Caterpillar says it will defends its use of everything from skid steer designs to machine controls
Содержание:
Doosan Bobcat North America has filed federal and international lawsuits against Caterpillar, Inc., alleging patent infringement for components on skid steers, compact track loaders, excavators, wheel loaders, track loaders and bulldozers.
A lawsuit filed in federal court in the Eastern District of Texas which also names the largest Caterpillar dealer in Texas, HOLT CAT as a defendant, alleges Caterpillar has infringed on Bobcat patents involving: automated shifting of hydraulic drive systems, issued in 2016; variable engine control speed, issued in 2019; tracked utility vehicle, issued in 2019; system and method for defining a zone of operation for a lift arm, issued in 2019; and hydraulic power prioritization, issued March 2021. These accusations, are just the surface of South Korea-based Doosan’s 29-page complaint that goes back to the founding by Bobcat and its original parent company, the Melroe Manufacturing Co. in 1947. Doosan Bobcat essentially accuses Caterpillar of adopting technology and infringing on the patent rights of products developed by Bobcat and other competitors over nearly eight decades.
In total, Doosan Bobcat says that 14 patents, including ones involving Sticksteer, Bobcat’s remote joystick machine control, and E-fence, Bobcat’s geofencing safety software, need to be upheld. The patents also cover power performance and efficiency.
The complaint refers to Irving, Texas-based Caterpillar as a «late arrival to the skid-steer loader market,» and notes it did not enter the skid steer sector until «about 1999.» It alleges that Caterpillar tears down competitor equipment and reverse-engineers new equipment technology into CAD drawings that differ from the original equipment manufacturer.
Aside from filing in the area where both Holt and Caterpillar are based, the Eastern District of Texas has become a go-to court for intellectual property disputes with nearly a quarter of such lawsuits last year filed there.
Bobcat vs Cat
Caterpillar has not yet released a statement responding to the lawsuit, but did file a response to a concurrent complaint that Doosan Bobcat filed with the International Trade Commission, asking the international court to stop Caterpillar from trading its supposedly infringing skid steers, compact excavators, loaders, track loaders, bulldozers and components thereof with other countries under Section 337 of the U.S. Tariff Act, which enforces intellectual property claims.
Bobcat’s X225 compact excavator, the first compact excavator to be produced in North America in 1989, is one of many patent’s Doosan Bobcat is alleging Caterpillar, Inc., violated. Photo courtesy Doosan Bobcat
«Doosan Bobcat’s requested remedial orders would harm the U.S. public interest, undermine ongoing infrastructure projects, harm the economy in nearly every state, and jeopardize national priorities … [the court] should reject Doosan Bobcat’s attempt to use Section 337 as a cudgel,» read the response from Caterpillar’s law firm Kirkland & Ellis.
Both of Doosan Bobcat’s legal actions seek damages «adequate to compensate for the infringement,» an accounting and ongoing royalty payments for any post-verdict use of the technology, lost profits, attorney’s fees, and costs.
The federal court complaint filed in Texas states that “Bobcat has suffered and continues to suffer substantial damages,” but no specific dollar amount is disclosed in the public filings. Bobcat has requested a permanent injunction preventing Caterpillar from making, using, selling, or importing any products that infringe on the patents it claims are being violated.
Not the First Time Cat Challenged on Patents
Doosan Bobcat’s complaint repeatedly references another recent patent case involving Caterpillar, Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc. Wirtgen America, a maker of roadbuilding equipment, was acquired by John Deere in 2017. Shortly after, it alleged in a lawsuit that Caterpillar’s road-milling machines infringed several patents related to cold milling technology. A federal jury awarded Wirtgen $12.9 million in damages in that case and Judge Joshua Wolson added nearly $6.5 million more and issued a ban on sales of the infringing machines, so there is a precedent for the relief Doosan Bobcat is seeking.
Just as Doosan Bobcat is doing today, Wirtgen also filed a concurrent complaint with the International Trade Commission under Section 337 of the Tariff Act. The ITC banned imports of Caterpillar’s infringing road-milling machines from 2019 until redesigned versions were allowed to be imported in 2021 in that case. Wirtgen and Caterpillar resolved the lawsuit in October 2024, but the case showed both federal courts and the ITC are willing to find infringement in patent disputes involving construction equipment, resulting in substantial damages and redesigns of products.
What Does It Mean for Contractors?
While core technologies may be patented, key functionalities of construction equipment has always been gray area for OEMs, but involving the ITC opens up the possibility that some Caterpillar models may be taken off the market until they are redesigned or see a delay in software updates until key features are sufficiently changed.
The patents in both cases cover advanced control systems and automation features that drive increasingly common uses such as 2D and 3D machine controls and site geofencing.
Caterpillar is expected to file responses to the complaints in the coming weeks and the ITC could make an initial determination on whether to pursue an investigation into Caterpillar early next year.
