UPDATED: Shure Denied Emergency Motion for Restraining Order Over ClearOne BMA CTH

shure clear one update

Update: Shure sent rAVe the following response to this story: “Attempting to confuse the market, ClearOne continues to publicize every play by play of this litigation, like this recent decision, no matter how inconsequential. Of importance here is Shure’s track record of innovation and market leadership, and ClearOne’s efforts to unlawfully imitate Shure’s products.  Shure’s request for a preliminary injunction against ClearOne’s BMA CT and BMA CTH products remains pending and will be decided later this year. We also look forward to presenting our underlying case in Court of ClearOne’s infringement of Shure’s valuable intellectual property.”

ClearOne commented Tuesday on the report and recommendation issued by the Honorable Christopher J. Burke of the U.S. District Court of Delaware recommending the denial of Shure Incorporated’s (“Shure’s”) emergency motion for a temporary restraining order (“Motion”) to stop the sale of ClearOne’s innovative Huddle-compatible Ceiling Tile Beamforming Array (“BMA CTH”) products.

The backstory: In November 2019, ClearOne announced its COLLABORATE Versa Pro CT product offering, which combines the BMA CTH with the CONVERGE Huddle audio DSP for small- to medium-sized rooms. ClearOne began selling the product in December 2019. In February 2020, ClearOne announced the COLLABORATE Versa Room CT and Versa Lite CT product offerings, which also include the BMA CTH. ClearOne anticipates sales of these product offerings to begin later this quarter. On April 14, Shure filed an emergency Motion to stop ongoing and future sales of ClearOne’s BMA CTH products. Shure’s Motion asserted design patent infringement claims against ClearOne’s BMA CTH products and argued that Shure will be irreparably harmed by having to compete with those products.

See related  ClearOne Defeats Shure’s Groundless Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order

Judge Burke rejected Shure’s Motion, asserting that Shure had failed to show that it would suffer irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief and that ClearOne had raised a “substantial question” as to the validity of the patent Shure asserts against ClearOne, D865,723 (the “’723 patent”).

In August 2019, Judge Edmond E. Chang of the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Illinois granted ClearOne’s request for a preliminary injunction (“PI Order”) preventing Shure from “manufacturing, marketing, and selling” the original MXA910 for use “in its drop-ceiling mounting configuration.” Then, in February 2020, ClearOne filed a motion for contempt against Shure for selling its MXA910W-A, which infringes ClearOne’s U.S. Patent No. 9,813,806 and violates the PI Order. Separately, the Federal Circuit in March 2020 confirmed the patentability of all claims of ClearOne’s U.S. Patent No. 9,264,553 over Shure’s appeal, and ClearOne’s claim against Shure for infringement of that patent remains pending.

Shure’s Motion for a preliminary injunction (“PI Motion”) relating to the BMA CT and BMA CTH is still pending before the Court. Judge Burke’s ruling, which Shure can file an objection to by May 8, only addressed Shure’s request for a Temporary Restraining Order.