Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to continue reading.

We have used your information to see if you have a subscription with us, but did not find one. Please use the button below to verify an existing account or to purchase a new subscription.

Your current subscription does not provide access to this content. Please use the button below to manage your account.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Please log in, or sign up for a new account to continue reading.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Thank you for reading! We hope that you continue to enjoy our free content.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Welcome! We hope that you enjoy our free content.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Thank you for reading! On your next view you will be asked to log in or create an account to continue reading.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Thank you for reading! On your next view you will be asked to log in to your subscriber account or create an account and subscribe purchase a subscription to continue reading.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Thank you for signing in! We hope that you continue to enjoy our free content.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Thank you for reading! We hope that you continue to enjoy our free content.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Thank you for reading! We hope that you continue to enjoy our free content.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Thank you for reading! We hope that you continue to enjoy our free content.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Thank you for reading! We hope that you continue to enjoy our free content.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Thank you for reading! We hope that you continue to enjoy our free content.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Checking back? Since you viewed this item previously you can read it again.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to continue reading.

Please purchase a subscription to continue reading.

Your current subscription does not provide access to this content.

To subscribe, click here. Already a subscriber? Click here.

Sorry, no promotional deals were found matching that code.

Promotional Rates were found for your code.

Cloudy early, becoming mostly clear after midnight. Low 26F. Winds NNW at 10 to 15 mph..

Cloudy early, becoming mostly clear after midnight. Low 26F. Winds NNW at 10 to 15 mph.

{span}The patent infringement trial of the Chamberlain Group against Overhead Door Corporation kicked off in Marshall’s federal court this week over inventions related to wireless or smart garage door opener technology.{/span}

{span}The patent infringement trial of the Chamberlain Group against Overhead Door Corporation kicked off in Marshall’s federal court this week over inventions related to wireless or smart garage door opener technology.{/span}

The nation’s two top garage door opener manufacturers, The Chamberlain Group Inc. and Overhead Door Corporation, are in Marshall’s federal court this week, battling it out over inventions related to wireless or smart garage door opener technology.

In the case, The Chamberlain Group Inc., the world’s largest manufacturer of automatic garage door openers, filed suit against Overhead Door Corporation on March 10, 2021, accusing the company of making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing products that allegedly infringe the asserted patents in the case. The accused products in the suit include: The Genie 7155 TKV and Overhead Door Destiny 1500 products, and the Aladdin Connect and Overhead Door Anywhere Wall Controller and Door Sensor Kit.

The Illinois-based company, also known as GCI, is seeking $62.7 million in the case.

“The accused products are being offered for sale by defendants and their affiliates nationwide, including in the state of Texas and this judicial district,” the lawsuit states. “Continued sales of the accused products will further damage CGI’s hard-earned position and good reputation in the marketplace and irreparably harm CGI in other ways.

“As a result of defendants’ actions, CGI was forced to file this lawsuit to protect its patented innovations and its reputation as the leader in the access control industry,” the lawsuit states.

Jury selection followed by opening statements and testimony in the case began Monday, with U.S. District Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap presiding.

“We’re here to talk about garage door openers,” Chamberlain’s attorney Ruffin Cordell, with Fish & Richardson PC, out of Washington D.C., told jurors in opening statements. “Those that had them in the past may be familiar with them, but these are a little bit different.”

Detailing the advancement of garage door openers, Cordell said garages are traditionally controlled with the push button on the wall or by a clicker operated from the car. Chamberlain brought garage door openers into the new age, creating a smart device.

“It’s a great American success story,” Cordell said, noting the company boasts about 6,000 employees and prides itself on being an innovator in the industry.

Noting Chamberlain’s illustrious legacy, Cordell said the company introduced their first garage opener in 1961. Over time, their products evolved with the Wi-Fi component added in 2013.

“Chamberlain’s products are used everywhere,” said Cordell, noting Chamberlain’s MyQ is a device that allows a person to open and close the garage door from anywhere using a smartphone.

“Make no mistake, when they came on the scene, they began to set the pace,” Cordell said of Chamberlain.

Cordell introduced several witnesses, who will be testifying at trial, including James “Jim” Fitzgibbon, the inventor and director of the intellectual property; and Barbara Kelkhoff, Chamberlain’s regulatory engineering manager.

“We’re here because Chamberlain has patented technology that enables us to control these doors while far away,” Cordell reiterated.

He said the defendant, Overhead Door, is using Chamberlain’s patented technology without permission and needs to be held accountable.

Cordell told jurors that they will hear a lot about the industry’s UL325 safety standard in the case. The standard addresses the automatic operation of garage doors and was developed by the collective brainstorming of companies in the industry to prevent garage door injuries, particularly involving children, from happening.

Cordell said for safety purposes, Chamberlain was the one that invented ways to accomplish the alerting and notification features that were needed.

“The standard (directive) says you have to alarm. They don’t tell you how, just that you have to alarm,” he explained.

“Chamberlain invented ways to accomplish that alerting in ways that consumers actually liked,” said Cordell.

Explaining the four patents-in-suit, Cordell noted that one of the patents-in-suit is a retrofit patent whereas the old garage door opener is converted into a smart device; another is a feature enhancement, and two others are the home security integration part of the invention.

Cordell said being able to tie the home security component into the garage door feature is important to homeowners.

“In this case, Chamberlain did tell Overhead Door about these patents. They told them before they even made a product,” said Cordell, referring to a letter the company sent to Genie, which is owned by Overhead Door.

Cordell said, because of that, the plaintiff’s team will be asking the jury to not only find that the defendant is guilty of infringement, but that the infringement is “willful,” meaning Overhead Doors allegedly knew about the patents but decided to use the technology anyway.

As a result, he said Chamberlain is losing business. Overhead Door’s attorney David Callahan, of Latham & Watkins LLP, argued that the defendant does not infringe.

In his opening statements, Callahan detailed the history of Overhead Door, noting that the company was founded in 1921, is headquartered in Lewisville, and has 750 employees in Texas and about 3,000 nationwide. He noted that the Genie division of the business is operated out of Ohio.

Regarding the safety standard that the plaintiff’s counsel referred to, Callahan noted that all garage openers must comply with the UL 325 standard, designated by the industry.

“They’re saying these patents are a lot more than what they are,” Callahan said of the plaintiff.

“The inventions disclosed in the patents are not the only way to comply with the UL 325 standard,” he argued, noting Overhead Doors found its own way of doing that.

Callahan further contended that Overhead Door doesn’t have a secure communication encrypted link as one of the patents-in-suit requires.

Callahan noted that Overhead’s witnesses in the case will include LeRoy Krupke, an engineer who worked for the company for more than 30 years developing and designing many of its products.

“When it came time for Overhead Door to make a device to (connect) from your phone, Mr. Krupke and his team said they want to make it wireless — take the existing product and add something to it,” said Callahan.

Expounding on the differences in the defendant’s product compared to the plaintiff’s Callahan noted that the circuit board in Overhead Door’s device is divided into two, and therefore, does not have one process.

“Mr. Krupke is going to explain to you these two different processes the GDO (garage door opener) and IDCM have,” Callahan told the jury.

He said the GDO process listens to a pre-determined signal coming from a garage wall unit or click from a car device in order to open and close the garage while the IDCM process listens for a pre-determined signal that only comes from a mobile device.

“These are two different ways of doing it,” Callahan said of Overhead Door’s processes.

“And as the (industry) parties have agreed, there are different ways of practicing the UL 325 standard,” said Callahan. “DASMA (Door & Access Systems Manufacturers Association) created these standards and does it in connection with (companies) in the industry.”

“The industry wanted to get together and make sure the products they’re making are safe for everybody (when used remotely),” said Callahan.

The lawyer further noted that Chamberlain’s accusation that Overhead Door is stealing their sales is false.

“They’ll say we took their sales,” said Callahan. “It’s true that Chamberlain lost sales, but it is not true that we were the cause of that.”

Testimony in the case continues today at the Sam B. Hall Jr. Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse in Marshall.

Email notifications are only sent once a day, and only if there are new matching items.