`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`ICON HEALTH & FITNESS, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`PELOTON INTERACTIVE, INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`C.A. No. ___________
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ICON HEALTH & FITNESS, INC.’S COMPLAINT FOR
`PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff ICON Health & Fitness, Inc. (“ICON”) hereby complains against defendant
`
`Peloton Interactive, Inc. (“Peloton”) as follows:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`ICON is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Delaware with its
`
`principal place of business located at 1500 South 1000 West, Logan, Utah 84321.
`
`2.
`
`Peloton is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Delaware with
`
`its principle place of business located at 158 West 27th Street, New York, New York 10001.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271 et seq.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the patent claims pursuant to
`
`28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338.
`
`5.
`
`Peloton is incorporated in this District, and Peloton has purposefully availed itself
`
`of the benefits and protections of the laws of the State of Delaware.
`
`6.
`
`Peloton intends to and does promote, use, offer for sale, and sell the infringing
`
`products and services described herein to customers in this District.
`
`RLF1 25070316v.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-00507-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/21 Page 2 of 12 PageID #: 2
`
`
`
`
`7.
`
`Peloton advertises, markets, sells, and offers its products and services through its
`
`websites, which advertising, marketing, selling, and offerings are available to the purchasing
`
`public across the United States, including in this District.
`
`8.
`
`This Court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over Peloton is consistent with the
`
`Constitutions of the United States and the State of Delaware.
`
`9.
`
`Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1400 because Peloton
`
`resides within this District and has committed, and continues to commit, acts of patent
`
`infringement within this District.
`
`ICON’S HISTORY OF INNOVATION
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`10.
`
`ICON began building its business in 1977 upon creativity, investment, and hard
`
`work. This led to a stable, inventive, and diversified fitness company built upon hundreds of
`
`industry-leading patents and the most well-known brands in the industry, including
`
`NordicTrack®, ProForm®, and iFIT®.
`
`11.
`
`ICON was the first to develop and commercialize interactive connected
`
`technology that allowed in-home, live, and on-demand instructor led classes with competition
`
`and leaderboards (i.e., iFIT) at least 12 years before Peloton was founded.
`
`12.
`
`ICON demonstrated its first iteration of iFIT in the late 1990s at a well-known
`
`fitness sporting goods, team sport, and fitness tradeshow called the Atlanta Super Show at the
`
`Georgia World Congress Center. For that show, ICON created a remote studio-based treadmill
`
`class that was led by an instructor located at ICON’s headquarters in Utah and presented
`
`remotely to class participants in Atlanta. The instructor led the remote users through a treadmill
`
`class, and the speed and incline of the users’ treadmills was remotely controlled by the instructor
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-00507-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/21 Page 3 of 12 PageID #: 3
`
`
`
`
`in Utah. Nothing like this had been seen in the fitness industry. ICON was awarded many
`
`industry-leading patents covering this technology.
`
`13. Many of those industry-leading patents allowed ICON to be the sole provider of
`
`treadmills, exercise bikes, rowers, ellipticals, and cabled strength machines with a remote-control
`
`feature for nearly 20 years. ICON invested a tremendous amount of time and resources to
`
`develop its remote-control technology nearly 20 years ago, and it has continued to invest in
`
`further generations of this technology. ICON must protect that investment and the patent rights it
`
`has been granted—and expects to still be granted in the future—against infringers like Peloton.
`
`14.
`
`ICON’s United States Patent No. 10,864,407 (“’407 Patent”) is an example of
`
`further generations of ICON’s iFit technology. The ’407 Patent generally discloses and claims
`
`technology to automatically control an exercise device in conjunction with an interactive
`
`integrated weight system. This system allows a user to obtain the benefit of automatic control
`
`and programming customized for their fitness goals, and seamlessly integrates both aerobic
`
`(cardio) and anaerobic (weight/resistance training) into a single exercise using a single device.
`
`15.
`
`ICON’s ’407 Patent teaches a system that allows users to save space and time,
`
`and still obtain the benefit of a customized, automatically controlled, combined cardio and
`
`strength training workout.
`
`PELOTON’S HISTORY OF INFRINGEMENT AND LACK OF INNOVATION
`
`16.
`
`Since its inception, Peloton has proved itself an infringer and demonstrated a
`
`pattern of copying ICON’s innovations:
`
`•
`
`In 2016, ICON was forced to sue Peloton for patent infringement based
`
`on its first and then only product, the Peloton Bike. That case was
`
`resolved.
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-00507-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/21 Page 4 of 12 PageID #: 4
`
`
`
`
`•
`
`In 2020, ICON was also forced to sue Peloton for patent infringement by
`
`Peloton’s Tread product. That case is currently pending in this Court,
`
`Peloton Interactive, Inc. v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., CA No. 20-
`
`662-RGA.
`
`• Also in 2020, Peloton’s pattern of infringement required ICON to bring
`
`another patent infringement case based upon Peloton’s release of its
`
`Bike+. That case is currently pending in this Court, ICON Health &
`
`Fitness, Inc. v. Peloton Interactive, Inc., CA No. 20-1386-RGA.
`
`•
`
`ICON has now been forced to file the current action—the fourth patent
`
`infringement case against Peloton.
`
`PELOTON’S CURRENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`BIKE+ IS THE MOST RECENT EXAMPLE OF PELOTON’S PATTERN OF COPYING ICON’S
`TECHNOLOGY
`
`17.
`
`18.
`
`Peloton’s most recent infringement relates to its Bike+ product.
`
`Peloton began offering the Bike+ and associated app on September 9, 2020,
`
`which incorporates ICON’s patented automatic control and interactive integrated weight system
`
`as a key new feature. Peloton calls the automatic control “Auto Follow.” Auto Follow
`
`automatically adjusts the bike’s resistance to match an instructor’s callout:
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-00507-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/21 Page 5 of 12 PageID #: 5
`
`
`
`
`
`Peloton advertises the Auto Follow feature as key to its new premium Bike+
`
`19.
`
`product. Bike+ consumers and media outlets praise Peloton’s Auto Follow feature—apparently
`
`unaware that Peloton, rather than innovating, is actually infringing ICON’s longstanding
`
`intellectual property rights.
`
`20.
`
`Auto-Follow is paired with a weight cradle on the Bike+ and other features that
`
`tell a user when to alternate between using the free weights and using the Bike+ (e.g., the
`
`information timeline). Below is a high-level depiction of this arrangement:
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-00507-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/21 Page 6 of 12 PageID #: 6
`
`
`
`
`21.
`
`The information timeline informs the user by icon and text where she is in the
`
`workout by showing elapsed time and time remaining, as well as the type of workout being
`
`performed and when to alternate exercises (e.g., cycling, weights, or some combination of
`
`exercises). This feature also infringes upon ICON’s intellectual property rights, including
`
`ICON’s ’407 Patent. Below is another example of the information timeline that contains icons
`
`representing cardio and weight lifting portions of the workout.
`
`22.
`
`Peloton prominently advertises its automatic control and interactive integrated
`
`weight system, allowing users to benefit from both a cardio and strength training exercise by
`
`using ICON’s patented features:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-00507-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/21 Page 7 of 12 PageID #: 7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`23.
`
`In addition to the praise for the infringing Auto Follow feature, media outlets are
`
`also highlighting the swiveling screen as well. The swiveling screen can facilitate a user
`
`alternating between a cardio and strength training workout, as stated in Peloton’s advertising
`
`above.
`
`24.
`
`Forbes reviewed the Bike+ and called the swiveling screen (along with the Auto-
`
`follow feature) a “crucial feature.” Forbes characterizes this feature as “much more important
`
`now [that] Peloton creates all kinds of exercise classes, not just spin-style ones.”
`
`(https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewwilliams/2020/09/08/peloton-bike-adds-four-crucial-
`
`features-one-just-for-apple-watch-owners/#5ac70316476a).
`
`25. Market Insider also published an article titled “the 5 coolest features of Peloton’s
`
`new $2,500 premium bike, from a rotating high-definition screen to automatic resistance
`
`control.” Yet again, the swiveling screen, along with the infringing Auto-follow feature, is called
`
`out as one of the “coolest features” on the Bike+. (https://www.businessinsider.com/5-of-the-
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-00507-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/21 Page 8 of 12 PageID #: 8
`
`
`
`
`coolest-features-of-pelotons-new-premium-bike-2020-9#rotating-high-definition-touch-screen-
`
`1).
`
`26.
`
`ICON’s swiveling screen is patent pending (U.S. App. No. 17/066,485) and was
`
`used by ICON long before Peloton’s Bike+. Below is an advertisement of ICON’s swiveling
`
`screen feature and its interactive integrated weight system that pre-dates Peloton’s use:
`
`
`
`
`
`27.
`
`Peloton is not only infringing upon ICON’s ’407 patent by incorporating Auto
`
`Follow and an interactive integrated weight system into its Bike+ product, it is facilitating that
`
`infringement by also using ICON’s patent pending swivel screen as well.
`
`28.
`
`Peloton’s Auto Follow feature and its interactive integrated weight system are
`
`important features to Peloton that drive demand for the Bike+, and have allowed Peloton to
`
`charge a $600 premium for the Bike+ compared to its original Bike that does not include the
`
`infringing features.
`
`29.
`
`Unless enjoined by this Court, Peloton will continue its pattern of infringement
`
`and disregard for ICON’s intellectual property.
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-00507-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/21 Page 9 of 12 PageID #: 9
`
`
`
`
`COUNT I
`
`(Infringement of the U.S. Patent No. 10,864,407)
`
`30.
`
`By this reference ICON realleges and incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as
`
`though fully set forth herein.
`
`31.
`
`The ’407 Patent was filed on March 12, 2019 and issued on December 15, 2020.
`
`ICON is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in the ’407 Patent. The ’407 Patent is valid and
`
`enforceable. A copy of the ’407 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`
`32.
`
`The ’407 Patent discloses and claims technology that is an improvement over
`
`prior art in that it provides for an exercise machine that is automatically controlled by
`
`programmed instructions, seamlessly integrates aerobic and anaerobic exercise with free weights
`
`and a cradle, and instructions regarding alternating use between the exercise machine and the
`
`free weights. The ’407 Patent’s new solution for a diverse and streamlined workout routine at
`
`home, that is also time and space-conscious, was not well-understood, routine, or convention at
`
`the time.
`
`33.
`
`In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), Peloton makes, uses, offers to sell, and sells its
`
`Bike+ and associated app and thereby directly infringes the ’407 Patent. Peloton’s Bike+ and
`
`associated app are exercise machines comprising (1) a free weight cradle configured to hold one
`
`or more free weights; (2) an exercise element that is movable with respect to the free weight
`
`cradle during a performance of a programmed workout; (3) a console that incorporates a display
`
`and a speaker; (4) one or more processors; (5) memory storing programmed instructions of the
`
`programmed workout that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more
`
`processors to: automatically control, by the programmed instructions of the programmed
`
`workout, an operating parameter of the exercise element during the performance of the
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-00507-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/21 Page 10 of 12 PageID #: 10
`
`
`
`
`programmed workout; and (6) automatically present, by the programmed instructions of the
`
`programmed workout, exercise instructions regarding alternating use of the exercise element,
`
`and of the one or more free weights, during the performance of the programmed workout.
`
`34.
`
`Peloton’s Bike+ and associated app satisfy each and every limitation of at least
`
`claim 1 of the ’407 Patent. Peloton thereby directly infringes one or more claims of the ’407
`
`Patent.
`
`35.
`
`Peloton’s infringement of the ’407 Patent will continue to damage ICON’s
`
`business, causing irreparable harm, for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless it is
`
`enjoined by this Court.
`
`36.
`
`Peloton’s acts of infringement have caused damage to ICON. Thus, in addition to
`
`injunctive relief, ICON is entitled to recover the damages sustained as a result of Peloton’s
`
`wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial.
`
`37.
`
`By reason of the foregoing, ICON is entitled to relief against Peloton, pursuant to
`
`at least 35 U.S.C. §§ 283–85.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, ICON requests relief as follows:
`
`A. A judgment finding Peloton liable for infringement of one or more of the claims of
`
`the ’407 Patent;
`
`B. Orders of this Court temporarily, preliminarily, and permanently enjoining Peloton,
`
`its agents, servants, and any and all parties acting in concert with any of them, from
`
`directly or indirectly infringing in any manner any claim of the ’407 Patent pursuant
`
`to at least 35 USC § 283;
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-00507-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/21 Page 11 of 12 PageID #: 11
`
`C. An award of damages to ICON for infringement of the ’407 Patent, in an amount to
`
`be proved at trial, pursuant to all applicable law, including at least 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`D. An award of treble damages to ICON, pursuant to all applicable law, including at
`
`least 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`E. A declaration that this case is an exceptional case;
`
`F. An award of ICON’s costs in bringing its action, pursuant to all applicable law,
`
`including at least 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`G. An award of ICON’s attorneys’ fees in its action, pursuant to all applicable law,
`
`including at least 35 U.S.C. § 285;
`
`H.
`
`Imposition of a constructive trust on, and an order requiring a full accounting of, the
`
`sales made by Peloton as a result of its wrongful or infringing acts alleged herein;
`
`I.
`
`J.
`
`Pre-judgment interest, pursuant to at least 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`Post-judgment interest, pursuant to at least 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a);
`
`K. Any and all other relief to which ICON may show itself to be entitled; and
`
`L.
`
`Such other and further relief as this Court shall deem just and proper.
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-00507-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/21 Page 12 of 12 PageID #: 12
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`ICON hereby demands a jury trial on all issues so triable in this case.
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Frederick L. Cottrell, III
`Frederick L. Cottrell, III (#2555)
`Christine D. Haynes (#4697)
`Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A.
`920 N. King Street
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`(302) 651-7700
`cottrell@rlf.com
`haynes@rlf.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff ICON Health &
`Fitness, Inc.
`
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`David R. Wright
`MASCHOFF BRENNAN GILMORE
`ISRAELSEN & WRIGHT PLLC
`111 South Main Street, Suite 600
`Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
`(801) 297-1850
`
`Tyson K. Hottinger
`MASCHOFF BRENNAN GILMORE
`ISRAELSEN & WRIGHT PLLC
`100 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite 1200
`Irvine, California 92618
`(949) 202-1900
`
`Dated: April 7, 2021
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`