products, in part, by lending his credentials as a doctor of chiropractics research to the active
|
|
- Abel Cody Arnold
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1
2 Defendant KURT FULLE actively promotes, sells, and markets the accused products for NIKKEN INC. 4. On information and belief, Defendant CHARLES COCHRAN resides at 1599 Chilton Street, Arroyo Grande, CA and acts as a corporate speaker on behalf of NIKKEN, INC. for the accused products. Defendant CHARLES COCHRAN actively promotes the accused products, in part, by lending his credentials as a doctor of chiropractics research to the active compounds found in the accused products. As recently as March 2, 2011 Defendant Charles Cochran delivered a presentation of the accused products at a NIKKEN INC. corporate presentation specifically aimed at promoting and marketing the accused products. Further, Defendant CHARLES COCHRAN has been contracted by NIKKEN to specifically develop formulations of the accused products. 5. On information and belief, Defendant DAVID BALZER is employed at the address of 52 Discovery Irvine, CA, and is a product Consultant and Technical Advisor /Sci-Board Chairman to NIKKEN INC. Defendant DAVID BALZER actively promotes the accused products, and as recently as March 2, 2011 hosted a NIKKEN INC. corporate presentation specifically aimed at the introduction of the recently re-formulated accused products to distributors. 6. On information and belief, Defendants MAC MACDONALD and PATRICIA TERRY are husband and wife, and reside at Point Ln SW Lakewood, WA These defendants have entered into a sales/distribution contract with Defendant NIKKEN INC. to sell NIKKEN S product line, including the accused products. On information and belief, these defendants have been extremely successful earning approximately $1,500,000 from the NIKKEN INC. contracts, and earning the distinction of a NIKKEN ROYAL AMBASSADOR actively promoting the products of NIKKEN INC. and acting as ambassadors of NIKKEN. 7. On information and belief, Defendants DAVE JOHNSON and VALERIE JOHNSON are husband and wife, and reside at 718 Calvert Ln, Fort Washington, MD These defendants have entered into a sales/distribution contract with Defendant NIKKEN INC. to sell NIKKEN S product line, including the accused products. On information and belief, 2 COMPLAINT
3 the these defendants have been extremely successful earning approximately $1,800,000 from the NIKKEN INC. contracts, and earning the distinction of a NIKKEN ROYAL AMBASSADOR actively promoting the products of NIKKEN INC. and acting as ambassadors of NIKKEN INC. 8. On information and belief, Defendants DENNIS WILLIAMS and RUTH WILLIAMS are husband and wife, and reside at SW 276 th St, Vashon, WA These defendants have entered into a sales/distribution contract with Defendant NIKKEN INC. to sell NIKKEN S product line, including the accused products. On information and belief, these defendants have been extremely successful under the NIKKEN INC. contract earning the distinction of a NIKKEN ROYAL AMBASSADOR actively promoting the products of NIKKEN INC. and acting as ambassadors of NIKKEN. 9. Defendants NIKKEN INC., KURT FULLE, CHARLES COCHRAN, DAVID BALZER, MAC MACDONALD, PATRICIA TERRY, DAVE JOHNSON, VALERIE JOHNSON, DENNIS WILLIAMS, and RUTH WILLIAMS are referred to collectively herein as Defendants. 10. On information and belief, Defendant NIKKEN INC. has numerous other distributors within its distribution network that sell and market the accused products, but the names and addresses are not currently known to Plaintiff. These individuals may include, but are not limited to, those earning the distinction of NIKKEN ROYAL DIAMOND members. Once these individuals are identified, Plaintiffs will petition this Court to individually name and serve each distributor as defendants to this lawsuit JURISDICTION AND VENUE 11. Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in the Central District of California (the District ) because Defendants have caused tortious injury in this District through acts committed both inside and outside the District, including the unlawful conduct relating to the patent-in-suit and as further detailed below. 12. Defendant NIKKEN INC. maintains a place of business in the District at 52 Discovery Irvine, CA, NIKKEN INC. is subject to personal jurisdiction in the 3 COMPLAINT
4 District because NIKKEN INC. regularly solicits business in the District or derives substantial revenue from sales of goods including the accused products in the District. Additionally, NIKKEN INC. has engaged in a persistent course of conduct in the District. 13. On information and belief, Defendant KURT FULLE is subject to personal jurisdiction because he is a resident of the State and is employed by Defendant NIKKEN INC. at 52 Discovery Irvine, CA, Defendant KURT FULLE actively promotes, sells and markets the accused products for NIKKEN INC. 14. On information and belief, Defendant CHARLES COCHRAN is subject to personal jurisdiction in that he is a resident of this State and has entered into distribution and promotion contract with NIKKEN INC. in this District to sell and actively promote the accused products, has ordered and received the accused products from this District and has sold those products throughout this State including within this District. As part of his contractual obligations, Defendant CHARLES COCHRAN actively promotes the accused products, in part, by lending his credentials as a doctor of chiropractics research the active compounds found in the accused products. As recently as March 2, 2011 Defendant Charles COCHRAN made a corporate presentation specifically aimed at promoting and marketing the accused products. Further, Defendant CHARLES COCHRAN has entered into contracts with NIKKEN INC. to specifically develop formulations of the accused products. 15. On information and belief, Defendant DAVID BALZER is subject to personal jurisdiction in that it is believed that he has entered into a product consultant and product technology advisory contract with NIKKEN INC. in this District to sell and actively promote the accused products, has ordered and received the accused products from this District and has sold those products throughout this State including within this District. As part of his contractual obligations, Defendant DAVID BALZER actively promotes the accused products, in part, by creating and publishing corporate presentations targeted specifically at the accused products, including a presentation as recently as March 2, On information and belief Defendant MAC MACDONALD is subject to personal jurisdiction in that he has entered into distribution sales contract with NIKKEN INC. in this 4 COMPLAINT
5 District to sell the accused products, has ordered and received the accused products from this District and has sold those products throughout this State including within this District. On information and belief, Defendant MAC MACDONALD has earned the distinction of a NIKKEN ROYAL AMBASSADOR (a distinction given only to NIKKEN INC. s top sales agents), and actively promotes the accused products and acts as an ambassador of NIKKEN. 17. On information and belief, Defendant PATRICIA TERRY is subject to personal jurisdiction in that she has entered into distribution sales contracts with NIKKEN INC. in this District to sell the accused products, has ordered and received the accused products from this District and has sold those products throughout this State including within this District. On information and belief, Defendant PATRICIA TERRY has earned the distinction of a NIKKEN ROYAL AMBASSADOR (a distinction given only to NIKKEN S top sales agents), and actively promotes the accused infringing products and acts as an ambassador of NIKKEN INC. 18. On information and belief, Defendant DAVE JOHNSON is subject to personal jurisdiction in that he has entered into distribution sales contract with NIKKEN INC. in this District to sell the accused products, has ordered and received the accused products from this District and has sold those products throughout this State including within this District. On information and belief, Defendant DAVE JOHNSON has earned the distinction of a NIKKEN ROYAL AMBASSADOR (a distinction given only to NIKKEN S top sales agents), and actively promotes the accused infringing products and acts as an ambassador of NIKKEN INC. 19. On information and belief, Defendant VALERIE JOHNSON is subject to personal jurisdiction in that she has entered into distribution sales contracts with NIKKEN INC. in this District to sell the accused products, has ordered and received the accused products from this District and has sold those products throughout this State including within this District. On information and belief, Defendant VALERIE JOHNSON has earned the distinction of a NIKKEN ROYAL AMBASSADOR (a distinction given only to NIKKEN S top sales agents), and actively promotes the accused products and acts as an ambassador of NIKKEN INC. 20. On information and belief, Defendant DENNIS WILLIAMS is subject to personal jurisdiction in that he has entered into distribution sales contract with NIKKEN INC. in this 5 COMPLAINT
6 District to sell the accused products, has ordered and received the accused products from this District and has sold those products throughout this State including within this District. On information and belief, Defendant DENNIS WILLIAMS has earned the distinction of a NIKKEN ROYAL AMBASSADOR (a distinction given only to NIKKEN S top sales agents), and actively promotes the accused products and acts as an ambassador of NIKKEN INC. 21. On information and belief, Defendant RUTH WILLIAMS is subject to personal jurisdiction in that she has entered into distribution sales contracts with NIKKEN INC. in this District to sell the accused products, has ordered and received the accused products from this District and has sold those products throughout this State including within this District. On information and belief, Defendant RUTH WILLIAMS has earned the distinction of a NIKKEN ROYAL AMBASSADOR (a distinction given only to NIKKEN S top sales agents), and actively promotes the accused products and acts as an ambassador of NIKKEN INC. 22. Venue for this action is proper in the District pursuant to 28 U.S.C and 1400 because a significant portion of Defendants infringing activities have occurred in the District. 23. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. 1 et seq., and pursuant to 28 U.S.C and 1338(a). The state law unfair competition claim arises under, inter alia, California Business and Professions Code et seq. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the related state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C BACKGROUND FACTS 24. On October 29, 1996, the United States patent Office duly issued United States Patent No. 5,596,676 entitled METHOD FOR THE TREATMENT OF OSTEOARTHRITIS to Harry W. Diehl. A true copy of the 676 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The 676 patent relates to a method of treating the symptoms of non-rheumatoid arthritis by administering to the afflicted subject a therapeutically effective amount of cetyl myristoleate either orally, topically, or parenterally. 676 Patent Abstract. 6 COMPLAINT
7 The 676 Patent has been assigned to Plaintiff by virtue of an assignment dated April 8, 2009 and recorded with the United States Patent Office on January 6, 2010, which can be found at reel/frame / The original inventor of the 676 Patent, Harry Diehl, is a highly recognized figure in the bone/joint wellness fields, and in particular is recognized as the pioneer of cetyl myristoleate. In fact, during a NIKKEN INC. corporate presentation on March 2, 2011, hosted by Defendants Dr. CHARLES COCHRAN and DAVID BALZER, Defendants state: In our joint compound, and this is the newly formulated joint compound, and I m proud to say that it not only uses and is endorsed by the Diehl Estate, we call it The Real Diehl, this formulation was put together by Dr. Charles Cochran, Dr. Chuck Cochran, who s going to join us in a couple of minutes to talk about what he s done, to talk about his life with CM [cetyl myristoleate] and why he put this formulation together the way he did. 27. A complete copy of the slides presented and published by Defendants CHARLES COCHRAN, DAVID BALZER, and NIKKEN INC. during this presentation are attached hereto as Exhibit B. 28. NIKKEN INC. produces several products, including Kenzen Joint and CM Complex Cream for human use, both of which are advertised to contain cetyl myristoleate to support bone and joint health. NIKKEN INC. also produces Kenzen Pet Joint for dogs and cats, which is also advertised to contain cetyl myristoleate to support bone and joint health. Plaintiffs pre-litigation testing confirms that Kenzen Joint, CM Complex Cream and Kenzen Pet Joint (i.e., the accused products) all contain cetyl myristoleate, as do the publications from the Defendants. See Exhibits B and C. 29. Defendants actively promote these products for the treatment of osteoarthritis. Defendants further promote the active ingredient in these products cetyl myristoleate as the component responsible for beneficial treatment of osteoarthritis. See Exhibits B and C. During a NIKKEN INC. corporate presentation conducted by Defendants CHARLES COCHRAN and DAVID BALZER on March 2, 2011, Defendants states: It s a high potency CM [cetyl myristoleate] complex supporting collagen, bone, and connective tissue repair, lubricates the joints, aids in joint mobility, is highly bio available, and, of course, is endorsed by the Diehl Estate. And you can see from the supplement facts that are here that what we ve done is we have focused extraordinarily at keeping it clean, keeping it simple, keeping it effective. We have a high potency CM complex which is more than a gram. It s COMPLAINT
8 milligrams composed of no less than 40% cetyl myristoleate. 30. Defendants have been and are infringing, contributing to infringement, and/or inducing others to infringe the 676 Patent by making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing the accused products. Defendants acts of infringement have occurred within this district and elsewhere throughout the United States. 31. Defendants have willfully infringed the 676 Patent by continuing its acts of infringement after being on notice of this patent. 32. Defendants have made and continue to make willfully false statements regarding the accused products, and as a result of those statements Plaintiff has suffered injury COUNT 1: PATENT INFRINGEMENT 33. Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates by this reference paragraphs 1 through 32 above as though fully set forth herein. 34. In violation of 35 U.S.C. 271, Defendants have infringed and are continuing to infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, the 676 patent by practicing one or more claims of the 676 patent, in its manufacture, use, offering for sale, sale and importation of the accused products, and by contributing to this infringement and inducing others to infringe. 35. Plaintiff currently estimate the present and future damages of approximately $10,300,000 based on the Defendants historical sales of these products, as has been discerned by Plaintiff. However Plaintiff reserves the right to adjust this damages estimate based on evidence adduced at trial. 36. Because Defendants infringement is willful, Plaintiff further requests under 35 U.S.C. 284that the damages be tripled, resulting in a total patent damages estimate of $31,000, Plaintiff has been damaged by Defendants infringement and, unless Defendants are enjoined Defendants will continue their infringing activity and Plaintiffs will continue to be damaged COMPLAINT
9 COUNT 2: UNFAIR COMPETITION CAL. BUSINESS AND PROFESSION CODE Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates by this reference paragraphs 1 through 37 above as though fully set forth herein. 39. Defendants CHARLES COCHRAN, DAVID BALZER and NIKKEN INC. have made statements that the Diehl estate has endorsed the accused products: In our joint compound, and this is the newly formulated joint compound, and I m proud to say that it not only uses and is endorsed by the Diehl Estate, we call it The Real Diehl. The Kenzen joint compound, as it has been formulated by Dr. Cochran, our new formulation, what we re allowed to say is, yes, it s a high potency complex. It supports collagen, bone, and connective tissue repair, lubricates the joints, aids in joint mobility, is highly bio available, and, of course, endorsed by the Diehl Estate. 40. On information and belief, this statement is willfully false and intended to form an endorsement and connection between the inventor of the 676 Patent, Harry Diehl, and the accused products. 41. Defendants prominently display the words Real Diehl on its products and in its promotional marketing materials, along with a logo on its label, intending to further create an endorsement and connection between the inventor of the 676 Patent and the accused products The Real Diehl Logo Placed on NIKKEN INC. Products that Contain Cetyl Myristoleate 42. Defendants false statement have caused injury to Plaintiffs by deceptively suggesting to the public that the accused products are endorsed by the 676 Patent inventor and therefore cannot infringe the 676 Patent in violation of California Business and Profession Code et seq. Defendants false statements are intended to create the appearance that the accused products are legitimately made and sold. 43. In addition to the damages to Plaintiff, a civil penalty of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) for each sale, which constitutes a violation of the Cal. Business and Professional 9 COMPLAINT
10 Code Sec , is appropriate and will result in severe multi-million dollar penalties. 44. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendants will continue to perform the acts complained of herein and cause said damage and injury, all to the immediate and irreparable harm of Plaintiff. COUNT 3: UNFAIR COMPETITION CAL. BUSINESS AND PROFESSION CODE Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates by this reference paragraphs 1 through 44 above as though fully set forth herein. 46. Defendants have made statements that the formulation of the accused products will yield better therapeutic results: We have a high potency CM complex which is more than a gram. It s 1155 milligrams composed of no less than 40% cetyl myristoleate. We started with a 40% cetyl myristoleate product, and the original formula, Dave, had anywhere from 25% to 30% cetyl myristoleate. We ve been able to concentrate that and distill that to a point where now we can actually make a 40% cetyl myristoleate product available, but we ve also increased the levels of the cetyl oleate. Q: An in a nutshell, what you ve essentially told us is that you have the correct balance, the correct proportions of these various cetyl esters so that we get the maximum effect from what you ve put together in the complex. A: Exactly. And, at the same time, eliminated some of the other potentially, maybe, fatty acids that were not really conducive to proper health. So we got rid of some of the bad guys and we increased the really good guys to really therapeutic levels. March 2, 2011 Presentation. 47. Defendants have also made statements that the accused products containing cetyl myristoleate are superior to the competition because the cetyl myristoleate in the accused products is in liquid form. 48. On information and belief, Defendants have absolutely no scientific or factual basis for these statements or suggestions. These statements are completely unsupported and intended to induce the public into purchasing the accused products over other competing products, including those produced by Plaintiffs. NIKKEN INC. provides marketing materials on various NIKKEN INC. distributor internet websites which reference clinical study results which were 10 COMPLAINT
11 conducted using Plaintiff s product and falsely stating the study results were as a result of using the newly reformulated accused products. 49. Defendants false statements have caused injury to Plaintiffs by deceptively suggesting a superior product with no scientific basis, and these statements were made solely to promote the accused products over the competition in violation of California Business and Profession Code et seq. 50. In addition to the damages to Plaintiff, a civil penalty of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) for each sale, which constitutes a violation of the Cal. Business and Professional Code Sec , is appropriate and will result in severe multi-million dollar penalties. 51. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendants will continue to perform the acts complained of herein and cause said damage and injury, all to the immediate and irreparable harm of Plaintiff. COUNT 4: UNFAIR COMPETITION LANHAM ACT, 15 U.S.C Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates by this reference paragraphs 1 through 51 above as though fully set forth herein. 53. Defendants have made statements that the Diehl estate has endorsed the accused products as described above. On information and belief, those statements are willfully false and misleading. This statement is literally false and not mere puffery. 54. That statement actually deceived and had the capacity to deceive a substantial segment of the audience, and this deception was material, in that it was likely to influence the purchasing decision. 55. The Defendants sold the accused products through interstate commerce. 56. Defendants false statement have caused injury to Plaintiffs by deceptively suggesting to the public that the accused products are endorsed by the 676 Patent inventor and therefore cannot infringe the 676 Patent in violation of 15 U.S.C Defendants false statements are intended to create the appearance that the accused products are legitimately made and sold. 11 COMPLAINT
12 Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendants will continue to perform the acts complained of herein and cause said damage and injury, all to the immediate and irreparable harm of Plaintiff. COUNT 5: UNFAIR COMPETITION LANHAM ACT, 15 U.S.C Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates by this reference paragraphs 1 through 57 above as though fully set forth herein. 59. Defendants have made statements regarding the therapeutic effects of its formulation, and that the active ingredient (i.e., cetyl myristoleate) is superior to the competition because the cetyl myristoleate in the accused products is in liquid form, as detailed above. On information and belief, these statements are literally false and it is believed lack scientific substantiation and not mere puffery 60. These statements actually deceived and had the capacity to deceive a substantial segment of the audience, and this deception was material, in that it was likely to influence the purchasing decision. 61. The Defendants sold the accused products through interstate commerce. 62. Defendants false statements have caused injury to Plaintiffs by deceptively suggesting a superior product with no scientific basis, and these statements were made solely to promote the accused products over the competition in violation of 15 U.S.C Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendants will continue to perform the acts complained of herein and cause said damage and injury, all to the immediate and irreparable harm of Plaintiff. 64. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that this Court enter judgment in its favor on each and every claim for relief set forth above and award it relief, including, but not limited to the following: a preliminary and permanent injunction restraining and enjoining Defendants, their principals, officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, successors and assigns and all those in active concert or participation with Defendants 12 COMPLAINT
13
14
15 EXHIBIT A
16
17
18
19
20 EXHIBIT B
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31 EXHIBIT C
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48 Section IX. (b) VENUE Defendant MAC MACDONALD Washington Defendant PATRICIA MACDONALD Washington Defendant DENNIS WILLIAMS Washington Defendant RUTH WILLIAMS Washington Defendant DAVID BALZER Unknown
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1 COMPLAINT
Case :-cv-00-r-as Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 KATTEN MUCHIN ROSENMAN LLP Noah R. Balch (SBN noah.balch@kattenlaw.com Joanna M. Hall (SBN 0 joanna.hall@kattenlaw.com 0 Century Park East, Suite
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO.: 1:16-CV-165 ) ) ) ) ) ) )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO.: 1:16-CV-165 EAGLES NEST OUTFITTERS, INC., Plaintiff DYLAN HEWLETT, D/B/A BEAR BUTT, Defendant.
More informationCase: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 02/12/16 Page 1 of 16 PageID #:1
Case: 1:16-cv-02212 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/12/16 Page 1 of 16 PageID #:1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION SIOUX STEEL COMPANY A South Dakota Corporation
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS VICTORIA DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS VICTORIA DIVISION MARK N. CHAFFIN Plaintiff, Civil Action No. v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MICHAEL R. BRADEN and LBC MANUFACTURING Defendants.
More informationCase 2:17-cv EJF Document 2 Filed 10/02/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION
Case 2:17-cv-01100-EJF Document 2 Filed 10/02/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION Trent Baker Baker & Associates PLLC 358 S 700 E B154 Salt Lake City,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK COMPLAINT
Case 1:14-cv-08423-GBD Document 2 Filed 10/22/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Marshall Feature Recognition, LLC Plaintiff, V. Terra Holdings, LLC, 14-civ-8423
More informationCase 1:11-cv JRH -WLB Document 1 Filed 07/21/11 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:11-cv-00107-JRH -WLB Document 1 Filed 07/21/11 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION BONRO MEDICAL, INC., Plaintiff, V. LffiERTY MEDICAL
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JOHN JOSEPH BENGIS, an individual,
Case 2:03-cv-05534-NS Document 1 Filed 10/03/03 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ------------------------------------------ JOHN JOSEPH BENGIS, an individual,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO.: 1:16-CV-381 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO.: 1:16-CV-381 EAGLES NEST OUTFITTERS, INC., Plaintiff, v. IBRAHEEM HUSSEIN, d/b/a "MALLOME",
More informationCase 1:16-cv GAO Document 1 Filed 07/29/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND PARTIES
Case 1:16-cv-11565-GAO Document 1 Filed 07/29/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS THE LIFE IS GOOD COMPANY, ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) C.A. No. ) OOSHIRTS INC., ) Defendant
More informationCase 3:17-cv JCH Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT. Case No.
Case 3:17-cv-01907-JCH Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT PEAK WELLNESS, INC., a Connecticut corporation, Case No. Plaintiff, v.
More informationCase 2:12-cv JCM-VCF Document 1 Filed 11/13/12 Page 1 of 10
Case :-cv-0-jcm-vcf Document Filed // Page of R. Scott Weide, Esq. Nevada Bar No. sweide@weidemiller.com Ryan Gile, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 0 rgile@weidemiller.com Kendelee L. Works, Esq. Nevada Bar No. kworks@weidemiller.com
More informationCase 0:10-cv MJD-FLN Document 1 Filed 04/06/10 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. Court File No.
Case 0:10-cv-01142-MJD-FLN Document 1 Filed 04/06/10 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Wells Fargo & Company, John Does 1-10, vs. Plaintiff, Defendants. Court File No.: COMPLAINT
More informationCase 3:17-cv AJB-KSC Document 1 Filed 05/23/17 PageID.1 Page 1 of 8
Case :-cv-00-ajb-ksc Document Filed 0// PageID. Page of 0 DAVID M. BECKWITH (CSB NO. 0) davidbeckwith@sandiegoiplaw.com TREVOR Q. CODDINGTON, PH.D. (CSB NO. 0) trevorcoddington@sandiegoiplaw.com JAMES
More informationCase3:15-cv DMR Document1 Filed09/16/15 Page1 of 11
Case:-cv-0-DMR Document Filed0// Page of MICHAEL G. RHODES () (rhodesmg@cooley.com) California Street, th Floor San Francisco, CA Telephone: Facsimile: BRENDAN J. HUGHES (pro hac vice to be filed) (bhughes@cooley.com)
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION CASE NO. v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION R.D. JONES, STOP EXPERTS, INC., and RRFB GLOBAL, INC., Plaintiffs, CASE NO. v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED INTELLIGENT TRAFFIC, Defendant.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT
Case 1:99-mc-09999 Document 606 Filed 10/28/11 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 53338 ECOPHARM USA, LLC IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Plaintiff, v. C.A. No. RALCO NUTRITION, INC.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE. No. Plaintiff, Defendants.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 1 1 1 MASTERS SOFTWARE, INC, a Texas Corporation, v. Plaintiff, DISCOVERY COMMUNICATIONS, INC, a Delaware Corporation; THE LEARNING
More informationCase 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 01/29/18 Page 1 of 14
Case 1:18-cv-00772 Document 1 Filed 01/29/18 Page 1 of 14 James D. Weinberger (jweinberger@fzlz.com) Jessica Vosgerchian (jvosgerchian@fzlz.com) FROSS ZELNICK LEHRMAN & ZISSU, P.C. 4 Times Square, 17 th
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION GREENOLOGY PRODUCTS, INC., a ) North Carolina corporation ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO.: 16-CV-800
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case 2:16-cv-01704 Document 1 Filed 04/07/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ANTHONY JACINO, and GLASS STAR AMERICA, INC. Case No. v. Plaintiffs, COMPLAINT
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION COMPLAINT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION Mon Cheri Bridals, LLC ) ) v. ) Case No. 18-2516 ) John Does 1-81 ) Judge: ) ) Magistrate: ) ) COMPLAINT Plaintiff
More informationCase 8:18-cv Document 1 Filed 08/07/18 Page 1 of 26 Page ID #:1
Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0/0/ Page of Page ID #: 0 0 Michael K. Friedland (SBN, michael.friedland@knobbe.com Lauren Keller Katzenellenbogen (SBN,0 lauren.katzenellenbogen@knobbe.com Ali S. Razai (SBN,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 8:10-cv-01936-VMC-AEP Document 1 Filed 08/31/10 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1 Case No. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA DAMOTECH INC., a Quebec corporation, v. Plaintiff, ALLLPOINTS
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Case 2:09-cv-00807-EAS-TPK Document 1 Filed 09/15/09 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ABERCROMBIE & FITCH CO. and : ABERCROMBIE & FITCH TRADING CO.,
More informationCase 2:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/09/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1
Case 2:18-cv-00198 Document 1 Filed 05/09/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION SEMCON IP INC., Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL KORS
More informationCourthouse News Service
-\ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA PICTURE PATENTS, LLC, ) ) \.L Plaintiff, ) ) Civil Case No. j.'o&cv o?&>4' MONUMENT REALTY LLC, ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ) Defendant.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK GLO SCIENCE, INC. ) a Delaware Corporation ) 10 W 37 th Street, Suite 1001 ) New York, NY 10018 ) ) Civil Action No. Plaintiff,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION Chris West and Automodeals, LLC, Plaintiffs, 5:16-cv-1205 v. Bret Lee Gardner, AutomoDeals Inc., Arturo Art Gomez Tagle, and
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION MINKA LIGHTING, INC., V. PLAINTIFF, WIND RIVER CEILING FANS LLC, SUMMER WIND INTERNATIONAL LLC, AND MONTE HALL, DEFENDANTS.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION KING S HAWAIIAN BAKERY SOUTHEAST, INC., a Georgia corporation; KING S HAWAIIAN HOLDING COMPANY, INC., a California corporation;
More information3 James A. McDaniel (Bar No ) 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case :-cv-00-raj Document Filed 0// Page of David B. Draper (Bar No. 00) Email: ddraper@terralaw.com Mark W. Good (Bar No. ) Email: mgood@terralaw.com James A. McDaniel (Bar No. 000) jmcdaniel@terralaw.com
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:17-cv-00499-MHC Document 1 Filed 02/09/17 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION DELTA AIR LINES, INC., Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. JOHN DOES
More informationCase 1:14-cv JMS-MJD Document 1 Filed 01/09/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1
Case 1:14-cv-00026-JMS-MJD Document 1 Filed 01/09/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION CONTOUR HARDENING, INC. ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Plaintiff Case No.: 1:17-cv-6236 COMPLAINT
Case 1:17-cv-06236 Document 1 Filed 08/17/17 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK THE GREEN PET SHOP ENTERPRISES, LLC, Plaintiff Case No.: 1:17-cv-6236
More informationCase 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/22/18 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
Case 1:18-cv-11065 Document 1 Filed 05/22/18 Page 1 of 14 R. Terry Parker, Esquire Kevin P. Scura, Esquire RATH, YOUNG & PIGNATELLI, P.C. 120 Water Street, 2nd Floor Boston, MA 02109 Attorneys for Plaintiff
More informationCase 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 03/27/18 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1
Case 1:18-cv-01866 Document 1 Filed 03/27/18 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------X AURORA LED TECHNOLOGY,
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF YOLO. Plaintiff, Defendant. JEFF W. REISIG, District Attorney of Yolo County, by LARRY BARLLY, Supervising
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 JEFF W. REISIG, Yolo County District Attorney LARRY BARLLY, State Bar. No. 114456 Supervising Deputy District Attorney Consumer Fraud and Environmental Protection Division
More informationTHE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:15-cv-590 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:15-cv-590 VEOLIA WATER SOLUTIONS & TECHNOLOGIES SUPPORT, v. Plaintiff, WESTECH ENGINEERING, INC.,
More informationCase 3:15-cv AA Document 1 Filed 01/12/15 Page 1 of 17
Case 3:15-cv-00058-AA Document 1 Filed 01/12/15 Page 1 of 17 THOMAS J. ROMANO, OSB No. 053661 E-mail: tromano@khpatent.com SHAWN J. KOLITCH, OSB No. 063980 E-mail: shawn@khpatent.com KIMBERLY N. FISHER,
More informationCase 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 14 Page ID #:1
Case :-cv-00 Document Filed 0/0/ Page of Page ID #: 0 0 Mark D. Kremer (SB# 00) m.kremer@conklelaw.com Zachary Page (SB# ) z.page@conklelaw.com CONKLE, KREMER & ENGEL Professional Law Corporation 0 Wilshire
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION
Case 6:10-cv-00068-LED Document 1 Filed 02/27/2010 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION SONIX TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD v. Plaintiff, VTECH ELECTRONICS NORTH AMERICA,
More informationCase 1:15-cv Document 1 Filed 02/27/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. COMPLAINT and Jury Demand
Case 1:15-cv-10597 Document 1 Filed 02/27/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS DUNE JEWELRY, INC. Plaintiff, v. REBECCA JAMES, LLC, Defendant. Civil Action No. 1:15-cv-10597
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NO:
Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0/0/ Page of Page ID #: JOHN M. BEGAKIS (Bar No. ) john@altviewlawgroup.com JASON W. BROOKS (Bar No. ) Jason@altviewlawgroup.com ALTVIEW LAW GROUP, LLP 00 Wilshire Boulevard,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION : : : : : : : : : :
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION WHEEL PROS, LLC, v. Plaintiff, WHEELS OUTLET, INC., ABDUL NAIM, AND DOES 1-25, Defendants. Case No. Electronically
More informationCase 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed 07/31/17 Page 1 of 10 Page ID #:1
Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Page ID #: TREVOR Q. CODDINGTON, PH.D. (CSB NO. 0) trevorcoddington@sandiegoiplaw.com JAMES V. FAZIO, III (CSB NO. ) jamesfazio@sandiegoiplaw.com SAN DIEGO IP LAW
More informationCase 2:07-cv CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 07/30/2007 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Case 2:07-cv-02334-CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 07/30/2007 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS PAYLESS SHOESOURCE WORLDWIDE, INC. ) a Delaware corporation, ) ) Plaintiff,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN GREEN BAY DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN GREEN BAY DIVISION ORION ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC. v. Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 16-cv-1250 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ENERGY BANK, INC.,
More informationCase 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 03/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:17-cv-00549 Document 1 Filed 03/01/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 13 Civil Action No. GOLIGHT, INC., a Nebraska corporation, v. Plaintiff, KH INDUSTRIES, INC., a New York corporation, UNITY MANUFACTURING
More informationCase 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 03/04/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1
Case 1:16-cv-00065 Document 1 Filed 03/04/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BEAUMONT DIVISION PRAXAIR, INC., PRAXAIR TECHNOLOGY, INC. Plaintiffs,
More informationCase 2:14-cv JRG-RSP Document 9 Filed 08/08/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 227
Case 2:14-cv-00799-JRG-RSP Document 9 Filed 08/08/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 227 ECLIPSE IP LLC, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION Plaintiff, v. LUXI
More informationCase 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1
Case 2:16-cv-01388 Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION MICOBA LLC Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. v. JURY
More informationCOMPLAINT. Plaintiff, The Green Pet Shop Enterprises, LLC ( Green Pet Shop or. Plaintiff ), by and through its attorneys, THE RANDO LAW FIRM P.C.
Case 1:18-cv-04526 Document 1 Filed 08/09/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1 Attorneys for Plaintiff: THE RANDO LAW FIRM P.C. 6800 Jericho Turnpike Suite 120W Syosset, NY 11791 (516) 799-9800 CARLSON, GASKEY
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES, RESTITUTION AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
Case :-cv-000-e Document Filed 0/0/ Page of Page ID #: 0 0 GLUCK LAW FIRM P.C. Jeffrey S. Gluck (SBN 0) N. Kings Road # Los Angeles, California 00 Telephone: 0.. ERIKSON LAW GROUP David Alden Erikson (SBN
More informationSuperior Court of California
Superior Court of California County of Orange Case Number : 0--0001-CU-NP-CXC Copy Request: Request Type: Case Documents Prepared for: cns Number of documents: 1 Number of pages: Todd M. Friedman, Esq.-
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case :-cv-00 Document Filed 0/0/ Page of Page ID #: 0 0 Brent H. Blakely (SBN bblakely@blakelylawgroup.com Cindy Chan (SBN cchan@blakelylawgroup.com BLAKELY LAW GROUP Parkview Avenue, Suite 0 Manhattan
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT
Case 1:13-cv-03311-CAP Document 1 Filed 10/04/13 Page 1 of 23 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION YELLOWPAGES.COM LLC, Plaintiff, v. YP ONLINE, LLC,
More informationCase 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 12/08/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:16-cv-01159-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/08/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE BLACKBIRD TECH LLC d/b/a BLACKBIRD TECHNOLOGIES, v. Plaintiff,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE DIVISION RUUD LIGHTING, INC., Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 12-515 v. COOPER LIGHTING, LLC, Defendant. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT FOR
More informationPlaintiff Privacy Pop, LLC ( Plaintiff ) complains and alleges as follows against Defendant Gimme Gimme, LLC ( Defendant ).
0 0 Robert J. Lauson (,) bob@lauson.com Edwin P. Tarver, (0,) edwin@lauson.com LAUSON & TARVER LLP 0 Apollo St., Suite. 0 El Segundo, CA 0 Tel. (0) -0 Fax (0) -0 Attorneys for Plaintiff Privacy Pop, LLC
More informationCase 5:16-cv Document 1 Filed 09/12/16 Page 1 of 16 Page ID #:1
Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 Todd M. Friedman () Adrian R. Bacon (0) Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. 0 Oxnard St., Suite 0 Woodland Hills, CA Phone: -- Fax: --0 tfriedman@toddflaw.com
More informationCase 2:10-cv RAJ Document 1 Filed 08/16/10 Page 1 of 8
Case :-cv-0-raj Document Filed 0// Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE MIRINA CORPORATION, a Washington Corporation, v. Plaintiff, MARINA BIOTECH,
More informationTHE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:11-cv ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:11-cv-00296 VEOLIA WATER SOLUTIONS & TECHNOLOGIES SUPPORT, v. Plaintiff, SIEMENS INDUSTRY, INC.,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Case 1:99-mc-09999 Document 186 Filed 04/29/11 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 17113 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE AUGME TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff, Civil Action No. v. PANDORA MEDIA,
More informationUSDC IN/ND case 1:18-cv document 1 filed 04/09/18 page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA FORT WAYNE DIVISION
USDC IN/ND case 1:18-cv-00086 document 1 filed 04/09/18 page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA FORT WAYNE DIVISION ASW, LLC, ) Plaintiff, ) ) VS. ) CASE NO. 1:18-cv-86 )
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) Plaintiff,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE OPTICAL DEVICES, LLC, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. v. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT TOSHIBA CORPORATION AND TOSHIBA AMERICA INFORMATION
More informationCase 1:17-cv JCH-JHR Document 17 Filed 03/31/17 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 1:17-cv-00062-JCH-JHR Document 17 Filed 03/31/17 Page 1 of 9 LODESTAR ANSTALT, a Liechtenstein Corporation IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO Plaintiff, vs. Cause No.
More informationCase 1:15-cv EJF Document 2 Filed 09/25/15 Page 1 of 12
Case 1:15-cv-00128-EJF Document 2 Filed 09/25/15 Page 1 of 12 Karl R. Cannon (USB No. 6508 CLAYTON, HOWARTH & CANNON, P.C. 6985 Union Park Center, Suite 200 Cottonwood Heights, Utah 84047 Telephone: (801
More informationCase 5:14-cv Document 1 Filed 11/06/14 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:1
Case :-cv-00 Document Filed /0/ Page of Page ID #: 0 KATHERINE K. HUANG (State Bar No. ) CARLOS A. SINGER (State Bar No. ) HUANG YBARRA SINGER & MAY LLP 0 South Hope Street, Suite 0 Los Angeles, CA 00-0
More informationCase 2:11-cv CEH-DNF Document 1 Filed 07/12/11 Page 1 of 55 PageID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
Case 2:11-cv-00392-CEH-DNF Document 1 Filed 07/12/11 Page 1 of 55 PageID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION PHELAN HOLDINGS, INC., d/b/a PINCHER=S CRAB SHACK,
More informationCase: 2:17-cv MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/23/17 Page: 1 of 15 PAGEID #: 1
Case: 2:17-cv-00237-MHW-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/23/17 Page: 1 of 15 PAGEID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION SCOTT W. SCHIFF c/o Schiff & Associates
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, CASE NO. v. Plaintiff,
More informationCase 1:11-cv REB Document 1 Filed 12/15/11 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:11-cv-00636-REB Document 1 Filed 12/15/11 Page 1 of 5 Lane M. Chitwood, ISB No. 8577 lchitwood@parsonsbehle.com Peter M. Midgley, ISB No. 6913 pmidgley@parsonsbehle.com John N. Zarian, ISB No. 7390
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION. Civil Action No. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
1 1 Brenton R. Babcock (SBN,1 brent.babcock@knobbe.com Ali S. Razai (SBN, ali.razai@knobbe.com KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP 0 Main Street, Fourteenth Floor Irvine, CA Telephone: ( 0-00 Facsimile:
More informationFILED SAN MAteO COUNTY
1 JAMES P. FOX, DISTRICT ATTORNEY County of San Mateo, State of California 2 State Bar No. 45169 Hall of Justice and Records 3 400 County Center, Third Floor Redwood City, CA 94063 4 By Chuck Finney, Deputy
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-0 Document Filed 0/0/ Page of Page ID #: A P ROFESSIONAL CORI'OR... TION I IIVINE 0 0 A Professional Comoration MICHAEL L. MEEKS (SBN: 000) LOUISE TRUONG (SBN: ) 00 Von Karman A venue, Suite
More informationCase 2:13-cv DSF-MRW Document 14 Filed 12/16/13 Page 1 of 17 Page ID #:150
Case :-cv-00-dsf-mrw Document Filed // Page of Page ID #:0 Case :-cv-00-dsf-mrw Document Filed // Page of Page ID #: 0. Plaintiff brings this class action to secure injunctive relief and restitution for
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ILIFE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff, v. NINTENDO OF AMERICA, INC., Defendant. Civil Action No. 3:13-cv-4987 Jury Trial Demanded PLAINTIFF
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. Civil Action No. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS LEXINGTON LUMINANCE LLC, v. GOOGLE, INC., Plaintiff, Defendant. Civil Action No. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
More informationCase 1:11-cv RMC Document 1 Filed 08/20/10 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Case 1:11-cv-01128-RMC Document 1 Filed 08/20/10 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION STARLINGER & CO. GMBH, V. Plaintiff, Civil Action No.
More informationCase: 4:13-cv Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/01/13 Page: 1 of 15 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
Case: 4:13-cv-01501 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/01/13 Page: 1 of 15 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI VICTORY OUTREACH ) INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ) a California
More informationCase 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed 03/02/17 Page 1 of 21 PageID: 1
Case 2:17-cv-01457 Document 1 Filed 03/02/17 Page 1 of 21 PageID: 1 Thomas R. Curtin George C. Jones GRAHAM CURTIN A Professional Association 4 Headquarters Plaza P.O. Box 1991 Morristown, New Jersey 07962-1991
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA. Plaintiff, for its complaint, by and through its attorney, alleges that:
Lester Electrical Inc., IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA Plaintiff, V. Diversified Power International, LLC and Nivel Parts & Manufacturing Co., LLC COMPLAINT Defendants.
More informationCase 1:18-cv WJM-KLM Document 1 Filed 11/07/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:18-cv-02874-WJM-KLM Document 1 Filed 11/07/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO David A. Kupernik Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO.: 24K Real Estate
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
CASE 0:09-cv-03335-DWF -TNL Document 3 Filed 04/09/10 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA 3M Innovative Properties Company and 3M Company, vs. Plaintiffs, Tredegar
More informationCase 3:10-cv FLW-DEA Document 48 Filed 09/27/11 Page 1 of 10 PageID: 1147 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Case 3:10-cv-05695-FLW-DEA Document 48 Filed 09/27/11 Page 1 of 10 PageID: 1147 Edward R. Mackiewicz STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP 1330 Connecticut Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20036 Telephone: 202-429-6412 Facsimile:
More informationCase 1:16-cv JMS-MJD Document 1 Filed 01/26/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1
Case 1:16-cv-00215-JMS-MJD Document 1 Filed 01/26/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION CUMMINS LTD. and CUMMINS INC. vs. Plaintiffs
More informationCase 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 09/24/15 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:1
Case :-cv-00 Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 CHRISTOPHER S. RUHLAND (SBN 0) Email: christopher.ruhland@ dechert.com MICHELLE M. RUTHERFORD (SBN ) Email: michelle.rutherford@ dechert.com US Bank
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Gregory J. Kuykendall, Esquire greg.kuykendall@azbar.org SBN: 012508 PCC: 32388 145 South Sixth Avenue Tucson, Arizona 85701-2007 (520) 792-8033 Ronald D. Coleman, Esq. coleman@bragarwexler.com BRAGAR,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT (Jury Trial Demanded)
Case 1:07-cv-00662-UA-RAE Document 2 Filed 09/04/2007 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA HANESBRANDS, INC.; HBI BRANDED APPAREL ENTERPRISES, LLC;
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION CHARLES C. FREENY III, BRYAN E. FREENY, and JAMES P. FREENY, Plaintiffs, Case No. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED v. HTC AMERICA,
More informationCase 4:14-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/08/14 Page 1 of 6
Case 4:14-cv-02578 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/08/14 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION BELFER COSMETICS, LLC Plaintiff, vs. Case No.
More informationCase 1:10-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 10/05/10 Page 1 of 20
Case 1:10-cv-00852-UNA Document 1 Filed 10/05/10 Page 1 of 20 Case 1:10-cv-00852-UNA Document 1 Filed 10/05/10 Page 2 of 20 4. Plaintiff Allergan Sales, LLC is a corporation organized and existing under
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION COMPLAINT
Case 2:10-cv-02551-SHM-cgc Document 1 Filed 07/29/10 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION BRAVADO INTERNATIONAL GROUP MERCHANDISING SERVICES,
More informationCase 6:18-cv Document 1 Filed 01/31/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1
Case 6:18-cv-00036 Document 1 Filed 01/31/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION SPIDER SEARCH ANALYTICS LLC Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-00-cjc-an Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: Todd M. Friedman, Esq. (SBN: ) tfriedman@attorneysforconsumers.com Suren N. Weerasuriya, Esq. (SBN: ) Sweerasuriya@attorneysforconsumers.com LAW
More informationCase 3:14-cv RS-EMT Document 1 Filed 03/28/14 Page 1 of 11
Case 3:14-cv-00151-RS-EMT Document 1 Filed 03/28/14 Page 1 of 11 SPIKER, INC. Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION v. Civil Action No.
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS, STATE OF FLORIDA, Plaintiff, Case No.: vs. GILDA
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ODIE B. POWELL, CASE NO. 115 West Sunflower Street Ruleville, MS 38771-3837 JUDGE: Plaintiff, MAGISTRATE: vs. COMPLAINT FOR
More informationCase 9:18-cv RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2018 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.
Case 9:18-cv-80674-RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2018 Page 1 of 11 Google LLC, a limited liability company vs UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Plaintiff, CASE NO.
More information