Dynocom Industries, Inc. v. Magicmotorsport SRL (D. Mass. 23-cv-12648).

Dynocom accused Magicmotor of infringing a patent for a “Portable On Vehicle Dynamometer,” and moved to compel production of a physical sample of Magicmotor’s accused “Dynomag Hub” product in the United States. Judge Kelley granted this motion in part, and ordered a sample be made available for inspection. Magicmotor, an Italian company, had argued that its document production included enough information, including technical documents with English translations and detailed photographs of the accused product, but Judge Kelley agreed with Dynocom that inspection of the product itself was required to ascertain internal connections and structures that may not be visible in the images that had been produced. She further noted that the Massachusetts Local Rules require the production of samples of accused products, absent some agreement among the parties to the contrary.

Judge Kelley denied Dynocom’s motion to the effect that it sought production of the accused product in the United States, noting that the Local Rules allows for inspection of accused products when production is not practicable. According to Magicmotor, the accused Dynomag Hub weighs several thousand pounds, making shipment from Italy to Boston unreasonably expensive and time consuming to ship, and would potentially damage the hub. It further asserted that the sole product presently in the United States was in the country for sale, and that the steps required to conduct an inspection would render it unsellable or at a minimum void its warranty, resulting in the loss of tens of thousands of dollars. Accordingly, Judge Kelley agreed with Magicmotor that the inspection should take place in its place of business in Italy.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.