iFIT Inc. v. Peloton Interactive, Inc.

iFIT Inc. v. Peloton Interactive, Inc.

Opinion

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Before me is Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint. (D.I. 13). I have reviewed the parties' briefing. (D.I. 14, 17, 18). For the reasons that follow, this motion is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART.

I. BACKGROUND

On April 7, 2021, Plaintiff iFIT Inc.¹ filed this action against Defendant Peloton Interactive, Inc. alleging [*2]  that Peloton's Bike+ directly infringes U.S. Patent No. 10,864,407 ("the '407 patent"). (D.I. 1). Peloton moved to dismiss iFIT's claim for enhanced damages for failure to state a claim. (D.I. 8). Specifically, Peloton argued that the original complaint contained no allegations of willful infringement. (D.I. 9 at 4). Rather than oppose the motion, iFIT filed its First Amended Complaint. (D.I. 11). In its First Amended Complaint, iFIT alleges: "Peloton was aware of the application which led to the '407 Patent at the commencement of the 1386 action² between [iFIT] and Peloton where [iFIT] asserted U.S. Patent 10,293,211, of which the '407 Patent is a continuation," (id. at ¶ 29); "At the latest, Peloton became aware of the '407 Patent when this action was served," (id. at ¶ 30); "Despite Peloton's prior knowledge of the '407 Patent, including but not limited to knowledge of the '407 Patent as a result of [iFIT]'s original complaint, Peloton continues to market and sell the infringing Bike+ product," (id. at ¶ 31); and "Peloton's ongoing infringement is willful." (Id. at ¶ 39). Peloton filed a second motion to dismiss iFIT's claims for willful infringement and enhanced damages in the First Amended Complaint. (D.I. 13).

II. LEGAL STANDARD

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