Law360 is providing free access to its coronavirus coverage to make sure all members of the legal community have accurate information in this time of uncertainty and change. Use the form below to sign up for any of our weekly newsletters. Signing up for any of our section newsletters will opt you in to the weekly Coronavirus briefing.
Sign up for our Delaware newsletter
You must correct or enter the following before you can sign up:
Thank You!
Law360 (February 3, 2021, 9:07 PM EST ) In the latest patent bench trial to be held remotely amid the pandemic, child car seat maker Wonderland told a Delaware federal judge Wednesday that its rival Evenflo aimed to capture market share by selling products that infringe three patents on seats that can adjust as children grow.
The virtual bench trial had been set to begin Monday, after U.S. District Judge Richard Andrews said last year that a jury trial wasn't practical because of the virus. Opening arguments were delayed by two days due to a snow storm on the East Coast.
Wonderland's attorney, Michael Songer of White & Case LLP, told the judge that Evenflo issued an internal "call to action" to beat Wonderland in the market before releasing its allegedly infringing product.
Wonderland, which makes products that are sold by other companies under brand names like Graco, Nuna and Joie, designed a car seat called the forever seat, which can be adjusted so it can be used for infants, toddlers and small children. Songer said the product "really changed the marketplace," because a single seat can be used throughout childhood.
"It changed consumers' expectations because now you only need to buy one seat," he said. "You don't have to buy one for when they're a baby and then a different one as they're growing."
Songer said that in response, Evenflo got Wonderland seats, tore them down and designed a competing car seat called the EveryStage.
"It was such a big deal that they even called this their 'hero product,'" Songer said. "With this EveryStage Evenflo product, they intended to market this from the start to compete with and capture share from the Wonderland seats."
Wonderland claims the EveryStage seat infringes patents covering a headrest and harness system, as well as a cavity in the seat to store the harness. But Evenflo's attorney, Jeffrey Lyons of BakerHostetler, told the judge that its products don't contain the features found in the patents.
For instance, Lyons said that the storage feature in Evenflo's products not only doesn't infringe Wonderland's patents, it was an "afterthought" in the design process and "was so unimportant to marketing that it's not advertised."
He also pushed back on Wonderland's suggestion that Evenflo's decision to purchase and tear down Wonderland's products when designing its own should be seen as evidence of infringement.
Despite Wonderland's "attempt to paint Evenflo as a pirate stealing Wonderland's inventions," reviewing competing products is "industry standard practice that is itself regularly practiced by Wonderland," Lyons said.
The two sides also sparred over damages, with Wonderland saying its expert will testify that it should get between $4 and $8 for each EveryStage seat sold.
Lyons said Evenflo has sold 100,000 seats, and that damages between $400,000 and $800,000 was "exorbitant." He said that if infringement is found, damages should be $1.50 per product for two of the patents and 50 cents per product for the other.
The case had been set for a jury trial, but Judge Andrews said in December that he didn't think that could happen because of the pandemic. He asked the parties if they would open to a bench trial, which he said would be "very feasible." The parties mutually agreed to that format, but requested that the trial be entirely virtual, "for the safety of all concerned."
A remote trial, they said, "would relieve some considerable COVID-related anxiety associated with an in-person proceeding." Judge Andrews agreed to make it an all-remote affair using the TrialGraphix system.
A number of remote patent bench trials have been held during the pandemic, most notably a case in which a Virginia federal judge ordered Cisco to pay $1.9 billion for infringing network security patents owned by Centripetal Networks, in one of the biggest patent damages awards in history.
The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent Nos. 7,862,117, 8,087,725 and 8,123,294.
Wonderland is represented by Michael J. Songer, Shamita Etienne-Cummings, Bijal Vakil and Henry Huang of White & Case LLP, and Steven J. Balick and Andrew C. Mayo of Ashby & Geddes.
Evenflo is represented by John M. Mueller and Jeffrey J. Lyons of BakerHostetler, and Jack B. Blumenfeld, Jeremy A. Tigan and Jennifer A. Ward of Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP.
The case is Wonderland Switzerland AG v. Evenflo Co. Inc., case number 1:18-cv-01990, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.
--Editing by Michael Watanabe.
Correction: An earlier version of this story misspelled Bijal Vakil's name. The error has been corrected.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
