AstroTurf Slapped with Patent Infringement Verdict

There’s nothing quite like October for a sports fan. Whether it’s tuning into college football on Saturday, tailgating for an NFL game on Sunday, or enjoying the excitement that is the MLB postseason, one must choose what event to watch or partake in carefully because of the sporting entertainment options available during this time of year.

This particular October is likely one to be forgotten because of the feats of some major player in sports. Not to be forgotten, Astroturf, a leading provider of synthetic grass for various sports, has indicated an intent to appeal a costly verdict handed down by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan regarding its alleged infringement of competitor FieldTurfUSA’s patent. The court ordered AstroTurf to pay $30 million in lost profits and royalties after it found willful infringement of Patent Number 6,723,412 (owned by FieldTurf USA) by its GameDay Grass MT product.

AstroTurf lists its infringing product as “a super-stable, multi-ply primary backing system that is covered in a heavy urethane, environmentally-friendly BioCel coating for uniformity, consistency and precise performance across the entire field.” As a defense, AstroTurf attacked the validity of the patent. In order for a patent to be valid, it must be of patentable subject matter, it must be useful, it must be novel, it must be non-obvious, and it must be sufficiently described such that an ordinary person skilled in the art could recreate and use the invention being patented.

In this patent infringement suit, AstroTurf claimed that the invention described in the patent application was obvious and evident in the prior art of the industry. In order to succeed on this claim, AstroTurf had to show that an ordinary person having skill in the art of producing artificial turf would have known of the subject of the patent at the time of the invention. As the jury decided, AstroTurf plainly did not meet its burden, and was slapped with hefty infringement penalties as a result.

Both AstroTurf and FieldTurf USA are popular alternatives to maintaining real grass on a playing surface. Approximately half of all NFL teams use artificial grass, and it is estimated that over 11,000 synthetic turf fields are used by various sports in the United States. With such a high demand, and a noticeable area of potential growth for the technology, it is easy to understand why FieldTurfUSA ignited the litigation battle. It is also clear why AstroTurf has already indicated it plans to appeal the ruling. The world of sports depends on these innovations as they grow in popularity and demand, and these companies depend on the profits from their inventions to keep the sports world at play.

By: Samantha Kelley, Associate Editor of Sports and Entertainment

photo credit: www.astroturf.com

Sources Used:

35 U.S.C. § 101-103

http://www.law360.com/articles/713424/astroturf-must-pay-30m-for-infringing-rival-s-patent

http://www.astroturf.com/products/

http://www.astroturf.com/news/in-the-news/

http://www.syntheticturfcouncil.org/?page=Sports_Fields

http://www.fieldturf.com/en/artificial-turf/artificial-turf-news/jury-finds-astroturf-guilty-of-violating-fieldturf-patent