,053,646	Helicopter and VTOL aircraft landing pad information sheet
11,053,578	Removing coatings from ceramic matrix composite substrates
11,053,544	Corn event DAS-59122-7 and methods for detection thereof
11,053,511	Production of DHA and other LC PUFAs in plants
11,053,290	Modified Tamm-Horsfall protein and related compositions and methods of use
11,053,214	Compositions and methods related to pyridinoylpiperidine 5-HT.sub.1F agonists
11,053,003	Cyclorotor thrust control, transmission and mounting system
11,052,878	Manually-operable hydraulic stabilizing system
11,052,192	Disposable inserter and reusable inserter for accommodating a disposable inserter
11,052,153	Highly branched alpha-D-glucans
11,052,009	Device for adjustably supporting portions of a patient for surgery
11,052,008	Surgical frame and method for use thereof facilitating patient transfer
11,051,961	Deployment handle with stabilizing rail for a pre-loaded prosthesis delivery device
11,051,899	Surgical draping system and method
11,051,865	Fixation of bone implants
11,051,859	Spinal correction system and method
11,051,854	Spinal implant system and method
11,051,770	Patient positioning support structure

August 4, 2021

Egglife Foods Sues Crepini, LLC for Alleged Trade Dress Infringement

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

South Bend, Indiana – Apparently Egglife Foods, Inc. (“Egglife”), the Plaintiff, sell ready-to-eat wraps that are made with cage-free egg whites instead of flour (“egglife egg white wraps”). Introduced in 2019, founder Peggy Johns claims to have invented egglife egg white wraps, using a now patented method (U.S. Patent No. 10,194,669). Egglife claims its egglife egg white wraps are available in over 3,500 retail locations throughout the United States and have garnered a loyal following of passionate consumers. Since 2019, Egglife has allegedly invested $5 million dollars in the Egglife brand and is on pace to reach $30 million in retail sales in 2021. According to the complaint, Egglife products have a distinct packaging including a unique combination of shapes, colors, text font, a center window, and accent elements that act as a source identifier to its consumers (the “Trade Dress”).

The Defendant, Crepini, LLC (“Crepini”), was apparently founded in 2007 with “the dream of bringing crepes into every North American household.” Crepini allegedly sold its egg white thins products in at least three different packaging styles from early 2018 through 2019. Per the Complaint, Crepini owns U.S. Trademark Registration Nos. 5,888,044 and 5,447,364 for “Egg Thins” and “Egg White Thins,” respectively. Egglife claims Crepini rebranded yet again and announced an extensive packaging overhaul including changing the name of the product to “egg wraps” on January 1, 2021.

August 3, 2021

161 Trademark Registrations Issued to Indiana Companies in July 2021

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

The U.S. Trademark Office issued the following 161 trademark registrations to persons and businesses in Indiana in July 2021 based on applications filed by Indiana trademark attorneys:

Reg. Number	Word Mark
6434626	ZOOMERS RV
6433404	GEOTHERMAL ENERGY WE CAN ALL AGREE ON
6432951	RAYBELLA
6432531	HT HOBBS TELECOM
6432457	E3

August 2, 2021

Patent Infringement Suit Dismissed for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

New Albany, Indiana – Chief Judge Tanya Walton Pratt for the Southern District of Indiana dismissed a patent infringement suit filed by Plaintiff, Eddie M. Green, Jr. (“Green”) in March 2020 for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Green, who claimed Defendants, Ara Yavruyan and Chain Vault Inc., infringed on his U.S. Patent No. 9,940,796 for the “Yellow Fellow Safety Sign” filed his pro se Complaint in the Southern District of Indiana although he noted a California address for the Defendants. In response, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss arguing improper venue, lack of personal jurisdiction, failure to effect service, and that the Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

In or around April 2020, the Court directed the Clerk to issue process, which was returned unexecuted by the United States Marshals Service (“USMS”) on July 9, 2020 as it could not locate the Defendants at the address listed on the Complaint. A second address was found and the Court ordered the USMS to issue process at the second address. On October 20, 2020, the USMS again returned an unexecuted summons, Complaint, and Order because it could not locate the second address for the Defendants. After being required to submit search evidence and a proper address to the Court, Green filed a Motion for Alias Summons which was granted on November 18, 2020. On November 19, 2020, having been served, the Defendants filed their Motion to Dismiss.

Over the course of one month after the filing of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Green submitted a Motion for Summary Judgment, a Motion to Strike Declaration, and five filings opposing the Motion to Dismiss.

When a Court is faced with a Fed. Rule Civ. P. 12(b)(2) motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, a plaintiff only needs to make a prima facie case of personal jurisdiction. However, “[i]f the defendant has submitted evidence in opposition to the implementation of jurisdiction, ‘the plaintiff must go beyond the pleadings and submit affirmative evidence supporting the exercise of jurisdiction.’” Additionally, the Court must employ a three-prong test to determine if there is specific jurisdiction: (1) the defendant purposefully directed its activities at residents of the forum, (2) the claim arises out of or relates to those activities, and (3) assertion of personal jurisdiction is reasonable and fair.”

Here, the Defendants claim neither reside or have any physical presence in Indiana or “continuous or systematic contacts with Indiana. Thus, the Court must use the three-prong test for specific jurisdiction. However, the Defendants claim they have no contacts with the state of Indiana at all and have therefore not availed themselves to specific jurisdiction. It does not appear Green was able to provide any evidence to the contrary and therefore, the Motion to Dismiss was granted.

July 30, 2021

Netsoft Holdings, LLC Sued for Alleged Patent Infringement

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – Apparently the Plaintiff, Social Positioning Input Systems, LLC (“Social”), is the owner by assignment of U.S. Patent No. 9,261,365 (the “‘365 Patent”). The ‘365 Patent is titled “Device, System and Method for Remotely Entering, Storing and Sharing Addresses for a Positional Information Device.” Social claims Netsoft Holdings, LLC (“Netsoft”), the Defendant, has infringed on at least Claim 1 of the ‘365 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or offering for sale associated hardware and software for asset locating (the “Product”). For example, the Product may include Netsoft’s Hubstaff asset tracking platform and any associated hardware, apps, or other software.

According to the Complaint, the Product provides an asset tracking system for real-time GPS tracking of assets that the user can see on a positional information device (i.e., a mobile device or computer). The Product apparently allows an organization’s owner and managers to track their staff’s location, review their previous routes, and display time stamps showing where users were at a specified time along their route. Because Social claims the Product infringes on at least Claim 1 of the ‘365 Patent, it is seeking damages for patent infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284.

July 28, 2021

Fishers-Based Formstack, LLC Sued for Alleged Patent Infringement

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Fishers, Indiana – Digital Verification Systems, LLC (“Digital”) is apparently the owner by assignment of U.S. Patent No. 9,054,860 (the “‘860 Patent”) for a Digital Verified Identification System and Method. According to the Complaint, Formstack, LLC (“Formstack”), the Defendant, offers at least one Product, Formstack Sign, that infringes one or more claims of the ‘860 Patent.

Digital claims Formstack’s Product provides a system for e-signing documents and for digitally verifying the identification of the signer as shown below.

Apparently, the Product further includes a digital identification module to be associated with at least one user and at least one verification data element, for example, a unique login ID and password. It also appears a user can store their e-signature within a document using the Product. As Digital claims each of these components of the Product are covered by the ‘860 Patent, it is seeking damages for patent infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284.

July 26, 2021

Delta Faucet Company Sues Amazon Storefront for Alleged Trademark Infringement

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – Delta Faucet Company (“Delta”), the Plaintiff, is an Indiana corporation that is apparently known as “America’s Faucet Innovation Leader.” Delta claims its products may only be purchased in the United States from Delta itself, or its Authorized Sellers. According to the Complaint, this allows Delta to control the quality of the products and protect the value of its brand(s). As Delta’s brand is important to the company, it has registered numerous trademarks with the U.S. Trademark Office including those in the table below (the “Delta Marks”).

Registered Mark	Registration Nos.
	5,273,845
	2,583,761
	3,062,101
	2,586,604
DELTA	4,518,067
	0,668,880
DELTA	4,638,296

Delta has filed multiple infringement suits in Indiana this year to vigorously defend its intellectual property rights. E-commerce sales have exploded over the past decade and while online marketplaces have created opportunities, they have also apparently created a challenge for brand owners to control the quality and safety of their products. Further, Delta claims online marketplaces have a low barrier to entry and do not require sellers to be Authorized Sellers, meaning many unauthorized sellers with no relationship to Delta are able to sell counterfeit or lesser quality products online without Delta’s consent. This can lead to consumer reviews that associate the problem with their product “with the brand/manufacturer rather than the product seller.” Given these risks, Delta claims it imposes additional requirements on its Authorized Sellers who sell online, including only allowing websites that are operated by the Authorized Seller and not a storefront on any online marketplace. The website must also include the “Authorized Seller’s mailing address, telephone number, and email address” along with being fully inspected and approved by Delta.

Delta claims that due to the risks to consumers and reputational concerns, it actively monitors the online sale of its products. Over the course of this monitoring, Delta apparently found a high volume of products being sold illegally on Amazon by Defendants, Dmitrii Iakovlev and John Does, 1-10 (while the identities of John Does 1-10 are currently unknown, Delta intends on discovering their identities and amending its Complaint). Delta claims it sent multiple cease and desist communications to Defendants, but Defendants have continued to sell products bearing the Delta Marks on their “TechnoProffs” Amazon storefront. Additionally, the Complaint cites to numerous one-star reviews for the sales of alleged Delta products on the TechnoProffs storefront that were damaged and/or missing pieces.

Due to the alleged harm of the sales of unauthorized products bearing the Delta Marks, Delta is seeking injunctive relief and enhanced damages for trademark infringement pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 1116 and 1117(a). Also pursuant to the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), Delta claims Defendants actions constitute unfair competition. Delta is further seeking damages for trademark infringement and unfair competition under Indiana common law. Finally, because Defendants have allegedly knowingly and willfully sold products represented as genuine Delta products when they are not, Delta claims Defendants have committed deception in violation of Indiana Crime Victim’s Relief Act, Ind. Code § 35-43-5-3.

July 23, 2021

Wabash County Truck Repair Business Sued for Alleged Trademark Infringement

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

South Bend, Indiana – Apparently Triple LLL Truck Repair, Inc., the Plaintiff, entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement (the “Agreement”) with Defendants, Triple LLL, Inc. (“Triple LLL”) and Maurice Long, in February 2012. Under the Agreement, Plaintiff purportedly purchased the assets of Triple LLL with the exception of Triple LLL’s cash, accounts receivable, motor vehicles not identified in the Agreement, and personal items of Mr. Long that were identified in the Agreement. The assets purchased included the goodwill and intangible assets of the business including, apparently, the intellectual property.

Since purchasing the business, the Plaintiff claims it has run a full-service maintenance and repair facility using the “Triple LLL” mark (the “Mark”). Further, the Plaintiff owns U.S. Registration No. 6,209,305 in connection with “retail stores featuring tractor, truck, and trailer parts and tractor, truck, and trailer maintenance, repair, and tire alignment” (the “Registration”).

It has since come to the attention of the Plaintiff that Triple LLL has begun operating a truck repair facility under the name “Triple LLL, Inc. Truck and Trailer Services.” In addition to the similar name, Triple LLL apparently runs its new business out of the same building it previously used for its business operations. Plaintiff claims the Defendants’ use of the Mark and the use of the same building to operate their business is likely to cause confusion and deceive the public into believing the Parties are connected. Further, Plaintiff claims Triple LLL has actively solicited its customers and actual confusion has occurred between vendors and customers of Plaintiff.

Therefore, Plaintiff is seeking damages for willful trademark infringement in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1114. Plaintiff also claims Defendants’ actions amount to unfair competition and false designation of origin in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125. Plaintiff is requesting damages, treble damages, ill-gotten profits, reasonable attorneys’ fees, statutory damages, and the costs of the suit.

July 21, 2021

Vroom, Inc. Sues Indianapolis Car Company for Alleged Trademark Infringement

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indianapolis, Indiana – Vroom, Inc. (“Vroom”), the Plaintiff, apparently began selling used vehicles online in 2013. As e-commerce has taken off, Vroom sought and registered numerous trademarks including those at issue in this case as shown below (the “Vroom Marks”).

Mark	Registration No./Serial No.
VROOM	4,917,005
	5,076,055
VROOM	5,592,887
	5,436,572
VROOM GET IN	5,964,489
VROOM	6,075,286
	6,070,931
VROOM	87/287,698

According to the Complaint, Vroom became aware of Defendants’, Midwest Motors LLC, d/b/a Vrooomsace Car Selection and Khaled Alragwi, use of VROOMSACE, VROOMSACE CAR SELECTION, VROOMCARS.COM, vroomcars.com, and vroomindy.com in connection with the buying and selling of used cars (collectively the “Allegedly Infringing Properties”) in December 2020. Counsel for Vroom apparently sent multiple letters and emails to Defendants and even attempted to contact Defendants by phone to inform them of their allegedly infringing actions. As of the filing of the Complaint, Vroom claims Defendants did not respond to any of the cease and desist communications and continued using the Allegedly Infringing Properties.

Vroom claims Defendants’ use of the Allegedly Infringing Properties is likely to cause confusion or deceive customers as to the connection of the Defendants and Vroom. Therefore, Vroom is claiming Defendants’ activities and use of the Allegedly Infringing Properties constitute trademark infringement in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1114. Also, under the Lanham Act, Vroom is seeking damages for false designation of origin and unfair competition in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). Vroom is further claiming Defendants’ actions constitute common law unfair competition and trademark infringement. Finally, Vroom claims Defendants are in violation of the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d) for using and registering the domain names “vroomindy.com” and “vroomcars.com.”

July 19, 2021

Seventh Circuit Affirms Denial of Fees for Trademark Infringement Case

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Chicago, Illinois – Chicago is apparently home to two hotels named “Hotel Chicago.” The first, owned by plaintiff/appellee, LHO Chicago River, LLC (“LHO”) was allegedly named in 2014. The second hotel, owned by defendants/appellants Rosemoor Suites, LLC, Portfolio Hotel & Resorts, LLC and Chicago Hotel, LLC (collectively “Rosemoor”), was apparently renamed to “Hotel Chicago” in 2016. LHO filed suit for trademark infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act, deceptive advertising, and common-law trademark infringement under Illinois law.

The district court found that LHO failed “to show that it is likely to succeed in proving secondary meaning” of the alleged mark “Hotel Chicago” and thus denied preliminary injunctive relief. While LHO appealed this ruling, it moved to voluntarily dismiss its claims with prejudice prior to briefing.

After the case was dismissed, Rosemoor filed a motion requesting more than half a million dollars in attorney fees, claiming the case was “exceptional.” This request was denied by the district court. On appeal, the Seventh Circuit held that the district court did not use the proper standard of Octane Fitness to deny the request and remanded. On remand, Rosemoor filed a renewed request for fees including an extra $130,000 on top of the original fee request. However, even after applying the Octane Fitness standard, the district court still denied the fee request. The Seventh Circuit affirmed finding the district court “considered the evidence under the Octane Fitness framework and reasonably determined that this case did not qualify as exceptional.”

Practice Tip: Under Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 572 U.S. 545 at n.7. (2014), a district court must consider the totality of the circumstances by simply weighing non-exclusive factors such as “frivolousness, motivation, objective unreasonableness (both in the factual and legal components of the case) and the need in particular circumstances to advance considerations of compensation and deterrence.”