Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

download Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

of 35

Transcript of Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    1/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    2/35

    2

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    7

    8

    9

    1011

    12

    13

    14

    15

    16

    17

    18

    19

    20

    21

    22

    23

    24

    25

    26

    27

    28

    H Y M S O NG O L D S T E I N&P A N T I L I A T ,PLLC

    1 6 4 2 7 N o r

    t h S c o

    t t s d a l e

    R o a

    d , S u i

    t e 3 0 0

    S c o

    t t s d a l e ,

    A r i z o n a

    8 5 2 5 4

    T e l e p

    h o n e :

    4 8 0 - 9 9 1 - 9 0 7 7 / F a c s i m

    i l e :

    4 8 0 - 4 4 3 - 8 8 5 4

    JURISDICTION AND VENUE

    5. This action arises from two claims for relief for patent infringement and one

    claim for relief for trade dress infringement; all claims for relief arise under federal law. The

    patent claims arise under the United States Patent laws, 35 U.S.C. 271, and the trade dress

    claim arises under the Lanham Act 43(a), 15 U.S.C. 1125(a), thus, this Court has subject

    matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338. The Court further has subject

    matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1332 as there is complete diversity of citizenship

    between plaintiff and defendants.

    6. This Court has specific personal jurisdiction over The Home Depot, Inc., Home

    Depot U.S.A., Inc. and One World because the acts which constitute the instant causes ofaction patent infringement and trade dress infringement - were committed in Arizona and

    directed at residents of Arizona.

    7. This Court has general personal jurisdiction over The Home Depot, Inc. and

    Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., because they regularly and systematically conduct business in

    Arizona, including but not limited to maintaining retail stores in Arizona, and thus have

    purposefully availed themselves of the privilege of conducting business in Arizona.

    8. This Court has general personal jurisdiction over One World because, upon

    information and belief, it has and continues to regularly and systematically conduct business

    in Arizona, including shipping products into Arizona or into the stream of commerce

    knowing the products would be sold and used in Arizona, and thus has purposefully availed

    itself of the privilege of conducting business in this State.

    9. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400(b).

    BACKGROUND FACTS

    10. Misty Mate, headquartered in Tempe, Arizona, manufactures and sells a wide

    range of personal cooling products, including personal misters, misting systems and cooling

    apparel.

    11. Misty Mate invented the first pressure-operated personal mister in 1989 and has

    since provided, throughout the United States and internationally, millions of innovative,

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    3/35

    3

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    7

    8

    9

    1011

    12

    13

    14

    15

    16

    17

    18

    19

    20

    21

    22

    23

    24

    25

    26

    27

    28

    H Y M S O NG O L D S T E I N&P A N T I L I A T ,PLLC

    1 6 4 2 7 N o r

    t h S c o

    t t s d a l e

    R o a

    d , S u i

    t e 3 0 0

    S c o

    t t s d a l e ,

    A r i z o n a

    8 5 2 5 4

    T e l e p

    h o n e :

    4 8 0 - 9 9 1 - 9 0 7 7 / F a c s i m

    i l e :

    4 8 0 - 4 4 3 - 8 8 5 4

    handheld and easy-to-use personal misters that cool the air up to 30F.

    12. Misty Mate currently sells a Pro Series line of personal misters including the

    Misty 8, Misty 16, and Misty 24 (collectively the Misty Mate Pro Series Misters).

    13. Each Misty Mate Pro Series Mister includes a hand operated pump/carry handle,

    a custom pressure gauge, a water reservoir, a pressure regulator and a nozzle.

    14. On December 6, 2011, after a full and extensive examination, the United States

    Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) duly and legally issued United States Patent Number

    8,070,140 (the 140 Patent). A true and correct copy of the 140 Patent is attached as

    Exhibit A.

    15. On August 9, 2011, after a full and extensive examination, the PTO duly andlegally issued United States Patent Number D643,092 (the 092 Patent). A true and

    correct copy of the 092 Patent is attached as Exhibit B.

    16. Misty Mate owns all the right, title and interest to the 140 Patent and 092

    Patent (collectively, the Patents) and has been dutifully marking its products with the

    Patents numbers in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 287.

    17. In 2013, Home Depot purchased assorted Misty Mate products for test

    marketing in dozens of Home Depot locations throughout the United States.

    18. At the conclusion of the test marketing, representatives of Misty Mate and

    Home Depot met to discuss furthering purchases by Home Depot.

    19. On August 19, 2013, Misty Mate advised Home Depots representatives, in

    writing, that the Misty Mate Pro Series Misters were covered by several United States

    Patents, and attached copies of the Patents to that email.

    20. In fact, Home Depot had previously been selling a misting product

    manufactured by Orbit Irrigation Products, Inc. (Orbit) that was alleged to have infringed

    the Patents.

    21. Orbit had ceased selling the accused product to Home Depot in 2013.

    22. Home Depot acknowledged Misty Mates email informing Home Depot of

    those Patents.

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    4/35

    4

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    7

    8

    9

    1011

    12

    13

    14

    15

    16

    17

    18

    19

    20

    21

    22

    23

    24

    25

    26

    27

    28

    H Y M S O NG O L D S T E I N&P A N T I L I A T ,PLLC

    1 6 4 2 7 N o r

    t h S c o

    t t s d a l e

    R o a

    d , S u i

    t e 3 0 0

    S c o

    t t s d a l e ,

    A r i z o n a

    8 5 2 5 4

    T e l e p

    h o n e :

    4 8 0 - 9 9 1 - 9 0 7 7 / F a c s i m

    i l e :

    4 8 0 - 4 4 3 - 8 8 5 4

    23. Early in 2014, Home Depot began selling another misting product that infringed

    the Patents sold under the trade name Arctic Cove. Arctic Cove is not affiliated whatsoever

    with Misty Mate.

    24. Upon information and belief, The Arctic Cove personal misters were sold to

    Home Depot by One World.

    COUNT I INFRINGEMENT OF THE 140 PATENT

    25. Misty Mate re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-23, inclusive,

    of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

    26. In violation of 35 U.S.C. 271, Home Depot and One World (collectively,

    Defendants) have infringed and continue to infringe the 140 Patent by making, using,selling, or offering to sell the Arctic Cove personal misters.

    27. In further violation of 35 U.S.C. 271, Defendants further infringe the 140

    Patent by contributing to and/or actively inducing the infringement by others of the 140

    Patent by the manufacture, use, sale, offering for sale, and/or importation or exportation of

    Defendants Arctic Cove personal misters.

    28. On August 19, 2013, Misty Mate informed Home Depot of the 140 Patent and

    Home Depot acknowledged receipt of the email informing it of the 140 Patent. Because

    Home Depot purchased and resold the infringing Arctic Cove personal misters after

    receiving that notice, Home Depot has willfully infringed the 140 Patent.

    29. As a result of the infringement of the 140 Patent, Misty Mate has been

    damaged and is entitled to be compensated for its damages, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284 in an

    amount to be determined at trial.

    30. Misty Mate has suffered irreparable harm as a result of Defendants

    infringement of the 140 Patent.

    31. Unless Defendants are enjoined by this Court from continuing their

    infringement of the 140 Patent, Misty Mate will continue to suffer irreparable harm and

    impairment of the value of its patent rights. Thus, Misty Mate is entitled to a permanent

    injunction against further infringement.

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    5/35

    5

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    7

    8

    9

    1011

    12

    13

    14

    15

    16

    17

    18

    19

    20

    21

    22

    23

    24

    25

    26

    27

    28

    H Y M S O NG O L D S T E I N&P A N T I L I A T ,PLLC

    1 6 4 2 7 N o r

    t h S c o

    t t s d a l e

    R o a

    d , S u i

    t e 3 0 0

    S c o

    t t s d a l e ,

    A r i z o n a

    8 5 2 5 4

    T e l e p

    h o n e :

    4 8 0 - 9 9 1 - 9 0 7 7 / F a c s i m

    i l e :

    4 8 0 - 4 4 3 - 8 8 5 4

    32. Because Defendants past and continuing infringement of the 140 Patent has

    been deliberate and willful, their conduct warrants an award of treble damages, pursuant to

    35 U.S.C. 284.

    33. This is an exceptional case justifying an award of attorney fees to Misty Mate,

    pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285.

    COUNT II INFRINGEMENT OF THE 092 PATENT

    34. Misty Mate re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-32, inclusive,

    of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

    35. Defendants have infringed and are continuing to infringe the 092 Patent by

    making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing/exporting personal misters inviolation of 35 U.S.C. 271.

    36. On August 19, 2013, Misty Mate informed Home Depot of the 092 Patent and

    Home Depot acknowledged receipt of the email informing it of the 092 Patent. Because

    Home Depot purchased and resold the infringing personal Arctic Cove misters after

    receiving such notice, Home Depot has willfully infringed the 092 Patent.

    37. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants infringement of the 092 Patent,

    Misty Mate has suffered and will suffer monetary damages and Misty Mate is entitled to

    recover from Defendants the damages sustained in an amount to be determined at trial.

    38. Defendants infringement of the 092 Patent has been willful.

    39. Defendants acts of willful infringement of the 092 Patent will continue unless

    enjoined by the Court.

    40. Misty Mate has suffered irreparable harm as a result of Defendants willful

    infringement of the 092 Patent.

    41. Unless Defendants are enjoined by this Court from continuing their willful

    infringement of the 092 Patent, Misty Mate will suffer additional irreparable harm and

    impairment of the value of its patent rights. Thus, Misty Mate is entitled to a permanent

    injunction against further infringement.

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    6/35

    6

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    7

    8

    9

    1011

    12

    13

    14

    15

    16

    17

    18

    19

    20

    21

    22

    23

    24

    25

    26

    27

    28

    H Y M S O NG O L D S T E I N&P A N T I L I A T ,PLLC

    1 6 4 2 7 N o r

    t h S c o

    t t s d a l e

    R o a

    d , S u i

    t e 3 0 0

    S c o

    t t s d a l e ,

    A r i z o n a

    8 5 2 5 4

    T e l e p

    h o n e :

    4 8 0 - 9 9 1 - 9 0 7 7 / F a c s i m

    i l e :

    4 8 0 - 4 4 3 - 8 8 5 4

    42. Since Defendants past and continuing infringement of the 092 Patent has been

    deliberate and willful, their conduct warrants an award of treble damages, pursuant to 35

    U.S.C. 284.

    43. This is an exceptional case justifying an award of attorney fees to Misty Mate,

    pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285.

    COUNT III TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT

    44. Misty Mate hereby realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-42,

    inclusive, of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein.

    45. Misty Mate owns the protectable and distinctive product packaging trade dress

    for the Misty 16-ounce personal mister (Misty 16).46. Home Depot and One Worlds Arctic Cove personal mister infringes Misty

    Mates protected trade dress packaging under the Lanham Act 43(a), 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).

    47. Misty Mate has continuously and exclusively been using its packaging trade

    dress which includes a generally rectangular clear plastic shell with a curved top portion, a

    hang hole on the top of the plastic shell, the plastic shell having a three-dimensional

    triangular bottom portion, with the mister placed on the left side of the plastic shell, an insert

    surrounding the top and right side of the mister, the insert having a picture of a person using

    the misting product, the insert of the Misty 16 referring to the product as a 16-oz personal

    mister, and the use of varying shades of the color blue and other graphical content associated

    with the Misty 16.

    48. The Defendants Arctic Cove mister packaging is nearly identical in size and

    shape to Misty-Mates Misty 16 packaging. Upon information and belief, the Defendants

    Arctic Cove mister is packaged to be substantially similar to Misty Mates distinctive

    packaging in order to trade on the extensive goodwill established therein.

    49. Misty Mates continuous use of its distinctive packaging has resulted in the

    trade dress obtaining secondary meaning by serving as a distinctive source-indicator of high-

    quality personal misting products from a single source. Misty Mates trade dress has

    acquired secondary meaning, as it is utilized by purchasers and distributors alike to identify

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    7/35

    7

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    7

    8

    9

    1011

    12

    13

    14

    15

    16

    17

    18

    19

    20

    21

    22

    23

    24

    25

    26

    27

    28

    H Y M S O NG O L D S T E I N&P A N T I L I A T ,PLLC

    1 6 4 2 7 N o r

    t h S c o

    t t s d a l e

    R o a

    d , S u i

    t e 3 0 0

    S c o

    t t s d a l e ,

    A r i z o n a

    8 5 2 5 4

    T e l e p

    h o n e :

    4 8 0 - 9 9 1 - 9 0 7 7 / F a c s i m

    i l e :

    4 8 0 - 4 4 3 - 8 8 5 4

    and distinguish Misty Mates Misty 16 mister from others manufactured by competitors.

    Moreover, Misty Mates distinctive trade dress packaging is utilized by its purchasers as an

    indication of Misty Mates valuable goodwill and quality craftsmanship.

    50. By reason of Defendants collective acts alleged herein, Defendants falsely

    represent that Defendants are somehow affiliated with, or sponsored or endorsed by, Misty

    Mate; Defendants dilute the goodwill in the Misty Mate Misty 16 trade dress; and

    Defendants conduct is therefore likely to confuse, mislead, or deceive purchasers as to the

    source, sponsorship or affiliation of its mister.

    51. Defendants Arctic Cove 16-oz personal mister packaging is a colorable

    imitation of Misty Mates Misty 16 distinctive packaging trade dress.52. Defendants Arctic Cove packaging Infringes Misty Mates protected trade

    dress under the Lanham Act 43(a), 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).

    53. Defendants use of Misty Mates trade dress packaging consists of trade dress

    infringement, unfair competition and false designation of origin.

    54. By reason of Defendants collective acts alleged herein, Misty Mate has

    suffered and continues to suffer damage to its business, reputation, and goodwill, together

    with the loss of sales and profits Misty Mate would have made but for Defendants acts, in

    an amount to be proven at trial.

    55. By reason of Defendants acts alleged herein, Misty Mate has suffered and

    continues to suffer irreparable damage. Unless Defendants are restrained, the damage and

    irreparable harm to Misty Mate will increase. Misty Mate has no adequate remedy at law.

    Misty Mate is entitled to preliminary and permanent injunctive relief.

    PRAYER FOR RELIEF

    Wherefore, upon final hearing or trial, plaintiff Misty Mate respectfully requests the

    following relief:

    a) judgment that Home Depot and One World Technologies have infringed U.S. Patent

    Nos. 8,070,140 and D643,092;

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    8/35

    8

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    7

    8

    9

    1011

    12

    13

    14

    15

    16

    17

    18

    19

    20

    21

    22

    23

    24

    25

    26

    27

    28

    H Y M S O NG O L D S T E I N&P A N T I L I A T ,PLLC

    1 6 4 2 7 N o r

    t h S c o

    t t s d a l e

    R o a

    d , S u i

    t e 3 0 0

    S c o

    t t s d a l e ,

    A r i z o n a

    8 5 2 5 4

    T e l e p

    h o n e :

    4 8 0 - 9 9 1 - 9 0 7 7 / F a c s i m

    i l e :

    4 8 0 - 4 4 3 - 8 8 5 4

    b) judgment and order requiring Home Depot and One World Technologies to pay

    damages to Misty Mate adequate to compensate it for their wrongful infringing acts,

    in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 284 and 289;

    c) judgment requiring Home Depot and One World Technologies to pay increased

    damages up to three times for its willful and deliberate infringement of the 140 and

    092 Patents;

    d) judgment that this is an exceptional patent case, under 35 U.S.C. 285, and an award

    to Misty Mate for its costs, including its reasonable attorney fees and other expenses

    incurred in connection with this action;

    e) judgment that Home Depot and One World Technologies infringe Misty Mates

    trade dress;

    f) judgment that Home Depot and One World Technologies actions consist of unfair

    competition and false designation of origin;

    g) judgment that Home Depot and One World Technologies Home Depot and OneWorld Technologies actions related to the trade dress have been willful;

    h) judgment requiring Home Depot and One World Technologies to account for and to

    pay Misty Mate all profits derived from Home Depot and One World Technologies

    wrongful conduct;

    i) judgment awarding compensatory damages for the injuries sustained as a result of

    the acts complained of herein;

    j) judgment awarding enhanced damages and profits for Home Depot and One World

    Technologies willful infringement as provided in 15 U.S.C. 1117 and punitive

    damages as provided under Arizona common law;

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    9/35

    9

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    7

    8

    9

    1011

    12

    13

    14

    15

    16

    17

    18

    19

    20

    21

    22

    23

    24

    25

    26

    27

    28

    H Y M S O NG O L D S T E I N&P A N T I L I A T ,PLLC

    1 6 4 2 7 N o r

    t h S c o

    t t s d a l e

    R o a

    d , S u i

    t e 3 0 0

    S c o

    t t s d a l e ,

    A r i z o n a

    8 5 2 5 4

    T e l e p

    h o n e :

    4 8 0 - 9 9 1 - 9 0 7 7 / F a c s i m

    i l e :

    4 8 0 - 4 4 3 - 8 8 5 4

    k) judgment requiring Home Depot and One World Technologies to pay Misty Mate

    prejudgment interest;

    l)

    Misty Mate be awarded its attorney fees and costs pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117 and35 U.S.C. 285; and

    m) such additional relief the Court deems fair and just.

    RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 11th day of July, 2014

    By: /s/ David B. GoldsteinDavid B. Goldstein

    [email protected] Goldstein & Pantiliat, PLLC16427 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 300Scottsdale, AZ 85254(480) 991-9077

    Mark M. Grossman ( pro hac vice to be submitted)[email protected]

    Nicolas Spear ( pro hac vice to be submitted)[email protected]

    Kyle D. Wallenberg ( pro hac vice to be submitted)Grossman Law Offices309 W. Washington Street, Suite 700Chicago, Illinois 60606(312) 621-9000

    mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]
  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    10/35

    10

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    7

    8

    9

    1011

    12

    13

    14

    15

    16

    17

    18

    19

    20

    21

    22

    23

    24

    25

    26

    27

    28

    H Y M S O NG O L D S T E I N&P A N T I L I A T ,PLLC

    1 6 4 2 7 N o r

    t h S c o

    t t s d a l e

    R o a

    d , S u i

    t e 3 0 0

    S c o

    t t s d a l e ,

    A r i z o n a

    8 5 2 5 4

    T e l e p

    h o n e :

    4 8 0 - 9 9 1 - 9 0 7 7 / F a c s i m

    i l e :

    4 8 0 - 4 4 3 - 8 8 5 4

    JURY DEMAND

    Misty Mate requests a trial by jury under Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil

    Procedure as to all issues in this lawsuit of which trial by jury is permitted.

    Respectfully Submitted,

    MISTY MATE, INC.

    Date: July 11, 2014 By:/s/ David B GoldsteinDavid B. [email protected] Goldstein & Pantiliat, PLLC16427 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 300Scottsdale, AZ 85254(480) 991-9077

    Mark M. Grossman ( pro hac vice to be submitted)[email protected]

    Nicolas Spear ( pro hac vice to be submitted)[email protected] D. Wallenberg ( pro hac vice to be submitted)[email protected] Law Offices309 W. Washington Street, Suite 700Chicago, Illinois 60606(312) 621-9000

    mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]
  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    11/35

    EXHIBIT A

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    12/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    13/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    14/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    15/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    16/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    17/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    18/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    19/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    20/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    21/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    22/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    23/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    24/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    25/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    26/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    27/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    28/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    29/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    30/35

    EXHIBIT B

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    31/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    32/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    33/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    34/35

  • 8/12/2019 Misty Mate v. Home Depot et. al.

    35/35