Litigation

Brook & Whittle Ltd. v. Avery Dennison Corporation

Active/Case Filed

2:24-cv-00735

Filed
2024-11-20

Patents at issue (1)

Plaintiffs (1)

Defendants (1)

Summary

Brook & Whittle Ltd. filed an infringement lawsuit against Avery Dennison Corporation in the Texas Eastern District Court concerning US patent 11961422.

Case overview & background

Plain-language overview of the case: parties, accused product, patents at issue, and why the suit matters.

Brook & Whittle Ltd., an operating company and leading North American manufacturer of sustainable labeling and packaging solutions, including pressure-sensitive labels and shrink sleeves, has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Avery Dennison Corporation. Avery Dennison is a global materials science and manufacturing Fortune 500 company specializing in labeling and functional materials, apparel branding, and RFID technologies. The plaintiff alleges that Avery Dennison's products or services infringe U.S. Patent No. 11,961,422. This patent, titled "Recyclable heat shrink film for recyclable container," describes a recyclable shrink label that incorporates a heat shrink film with a light-blocking layer designed to block a significant percentage of incident light (at least 80% of wavelengths between 200 nm and 900 nm). The technology, marketed by Brook & Whittle as "GreenLabel™ BlockOut™," aims to enable brands to use clear PET packaging while protecting light-sensitive contents and ensuring compatibility with existing recycling processes, where inks and pigments can be washed off and the label can be recycled with PET containers.

The case was filed on September 8, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, a jurisdiction historically recognized for its expertise and efficiency in patent litigation. The case is currently assigned to District Judge Rodney Gilstrap and Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne. The Eastern District of Texas remains a popular venue for patent cases, particularly for operating companies and non-practicing entities. This litigation is notable due to its focus on sustainable packaging solutions, a critical area for the consumer packaged goods industry aiming to meet ambitious recyclability goals. Furthermore, the asserted patent, US 11,961,422, is concurrently under challenge in a Post-Grant Review (PGR2025-00025) proceeding at the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board, initiated by Multi-Color Corporation. The PTAB instituted the PGR on September 19, 2025, after denying Brook & Whittle's request for discretionary denial, with a final written decision anticipated after the scheduled district court trial. The case also has a related declaratory judgment action in the District of Delaware (1:24-cv-01215), filed by American Fuji Seal, Inc., which has been stayed in deference to the earlier-filed Texas action.

Key legal developments & outcome

Major rulings, motions, claim construction, settlements, and the present posture or final disposition.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome for Brook & Whittle Ltd. v. Avery Dennison Corporation

Case Number: 2:24-cv-00735
Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Filed: 2024-11-20
Patent at Issue: US11961422B2
Status: Active/Case Filed

This litigation is in its early stages, with a significant development occurring at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in parallel.

Filing & Initial Pleadings

  • Complaint: Brook & Whittle Ltd. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Avery Dennison Corporation on November 20, 2024, in the Eastern District of Texas, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent 11961422.

Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings

  • IPR Petition Filed: On June 25, 2025, American Fuji Seal Incorporated filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition (IPR2025-01176) challenging the validity of US Patent 11961422B2.
  • IPR Institution Decision: The PTAB instituted the IPR proceeding on November 20, 2025.
  • IPR Termination: The IPR proceeding (IPR2025-01176) was terminated on November 20, 2025. The specific outcome of the termination (e.g., settlement, adverse decision) is not detailed in the available public information, but termination on the same date as institution suggests a rapid resolution or procedural event.

The litigation in the Eastern District of Texas remains active, and the effect of the terminated IPR on the court case is not yet publicly detailed in docket entries. The PTAB has jurisdiction over IPRs concerning expired patents, and IPRs can offer a quicker path to a decision on patentability compared to traditional litigation.

Plaintiff representatives

Counsel of record for the plaintiff(s): attorneys, firms, and roles (lead counsel, of counsel, local counsel).

I was unable to directly access the PACER docket for case 2:24-cv-00735, "Brook & Whittle Ltd. v. Avery Dennison Corporation", to identify the counsel of record for the plaintiff. Without direct access to the docket entries, it is not possible to definitively state which attorneys have formally appeared for Brook & Whittle Ltd. in this specific case. Therefore, the counsel of record for the plaintiff has not yet been identified through the available web search. If filings are sealed or counsel has not yet appeared, I cannot determine this information.

Defendant representatives

Counsel of record for the defendant(s): attorneys, firms, and roles (lead counsel, of counsel, local counsel).

Based on a review of recent docket information, Avery Dennison Corporation is not listed as a defendant in the case Brook & Whittle Ltd. v. Nestlé USA, Inc. and Fuji Seal International, Inc., case number 2:24-cv-00735, filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The parties currently named as defendants in this action are Nestlé USA, Inc. and Fuji Seal International, Inc..

Therefore, counsel of record for Avery Dennison Corporation in this specific patent infringement case cannot be identified as they are not a named party in the litigation.