IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NORTHERN DIVISION

Charles K. Renfro,

) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) BUILDING PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING ) INTERNATIONAL, INC. ) (a/k/a, BPMI, INC.) ) ) Defendant. )

Civil Action No.

JURY TRIAL REQUESTED

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff Charles K. Renfro (Plaintiff) for his complaint against Defendant BUILDING PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING INTERNATIONAL, INC. (Defendant) alleges as follows:

JURISDICTION 1. This Complaint is an action for patent infringement under Title 35 of the United States Code. Subject matter jurisdiction is conferred on this Court by 28 U.S.C. 1338.

2. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant because the Defendant is a business entity which, on information and belief, has sold, offered for sale, and/or distributed products in the State of Tennessee and in this district which infringe upon at least one claim of Plaintiffs U.S. patents (defined below) in violation of Title 35 of the United States Code and/or which own, operate, and/or control an Internet website through which infringing products may be purchased by customers in the State of Tennessee and in this district by way of an interactive, online ordering system.

3. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400.

PARTIES 4. Plaintiff is an individual U.S. citizen residing in the State of Tennessee, having an address of 146 Volunteer Drive, Elizabethton, TN 37643.

5. On information and belief, Defendant is an Oregon corporation, with a business address at 7902 SW Hunziker Street, Tigard, Oregon 97223.

BACKGROUND 6. Plaintiff is the owner of the sole and exclusive right to make, use, offer to sell, sell, import/export, and otherwise commercially exploit all subject matter covered by any one or more of the claims of the following United States Patents (hereinafter, collectively, the Patent Portfolio):

a. U.S. Pat. No. 6,910,799 issued on June 28, 2005, to Charles K. Renfro, entitled Mixing Apparatus and Method ("the 799 Patent" shown in Exhibit A); b. U.S. Pat. No. 7,070,318 issued on July 4, 2006, to Charles K. Renfro, entitled Mixing Apparatus Having Rotational and Axial Motion ("the 318 Patent" shown in Exhibit B); c. U.S. Pat. No. 7,407,321 issued on August 5, 2008, to Charles K. Renfro, entitled Method For Mixing Colorant With A Viscous Material ("the 321 Patent" shown in Exhibit C); and d. U.S. Pat. No. 7,980,755 issued on July 19, 2011, to Charles K. Renfro, entitled Method For Mixing Additive Into Viscous Material ("the 755 Patent" shown in Exhibit D).

7. As the owner of all right, title and interest in and to the Patent Portfolio, Plaintiff has the sole and exclusive right to sue others for current and past direct infringement of the patents in the Patent Portfolio and all other infringements or violations of rights pertaining to such patents including, but not limited to, acts of contributory infringement
3

and active inducement of infringement by others, and to obtain all remedies for such infringements and/or violations including, but not limited to, injunctive relief, damages and attorney fees/expenses.

8. The patents of the Patent Portfolio are directed to an apparatus and method for mixing colorant with a viscous material. The apparatus and method are used to cause colorant and viscous material to be mixed by removing a cap from a filler end of a tube of viscous base material, adding the colorant to the viscous material at the filler end of the tube, sealing the mixing apparatus to the filler end of the tube, inserting a mixing end of the mixer and reciprocating the mixing end of the mixer within the tube to mix the viscous material and added colorant.

9. On information and belief, Defendant has made, used, offered to sell, and/or sold and/or are now making, using, offering to sell, and/or selling in the United States, including this district, caulk mixing apparatuses ("Accused Devices") including, but not limited to, machines identical to or similar to those shown and described in the materials of Exhibit E from Defendants website.

10. The Accused Devices shown in Exhibit E employ what is said to be a 2-piece manual mixer (hereinafter the Technology). The Technology includes, among other things, a cylinder, a cap, a handle, and a plunger. The end of a tube of caulk is removed and the
4

tube of caulk is placed in the cylinder. Colorant is added to the tube of caulk. The cap is sealed to or otherwise adjacent the top of the tube of caulk, and the handle is used to cycle the plunger through the tube of caulk to mix the colorant and caulk.

11. On or about May 2, 2000, Plaintiff filed a U.S. patent application in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) of the United States Department of Commerce, which application was assigned U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 09/563,465 (the 465 Application) and a filing date of May 2, 2000.

12. The 465 Application became abandoned on or about June 6, 2002, but not before a second applicationa continuation application claiming priority to the 465 applicationwas filed with the USPTO on April 2, 2002. The second application was assigned U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 10/115,330 (the 330 Application). The 330 Application ultimately issued as the 318 Patent on July 4, 2006.

13. On November 14, 2002, a continuation application claiming priority to the 330 Application was filed with the USPTO and was assigned U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 10/293,850 (the 850 Application). The 850 Application ultimately issued as the 799 Patent on June 28, 2005.

14. On May 13, 2004, a continuation in part application assigned U.S. Patent Application Serial Number 10/845,551 (the 551 Application) and claiming priority to the 465 Application, the 330 Application, and the 850 Application was filed with the USPTO. The 551 Application became abandoned on April 13, 2007.

15.On May 28, 2005, prior to the abandonment of the 551 Application, a continuationin-part application claiming priority to the 551 Application and the 850 Application was filed with the USPTO and was assigned U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 11/139,174 (the 174 Application). The 174 Application ultimately issued as the 321 Patent on August 5, 2008.

16. On February 26, 2007, also prior to the abandonment of the 551 Application, a second continuation-in-part application claiming priority to the 551 Application and the 850 Application was filed with the USPTO and was assigned U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 11/710,803 (the 803 Application). The 803 Application ultimately issued as the 755 Patent on July 19, 2011.

17. At least as early as November 13, 2012, Accused Devices appeared for sale both by BPMI and by Amazon Services LLC and/or its affiliates ("Amazon") directly to customers on the World Wide Web via the website uniform resource locator (URL) http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0095EI43C/sr=16

3/qid=1353101267/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&qid=1353101267&seller= &sr=1-3.

18. Amazon provides the highly interactive selling platform on the World Wide Web in which goods can be purchased directly by end users via the Internet wherein the purchased goods are shipped to the purchasers given postal address.

19. On information and belief, Defendant manufactures and/or markets Accused Devices through channels and levels of trade or modes of distribution including, but not limited to, direct sales via Defendants website through phone number 503-505-1824 or after hours phone number 503-505-1824 [Exhibit F], on the Amazon website Amazon.com [Exhibit G], and through one or more third party dealers [Exhibits H] including, without limitation, Ace Hardware and True Value Hardware.

20. On information and belief, Defendant manufactures, produces, assembles, sells, uses and/or offers for sale and/or has manufactured, has produced, has assembled, has sold, has used and/or has offered for sale Accused Devices in this District, in Tennessee and elsewhere as disclosed, for example, via direct offers for sale on the Amazon.com website.

PATENT INFRINGEMENT 21. Plaintiff hereby restates the averments of the previous paragraphs as if fully set forth herein, and states as follows:

22. Each patent in the Patent Portfolio was duly, validly, and legally issued by the USPTO to Plaintiff who has the right to sue others for infringement of any claim of any of the patents in the Patent Portfolio, and to grant licenses to others for the use thereof. The claims of the patents of the Patent Portfolio that are infringed herein are valid and enforceable and all of the patents of the Patent Portfolio are valid, unrevoked, enforceable, in force, and subsisting.

23. Defendant has never had and currently has no license, authorization, consent, permission or other right to manufacture, offer to sell, sell, import, export, purchase, and/or use any of the Accused Devices or any other product covered by any claim of the patents of the Patent Portfolio, or engage in any acts that, if unauthorized, would violate any rights pertaining to the patents in the Patent Portfolio under Title 35 of the United States Code.

24. Defendant has been and is now infringing the patents in the Patent Portfolio, and each of them, in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271(a) by various acts including, but not limited to, the unauthorized making, selling, offering to sell, importing, exporting, purchasing,
8

and/or using in the United States, including in this District, products and/or methods covered by at least one of the claims of each of the patents of the Patent Portfolio.

25. Acts of Defendant complained of herein further infringe and have infringed each of the patents of the Patent Portfolio in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271 (b) by actively inducing others to infringe each of the patents of the Patent Portfolio.

26. Acts of Defendant complained of herein further constituted and/or constitute contributory infringement of at least one claim of each of the patents of the Patent Portfolio in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271 (c).

27. The acts of Defendant complained of herein have caused and are presently causing irreparable harm, damage, and injury to Plaintiff for which Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law, and such acts will continue to cause such irreparable harm, damage, and injury to Plaintiff unless and until the same are enjoined and restrained by this court.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief from the Court as follows: A. That Defendant and its agents, servants and all those in active concert or participation with it be enjoined pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 283 from and against making, using, offering to sell, selling and/or importing the Accused Devices and any and all other products which infringe one or more of the claims of any of the
9

patents of the Patent Portfolio, and from and against contributing to the infringement of one or more of the claims of any of the patents of the Patent Portfolio by others.

B.

That Defendant be ordered to pay damages to Plaintiff, together with interest and costs, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284.

C.

That Defendant be ordered to pay treble damages to Plaintiff, together with interest and costs, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284 based on the willful nature of Defendants infringing activities described herein.

D.

That the Court find this to be an exceptional case under 35 USC 284 by reason of the willful nature of the infringements of each of the patents of the Patent Portfolio by the Defendant and, as a result thereof, order the Defendant to pay Plaintiffs reasonable attorney fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285.

E.

That Plaintiff has such other and further relief as the Court deems just.

10

REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff hereby requests a jury to try any issue triable of right before a jury. LUEDEKA NEELY GROUP, P.C. By: Michael E. Robinson BPR No. 24681 Michael J. Bradford BPR No. 22689 Matthew M. Googe BPR No. 30164 Attorneys for Plaintiff P. O. Box 1871 Knoxville, TN 37901-1871 (865) 546-4305 (865) 523-4478 (fax) RRobinson@LNG-Patent.com MBradford@LNG-Patent.com MGooge@LNG-Patent.com

11