Extang Corp. v. Truck Accessories Grp., LLC

Extang Corp. v. Truck Accessories Grp., LLC

Opinion

FILED UNDER SEAL

MEMORANDUM OPINION

February 18, 2022

Wilmington, Delaware

/s/ Kent A. Jordan

JORDAN, Circuit Judge, sitting by designation.

I. INTRODUCTION

This is a lawsuit by Extang Corporation, UnderCover, Inc., and Laurmark Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a BAK Industries (collectively and in the singular, "Extang") against Truck Accessories Group, LLC d/b/a Leer, Inc. ("Leer"). Extang and Leer are competitors who sell accessories for pickup trucks. Extang alleges that Leer is infringing four patents that relate to foldable tonneau covers for pickup truck cargo boxes (the "Asserted Patents"). (D.I. 1 at 1-2.) The accused product is the model HF350 tonneau cover, which is designed, marketed, and sold by Leer. (D.I. 169 at 1.)

Both sides have moved for partial summary judgment on an assortment [*2]  of issues. This decision addresses the parties' cross-motions regarding willfulness: Extang moved for summary judgment that Leer's alleged infringement was willful, and Leer moved for summary judgment that any infringement was not willful. (D.I. 159; D.I. 176.) Both motions will be denied.

II. DISCUSSION

A. Summary Judgment Standard

Summary judgment is appropriate only if, after drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of the non-moving party, there exists "no genuine dispute as to any material fact" and the movant "is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Moyer v. Patenaude & Felix, A.P.C., 991 F.3d 466, 469 (3d Cir. 2021); Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). A "material fact" is one which could affect the outcome of the case, and "a dispute about a material fact is 'genuine' if the evidence is sufficient to permit a reasonable jury to return a verdict for the non-moving party." Lamont v. New Jersey, 637 F.3d 177, 181 (3d Cir. 2011).

B. Willfulness Standard

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.