Case: 1:16-cv-06097 Document #: 9 Filed: 06/10/16 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:94
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`
`THE CHAMBERLAIN GROUP INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`TECHTRONIC INDUSTRIES CO. LTD.,
`TECHTRONIC INDUSTRIES NORTH
`AMERICA, INC., ONE WORLD
`TECHNOLOGIES INC., OWT
`INDUSTRIES, INC., ET TECHNOLOGY
`(WUXI) CO. LTD., and RYOBI
`TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`
`Defendants,
`
`Civil Action No.: 1:16-cv-06097
`
`The Honorable Thomas M. Durkin
`
`Magistrate Judge Sidney Schenkier
`
`PUBLIC, REDACTED VERSION
`
`DECLARATION OF RON BROGLE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MEMORANDUM
`IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
`
`I, Ron Brogle, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I have been employed at The Chamberlain Group, Inc. (“CGI”) since 2003 in
`
`various roles, including as Design Engineer, Project Manager, Marketing Project Manager, and
`
`Manager of Corporate Development. From 2007 to 2010 I served as Manager, Electrical
`
`Engineer – Advanced Development, where I was responsible for advanced technology
`
`development and product concept feasibility. I have personal knowledge of the matters stated in
`
`this declaration and would testify truthfully to them if called upon to do so.
`
`2.
`
`I submit this declaration in support of CGI’s motion for a preliminary injunction
`
`barring the defendants from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing to the United
`
`States garage door openers that infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 7,635,966 (“the ’966 patent”) and
`
`7,224,275 (“the ’275 patent”).
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`
`THE CHAMBERLAIN GROUP INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`TECHTRONIC INDUSTRIES CO. LTD.,
`TECHTRONIC INDUSTRIES NORTH
`AMERICA, INC., ONE WORLD
`TECHNOLOGIES INC., OWT
`INDUSTRIES, INC., ET TECHNOLOGY
`(WUXI) CO. LTD., and RYOBI
`TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`
`Defendants,
`
`Civil Action No.: 1:16-cv-06097
`
`The Honorable Thomas M. Durkin
`
`Magistrate Judge Sidney Schenkier
`
`PUBLIC, REDACTED VERSION
`
`DECLARATION OF RON BROGLE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MEMORANDUM
`IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
`
`I, Ron Brogle, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I have been employed at The Chamberlain Group, Inc. (“CGI”) since 2003 in
`
`various roles, including as Design Engineer, Project Manager, Marketing Project Manager, and
`
`Manager of Corporate Development. From 2007 to 2010 I served as Manager, Electrical
`
`Engineer – Advanced Development, where I was responsible for advanced technology
`
`development and product concept feasibility. I have personal knowledge of the matters stated in
`
`this declaration and would testify truthfully to them if called upon to do so.
`
`2.
`
`I submit this declaration in support of CGI’s motion for a preliminary injunction
`
`barring the defendants from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing to the United
`
`States garage door openers that infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 7,635,966 (“the ’966 patent”) and
`
`7,224,275 (“the ’275 patent”).
`
`
`
`Case: 1:16-cv-06097 Document #: 9 Filed: 06/10/16 Page 2 of 5 PageID #:95
`
`
`
`
`3.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4.
`
`As shown in the picture above, a CGI garage door opener head-unit (
`
`
`
`) was intended to be modified to interface with a
`
`
`
`rechargeable battery (
`
`). The design would allow for the CGI
`
`garage door opener to charge the
`
` battery and to provide a centralized location for docking
`
`the battery. The interface design would also allow for the
`
` battery to connect to, and
`
`disconnect from, the CGI manufactured garage door opener. With this configuration, the design
`
`would allow for the battery to function as back-up power for the CGI garage door opener when
`
`connected, and as primary power for compatible power tools when disconnected from the CGI
`
`garage door opener.
`
`5.
`
`CGI sought to market the integrated back-up battery design to
`
`
`
`. (CGI had already been manufacturing GDOs for
`
` which were sold under the
`
` brand name, a practice which has continued to this date.) I attached, as Exhibit A,
`
`
`
`
`
`6.
`
`The companies discussed implementing CGI’s battery backup design using a
`
` battery—a rechargeable battery used to power a number of
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case: 1:16-cv-06097 Document #: 9 Filed: 06/10/16 Page 3 of 5 PageID #:96
`
`
`
`
`products ranging from cordless drills to circular saws—could be charged by, and used as back-up
`
`power for, the garage door opener.
`
`
`
`
`
` For example, page four of Exhibit A (on the left hand side of the slide),
`
`7.
`
`CGI estimated that the integrated back-up battery design would provide useful
`
`and desirable functionality to
`
` customers. As an example, on page 2 of Exhibit A,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` CGI also expected the partnership
`
`to be beneficial to CGI’s garage door opener consumers—and ultimately drive sales for both
`
`CGI’s garage door openers and
`
`. We at CGI believed that having a
`
`rechargeable back-up battery that could also be used in power tools would be a differentiator in
`
`the market and would allow us to market and sell against garage door openers without that
`
`functionality. The integrated battery charging design was estimated to take
`
` before
`
`being ready for marketing (see Exhibit A at page 7).
`
`8.
`
` was interested in CGI’s idea for the integrated back-up battery design and
`
`setup a conference call between CGI and Techtronic Industries North America (“TTI NA”) to
`
`discuss the project. I attached as Exhibit B a conference call invitation sent from
`
` to CGI
`
`and TTI NA, setting a call for December 9, 2008. I understand that TTI NA is a U.S. subsidiary
`
`of the China-based company (Techtronic Industries Co. Ltd) that manufactures and import into
`
`the U.S. the
`
` batteries. As shown on page 5 of Exhibit A,
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case: 1:16-cv-06097 Document #: 9 Filed: 06/10/16 Page 4 of 5 PageID #:97
`
`9.
`
`I understand that after being presented with this idea, TTI required CGI to
`
`purchase separate boards that would be manufactured by TTI and would include their charger
`
`technology. I attached as Exhibit C
`
` But TTI would not provide a quote for the
`
`cost until the parties had executed an NDA. Id. As such,
`
` Id.
`
`10.
`
`During this time period, myself and others in CGI’s Advanced Development team
`
`worked through a number of technical, regulatory, and financial hurdles to create the
`
`requirements for a working battery charger board that could be incorporated into a garage door
`
`opener and practice the integrated back-up battery design. I attached as Exhibit D a specification
`
`for the project that CGI had developed and sent to TTI NA based on some of this work.
`
`11.
`
`Based on CGI’s internal development efforts, CGI formed estimates of how much
`
`the battery charger would cost under a couple different scenarios. I attached as Exhibit E
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case: 1:16-cv-06097 Document #: 9 Filed: 06/10/16 Page 5 of 5 PageID #:98
`
`12.
`
`However, TTI ultimately identified that it would require COi to pa�
`
`I attached as Exhibit Fan internal COi email that memorialized this pricing
`
`(dated April 10, 2009).
`
`13.
`
`TTI's final quote was more than twice COi's estimated cost. It is my
`
`understanding that shortly after receiving this pricing information, with one of the primary
`
`reasons being that TTI's proposed cost of the TTI charging board was cost-prohibitive and would
`
`cause COI to have to price the unit at a price that would be cost-prohibitive to consumers given
`
`the fact the consumer could obtain COi's then-existing back-up battery system at a much lower
`
`cost. I understand that the project was then terminated, and COi told� that it could not
`
`continue developing the integrated back-up battery design and the companies terminated the
`
`project.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing
`
`is true and correct. Executed in Illinois this 10 th day of June, 2016.
`
`By:_��Tlon Brogle
`
`5
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
