Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Plaintiff,
v. Case No. _______
Defendant.
COMPLAINT
through its counsel, hereby files this Complaint with Jury Demand against Defendant Remington
principal place of business at 8822 Production Lane, Suite 101, Ooltewah, Tennessee 37363.
3. Plaintiff brings this action under U.S. patent laws, 35 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq., and U.S.
5. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over any state law, or statutory and
6. Upon information and belief, this Court has specific personal jurisdiction over
Tennessee and has substantial, continuous contacts with the state of Tennessee. Accordingly,
8. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 and § 1400 at
least because Defendant has committed acts of infringement in this district, has a regular and
established place of business in this district, conducts business in this district directly related to
the patents at issue in this case, is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction in this case, and a
substantial part of the infringing activity giving rise to the Plaintiff’s causes of action occurred in
BACKGROUND
distributing, and selling various phone, tablet and automotive accessories and other products,
including frictional holding pads for removably attaching items, such as cell phones or digital
shown below.
12. Handstands has been awarded and is the owner of many patents relating to and
covering its frictional holding devices. Among the patents that Handstands has been awarded are
U.S. Patent Nos. 7,125,602 (the “’602 Patent”), 7,252,867 (the “’867 Patent”) and D739,396 (the
13. In accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 287, Handstands has given notice to the public of
the Patents-in-Suit by duly and properly marking all articles covered by these patents that have
been sold, offered for sale, or imported by Handstands, including with prominent marking on
Handstands’ website.
14. Handstands’ Sticky Pad® and RoadsterTM products are well-known in the
industry, such that Handstands’ competitors are very likely to have seen its products, including
removable non-slip surface for use in vehicles to hold objects on a dashboard. The mark consists
of a product configuration which comprises a pad having a generally rectangular shape wherein
the pad has rounded corners, inwardly tapered long sides and outwardly tapered short sides
(hereinafter referred to as the “Pad Product Configuration”). The mark has been in continual use
with the associated goods since at least as early as December, 2001. A copy of United States
comprising rounded corners, inwardly tapered long sides and outwardly tapered short sides as
Handstands has significant common law rights associated with the product configuration of the
18. Remington is in the business of making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
19. Remington’s products are sold through online retailers, including at and
www.amazon.com, and in brick and mortar stores, including Fleet Farm, where they are
20. Upon information and belief, Remington manufactures, markets, and sells a
frictional pad product known as a Dash Pad (hereinafter “Accused Pad Product”). An example
frictional pad product known as a Smart Phone Dash Mount (hereinafter “Accused Holder
Pad® and RoadsterTM products because, among other reasons, Handstands’ products are
prominent on Amazon.com, the same channel used by Remington to sell its various products.
Patents-in-Suit prior to the filing of this Complaint, and has also had knowledge that the Accused
23. Remington has not obtained permission from Handstands to use any of the rights
attendant to the Patents-in-Suit or the ‘026 Registration in connection with the Accused Holder
amount to be proven at trial. The harm to Handstands from Remington’s infringing activities is
not fully compensable by monetary damages, and Handstands will continue to suffer irreparable
25. Upon information and belief, Remington acted in an objectively reckless manner
with respect to Handstands’ patent rights. Upon information and belief, Remington has made,
sold, offered to sell, and/or imported into the United States the Accused Holder Product and
Accused Pad Product knowing that it was highly likely that its acts would infringe the Patents-in-
Suit. As a result, Remington has engaged in willful infringement of the Patents-in-Suit, and
Handstands is therefore entitled to treble damages, interest, costs, and attorney’s fees in
26. Plaintiff hereby incorporates and realleges paragraphs 1-25 of this Complaint.
27. Upon information and belief, the Accused Pad Product infringes at least one claim
28. Upon information and belief, by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
importing into the United States the Accused Pad Product, Remington has in the past, does now,
claims of the ‘846 patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, in violation of 35
U.S.C. § 271.
(b) a pad having a bottom disposed on the dashboard or console of the vehicle,
and a top;
(b) the top having a contoured top surface extending over a majority of the top;
(e) the bottom having a bottom surface smoother than the top surface and
configured to contact and frictionally cling to the vehicle surface; and
(f) an item, removably disposed on the top surface of the pad, the item being
selected from the group consisting of: a cell phone, a personal digital assistant, a
writing instrument, a pen, a pencil, sunglasses, eye glasses, a global positioning
system, a radio, a two-way radio, a citizens band radio, a walkie-talkie, a camera,
a video recorder, a cassette player/recorder, a mini-cassette recorder, a DVD
player, a mini-disk player, and a portable television.
30. A claim chart cross referencing the elements of Claim 1 with an explanation of
the infringing aspects of the Accused Pad Product is attached hereto as Exhibit 5 and is
31. Upon information and belief, Remington’s customers and others are using the
Accused Pad Product and at no time has Handstands granted Remington’s customers and other
users of the Accused Pad Product permission to practice the claims of the ‘602 Patent.
32. Accordingly, Remington’s customers and users of the Accused Pad Product have
because it knew of Handstands’ products and its patent marking, and Remington knew that its
34. Upon information and belief, the packaging and/or manuals for Remington’s
Accused Pad Product instruct customers and other users on how to use the Accused Pad Product.
35. Upon information and belief, Remington has induced and is inducing its
customers and other users of the Accused Pad Product to infringe claims of the ‘602 Patent.
36. Furthermore, upon information and belief, the features provided by the Accused
Pad Product are material to practicing the ‘602 Patent and do not have a substantial non-
infringing use.
38. By reason of Remington’s infringement of the claims of the ‘602 Patent alleged
herein, Handstands has suffered damage in an amount to be proven at trial. The harm to
Handstands from Remington’s infringing activities are not fully compensable by monetary
damages, and Handstands will continue to suffer irreparable harm unless Remington’s infringing
conduct is enjoined.
39. Upon information and belief, Remington acted in an objectively reckless manner
with respect to Handstands’ patent rights. Upon information and belief, Remington has made,
sold, offered to sell, and/or imported into the United States the Accused Pad Product knowing
that it was highly likely that its acts would infringe the ‘602 Patent. As a result, Remington has
engaged in willful infringement of the ‘602 Patent, and Handstands is therefore entitled to treble
damages, interest, costs, and attorney’s fees in accordance with 35 U.S.C. §§ 284 and 285.
10
40. Plaintiff hereby incorporates and realleges paragraphs 1-39 of this Complaint.
41. Upon information and belief, the Accused Pad Product infringes at least one claim
42. Upon information and belief, by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
importing into the United States the Accused Pad Product, Remington has in the past, does now,
and continues to directly infringe, contributorily infringe, and/or induce others to infringe the
claims of the ‘867 patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, in violation of 35
U.S.C. § 271.
b) a pad having different top and bottom surfaces, the bottom surface is disposed
on and frictionally clings to the dashboard or console of the vehicle;
c) at least a substantial portion of the top surface is a contoured top surface with a
plurality of protrusions or indentations; and
d) an item, removably disposed on and frictionally clings to the top surface of the
pad, the item is selected from the group consisting of: a cell phone, a personal
digital assistant, a writing instrument, a pen, a pencil, sunglasses, eye glasses, a
global positioning system, a radio, a two-way radio, a citizens band radio, a
walkie-talkie, a camera, a video recorder, a cassette player/recorder, a mini-
cassette recorder, a DVD player, a mini-disk player, and a portable television.
44. A claim chart cross referencing the elements of Claim 1 with an explanation of
the infringing aspects of the Accused Pad Product is attached hereto as Exhibit 6 and is
11
Accused Pad Product and at no time has Handstands granted Remington’s customers and other
users of the Accused Pad Product permission to practice the claims of the ‘867 Patent.
46. Accordingly, Remington’s customers and users of the Accused Pad Product have
47. Upon information and belief, Remington knew about the ‘867 Patent at least
because it knew of Handstands’ products and its patent marking, and Remington knew that its
48. Upon information and belief, the packaging and/or manuals for Remington’s
Accused Pad Product instruct customers and other users on how to use the Accused Pad Product.
49. Upon information and belief, Remington has induced and is inducing its
customers and other users of the Accused Pad Product to infringe claims of the ‘867 Patent.
50. Furthermore, upon information and belief, the features provided by the Accused
Pad Product are material to practicing the ‘867 Patent and do not have a substantial non-
infringing use.
52. By reason of Remington’s infringement of the claims of the ‘867 Patent alleged
herein, Handstands has suffered damage in an amount to be proven at trial. The harm to
Handstands from Remington’s infringing activities are not fully compensable by monetary
damages, and Handstands will continue to suffer irreparable harm unless Remington’s infringing
conduct is enjoined.
12
with respect to Handstands’ patent rights. Upon information and belief, Remington has made,
sold, offered to sell, and/or imported into the United States the Accused Pad Product knowing
that it was highly likely that its acts would infringe the ‘867 Patent. As a result, Remington has
engaged in willful infringement of the ‘867 Patent, and Handstands is therefore entitled to treble
damages, interest, costs, and attorney’s fees in accordance with 35 U.S.C. §§ 284 and 285.
54. Plaintiff hereby incorporates and realleges paragraphs 1-53 of this Complaint.
55. Upon information and belief, at the Accused Holder Products infringe at least one
56. Upon information and belief, by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
importing into the United States the Accused Holder Products, Defendant has in the past, does
now, and continues to directly infringe, contributorily infringe, and/or induce others to infringe
the ornamental design covered by the ‘396 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271.
57. A side-by-side comparison of Fig. 1 of the ‘396 Patent to the Accused Holder
13
observer, giving such attention as purchaser usually gives, the ornamental design of the ‘396 and
the designs of the Accused Holder Products are substantially the same, the resemblance being
such as to deceive an ordinary observer, inducing him to purchase one supposing it to be the
other.
59. By reason of Remington’s infringement of the claims of the ‘396 Patent alleged
herein, Handstands has suffered damage in an amount to be proven at trial. The harm to
14
damages, and Handstands will continue to suffer irreparable harm unless Remington’s infringing
conduct is enjoined.
60. Upon information and belief, Remington acted in an objectively reckless manner
with respect to Handstands’ patent rights. Upon information and belief, Remington has made,
sold, offered to sell, and/or imported into the United States the Accused Pad Product knowing
that it was highly likely that its acts would infringe the ‘396 Patent. As a result, Remington has
engaged in willful infringement of the ‘396 Patent, and Handstands is therefore entitled to treble
damages, interest, costs, and attorney’s fees in accordance with 35 U.S.C. §§ 284 and 285.
61. Plaintiff hereby incorporates and realleges paragraphs 1-60 of this Complaint.
62. The Accused Pad Product is virtually identical to Handstands’ goods using the
Pad Product Configuration. As such, Remington’s use of goods having a generally rectangular
shape comprising rounded corners, inwardly tapered long sides and outwardly tapered short sides
63. Through these activities, Remington has infringed Handstands’ trademark rights
64. Handstands has suffered actual damages, including lost profits, as a result of
to Handstands arising from these acts by Remington is not fully compensable by money
damages. Handstands has suffered, and continues to suffer, irreparable harm that has no
15
65. Since Remington’s Accused Pad Product competes directly with the very popular
Handstands’ Sticky Pad® product and products using the '026 Registration product
configuration, Remington was surely familiar with the '026 Registration product configuration,
and Remington’s continued unauthorized use of the product configuration is willful and
intentional. As a result, Handstands is further entitled to treble damages and an award of costs
66. Plaintiff hereby incorporates and realleges paragraphs 1-65 of this Complaint.
67. Remington has used in interstate commerce the Accused Pad Product, which
corners, inwardly tapered long sides and outwardly tapered short sides in connection with non-
slip pad products, which use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to
the affiliation, connection, association, origin, sponsorship, or approval of their goods and
68. Through these activities, Remington has engaged in unfair competition under the
Remington in an amount to be proven at trial. Additionally, the harm to Handstands arising from
these acts by Remington is not fully compensable by money damages. Handstands has suffered,
and continues to suffer, irreparable harm that has no adequate remedy at law and that will
continue unless this unfair conduct by Remington is preliminarily and permanently enjoined.
16
Handstands’ Sticky Pad® product and products using the '026 Registration product
configuration, Remington was surely familiar with the '026 Registration product configuration,
and Remington’s continued unauthorized use of the product configuration is willful and
intentional. As a result, Handstands is further entitled to treble damages and an award of costs
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment in its favor
A. A judgment that Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for infringing the claims of the
cause confusion with Handstands’ ‘026 Registration and results in trademark infringement in
cause confusion with Handstands’ ‘026 Registration and results in unfair competition in violation
servants, employees, successors, assigns and all other persons in active concert or participation
with any of them, enjoining them from directly or indirectly infringing in any manner the claims
of the Patents-in-Suit;
17
servants, employees, successors, assigns and all other persons in active concert or participation
with any of them, enjoining them from using in commerce any mark or product configuration
that infringes, is likely to cause confusion with, or competes unfairly with Handstands’ ‘026
H. An order finding that Defendant willfully infringed the Patents-in-Suit, that this is
an exceptional case, and award Plaintiff enhanced damages, costs, and attorney’s fees in
Defendant’s infringement of and unfair competition related to the Pad Product Configuration and
J. Such other and further relief as shall seem just and proper to the Court under the
circumstances.
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff demands that all claims and causes of action raised in this Complaint be tried to a
jury to the fullest extent possible under the United States and Tennessee Constitutions.
18
19
(51) Int. Cl. Africtional holding pad for removably attaching items. Such
B32B 3/30 (2006.01)
(52) U.S. Cl. .................... 428/156; 296/97.3; 296/97.7; as a cell phone, to a Surface, such as a dash, to allow storage
296/97.9; 428/147; 428/158; 428/160; 428/192: of items on the pad to prevent the items from shifting or
428/194; 428/922 sliding due to the movement of the Support Surface. A
bottom Surface of the pad is tacky to cling to the Surface and
(58) Field of Classification Search ............... 428/40.1, a top Surface is tacky to cling to the item. A lowermost
428/42.1, 131, 192, 41.3, 41.5, 156, 158, contact Surface of the pad can have a greater Surface area
428/160, 141,922: 296/97.3, 97.7, 97.9 than an uppermost contact Surface. Indicia can be formed on
See application file for complete search history. the pad. The pad can be translucent or transparent. The pad
(56) References Cited can include an expanded vinyl material or a polyurethane
material.
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
2,128,118 A 8, 1938 Burford 46 Claims, 3 Drawing Sheets
18
- 22
2Zz
FIG 2
2%
NNNN 2NNNYNN NYNNNNNNNNNNNNNNY
34
20
36
F.G. 5 22
1O
FG. 6
-
zZzz
Fig. 2
322 326
318
|
418
ig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 7
Case 1:20-cv-00086-PLR-CHS Document 1-1 Filed 04/03/20 Page 30 of 40 PageID #: 49
Exhibit 4
(b) a pad having a bottom disposed on the The Remington product has a bottom
dashboard or console of the vehicle, and a disposed on the dashboard or console and a
top; top
Top
Bottom (meant
to be disposed
on dashboard
or console)
(d) the top surface including a plurality of The top surface includes a plurality of protrusions
protrusions or indentations; and a plurality of indentations
Contoured
Plurality of
top surface
protrusions and
indentations
Top
Bottom (meant to
be disposed on
dashboard or
console)
c) at least a substantial portion of the top The Remington product has a contoured top
surface is a contoured top surface with a surface extending over a substantial portion of
plurality of protrusions or indentations; and the top, with a plurality of protrusions and
indentations
Plurality of
protrusions and
indentiations
Contoured top
surface
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff N/A County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
Michael J. Bradford
Luedeka Neely Group, P.C., P. O. Box 1871
Knoxville, TN 37901 Phone: (865) 546-4305
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
’ 1 U.S. Government ’ 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State ’ 1 ’ 1 Incorporated or Principal Place ’ 4 ’ 4
of Business In This State
’ 2 U.S. Government ’ 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State ’ 2 ’ 2 Incorporated and Principal Place ’ 5 ’ 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:
I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and
then the official, giving both name and title.
(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land
condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)
(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section "(see attachment)".
II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes
precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
cases.)
III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
section for each principal party.
IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code
that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service
VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.
VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket
numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.
Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.
To: (Defendant’s name and address) Remington Industries, Inc. c/o Robert L. Lockaby, Jr., Registered Agent
GEARHISER, PETERS, ELLIOTT & CANNON, PLLC
320 McCallie Ave.
Chattanooga, TN 37402-2007
Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you
are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,
whose name and address are: Michael J. Bradford
LUEDEKA NEELY GROUP, P.C.
P. O. Box 1871
Knoxville, TN 37901-1871
Phone: 865-546-4305
If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.
You also must file your answer or motion with the court.
CLERK OF COURT
Date:
Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk
PROOF OF SERVICE
(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))
’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)
, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,
on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or
’ Other (specify):
.
My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ 0.00 .
Date:
Server’s signature
Server’s address