Get breaking news alerts via email

Click here to manage your alerts
Competitor sues Utah-based Chums over patent infringement
Salt Lake » Utah-based eyeglass-retainer company sees no merit in competitor’s suit
First Published Mar 13 2014 08:31 am • Last Updated Jun 18 2014 09:02 am

It doesn’t seem as though there should be much difference in the design of devices that keep sunglasses or eyeglasses from falling to the ground.

But apparently there might be.

Join the Discussion
Post a Comment

Birmingham, Ala.-based Cablz eyewear retainers recently sued Salt Lake City-based Chums in the U.S. District Court for the northern district of Alabama for patent infringement. The lawsuit seeks a jury trial and compensation for a patent protecting what Cablz claims is a unique eyewear-retainer system invented by company founder and CEO Ron Williams.

Chums’ products cited for infringement include the Orbiter, Adjustable Orbiter and Mono Orbiter.

"We take our intellectual property rights very seriously, and we’re taking the steps necessary to protect our patents from any company or party that seeks to profit from them without authorization. Lots of thought, time and engineering went into our designs. We’re confident Cablz will prevail in this lawsuit. If so, Chums and its retailers could be liable for damages and Chums could be prohibited from manufacturing or selling its infringing products."

Chums CEO Sterling McMurrin said his company is aware of the lawsuit but believes it is without merit. In a letter, he said that Chums’ products do not infringe any valid and enforceable claim included in the asserted patent. He said it will defend its products and partners against the allegations.

Chums answered the lawsuit on Feb. 12, denying Cablz’ infringement allegations and asserting counterclaims to invalidate the asserted patent.

"Chums and its retail partners know that eyewear retainers, which are suspended off the neck of the wearer, were available from Chums and others for many years before Cablz filed for its patent in 2008," wrote McMurrin. "In connection with its patent application, however, Cablz did not disclose and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office did not consider all of these prior eyewear retainers. In addition, Cablz waited almost a year after it obtained the patent at issue before bringing what Chums believes is a meritless lawsuit."

McMurrin said the fact that Cablz timed its suit to coincide with the February Outdoor Retailer Show was a "cynical way to obtain press for its products."

Chums has been producing retainers for about 30 years.

story continues below
story continues below


Twitter: @tribtomwharton

Copyright 2014 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Top Reader Comments Read All Comments Post a Comment
Click here to read all comments   Click here to post a comment

About Reader Comments

Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, please alert us by clicking the arrow on the upper right side of the comment and selecting "Flag comment as inappropriate". If you've recently registered with Disqus or aren't seeing your comments immediately, you may need to verify your email address. To do so, visit disqus.com/account.
See more about comments here.
Staying Connected
Contests and Promotions
  • Search Obituaries
  • Place an Obituary

  • Search Cars
  • Search Homes
  • Search Jobs
  • Search Marketplace
  • Search Legal Notices

  • Other Services
  • Advertise With Us
  • Subscribe to the Newspaper
  • Access your e-Edition
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact a newsroom staff member
  • Access the Trib Archives
  • Privacy Policy
  • Missing your paper? Need to place your paper on vacation hold? For this and any other subscription related needs, click here or call 801.204.6100.