UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

Similar documents
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO.: 1:16-CV-381 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 8:18-cv Document 1 Filed 08/07/18 Page 1 of 26 Page ID #:1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES, RESTITUTION AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO.: 1:16-CV-165 ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN GREEN BAY DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No.

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 02/12/16 Page 1 of 16 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JOHN JOSEPH BENGIS, an individual,

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 14 Page ID #:1

3 James A. McDaniel (Bar No ) 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 1:15-cv Document 1 Filed 02/27/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. COMPLAINT and Jury Demand

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION : : : : : : : : : :

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1 COMPLAINT

Case 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:12-cv JCM-VCF Document 1 Filed 11/13/12 Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT (Jury Trial Demanded)

Case 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.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. v. Civil Action No. COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION

Case 8:15-cv SDM-TGW Document 1 Filed 06/23/15 Page 1 of 11 PageID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO COMPLAINT

Case 5:14-cv Document 1 Filed 11/06/14 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:1

Case 2:13-cv RJS Document 2 Filed 03/06/13 Page 1 of 16

Case 3:15-cv AA Document 1 Filed 01/12/15 Page 1 of 17

Case 1:14-cv JMS-MJD Document 1 Filed 01/09/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

Case 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 2:18-cv JAD-CWH Document 1 Filed 12/21/18 Page 1 of 17

Case: 4:16-cv DDN Doc. #: 1 Filed: 07/15/16 Page: 1 of 9 PageID #: 1

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 01/29/18 Page 1 of 14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case3:15-cv DMR Document1 Filed09/16/15 Page1 of 11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 2:10-cv RAJ Document 1 Filed 08/16/10 Page 1 of 8

Case 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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Privacy Pop, LLC ( Plaintiff ) complains and alleges as follows against Defendant Gimme Gimme, LLC ( Defendant ).

Case 1:11-cv REB Document 1 Filed 12/15/11 Page 1 of 5

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case 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: 1:11-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 08/10/11 Page 1 of 19 PageID #:1

Case 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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION Civil Action No.: 3:17-CV-398.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA. Civil Action No. 07-CV-571

Case 2:13-cv KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 12/30/13 Page 1 of 31 PageID: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 1:18-cv BLW Document 1 Filed 01/17/18 Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. v.

Case 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

GIBSON LOWRY BURRIS LLP

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 03/27/18 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

USDC IN/ND case 2:18-cv JVB-APR document 1 filed 05/16/18 page 1 of 10

Case 2:33-av Document Filed 09/21/12 Page 1 of 33 PageID: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 2:11-cv CW Document 2 Filed 03/11/11 Page 1 of 9

Case 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 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/24/ :27 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 57 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/24/2015 EXHIBIT C

Case 2:18-cv JTM-MBN Document 1 Filed 06/04/18 Page 1 of 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND OTHER RELIEF INTRODUCTION

PlainSite. Legal Document. California Central District Court Case No. 2:16-cv WBS, Inc. v. Stephen Pearcy et al. Document 2.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. v. Case No. 3:12-cv-686

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:15-cv-590 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:11-cv ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

USDC 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

Case: 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: 1:11-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 09/06/11 Page 1 of 20 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION COMPLAINT

Case 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 1:10-cv JLT Document 1 Filed 01/22/2010 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:18-cv RGS Document 1 Filed 04/30/18 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 2:12-cv TC Document 2 Filed 12/10/12 Page 1 of 16

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 12/15/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1

Case 1:07-cv LTS Document 1 Filed 03/15/2007 Page 1 of 20

Case 2:16-cv RJS Document 2 Filed 09/29/16 Page 1 of 15

Case 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed 03/02/17 Page 1 of 21 PageID: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT AND TRADEMARK

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND. v. C.A. No. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT. Nature of the Action

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 03/07/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CEDAR RAPIDS DIVISION. Plaintiff, COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Transcription:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN CREE, INC. Plaintiff, v. Case No. 17- cv - 1804 MILWAUKEE WHOLESALE LLC d/b/a LED King and/or LEDKING.US and SMART TECHNOLOGY LLC d/b/a LED King and/or LEDKING.US, Defendants. COMPLAINT Plaintiff Cree, Inc. ( Cree ), for its Complaint against Defendants Milwaukee Wholesale LLC and Smart Technology LLC (referred collectively herein as Defendants ), states and alleges as follows: PARTIES 1. Plaintiff Cree is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of North Carolina with a principal place of business at 4600 Silicon Drive, Durham, North Carolina, 27703. Cree also has facilities located in Wisconsin at 9201 Washington Avenue, Racine, Wisconsin 53406 (formerly the headquarters of Ruud Lighting, Inc. ( Ruud Lighting ), which was acquired by Cree in 2011 and subsequently merged with Cree). 2. On information and belief, Defendant Milwaukee Wholesale LLC, doing business as LED King and/or LEDKING.US, is a privately held company organized and existing under the laws of the State of Wisconsin with a principal place of business at 400 W. Marquette Ave., Oak Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 1 of 13 Document 1

Creek, WI 53154. Milwaukee Wholesale LLC s registered agent for service of process in the state of Wisconsin is Naseer A. Nasir, 400 W. Marquette Ave., Oak Creek, WI 53154. 3. On information and belief, Defendant Smart Technology LLC, doing business as LED King and/or LEDKING.US, is a privately held company organized and existing under the laws of the State of Wisconsin. Smart Technology LLC s registered agent for service of process in the state of Wisconsin is Bashir Ahmad, 9770 S. 54th Street, Franklin, WI 53132. 4. Defendants make, use, sell, offer to sell in, and/or import into the United States lighting products including LED products and apparatuses utilizing LEDs. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 5. Cree incorporates the foregoing paragraphs of the Complaint by reference as though fully set forth herein. 6. This is a civil action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. 1 et seq, including without limitation 35 U.S.C. 271 and 281. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a). 7. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants under Wis. Stat. 801.05(1)(d), among other provisions. Defendants regularly and deliberately engage in and continue to engage in activities that result in using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing infringing products in and/or into the State of Wisconsin and this judicial district. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants because, among other things, Defendants conduct business in the State of Wisconsin and in this judicial district and thus enjoy the privileges and protections of Wisconsin law. 8. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400(b) because each of the Defendants is subject to personal jurisdiction in this district, resides in this district, has - 2 - Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 2 of 13 Document 1

committed acts of infringement in this district, and has a regular and established place of business in this district. BACKGROUND 9. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation of the foregoing paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 10. Cree is a market-leading innovator engaged in the design, manufacture, and sale of lighting products including light emitting diode ( LED ) products as well as devices and apparatuses utilizing LEDs. 11. One of Cree s products is the industry-leading CPY250 Canopy/Soffit luminaire, an outdoor LED light that helps increase location visibility and incoming traffic at service stations, convenience stores, drive-thru restaurants, parking garages or banking locations. Two models of Cree s CPY250 product are shown below: 12. Cree devoted substantial time, effort, and resources to the development and promotion of the CPY250 luminaire. As a result, the public has come to recognize and rely upon the CPY250 luminaire as an indication of the high quality associated with Cree. - 3 - Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 3 of 13 Document 1

13. The distinctive design of the CPY250 LED luminaire has become well known in the industry. The CPY250 LED luminaire designs have a thin profile constructed of rugged cast aluminum with a distinctive capital I shaped design through the center. The luminaires also contain unique ribbing down the length of the fixtures. Cree has two design patents claiming ornamental designs for light fixtures, as described below, relating to its CPY250 luminaire. 14. After the introduction of Cree s CPY250 luminaire, Defendants Milwaukee Wholesale LLC and Smart Technology LLC, began selling a knock-off Canopy Light Modern Design product, the LED Canopy 130W 5700K, through a website called LED King (ledking.us). The depiction below is from the LEDKING.US website, as compared to the patented design in U.S. Patent No. D743,084: http://www.ledking.us/hikashop-menu-for-categories-listing/product/69-canopylight130w5700k, accessed on December 20, 2017. The depiction below is from the LEDKING.US website, as compared to the patented design in U.S. Patent No. D721,844: - 4 - Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 4 of 13 Document 1

http://www.ledking.us/hikashop-menu-for-categories-listing/product/69-canopylight130w5700k, accessed on December 20, 2017. 15. Defendants LED Canopy 100W and 130W 5700K luminaire products, and substantially similar luminaires sold through LED King, ledking.us, Amazon, ebay or otherwise are hereinafter referred to as the LED King knock-off canopy luminaires. 16. Upon information and belief, Defendants Smart Technology LLC and/or Milwaukee Wholesale LLC are selling LED King knock-off canopy luminaires on ebay under the username ledking*us. LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are being offered on ebay using the same picture as in paragraph 14 above, for example as the 130Watt LED Gas Station Canopy LED Light at http://www.ebay.com/itm/canopy-130w-led-light-drop-lens-gas-station- Warehouse-Highbay-5700K-UL-DLC-130-W- /121974668198?epid=1562731115&hash=item1c6641bba6:g:S2UAAOSwoydWlo8W, accessed on December 20, 2017. - 5 - Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 5 of 13 Document 1

17. Upon information and belief, Defendants Smart Technology LLC and/or Milwaukee Wholesale LLC are selling LED King knock-off canopy luminaires on ebay under the username ourledhouse. The LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are being offered for sale through the ourledhouse username using the same pictures as described in paragraph 14 above, for example as the 130Watt LED Gas Station Canopy LED light at https://www.ebay.com/itm/canopy-130w-led-light-drop-lens-gas-station-warehouse- Highbay-5700K-UL-DLC-10yr/162072931194?hash=item25bc4cab7a:g:ZJcAAOSwZetXOdiH, accessed on December 20, 2017. 18. Upon information and belief, Defendants Smart Technology LLC and/or Milwaukee Wholesale LLC are also selling LED King knock-off canopy luminaires in 100 watts on ebay under the username ledking*us. LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are being offered on ebay using a near-identical picture as in paragraph 14 above, for example as the 100Watt LED Gas Station Canopy LED Light at https://www.ebay.com/itm/canopy-100w- LED-Light-Drop-Lens-Gas-Station-Warehouse-Highbay-5700K-UL-DLC- 10yrs/121991001150?epid=1562731115&hash=item1c673af43e:g:LtwAAOSwiYFXJ3OG, accessed on December 20, 2017. 19. Upon information and belief, Defendants Smart Technology LLC and/or Milwaukee Wholesale LLC are also selling LED King knock-off canopy luminaires on Amazon. LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are being offered on Amazon using the same picture as in paragraph 14 above, for example as the 130Watt LED Gas Station Canopy LED Light at https://www.amazon.com/led-station-warehouse-130w- 5700K/dp/B01FL6AV8I/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1513806176&sr=8-8&keywords=LED+king+canopy. - 6 - Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 6 of 13 Document 1

20. Upon information and belief, Defendants Smart Technology LLC and/or Milwaukee Wholesale LLC have knowledge of the 844 and 084 patents and/or have willfully blinded themselves as to the infringing nature of their activities. 21. Defendants LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are copies of Cree s CPY250 luminaire design. Defendants sales of LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are damaging to the goodwill associated with Cree s product and Cree s reputation. COUNT I INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. DESIGN PATENT NO. D721,844 22. Cree repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation of the foregoing paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 23. Cree is the owner of United States Design Patent No. 721,844 ( the 844 Patent ) titled Light Fixture. The 844 Patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on January 27, 2015. A true and correct copy of the 844 Patent is attached as Exhibit A. 24. Cree has practiced the 844 patent in connection with the commercialization of its CPY250 product. Cree marks its CPY250 products with the 844 patent. 25. As the owner of the 844 Patent, Cree is authorized and has standing to bring legal action to enforce all rights arising under the 844 Patent. 26. Defendants have infringed, and will continue to infringe, in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271, by making, using, selling, offering, to sell in, and/or importing into the United States LED King knock-off canopy luminaires. Milwaukee Wholesale LLC and Smart Technology LLC offer the LED King knock-off canopy luminaires for sale through a website called LED King, which can be found at the following hyperlink: http://www.ledking.us/hikashop-menu-for-categorieslisting/product/69-canopylight130w5700k, on Amazon, and on ebay. - 7 - Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 7 of 13 Document 1

27. Defendants infringe the 844 Patent because, inter alia, in the eye of an ordinary observer, giving such attention as a purchaser usually gives, the design of the 844 Patent and the designs of Defendants LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are substantially the same, the resemblance being such as to deceive such an ordinary observer, inducing them to purchase one supposing it to be the other. 28. Upon information and belief, Defendants have actual knowledge of the 844 Patent and actual knowledge that its activities constitute direct infringement of the 844 Patent, or has willfully blinded itself to the infringing nature of its activities, and yet continues its infringing activities. 29. Defendants infringement of the 844 Patent has been and will continue to be willful, deliberate and intentional. 30. As a result of Defendants infringement of the 844 Patent, Cree has suffered and will continue to suffer irreparable and monetary damages in an amount to be determined at trial, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by the Court. COUNT II INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. DESIGN PATENT NO. D743,084 31. Cree repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation of the foregoing paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 32. Cree is the owner of United States Design Patent No. 743,084 ( the 084 Patent ) titled Light Fixture. The 084 Patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on November 10, 2015. A true and correct copy of the 084 Patent is attached as Exhibit B. - 8 - Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 8 of 13 Document 1

33. Cree has practiced the 084 patent in connection with the commercialization of its CPY250 product. Cree marks its CPY250 products with the 084 patent. 34. As the owner of the 084 Patent, Cree is authorized and has standing to bring legal action to enforce all rights arising under the 084 Patent. 35. Defendants have infringed, and will continue to infringe, in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271, by making, using, selling, offering, to sell in, and/or importing into the United States LED King knock-off canopy luminaires. Milwaukee Wholesale LLC and Smart Technology LLC offer the LED King knock-off canopy luminaires for sale through a website called LED King, which can be found at the following hyperlink: http://www.ledking.us/hikashop-menu-for-categorieslisting/product/69-canopylight130w5700k, on Amazon, and on ebay. 36. Defendants infringe the 084 Patent because, inter alia, in the eye of an ordinary observer, giving such attention as a purchaser usually gives, the design of the 084 Patent and the design of Defendants LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are substantially the same, the resemblance being such as to deceive such an ordinary observer, inducing them to purchase one supposing it to be the other. 37. Upon information and belief, Defendants have actual knowledge of the 084 Patent and actual knowledge that its activities constitute direct infringement of the 084 Patent, or has willfully blinded itself to the infringing nature of its activities, and yet continues its infringing activities. 38. Defendants infringement of the 084 Patent has been and will continue to be willful, deliberate and intentional. 39. As a result of Defendants infringement of the 084 Patent, Cree has suffered and will continue to suffer irreparable and monetary damages in an amount to be determined at trial, - 9 - Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 9 of 13 Document 1

but in no event less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by the Court. COUNT III TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT UNDER THE LANHAM ACT, 15 U.S.C. 1125(A) 40. Cree repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation of the foregoing paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 41. Cree s CPY250 luminaires constitute protectable trade dress pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1125. The protectable trade dress of Cree s CPY250 luminaire are nonfunctional features that identify the product and its source to customers. 42. Defendants unauthorized distribution and sale of the LED King knock-off canopy luminaires is likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception of purchasers and potential purchasers as to the origin, sponsorship, approval, or association of Defendants products. 43. On information and belief, Defendants have used in connection with sales of LED King knock-off canopy luminaires, false designations of origin and false and misleading descriptions and representations, which misrepresent the nature, characteristics and qualities of those goods and falsely describe the origin, sponsorship, approval, or association of Defendants products. 44. Defendants sales of LED King knock-off canopy luminaires, which make use of Cree s CPY250 luminaire s trade dress, falsely and misleadingly describe and suggest that the product they are selling and offering for sale emanates from Cree, cause confusion and mistake, deceive and mislead the purchasing public, trade upon Cree s high quality reputation, and improperly appropriate to Defendants the valuable rights of Cree. 45. Defendants wrongful acts constitute trade dress infringement in violation of Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a). - 10 - Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 10 of 13 Document 1

46. Upon information and belief, Defendants have actual knowledge that the sales of LED King knock-off canopy luminaires, which make use of Cree s CPY250 luminaire s trade dress, willfully, falsely, and misleadingly describe and suggest that the products they are selling and offering for sale emanates from Cree; willfully causes confusion and mistake; willfully deceive and mislead the purchasing public; willfully trade upon Cree s high quality reputation, and willfully and improperly appropriate to Defendants the valuable rights of Cree. 47. Defendants wrongful acts have and will continue to cause irreparable injury to Cree and infringe upon Cree s trade dress in the future unless and until they are enjoined by this Court. Cree has no adequate remedy at law and is thus damaged in an amount that is yet to be determined. COUNT V FRAUDULENT REPRESENTATIONS UNDER THE WISCONSIN DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACT, WIS. STAT. 100.18 48. Cree repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation of the foregoing paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 49. Wis. Stat. 100.18 provides that no firm, corporation or association with intent to sell, distribute, increase the consumption of any merchandise directly or indirectly, to the public for sale shall make, publish, disseminate, circulate, or place before the public in this state, in a label or in any other way similar or dissimilar to the foregoing, an advertisement, announcement, statement or representation of any kind to the public which contains any assertion, representation or statement of fact which is untrue, deceptive or misleading. 50. As alleged throughout this Complaint, Defendants deliberately engaged in deceptive and unlawful marketing in violation of Wisconsin law, by misrepresenting to the public, - 11 - Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 11 of 13 Document 1

such as potential customers viewing the products on LEDKing.us, that they are selling Cree products, when they do not have such authorization or consent from Cree. 51. Cree has suffered damages as a direct and proximate result of Defendants misrepresentations to the public and to the Plaintiff. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Cree prays for entry of judgment against each Defendant (and its subsidiaries, successors, parents, affiliates, officers, directors, agents, servants, and employees) as follows: A. An entry of judgment in favor of Cree and against Defendants of all claims alleged herein; B. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 283, 17 U.S.C. 1116, 17 U.S.C. 502, 15 U.S.C. 1125(c)(1), and Defendants engaging in unfair competition, a preliminary and permanent injunction from directly or indirectly making, having made, using, selling or importing LED King knock-off canopy luminaires; C. An award of all profits incurred by Defendants due to the unfair competition and unauthorized sale or use of the products infringing the 844 and the 084 Patents, or in the alternative, at least a reasonable royalty; D. An award for all damages suffered by Cree and profits earned by Defendants from Defendants acts of trade dress infringement; E. An award for all damages, including costs and reasonable attorney fees, suffered by Cree from Defendants fraudulent representations and deceptive trade practices; F. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117(a), 35 U.S.C. 285, 17 U.S.C. 505, and Defendant s fraudulent representations, a declaration finding this case to be exceptional, and - 12 - Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 12 of 13 Document 1

providing reasonable attorney's fees and costs, and interests on those fees and costs in favor of Cree; G. Punitive and exemplary damages against Defendants and in favor of Cree in an amount sufficient to deter and punish Defendants for their willful and wrongful acts; H. Cree be awarded all actual and compensatory damages; and I. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. JURY DEMAND Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Cree demands a trial by jury on all issues triable by jury. Dated: December 28, 2017 PERKINS COIE LLP By s/ Christopher G. Hanewicz Christopher G. Hanewicz CHanewicz@perkinscoie.com Michelle M. Umberger MUmberger@perkinscoie.com Autumn N. Nero ANero@perkinscoie.com 1 East Main Street, Suite 201 Madison, WI 53703 (608) 663-7460 (Phone) (608) 663-7499 (Facsimile) Attorneys for Plaintiff, Cree, Inc. - 13 - Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 13 of 13 Document 1