1 Michael K.

Friedland (SBN 157,217)

michael.friedland@knobbe.com
2 Ali S. Razai (SBN 246,922)
ali.razai@knobbe.com
3 Daniel C. Kiang (SBN 307,961)
daniel.kiang@knobbe.com
4 KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
2040 Main Street, Fourteenth Floor
5 Irvine, CA 92614
Telephone: (949) 760-0404
6 Facsimile: (949) 760-9502
7 Attorneys for Plaintiff
OAKLEY, INC.
8
9
10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
13 OAKLEY, INC., a Washington ) Civil Action No. 8:17-cv-01699
corporation, )
14 )
Plaintiff, ) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT
15 ) INFRINGEMENT, TRADEMARK
v. ) INFRINGEMENT, UNFAIR
16 ) COMPETITION, FALSE
CALIFORNIA OPTICAL CORP. a ) DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN, AND
17 Delaware corporation, ) TRADEMARK DILUTION
)
18 Defendant. )
) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
19 )
)
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1 Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. (Oakley) hereby complains of California Optical
2 Corp. (Defendant) and alleges as follows:
3 I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4 1. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over the claims
5 in this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271 and 281, 15 U.S.C. 1114,
6 1116(a), 1121, and 1125, as these claims arise under the laws of the United
7 States. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the claims in this
8 Complaint which arise under state statutory and common law pursuant to 28
9 U.S.C. 1367(a) because the state law claims are so related to the federal claims
10 that they form part of the same case or controversy and derive from a common
11 nucleus of operative facts.
12 2. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because
13 Defendant has its headquarters in California and has a continuous, systematic,
14 and substantial presence within this judicial district, for example, by selling and
15 offering for sale infringing products in this judicial district, including but not
16 limited to selling infringing products directly to consumers and/or retailers in
17 this district and selling into the stream of commerce knowing such products
18 would be sold in California and this district, Defendants acts form a substantial
19 part of the events or omissions giving rise to Oakleys claims.
20 3. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Venue is
21 proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b), 1391(d), and 1400(b)
22 because Defendant is headquartered in California, and because Defendant has
23 committed acts of infringement by selling and offering to sell products that
24 infringe Oakleys patents in this district, and because Defendant has a regular
25 and established place of business in this district.
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
-1-
1 II. THE PARTIES
2 4. Plaintiff Oakley is a corporation organized and existing under the
3 laws of the State of Washington, having its principal place of business at One
4 Icon, Foothill Ranch, California 92610.
5 5. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
6 Defendant California Optical Corp. is a company organized and existing under
7 the laws of the State of Delaware, having its principal place of business at 30577
8 Huntwood Avenue, Hayward, California 94544.
9 6. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
10 Defendant has committed the acts alleged herein within this judicial district.
11 III. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
12 7. Oakley is one of the worlds most iconic brands. The company and
13 its products, particularly in the realm of eyewear, are instantly and universally
14 recognized for their innovative technology and distinctive style. Since its
15 founding, Oakleys engineers and designers have worked continuously to bring
16 new technology and breakthrough designs to the market.
17 8. Oakley has been actively engaged in the manufacture and sale of
18 high quality eyewear since at least 1985. Oakley is the manufacturer and
19 retailer of several lines of eyewear that have enjoyed substantial success and are
20 protected by various intellectual property rights owned by Oakley.
21 9. On May 20, 2014, the United States Patent and Trademark Office
22 (USPTO) duly and lawfully issued United States Design Patent No. D705,339
23 (the D339 Patent), titled Eyeglass. Oakley is the owner by assignment of
24 all right, title, and interest in the D339 Patent. A true and correct copy of the
25 D339 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
26 10. On January 17, 2012, the USPTO duly and lawfully issued United
27 States Design Patent No. D652,442 (the D442 Patent), titled Eyeglass.
28 ///
-2-
1 Oakley is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and interest in the D442
2 Patent. A true and correct copy of the D442 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit
3 B.
4 11. Defendant makes, uses, sells, offers for sale, and/or imports into
5 the United States eyewear that have infringed Oakleys patent rights, including
6 the D339 Patent and the D442 Patent (collectively, the Asserted Patents).
7 12. Defendants acts complained of herein have caused Oakley to
8 suffer irreparable injury to its business. Oakley will continue to suffer
9 substantial loss and irreparable injury unless and until Defendant is enjoined
10 from its wrongful actions complained of herein.
11 13. Defendant has actual knowledge of the Asserted Patents, including
12 at least through a letter sent to Defendant on or about January 22, 2016. Oakley
13 is informed and believes, and on that basis, alleges, that Defendants acts
14 complained of herein are willful and deliberate.
15 14. In order to protect Oakleys investment in the development of its
16 proprietary technology, Oakley has obtained numerous trademark registrations,
17 including Trademark Registration Nos. 1,904,181, 2,146,295, and 1,984,501
18 (the Oakley Marks).
19 15. Oakley is the owner of Trademark Registration No. 1,904,181.
20 Trademark Registration No. 1,904,181 was registered with the U.S.P.T.O. on
21 July 11, 1995 on the Principal Register. Trademark Registration No. 1,904,181
22 is associated with the following goods: protective and/or anti-glare eyewear,
23 namely, sunglasses, goggles, and their parts and accessories, namely,
24 replacement lenses, earstems, frames, nose pieces and foam strips; cases
25 specially adapted for protective and/or anti-glare eyewear and their parts and
26 accessories. A true and correct copy of the certificate of registration of
27 Trademark Registration No. 1,904,181 is attached hereto as Exhibit C.
28 ///
-3-
1 16. Oakley is the owner of Trademark Registration No. 2,146,295.
2 Trademark Registration No. 2,146,295 was registered with the U.S.P.T.O. on
3 March 24, 1998 on the Principal Register. Trademark Registration No.
4 2,146,295 is associated with the following goods: protective and/or anti-glare
5 eyewear, namely, sunglasses, goggles, spectacles and their parts and
6 accessories, namely, replacement lenses, earstems, frames, nose pieces and
7 foam strips; cases specially adapted for protective and/or anti-glare eyewear and
8 their parts and accessories. A true and correct copy of the certificate of
9 registration of Trademark Registration No. 2,146,295 is attached hereto as
10 Exhibit D.
11 17. Oakley is the owner of Trademark Registration No. 1,984,501.
12 Trademark Registration No. 1,984,501 was registered with the U.S.P.T.O. on
13 July 2, 1996 on the Principal Register. Trademark Registration No. 1,984,501 is
14 associated with the following goods: protective and/or anti-glare eyewear,
15 namely sunglasses, goggles, spectacles and their parts and accessories, namely
16 replacement lenses, earstems, frames, nose pieces and foam strips; cases
17 specially adapted for protective and/or anti-glare eyewear and their parts and
18 accessories; clothing and headwear, namely T-shirts, sweatshirts, jackets, hats,
19 and caps. A true and correct copy of the certificate of registration of Trademark
20 Registration No. 1,984,501 is attached hereto as Exhibit E.
21 18. The Oakley Marks have not been abandoned, canceled, or revoked.
22 Each of the Oakey Marks constitutes an enforceable trademark that uniquely
23 identifies products as emanating from, sponsored by, and/or authorized by
24 Oakley. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1065, each of the Oakley Marks has become
25 incontestable.
26 19. As a result of the widespread use and display of each of the Oakley
27 Marks as a distinctive trademark identifying sunglasses, (a) the public has come
28 to recognize and identify products bearing any of the Oakley Marks as
-4-
1 emanating from Oakley, (b) the public recognizes that products bearing any of
2 the Oakley Marks constitute high quality products that conform to the
3 specifications created by Oakley, and (c) that each of the Oakley Marks has
4 established strong secondary meaning and extensive goodwill.
5 20. The products sold by Oakley under each of the Oakley Marks has
6 been widely advertised, promoted, and distributed to the purchasing public
7 throughout the United States and the world.
8 21. Products sold under each of the Oakley Marks, by reason of their
9 style and design and quality of workmanship, have come to be known to the
10 purchasing public throughout the United States as representing products of high
11 quality, which are sold under good merchandising and customer service
12 conditions. As a result, each of the Oakley Marks, and the goodwill associated
13 therewith, are of great value to Oakley.
14 22. By virtue of the wide renown acquired by each of the Oakley
15 Marks, coupled with the national and international distribution and extensive
16 sale of products distributed under each of these trademarks, each of the Oakley
17 Marks has become famous.
18 IV. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
19 (Patent Infringement)
20 (35 U.S.C. 271)

21 23. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of Paragraphs 1-22 of

22 this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.

23 24. This is a claim for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. 271.

24 25. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and/or servants has, and

25 continues to, knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringe the D339 Patent by

26 making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a

27 design that would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to

28 ///

-5-
1 the claim of the D339 Patent for example, Defendants Polarized Sport Rim
2 Sunglasses model sunglasses as shown below.
3
4 Accused Product Oakleys Patent
5 Polarized Sport Rim Sunglasses U.S. Design Patent No. D705,339
(for various teams)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 26. Defendants acts of infringement of the D339 Patent were
14 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Defendant had actual
15 knowledge of Oakleys rights in the design claimed in the D339 Patent. Oakley
16 and its iconic designs are well-known throughout the eyewear industry, and
17 Defendants Polarized Sport Rim Sunglasses model sunglass is a nearly
18 identical copy of Oakleys patented design. Accordingly, Defendants actions
19 constitute willful and intentional infringement of the D339 Patent. Defendant
20 infringed the D339 Patent with reckless disregard of Oakleys patent rights.
21 Defendant knew, or it was so obvious that Defendant should have known, that
22 its actions constitute infringement of the D339 Patent. Defendants acts of
23 infringement of the D339 Patent were not consistent with the standards of
24 commerce for its industry.
25 27. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and/or servants has, and
26 continues to, knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringe the D442 Patent by
27 making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a
28 design that would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to

-6-
1 the claim of the D442 Patent for example, Defendants Short Stop Sunglasses
2 model sunglasses as shown below.
3 Accused Product Oakleys Patent
4 Short Stop Sunglasses U.S. Design Patent No. D652,442
(for various teams)
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 28. Defendants acts of infringement of the D442 Patent were
12 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Defendant had actual
13 knowledge of Oakleys rights in the design claimed in the D442 Patent. Oakley
14 and its iconic designs are well-known throughout the eyewear industry, and
15 Defendants Short Stop Sunglasses model sunglass is a nearly identical copy of
16 Oakleys patented design. Accordingly, Defendants actions constitute willful
17 and intentional infringement of the D442 Patent. Defendant infringed the D442
18 Patent with reckless disregard of Oakleys patent rights. Defendant knew, or it
19 was so obvious that Defendant should have known, that its actions constitute
20 infringement of the D442 Patent. Defendants acts of infringement of the D442
21 Patent were not consistent with the standards of commerce for its industry.
22 29. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants acts of
23 infringement, Defendant has derived and received gains, profits, and advantages
24 in an amount that is not presently known to Oakley.
25 30. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284, Oakley is entitled to damages for
26 Defendants infringing acts and treble damages together with interests and costs
27 as fixed by this Court.
28
-7-
1 31. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285, Oakley is entitled to reasonable
2 attorneys fees for the necessity of bringing this claim.
3 32. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 289, Oakley is entitled to Defendants total
4 profits from Defendants infringement of the Asserted Patents.
5 33. Due to the aforesaid infringing acts, Oakley has suffered great and
6 irreparable injury, for which Oakley has no adequate remedy at law.
7 34. Defendant will continue to infringe Oakleys patent rights to the
8 great and irreparable injury of Oakley, unless enjoined by this Court.
9 V. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
10 (Trademark Infringement)
(15 U.S.C. 1114)
11
35. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of Paragraphs 1-22 of
12
this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
13
36. This is a claim for trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. 1114.
14
37. Long after Oakleys adoption and use of each of the Oakley Marks,
15
after the federal registration of each of the Oakley Marks, and after each of the
16
Oakley Marks had become famous, Defendant has affixed and used marks that
17
are confusingly similar to each of the Oakley Marks without Oakleys consent
18
in a manner that infringes upon Oakleys rights in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1114.
19
Example of Defendants infringing use of the Oakley Marks are shown below:
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Polarized Sport Rim Sunglasses Polarized Preppy Sunglasses
27
///
28
-8-
1 38. Defendants wrongful acts as alleged in this Complaint constitute
2 willful and intentional infringement of each of the Oakley Marks. Defendant
3 engaged in such activities with the intent to unfairly compete against Oakley, to
4 trade upon Oakleys reputation and goodwill by causing confusion and mistake
5 among customers and the public, and to deceive the public into believing that
6 Defendants products are associated with, sponsored by, originated from, or are
7 approved by Oakley, when in truth and fact they are not.
8 39. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
9 Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakleys ownership and prior use of each of
10 the Oakley Marks and, despite such knowledge, Defendant willfully and
11 maliciously violated Oakleys trademark rights under 15 U.S.C. 1114 without
12 Oakleys consent.
13 40. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
14 Defendants infringement has been willful and deliberate, which renders this an
15 exceptional case within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. 1117.
16 41. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
17 Defendant has derived and received, and will continue to derive and receive,
18 gains, profits, and advantages from the use of each of the Oakley Marks in an
19 amount that is not presently known to Oakley. By reason of Defendants
20 actions, constituting unauthorized use and infringement of each of the Oakley
21 Marks, Oakley has been damaged and is entitled to monetary relief in an amount
22 to be determined at trial.
23 42. Due to Defendants actions, constituting unauthorized use and
24 infringement of each of the Oakley Marks, Oakley has suffered and continues to
25 suffer great and irreparable injury, for which Oakley has no adequate remedy at
26 law.
27 ///
28 ///
-9-
1 VI. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
2 (False Designation of Origin & Federal Unfair Competition)
(15 U.S.C. 1125(a))
3
43. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of Paragraphs 1-22
4
and 35-42 of this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
5
44. This is a claim for unfair competition and false designation of
6
origin under 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
7
45. Defendants use of each of the Oakley Marks without Oakleys
8
consent constitutes a false designation of origin, false or misleading description
9
of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which is likely to cause
10
confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or
11
association of Defendant with Oakley, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or
12
approval of Defendants goods or commercial activities by Oakley in violation
13
of 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
14
46. Defendants use of each of the Oakley Marks without Oakleys
15
consent constitutes a false designation of origin, false or misleading description
16
of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which in commercial
17
advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or
18
geographic origin of Defendants goods or commercial activities in violation of
19
15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
20
47. Such conduct by Defendant is likely to confuse, mislead, and
21
deceive Defendants customers, purchasers, and members of the public as to the
22
origin of the Oakley Marks or cause said persons to mistakenly believe that
23
Defendant and/or its products have been sponsored, approved, authorized, or
24
licensed by Oakley or are in some way affiliated or connected with Oakley, all
25
in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
26
///
27
///
28
- 10 -
1 48. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
2 Defendants actions were undertaken willfully with full knowledge of the falsity
3 of such designation of origin and false descriptions or representations.
4 49. Such conduct by Defendant is likely to confuse, mislead, and
5 deceive Defendants customers, purchasers, and members of the public as to the
6 origin of the Defendants products or cause said persons to believe that
7 Defendant and/or its products have been sponsored, approved, authorized, or
8 licensed by Oakley or are in some way affiliated or connected with Oakley, all
9 in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1125(a) and constitutes unfair competition with
10 Oakley.
11 50. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
12 Defendant has derived and received, and will continue to derive and receive,
13 gains, profits, and advantages from Defendants false designation of origin, false
14 or misleading statements, descriptions of fact, false or misleading
15 representations of fact, and unfair competition in an amount that is not presently
16 known to Oakley. By reason of Defendants actions, constituting false
17 designation of origin, false or misleading statements, false or misleading
18 descriptions of fact, false or misleading representations of fact, and unfair
19 competition, Oakley has been damaged and is entitled to monetary relief in an
20 amount to be determined at trial.
21 51. Due to Defendants actions, constituting false designation of origin,
22 false or misleading statements, false or misleading description of fact, false or
23 misleading representations of fact, and unfair competition, Oakley has suffered
24 and continues to suffer great and irreparable injury, for which Oakley has no
25 adequate remedy at law.
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
- 11 -
1 VII. FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
2 (Federal Trademark Dilution)
(15 U.S.C. 1125(c))
3
52. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of Paragraphs 1-22
4
and 35-51 of this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
5
53. This is a claim for trademark dilution under 15 U.S.C. 1125(c).
6
54. The products sold by Oakley under each of the Oakley Marks have
7
been widely advertised, promoted, and distributed to the purchasing public
8
throughout the United States and the world.
9
55. By virtue of the wide renown acquired by each of the Oakley
10
Marks, coupled with the national and international distribution and extensive
11
sale of various products distributed under these trademarks, each of the Oakley
12
Marks has become famous.
13
56. Defendants unauthorized commercial use of marks that are
14
confusingly similar to the Oakley Marks in connection with the sale, offer for
15
sale, distribution, advertising, and/or promotion of Defendants sunglasses are
16
likely to cause dilution by blurring or dilution by tarnishment of each of the
17
famous Oakley Marks.
18
57. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
19
Defendants actions were done willfully and maliciously with the intent to
20
exploit Oakleys reputation and dilute each of the Oakley Marks.
21
58. By reason of the aforesaid acts constituting trademark dilution,
22
Oakley has been damaged and is entitled to monetary relief in an amount to be
23
determined at trial.
24
59. Due to Defendants actions, constituting trademark dilution,
25
Oakley has suffered and continues to suffer great and irreparable injury, for
26
which Oakley has have no adequate remedy at law.
27
///
28
- 12 -
1 VIII. FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
2 (California Trademark Infringement and Trademark Dilution)
3 60. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of Paragraphs 1-22
4 and 35-59 of this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
5 61. Defendants acts complained of herein constitute trademark
6 infringement under California Business & Professions Code 14245 et seq.,
7 and under California common law.
8 62. Defendants acts complained of herein also constitute trademark
9 dilution under California Business & Professions Code 14247 et seq.
10 63. Defendants acts complained of herein are willful and deliberate
11 and committed with knowledge that Defendants unauthorized use of each of the
12 famous Oakley Marks causes a likelihood of confusion.
13 64. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
14 Defendant has derived and received and will continue to derive and receive,
15 gains, profits and advantages from Defendants trademark infringement and
16 trademark dilution in an amount that is not presently known to Oakley. By
17 reason of Defendants wrongful acts as alleged in this Complaint, Oakley has
18 been damaged and is entitled to monetary relief in an amount to be determined
19 at trial.
20 65. Due to Defendants trademark infringement and trademark
21 dilution, Oakley has suffered and continues to suffer great and irreparable injury
22 for which Oakley has no adequate remedy at law.
23 66. Defendants willful acts of trademark infringement and trademark
24 dilution constitute fraud, oppression, and malice. Accordingly, Oakley is
25 entitled to exemplary damages.
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
- 13 -
1 IX. SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
2 (California Unfair Competition)
3 67. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of Paragraphs 1-22
4 and 35-66 of this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
5 68. This is a claim for unfair competition, arising under California
6 Business & Professions Code 17200, et seq. and California common law.
7 69. Defendants acts of trademark infringement, false designation of
8 origin, and trademark dilution complained of herein constitute unfair
9 competition with Oakley under the common law and statutory laws of the State
10 of California, particularly California Business & Professions Code 17200 et
11 seq.
12 70. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
13 Defendant has derived and received, and will continue to derive and receive,
14 gains, profits and advantages from Defendants unfair competition in an amount
15 that is not presently known to Oakley.
16 71. By reason of Defendants wrongful acts as alleged in this
17 Complaint, Oakley has been damaged and is entitled to monetary relief in an
18 amount to be determined at trial.
19 72. By its actions, Defendant has injured and violated Oakleys rights
20 and has irreparably injured Oakley, and such irreparable injury will continue
21 unless Defendant is enjoined by this Court.
22 WHEREFORE, Oakley prays for judgment in its favor against
23 Defendant for the following relief:
24 A. An Order adjudging Defendant to have willfully infringed the
25 Asserted Patents under 35 U.S.C. 271;
26 B. A preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its
27 respective officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and
28 those persons in active concert or participation with Defendant, from infringing
- 14 -
1 the Asserted Patents patents in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271, including, for
2 example, through the manufacture, use, sale, offer for sale, and/or importation
3 into the United States of Defendants Polarized Sport Rim Sunglasses, Short
4 Stop Sunglasses, and any products that are not colorably different form these
5 products;
6 C. That Defendant account for all gains, profits, and advantages
7 derived by Defendants infringement of the Asserted Patents in violation of
8 35 U.S.C. 271, and that Defendant pay to Oakley all damages suffered by
9 Oakley and/or Defendants total profit from such infringement pursuant to 35
10 U.S.C. 284 and 289;
11 D. That the Court find for Oakey and against Defendant on Oakleys
12 claims of trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. 1114;
13 E. That the Court find for Oakley and against Defendant on Oakleys
14 claims of unfair competition, false designation of origin, and trademark dilution
15 under 15 U.S.C. 1125;
16 F. That the Court find for Oakley and against Defendant on Oakleys
17 claims of unfair competition under California Business & Professions Code
18 17200, et seq. and California common law;
19 G. That the Court issue a preliminary and permanent injunction
20 against Defendant, its agents, servants, employees, representatives, successors,
21 and assigns, and all persons, firms, or corporations in active concert or
22 participation with Defendant, enjoining them from engaging in the following
23 activities and from assisting or inducing, directly or indirectly, others to engage
24 in the following activities:
25 1. using any of the Oakey Marks or any mark confusingly
26 similar thereto;
27 2. falsely designating the origin of Defendants goods;
28 3. unfairly competing with Oakley in any manner whatsoever;
- 15 -
1 4. causing a likelihood of confusion or injuries to Oakleys
2 business reputation; or,
3 5. manufacturing, using, displaying, distributing, marketing,
4 advertising, and/or selling any goods bearing the Oakley
5 Marks or any mark confusingly similar thereto;
6 H. That an accounting be ordered to determine Defendants profits
7 resulting from its trademark infringement, false designation of origin, unfair
8 competition, and trademark dilution;
9 I. That Oakley be awarded monetary relief in an amount to be fixed
10 by the Court in its discretion as it finds just as an equitable remedy and as a
11 remedy under 15 U.S.C. 1117, including:
12 1. all profits received by Defendant from sales and revenues of
13 any kind made as a result of its infringing actions, said
14 amount to be trebled;
15 2. all damages sustained by Oakley as a result of Defendants
16 acts of trademark infringement, false designation of origin,
17 and unfair competition, and that such damages be trebled;
18 and,
19 3. the costs of this action;
20 J. That such damages and profits be trebled and awarded to Oakley
21 pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
22 K. An Order adjudging that this is an exceptional case;
23 L. That, because of the exceptional nature of this case resulting from
24 Defendants deliberate infringing actions, this Court award to Oakley all
25 reasonable attorneys fees, costs, and disbursements incurred as a result of this
26 action, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
27 M. That Oakley recover exemplary damages pursuant to California
28 Civil Code 3294;
- 16 -
1 N. An Order for a trebling of damages and/or exemplary damages
2 because of Defendants willful conduct pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284;
3 O. An award to Oakley of the attorney fees, expenses, and costs
4 incurred by Oakley in connection with this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285;
5 P. An award of pre-judgment and post-judgment interest and costs of
6 this action against Defendant; and,
7 Q. Such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and
8 proper.
9 Respectfully submitted,
10 KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
11
12 Dated: September 28, 2017 By: /s/ Ali S. Razai
Michael K. Friedland
13 Ali S. Razai
Daniel C. Kiang
14
Attorneys for Plaintiff
15 OAKLEY, INC.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 17 -
1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
2 Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so
3 triable.
4 Respectfully submitted,
5 KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
6
7 Dated: September 28, 2017 By: /s/ Ali S. Razai
Michael K. Friedland
8 Ali S. Razai
Daniel C. Kiang
9
Attorneys for Plaintiff
10 OAKLEY, INC.
11
12
13
14 26728701

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 18 -