Intercontinental Great Brands LLC v. Kellogg N. Am. Co.

Intercontinental Great Brands LLC v. Kellogg N. Am. Co.

Opinion

 [*1339]  [***1082]   Taranto, Circuit Judge.

Kraft Foods Global Brands LLC (now called Intercontinental Great Brands) owns U.S. Patent No. 6,918,532, which issued in 2005 and was supplemented with additional  [***1083]  claims on reexamination in 2011. The '532 patent describes and claims a food package that, after opening, can be resealed to maintain the freshness of the food items inside. Kraft brought this patent-infringement suit against Kellogg North America Co., Keebler Foods Co., and affiliates (collectively, Kellogg) in the Northern District of Illinois. The district court held that Kellogg was entitled to summary judgment of invalidity for obviousness [**2]  of the asserted claims of the '532 patent. Intercontinental Great Brands LLC v. Kellogg N. Am. Co., 118 F. Supp. 3d 1022, 1027-42 (N.D. Ill. 2015). The court also held that Kraft was entitled to summary judgment rejecting Kellogg's counterclaim of unenforceability of the patent due to alleged inequitable conduct by Kraft, chiefly in an ex parte reexamination proceeding. Id. at 1044-45. We affirm.

The '532 patent describes a combination of two known kinds of packaging. One, common for cookies, uses a frame surrounded by a wrapper. The other, common for wet wipes, uses a package on which the label may be pulled back to access the contents, then put back in place to reseal the package to preserve the items remaining inside.

Thus, the background section of the patent begins: "Containers for food products such as cookies and other snacks typically include a frame surrounded by an outer wrapper. The frame acts as a tray to hold the food product and to protect the food product from damage."'532 patent, col. 1, lines 12-15. A person wanting to consume some but not all of the items in the package "normally" does so "by opening one end of the wrapper, withdrawing the tray from the inside thereof, and then removing the food product from the tray." Id., col. 1, lines 15-18. "[T]hese containers," however, "generally do not provide a convenient opening [**3]  and reclosing arrangement. For example, reclosing of the wrapper, once opened, generally includes simply folding or rolling the end down and clipping the end to keep the wrapper closed." Id., col. 1, lines 19-23.

At the same time, "[r]eclosable seals have been used for dispensing bags for wet tissue or disposable cleaning wipes." Id., col. 1, lines 24-25. "The label on these bags can be pulled back thereby exposing an opening, allowing access to the wet tissues or wipes inside." Id., col. 1, lines 25-27. "Typically," however, "these dispensing bags" lack a rigid internal structure, i.e., "are completely flexible, formed exclusively of a plastic or other suitable flexible material which closely surrounds the pack of wet tissues or wipes." Id., col. 1, lines 27-30. Lacking an internal rigid structure, "such known dispensing bags are not well suited for containing food products as  [*1340]  these containers fail to provide adequate protection for storing food products." Id., col. 1, lines 34-36.

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