8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
1/15
-1-
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP A Limited Liability PartnershipIncluding Professional Corporations
DANIEL N. YANNUZZI (Cal. Bar No. 196612)[email protected]
MICHAEL MURPHY (Cal. Bar No. 234695)[email protected] Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP12275 El Camino Real, Suite 200San Diego, California 92130Telephone: (858) 720-8900Facsimile: (858) 509-3691
Attorney for PlaintiffPERFORMANCE DESIGNEDPRODUCTS LLC.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
PERFORMANCE DESIGNEDPRODUCTS LLC,a California limited liability company,
Plaintiff,
v.
MAD CATZ, INC.,a Delaware corporation, and
DOES 1–10, inclusive,
Defendants.
Case No. COMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
'16 CV0629 RBBGPC
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1 Filed 03/11/16 Page 1 of 8
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
2/15
-1- COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Plaintiff Performance Designed Products LLC (“PDP”) complains and alleges
as follows against Defendant Mad Catz, Inc. (“Mad Catz”).
THE PARTIES
1.
Plaintiff PDP is a California limited liability company, having a
principal place of business at 2300 West Empire Avenue, Suite 600, Burbank,
California 91504.
2. On information and belief, Defendant Mad Catz, Inc. (“Mad Catz”) is a
Delaware corporation, having a principal place of business at 10680 Treena Street,
Suite 500, San Diego, California 92131.
3.
The true names, identities and capacities, whether individual, associate,
corporate or otherwise, of Defendants DOES 1 to 10, inclusive, and each of them
(“the DOE Defendants”), are unknown to PDP at this time, who therefore sues the
DOE Defendants by such fictitious names. When the true names and capacities or
participation of the DOE Defendants are ascertained, PDP will amend this complain
to assert the true names, identities and capacities. PDP is informed and believes and
thereon alleges that each of the DOE Defendants sued herein is responsible for the
wrongful acts alleged herein, and is therefore liable to PDP in some manner for the
events and happenings alleged in this complaint. PDP is informed and believes and
thereon alleges that at all times herein mentioned, the DOE Defendants were and are
doing business and/or residing in this District.
NATURE OF THE ACTION
4. This is a civil action against Defendants for infringement of United
States Design Patent Numbers D624,078 (“the ’D078 Patent”) arising under the
patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United States Code.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction of this action under
28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question), and 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a) and (b) (any Act of
Congress relating to patents).
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1 Filed 03/11/16 Page 2 of 8
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
3/15
-2-
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6.
This Court has specific and general personal jurisdiction over
Defendants pursuant to due process and/or the California Long Arm Statute because
Defendants are California entities with their principal place of business in California
and within this judicial district, have committed and continue to commit acts of
infringement in violation of 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(a), (b), and (c), and place infringing
products into the stream of commerce, with the knowledge or understanding that
such products are sold in the State of California, including in this judicial district.
On information and belief, Defendants derive substantial revenue from the sale of
infringing products within this judicial district, expect their actions to have
consequences within this judicial district, and derive substantial revenue from
interstate and international commerce, including within this judicial district.
7. Venue is proper within this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)
because a substantial portion of the events giving rise to the claims for relief stated
in this Complaint arose in this judicial district. Specifically, Defendants have sold
or offered for sale infringing products in this district. Furthermore, Plaintiff PDP
maintains a business office within this district and has suffered harm within this
district.
BACKGROUND FACTS
8. Plaintiff PDP is a Burbank-based company that designs and
manufactures video game accessories. PDP has been supplying video game
accessories to the market for over a decade and has additional offices and facilities
in San Diego, California, China, Hong Kong, France and the United Kingdom.
Customers use PDP’s high quality products in many places throughout the world,
including the United States, Canada, Mexico, Europe, and Asia. PDP is an
innovator in the field of video game accessories and holds multiple patents,
including the ‘D078 Patent. Attached as Exhibit A is a copy of the ‘D078 Patent.
9. On information and belief, Defendant Mad Catz is a worldwide
provider of video game accessories. On information and belief, Mad Catz’s
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1 Filed 03/11/16 Page 3 of 8
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
4/15
-3-
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
products are on sale and in use throughout the United States, including in the State
of California and this district. Mad Catz offers for sale the “Fight Pad Pro
Controller” in this district and throughout the United States1.
10.
On information and belief, Mad Catz has used, imported into, sold, or
offered for sale in the United States its accused controllers, which infringe the
‘D078 Patent. Mad Catz has not obtained permission from PDP to use, import, sell,
or offer PDP’s designs claimed in the ‘D078 Patent. Mad Catz had many options in
developing the accused controller. Nevertheless, Mad Catz chose to willingly
infringe PDP’s designs claimed in the ‘D078 Patent by making, using, selling or
offering for sale, and/or importing its Fight Pad Pro Controller product during theterm of PDP’s ‘D078 Patent.
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
1 Mad Catz’s marketing materials inconsistently refer to the accused product as the Fight
Pad Pro Controller and the FightStick TE2. For removal of doubt, PDP accuses te productshown in the picture attached to Paragraph 11 of infringement.
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1 Filed 03/11/16 Page 4 of 8
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
5/15
-4-
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
11. Mad Catz’s Fight Pad Pro Controller has an overall appearance that is
confusingly similar and substantially the same, in view of the prior art and in the
eyes of an ordinary observer, as PDP’s Fight Pad for Xbox One controller (and the
designs claimed in the ‘D078 Patent), as demonstrated by the side-by-side
comparison below:
PDP Patented Design Mad Catz Product
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Infringement of Design Patent ’D078
12. PDP incorporates and realleges Paragraphs 1 through 20 of this
Complaint.
13. Under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), Defendants have infringed and continue to
infringe, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, the ’D078 Patent by making,
using, selling, and/or offering to sell in the United States, and/or importing into the
United States the Fight Pad Pro Controller identified in this Complaint, which
controller embodies the design covered by the ’D078 Patent.
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1 Filed 03/11/16 Page 5 of 8
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
6/15
-5-
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
14.
On information and belief, Defendants have gained profits by virtue of
their infringement of the ’D078 Patent.
15.
On information and belief, PDP has sustained damages as a direct and
proximate result of Defendants’ infringement of the ’D078 Patent, and, as such,
PDP is entitled to damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 284 and/or 289.
16. Moreover, PDP is informed and believes that Defendants’ infringement
of the ’D078 Patent is and has been willful. On information and belief, Defendants
have acted and continue to act with objective recklessness by proceeding despite an
objectively high likelihood that their actions constitute infringement of PDP’s valid
patents, and Defendants are aware of PDP’s patents, including the ’D078 Patent, and
know of the high likelihood that they cover Defendants’ products.
17. This is an exceptional case warranting an award of treble damages to
PDP under 35 U.S.C. § 284, and an award of attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
18. On information and belief, PDP will suffer and is suffering irreparable
harm from Defendants’ infringement of the ’D078 Patent. PDP has no adequate
remedy at law and is, under 35 U.S.C. § 283, entitled to an injunction against
Defendants’ continuing infringement of the ’D078 Patent. Unless enjoined,
Defendants will continue their infringing conduct.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PDP prays:
(a) For a judgment that Defendants have infringed PDP’s ‘D078
Patent;
(b)
For an order and judgment preliminarily and permanently
enjoining Defendants and their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees,
affiliates, attorneys, and all others acting in privity, active concert, or participation
with any of them, and their parents, subsidiaries, divisions, successors and assigns,
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1 Filed 03/11/16 Page 6 of 8
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
7/15
-6-
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
who receive actual notice of the judgment by personal service or otherwise, from
further acts of infringement of PDP’s ‘D078 Patent;
(c)
That Defendants be directed to file with this court, within thirty
(30) days after entry of any injunction in this case, a written statement, under oath,
setting forth in detail the manner in which Defendants have complied with the
injunction;
(d) For a judgment awarding PDP all damages, in an as yet
undetermined amount, adequate to compensate for Defendants’ infringement of
PDP’s ‘D078 Patent, and in no event less than a reasonable royalty for Defendants’
acts of infringement, including all pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at the
maximum rate permitted by law;
(e) For a judgment awarding PDP all damages, including treble
damages, based on any infringement found to be willful, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §
284, together with prejudgment interest;
(f)
For costs of suit and reasonable attorneys’ fees; and
(g)
For any other remedy to which PDP may be entitled under the
law, and any other further relief as the Court may deem appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
Dated: March 11, 2016
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER
& HAMPTON LLP
By /s/ Daniel N. Yannuzzi
DANIEL N. YANNUZZIMICHAEL MURPHY
Attorneys for Plaintiff
PERFORMANCE DESIGNED
PRODUCTS LLC.
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1 Filed 03/11/16 Page 7 of 8
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
8/15
-7-
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
PDP requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable in this action.
Respectfully submitted,
Dated: March 11, 2016
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER
& HAMPTON LLP
By /s/ Daniel N. Yannuzzi
DANIEL N. YANNUZZI
MICHAEL MURPHY
Attorneys for PlaintiffPERFORMANCE DESIGNED
PRODUCTS LLC.
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1 Filed 03/11/16 Page 8 of 8
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
9/15
CIVIL COVER SHEET
(SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
. (a) PLAINTIFFS
(b)
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
(c) (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) (If Known)
I. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendan
PTF DEF PTF
(U.S. Government Not a Party) or
and
(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)
V. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only)CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTE
PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY
PROPERTY RIGHTS
LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY PERSONAL PROPERTY
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS FEDERAL TAX SUITS
Habeas Corpus:
IMMIGRATION
Other:
V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
(specify)
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION
(Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity)
VII. REQUESTED INCOMPLAINT:
CLASS ACTION
DEMAND $
JURY DEMAND:
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)IF ANY
(See instructions):
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Performance Designed Products LLC, a California limited liabilitycompany
Los Angeles
Daniel N. Yannuzzi (SBN 196612/Michael Murphy (SBN 234695)Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP12275 El Camino Real, Ste. 200, San Diego, CA 92130 858-720-8900
DEFENDANTS Mad Catz, Inc., a Delaware corporation
San Diego
Title 35 - United States Code
Patent infringement
03/11/2016 s/Daniel N. Yannuzzi
'16 CV0629 RBBGPC
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1-1 Filed 03/11/16 Page 1 of 1
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
10/15
Exhibit A
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1-2 Filed 03/11/16 Page 1 of 6
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
11/15
USO0D624078S
1 2 ) United States Design
Patent
1 0 ) P a t e n t N o . : US D 6 2 4 , 0 7 8
S
J e n n i n g s e t a l .
4 5 )
Date
o f
P a t e n t : 4 4 S e p . 2 1 , 2010
(54) SYMMETRIC L
G ME
CONTROLLER
5,923,317
A
*
7/1999 S a y l e r
e t a l .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
345/156
D416 ,247 S *
1 1 / 1 999
Flender e t a l . . . D14/401
(75) Inventors:
Alice
Sebastian Minchella
Jennings, 13424946 5 *
5/2000 S W ? I l S O I l et 3 1 - - - - - -
- - Dl4/401
L05
Angeles
C
Us).
Nicholas
1 3435551 s
*
1 2 / 2 0 0 0
Hayes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
1 3 1 4 / 4 0 1
i
’
13471,552 s *
3/2003
Loughnane t a 1 .
. . . . . .
.. 1 3 1 4 / 40 1
2323mm“ slmmons ’ Smdlo CIW’CA
1 3 5 8 5 , 9 3 1 s *
2 / 2 0 0 9 P a l m e r
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .
1 3 1 8 / 7
* c i t e d by
examiner
( 7 3 ) Assignee:
Performance
Designed Products LLC,
S h e r m a n O a k s ’
CA
U s ) P r i m a r y ExammeriPrabhakar
Deshmukh
( 7 4 ) A t t o r n e y ,
A g e n t , o r FirmiSheppard M u l l i n
R i c h t e r
( * * )
T e r m : 1 4
Y e a r s Hampton
LLP
2 1 ) A p p 1 . N o . :
2 9 / 3 5 4 , 2 0 6
5 7 ) CLAIM
-
eornamenta esi oranas
mmetrica
ame contro er,
( 2 2 )
F i l e d . J a n .
2 0 ,
2010
Th
1d
g n f
y 1g 1 1
a s shown
and d e s c r i b e d .
(51) LOC 9 )
Cl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
14-03
(52) us.
l.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .
1 314/401;1321/333 DESCRIPTION
( 5 8 )
Field of
Classi?cation
Search
. . . . . . . .
D14/399*401 ,
FIG-
1
i s
a
p e r s p e c t i v e
View Of an asymmetrical
game 0 0 1 1
1 3 1 4 / 4 1 2 4 4 1 6 ;
1 3 2 1 / 3 2 4 ,
3 3 3 ;
2 7 3 / 1 4 8 B ;
r r o l l e r
s h o w i n g o u r
new
d e s i g n ;
4 6 3 / 1 ,
2 9 * 3 9 ,
4 6 , 4 7 ; 345/156461, 9 0 5
F I G .
2 i s a
f r o n t
e l e v a t i o n a l V i e w
t h e r e o f ;
S e e
a p p l i c a t i o n ? l e f o r
c o m p l e t e
s e a r c h h i s t o r y . F I G ‘ 3
i s
a
r e a r
e l e v a t i o n a l View t h e r e o f ;
( 5 6 ) R e f e r e n c e s
C i t e d F I G .
4
i s
a l e f t
s i d e
e l e v a t i o n a l View
t h e r e o f ;
U _ S _
PATENTDOCUMENTS F I G .
5
i s
a
r i g h t
s i d e e l e va t i o n a l
View t h e r e o f ;
D341,164 s * 1 1 / 1 9 9 3 Chan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
1 3 1 4 / 4 0 1 MG 1 5 ato p Plan vl ewthereof; a n d ’
5,297,426
A * 3/1 994 Kane
t
a 1 . . . . . .
. .
73/202 F I G . 7
s
a bottom plan View t h e r e o f .
5,394,168
2/1995
Smith
t
a 1 .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 345/156
- - -
5 , 5 0 1 , 4 5 8
A
* 3 /
1 9 9 6 M a l l o r y
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 2 7 3 / 1 4 8 B
T 2 3
3 1 5 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . “
a é e d f o r .
l n u s t r a n v e
p u r p o s e
o n l y
a n d f o r m
n o
1 3 3 7 3 , 1 4 9 s * 8 / 1 9 9 6 Kawasaki
. . . . . . . 1314/401
P 0 e
C
alme
eslgn'
D376,18O
S
*
12/1996 Takahata t
a 1 . D14/401
5,759,100
A
* 6/1998 Nakanishi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
463/37 1 Claim , 4 Drawing heets
Exhibit A - Page 8
111111
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
(12) United States Design Patent
Jennings et al.
(54)
ASYMMETRICAL
GAME CONTROLLER
(75) Inventors: Alice
Sebastian
Minchella Jennings,
Los Angeles,
CA
(US); Nicholas
Raymond Simmons, Studio City,
CA
(US)
(73)
(**)
Assignee: Performance Designed Products LLC
Shennan Oaks, CA (US)
Term: 14 Years
(21) Appl. No.: 29/354,206
(22) Filed: Jan.
20, 2010
(51) LOC (9) Cl. ................ ............... ................ ... 14-03
(52) U.S. Cl. ...... ................... ............ D14/401; D211333
(58) Field of Classification Search ........ DI4/399-401,
(56)
D14/412-416; D211324,333; 2731148 B;
46311 29-39 46 47;
3451156-161,905
See application file for complete search history.
References Cited
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
D341,164 S *
5,297,426 A *
5,394,168 A *
5,501,458 A *
D373,149 S *
D376,180 S
*
5,759,100 A
*
1111993 Chan ........................ .
D14/401
311994 Kane et al. ...... ..... ..... ....
73/202
211995 Smith et al. ..... ..... ..... ..
345/156
311996 Mallo ry ........ ..... ..... 2731148 B
811996 Kawasaki ..................
D14/401
1211996 Takahata et al. ..... ...... D14/401
611998 Nakanishi ..... .... ..... ..... . 463/37
USOOD624078S
(10) Patent No.: US D624,078 S
**
Sep. 21, 2010
45) Date of Patent:
5,923,317 A *
D416,247 S *
D424,046 S *
D435,551 S
*
D471,552 S *
D585,931 S *
* cited by examiner
7/1999 Sayler et al ................. 345/156
1111999 Flender et al. ..... ..... ... D14/401
5/2000
Swanson et al. ...........
D14/401
1212000
Hayes .......................
D14/401
3/2003
Loughnane et al. ....... .
D14/401
212009
Palmer ......................... D18/7
Primary Examiner-Prabhakar Deshmukh
74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm Sheppard Mullin Richter &
HamptonLLP
(57) CLAIM
The ornamental design for an asymmetrical game controller,
as shown and described.
DESCRIPTION
FIG. 1
is
a perspective view of an asymmetrical game con
troller showing our new design;
FIG. 2 is a front elevational view thereof;
FIG. 3 is a rear elevational view thereof;
FIG. 4 is a left side elevational view thereof;
FIG. 5 is a right side elevational view thereof;
FIG. 6 is a top plan view thereof; and,
FIG. 7
is
a bottom plan view thereof.
The broken lines are for illustrative purpose only and form no
part
of
the claimed design.
1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1-2 Filed 03/11/16 Page 2 of 6
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
12/15
US. atent S e p . 2 1 ,
2 0 1 0
S h e e t
1
0 1 4
US D624,078
S
Exhibit A - Page 9
u.s. Patent Sep.21 2010 Sheet 1 of 4
~
,
I ,
I I
J ---.
J ---
I ,
,
1
I
\
1
,
\ '
... -
: . )
' - - ~ I
I ,
, I
. '
,
"
--'
FIG. 1
]
.
,
I I
I I
,
,
\ ,
"
:.)
--'.
I I
, I
I '
,
"
-'
US D624 078 S
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1-2 Filed 03/11/16 Page 3 of 6
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
13/15
U Patent S e p . 2 1 , 2 0 1 0 S h e e t 2 o f 4 US D624,078 S
F I G . 2
Exhibit A - Page 10
u.s. Patent Sep.21 2010
---
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
14/15
US.
atent
S e p . 2 1 ,
2 0 1 0
S h e e t 3 o f 4
US D624,078
S
F I G .
5
Exhibit A - Page 11
u.s.
Patent
Sep.21,2010
Sheet 3 of 4
US D624,078 S
FIG.
4
~
11- 1 7 \
,
'
, '
,
'
, '
,
'
,
,
FIG. 5
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1-2 Filed 03/11/16 Page 5 of 6
8/19/2019 PDP v. Mad Catz - Complaint
15/15
US. atent S e p . 2 1 ,
2 0 1 0
S h e e t 4 o f 4
US D624,078
S
u.s. Patent
Sep.21,2010
Sheet 4 of 4
US D624,078 S
r
, ,
========
FIG.
6
, ,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
FIG.
7
Case 3:16-cv-00629-GPC-RBB Document 1-2 Filed 03/11/16 Page 6 of 6
Top Related