By Colin B. Harris
| September 24, 2015
Hoist Fitness Systems, Inc. (“Hoist”) filed a Complaint against Health In Motion, LLC (“Health In Motion”), Inspire Fitness and Sunset Swings (“Inspire Fitness”), and Does 1-10 (collectively, “Defendants”) on August 31, 2015 in the District Court for the Southern District of California. Incidentally, the Complaint specifies that the fictitious defendants named “Does 1-10” “include, but are not limited to, any subsidiaries, affiliates, and/or parent companies of Health In Motion.”

In its Complaint, Hoist alleges “patent infringement, trade dress infringement, unfair competition, and unjust enrichment with regard to Hoist’s intellectual property rights.”

Hoist asserts the following design patents regarding patent infringement:

  • U.S. Patent No. D544,050 (the ‘050 Patent),
  • U.S. Patent No. D519,585 (the ‘585 Patent), and
  • U.S. Patent No. D455,310 (the ‘310 Patent).


The Complaint includes several products developed from Hoist’s design patents, images from the design patents, and the allegedly infringing products, as follows:

 Hoist Product  Hoist Patent  Defendants' Product
 Hoist "Fitness Tree" - Model No. HF-4962
Image 1 copy
 Fig. 1 of '050 Patent
Image 2
VKR Chin/Dip Station
Image 3a
 Hoist Folding Bench - Model HF-4145
Folding Bench Image a
Figs. 1 and 9 of '585 Patent
Image 4b
 Folding Bench FLB-1

Image 5bImage 6
 Hoist "Dumbbell  Rack" - Model No. HF-4460
Image 7a

 Fig. 2 of '310 Patent
Image 8
 Dumbbell Rack - VDB8
Image 9a









































 

The trade dress infringement and unfair competition claims are related to the Hoist Squat Rack, Hoist Incline/Decline Bench, and Hoist Roman Hype.  Specifically, Hoist argues with respect to the trade dress infringement claim that the Defendants have used, and continue to use, the Hoist Squat Rack, Incline/Decline Bench, and Roman Hype products without Hoist’s consent “in a manner that is likely to cause confusion among ordinary consumers as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or approval of the Defendants’ products.”  Regarding the unfair competition claim, Hoist alleges that the Defendants’ acts are unlawful, fraudulent, unfair, misleading and likely to deceive the public. 

Special thanks to Ms. Clothilde Lucius for contributing to this post. 


Share