Skip to main content

SCRAM Bracelet Back to Federal Circuit in Patent Infringement Lawsuit?

By Robyn Hagan Cain on November 30, 2011 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

We’ve come to anticipate Lindsay Lohan news from the courts, but such news is typically linked to the troubled actress’s criminal woes. Today, we have patent-related Lindsay Lohan news.

No, everyone’s favorite Mean Girl has not become an inventor. Instead, the designer of her most frequently-photographed accessory - the SCRAM bracelet - is heading to court to defend its patent.

That’s right: Alcohol Monitoring Systems (AMS) has filed a second appeal with the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in its patent infringement lawsuit against Actsoft.

AMS's '919 patent, called "Blood Alcohol Monitor," discloses a device and methods of operating a device that monitors blood alcohol levels by determining the alcohol levels expelled through a subject's skin, a process known as transdermal alcohol monitoring.

The alcohol sensor creates an electrical current and the voltage of that electrical current is proportional to the amount of alcohol present in the sampled air. Through the use of conversion factors, the voltage can be used to calculate a transdermal alcohol concentration (TAC) that approximates blood alcohol content (BAC).

The device is incorporated into the company's SCRAM bracelet, which has gained notoriety thanks to high-profile celebrity arrests.

In October 2007, AMS asserted the '919 patent in a patent infringement lawsuit against Actsoft and Ohio House for the sale of the House Arrest Solution (HAS) device. The HAS device includes an ankle bracelet with a gas sensor that measures the voltage produced by the alcohol emitted through a subject's skin, but does not calculate TAC or any other percentage.

The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Actsoft. In January, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, affirmed the grant of summary judgment of no literal infringement, but reversed and remanded the grant of summary judgment of no infringement under the doctrine of equivalents.

Last month, the district court entered an order granting in part Actsoft's supplemental renewed motion for summary judgment; the district court concluded that "AMS could not rely upon or argue the claim construction that was previously ordered by the Federal Circuit," reports The Sacramento Bee. AMS is appealing against to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, claiming that the district court made a legal error in its decision.

We hear little about SCRAM bracelets when there's no Lindsay Lohan news, but we're happy to meet our SCRAM news quota with the AMS patent infringement lawsuit in the Federal Circuit.

Related Resources:


Copied to clipboard