MacNeil IP LLC v. Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: WeatherTech Direct, LLC (Illinois), and MacNeil IP LLC (Illinois)
  • Defendant: Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. (Delaware)
  • Plaintiff's Counsel: Polsinelli PC
• Case Identification: 1:24-cv-03767, N.D. Ill., 04/14/2026
• Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the Northern District of Illinois because the defendant has committed acts of infringement in the district and maintains regular and established places of business there.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant's "HaulMaster" Hitch Mount Bumper Step infringes four patents related to injection-molded, polymeric trailer hitch-mounted step devices.
• Technical Context: The technology concerns automotive accessories, specifically hitch-mounted steps designed to provide users with access to a vehicle's rear while also being engineered to absorb and dissipate energy during a rear-end collision, an improvement over traditional solid metal designs.
• Key Procedural History: The filing is a First Amended Complaint. The complaint alleges that the plaintiff marks its products in accordance with patent law, which may be used to support allegations of pre-suit notice for willfulness and damages calculations.

Case Timeline

Date	Event
2013-07-29	Earliest Priority Date for '364, '495, '796, and '035 Patents
2014-05-20	U.S. Patent No. 8,727,364 Issues
2014-10-07	U.S. Patent No. 8,851,495 Issues
2014-12-30	U.S. Patent No. 8,919,796 Issues
2015-09-29	U.S. Patent No. 9,145,035 Issues
2026-04-14	First Amended Complaint Filed

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 8,727,364 - Injection-Molded Plastic Hitch Step (Issued May 20, 2014)

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent identifies shortcomings of prior art hitch steps, which were typically made of solid metal. These designs were heavy and tended to transmit impact forces directly to the vehicle frame during a rear-end collision, rather than absorbing them '364 Patent, col. 1:26-41
• The Patented Solution: The patent discloses a hitch step made from an injection-molded thermoplastic polymer, creating a lightweight, substantially hollow structure. The core of the invention is a specific internal support network within the step body, comprising transverse members and "oblique cross members" that are "adapted to collapse in a forward direction" upon impact, thereby absorbing collision energy '364 Patent, col. 5:37-54 '364 Patent, abstract This design aims to provide sufficient strength to support a user while improving safety in a collision.
• Technical Importance: The technology represents a shift from rigid, force-transmitting metal accessories to engineered polymeric structures designed for both utility and crash energy management Compl. ¶¶18-21

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts infringement of at least Claim 6 Compl. ¶34
• The essential elements of independent claim 6 include:
  • A collapsible hitch step for a vehicle hitch receiver.
  • A step body with a rear panel, a right side panel, and a left side panel.
  • At least one "first transverse member" disposed forward of the rear panel.
  • A plurality of "oblique cross members" extending from the rear panel to the rear surface of the transverse member, which are "adapted to collapse in a forward direction upon impact."
  • "Other transverse members" spaced from the first transverse member and extending between the side panels.

U.S. Patent No. 8,851,495 - Integrally Molded Polymer Hitch Step (Issued Oct. 7, 2014)

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: Similar to the '364 Patent, this patent addresses the weight and force-transmission problems of conventional metal hitch steps '495 Patent, col. 1:25-41
• The Patented Solution: The invention is an integrally molded, single-piece polymer hitch step comprising a "substantially hollow step body" and a "substantially hollow tongue" '495 Patent, col. 2:1-13 The design emphasizes manufacturability through injection molding, featuring at least one "open external face" to allow for the formation of thin internal support walls '495 Patent, col. 2:4-7 The tongue is detailed with a "throat region" containing "vertically disposed reinforcing plates" to resist twisting forces from off-axis loads '495 Patent, col. 2:14-19
• Technical Importance: This patent focuses on the specific structural configuration that enables a single-piece, molded polymer part to achieve the dual goals of load-bearing strength and impact absorption, with a particular emphasis on resisting the torsional stress common in such products '495 Patent, col. 7:4-14

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts infringement of at least Claim 1 Compl. ¶40
• The essential elements of independent claim 1 include:
  • A hitch step with a "substantially hollow step body" containing at least one internal transverse support member and having at least one "open" external face.
  • A "substantially hollow tongue" joined to the step body, which provides the "sole support" for the step body.
  • A "throat region" of the tongue adjoining the step body, which has an open external face and "multiple vertically disposed reinforcing plates."
  • A "forward region" of the tongue extending from the throat region, which has an open face, a vertical plate, and at least one hitch pin hole.
  • The step body and tongue are "integrally molded of a polymeric material."

U.S. Patent No. 8,919,796 - Integrally Molded Polymer Hitch Step (Issued December 30, 2014)

• Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 8,919,796, "Integrally Molded Polymer Hitch Step," issued December 30, 2014 Compl. ¶11
• Technology Synopsis: This patent describes an integrally molded polymer hitch step with a hollow body and tongue, similar to the '495 Patent. It emphasizes the structural design of the throat region, which contains reinforcing plates disposed to resist torque from off-axis loads '796 Patent, col. 2:6-14 The claims further define the physical characteristics and performance of the thermoplastic elastomer material, specifying its ability to deflect under a defined load and return to its original position '796 Patent, col. 17:10-18:2
• Asserted Claims: Claim 7 is asserted as an example Compl. ¶46
• Accused Features: The complaint alleges the accused product's integrally molded polymeric construction, including its hollow step body and tongue with internal support members, infringes this patent Compl. ¶47

U.S. Patent No. 9,145,035 - Collapsible Step Platform and Receiver Post (Issued September 29, 2015)

• Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,145,035, "Collapsible Step Platform and Receiver Post," issued September 29, 2015 Compl. ¶13
• Technology Synopsis: This patent focuses on the "receiver post" (or tongue) of a collapsible hitch step. The invention describes a post body containing multiple cylinders for accepting a hitch pin, where each cylinder has an associated support structure '035 Patent, abstract These support structures, including top and bottom vertical members, are explicitly "adapted to collapse upon impact," thereby absorbing energy from a collision '035 Patent, col. 3:25-34
• Asserted Claims: Claim 1 is asserted as an example Compl. ¶52
• Accused Features: The complaint alleges that the receiver post of the accused product, with its body, internal panels, and multiple cylinders with associated support structures adapted to collapse, infringes this patent Compl. ¶53

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

• The "HaulMaster" Hitch Mount Bumper Step, sold by Harbor Freight Compl. ¶3

Functionality and Market Context

• The complaint alleges the accused product is a hitch step made from an "integrally molded polymer material" featuring a "substantially hollow step body and tongue" with internal support structures Compl. ¶24 The product is designed for insertion into a vehicle's hitch receiver and is alleged to be "adapted to collapse upon a rear end impact" Compl. ¶23 The complaint includes an annotated product webpage showing the accused product being marketed as providing "bumper and parking protection" Compl. Ex. 7 Compl. p. 9 Plaintiff alleges the accused product is sold nationwide, including in the Northern District of Illinois Compl. ¶22 An annotated photograph illustrates the alleged "oblique cross members" within the step body of the accused product Compl. p. 11

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

'364 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 6)	Alleged Infringing Functionality	Complaint Citation	Patent Citation
a collapsible hitch step adapted for insertion into a vehicle hitch receiver along a longitudinal axis...	The Infringing Product is a collapsible hitch step adapted for insertion into a vehicle hitch receiver.	¶35a	col. 1:42-45
a step body having a rear panel substantially orthogonal to the axis, the rear panel having an exterior side, an interior side, a bottom edge and a top edge;	The Infringing Product includes a step body with a rear panel having these features. An annotated image identifies these parts on the product.	¶35b	col. 3:61-65
at least one transverse member of the step body disposed forwardly of the rear panel and being disposed substantially at a right angle to the longitudinal axis, the transverse member having a rear surface; and	The step body includes multiple transverse members disposed forward of the rear panel at a right angle to the longitudinal axis.	¶35c	col. 5:4-8
a plurality of oblique cross members each extending from the interior side of the rear panel to the rear surface of the transverse member... the oblique cross members adapted to collapse in a forward direction upon impact...	The step body includes multiple oblique cross members extending from the rear panel to a transverse member, which are alleged to be adapted to collapse and absorb impact force.	¶35d	col. 5:37-54
wherein the transverse member is a first transverse member, the platform further including a right side panel... and a left side panel... the step body further including other transverse members... extending between the right side panel and the left side panel.	The step body includes right and left side panels and multiple transverse members extending between them.	¶35e	col. 6:44-51

'495 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1)	Alleged Infringing Functionality	Complaint Citation	Patent Citation
a substantially hollow step body having a height, a width... and a depth... the step body including at least one internal transverse support member... the step body including at least one external face that is open and is parallel to the axis;	The product has a substantially hollow step body with the claimed dimensions, internal transverse support members, and an open external face.	¶41b	col. 2:1-7
a substantially hollow tongue in which a rear end is joined to the step body and a front end is axially displaced from the rear end, the tongue sized to be slidably received... and in use provides the sole support for the step body...	The product has a substantially hollow tongue joined to the step body that provides sole support.	¶41c	col. 2:7-13
a throat region of the tongue adjoining the step body... the throat region having at least one external face that is parallel to the axis and is open; multiple vertically disposed reinforcing plates that extend from the open face to an opposed external face of the throat region;	The product's tongue has a throat region with an open external face and vertically disposed reinforcing plates. An annotated close-up photograph depicts the alleged "reinforcing plates" within the tongue's throat region Compl. p. 21	¶41d	col. 7:4-21
a forward region of the tongue extending forwardly from the throat region... the forward region having at least one external face which is open and a vertical plate disposed in parallel to the axis... at least one trailer hitch pin hole...	The product's tongue has a forward region with an open face, a vertical plate, and multiple hitch pin holes.	¶41e	col. 7:42-59
the step body and tongue being integrally molded of a polymeric material.	The product's step body and tongue are integrally molded of a thermoplastic elastomer.	¶41f	col. 1:42-45

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Scope Questions: A central question for the '364 patent will be the interpretation of "adapted to collapse in a forward direction." The parties may dispute whether this requires a specific, engineered buckling mechanism or if any forward deformation under impact suffices. For the '495 patent, the meaning of relative terms like "substantially hollow," "substantial portion," and "many times less" will likely be contested, as their scope determines the boundary between the claimed invention and potentially non-infringing designs.
  • Technical Questions: The complaint asserts that the accused product is "adapted to collapse" Compl. ¶23 and that its internal members "absorb force of the impact" Compl. ¶25d A key evidentiary question will be what proof-such as physical testing, simulations, or expert analysis-the plaintiff can provide to substantiate these functional allegations, which go beyond the product's visible structure.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

For the '364 Patent:

• The Term: "oblique cross members ... adapted to collapse in a forward direction"
• Context and Importance: This functional limitation is the core of the '364 patent's claimed safety improvement over prior art. Infringement will depend on whether the accused product's internal structures are proven to be "adapted to" perform this specific energy-absorbing function, making its construction pivotal to the case.
• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states the members "will absorb at least some of the force of the impact" '364 Patent, col. 5:51-53, which may support an interpretation where any forward-directed deformation that absorbs energy meets the limitation.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent describes a more specific action where, upon impact, the members collapse "such that their angle to axis X increases" '364 Patent, col. 5:48-50 A defendant could argue this requires a specific, measurable change in geometry, not just general crushing or fracturing.

For the '495 Patent:

• The Term: "substantially hollow"
• Context and Importance: This term distinguishes the invention from solid metal steps and is fundamental to the claimed benefits of reduced weight and material usage. Practitioners may focus on this term because its ambiguity creates a potential non-infringement defense if the accused product's internal structure can be characterized as something other than "substantially hollow" (e.g., a dense lattice).
• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification explains that the goal is "reducing overall material usage and weight" '495 Patent, col. 5:4-5 and that internal members "define internal cells or cavities" Compl. ¶20 This language could support a broad definition covering any non-solid structure with internal voids.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent figures consistently depict a structure with a thin outer shell and a sparse internal grid, with a large, open bottom face '495 Patent, Fig. 2 This could support a narrower construction requiring a high void-to-material ratio and an open-faced design.

VI. Other Allegations

• Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges that the defendant induces infringement by its customers through its "acts of having made for, importing, marketing, offering to sell and/or selling Infringing Products" Compl. ¶36 Compl. ¶42 Compl. ¶48 Compl. ¶54 This suggests a theory that Harbor Freight's sale of the product encourages the infringing act of "use" by the end customer.
• Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willfulness is "willful and deliberate" Compl. ¶38 Compl. ¶44 Compl. ¶50 Compl. ¶56 The stated bases for knowledge are constructive notice through plaintiff's patent marking on its own products and actual notice of the infringement claim, at a minimum, from the date the lawsuit was instituted Compl. ¶29

VII. Analyst's Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

1. Functional Equivalence vs. Structural Similarity: A primary issue will be whether the accused product, despite apparent structural similarities to the patented designs, actually performs the key functions as claimed. The case will likely require significant expert analysis and potentially physical testing to determine if the accused product is truly "adapted to collapse" and absorb impact energy in the specific manner required by the '364 and '035 patents, or if it merely crushes in a generic way.
2. Claim Construction of Relative Terms: The resolution of the case may depend heavily on the court's construction of qualitative and relative claim terms such as "substantially hollow" ('495 patent), "substantial portion" ('495 patent), and "adapted to collapse" ('364 patent). The breadth or narrowness of these definitions will directly impact the infringement analysis and could be dispositive.
3. Proof of Intent for Willfulness: Given that the primary allegation for pre-suit knowledge is based on patent marking, a key question will be whether the plaintiff can demonstrate that the defendant had actual, pre-suit knowledge of the patents and their infringement. Without evidence of direct communication or copying, proving the "deliberate" intent required for willfulness may present a significant challenge for the plaintiff.