Arbor Systems Sues Tonal Systems in Virginia on a Smart Sport Device Patent.

The complaint

The case is Arbor Systems LLC v. Tonal Systems, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-03513 (E.D. Va.), a five-page complaint for patent infringement filed October 20, 2026, ECF No. 1. The complaint says Arbor Systems LLC is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of New Mexico with its principal place of business in Albuquerque, New Mexico. It says Tonal Systems, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Virginia with an established place of business in San Francisco, California. It pleads venue under 28 U.S.C. 1400(b), alleging that Tonal Systems has an established place of business in the district and has committed acts of infringement there. The docket's initial case assignment entry names District Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles and Magistrate Judge William B. Porter.

The patent

The complaint identifies U.S. Patent 9,975,033, titled Smart sport device, and says it issued on May 22, 2018, from an application filed on January 17, 2017. The complaint alleges that Arbor is the assignee of all right, title and interest in the patent, including the right to enforce and collect damages. The body of the complaint does not list claim numbers; it incorporates Exhibit 2 claim charts that identify the Exemplary '033 Patent Claims and the Exemplary Defendant Products. Arbor also asserted the '033 patent in No. 1:26-cv-01316 (D. Del.), filed October 14, 2026.

What the patent covers

Claim 1 of U.S. Patent 9,975,033 covers a board with a body, a processor coupled to a wireless transceiver, a camera in the body to detect distance from another object, an accelerometer disposed within the body to detect acceleration of the board, and a module to compare a professional motion with a user motion for improving user motion.

What the lawsuit alleges

Count 1 alleges that Tonal Systems has directly infringed one or more claims of the '033 patent by making, using, offering to sell, selling, and/or importing Exemplary Defendant Products identified in the Exhibit 2 charts, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, and by having employees internally test and use those products. It adds, on information and belief, that numerous other infringing devices have been made, used, sold, imported, and offered for sale by Tonal Systems or its customers. It alleges that service of the complaint with the attached claim charts constitutes actual knowledge of infringement, and that at least since that service Tonal Systems has induced infringement by selling those products for end-user use in a manner that infringes. The prayer seeks a judgment of validity and enforceability, a judgment of direct and indirect infringement, an accounting, damages under 35 U.S.C. 284, and, if necessary, a finding that the case is exceptional under 35 U.S.C. 285 with attorney fees. The complaint demands a jury trial.

What to watch next

Watch for Tonal Systems' answer or first responsive motion after service; the clerk issued the summons on October 22, 2026. Also watch Arbor's same-day District of Colorado filings, Nos. 1:26-cv-05370 and 1:26-cv-05371. The case can end at any time, including by settlement or voluntary dismissal.