8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
1/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 1 -
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
JOHNSON & PHAM, LLPChristopher D. Johnson, SBN: 222698
E-mail: [email protected] Q. Pham, SBN: 206697
E-mail: [email protected] F. Chaney, SBN: 245227
E-mail: [email protected] Q. Pham, SBN: 276613E-mail: [email protected]
6355 Topanga Canyon Boulevard, Suite 326Woodland Hills, California 91367Telephone: (818) 888-7540Facsimile: (818) 888-7544
Attorneys for PlaintiffSPECULATIVE PRODUCT DESIGN, LLCd/b/a SPECK PRODUCTS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
WESTERN DIVISION
SPECULATIVE PRODUCT DESIGN,LLC d/b/a SPECK PRODUCTS, aCalifornia Limited Liability Company,
Plaintiff,
v.
PATRICK MATTSON, an Individual;STU DISTRIBUTION SERVICES,LLC, a Texas Limited LiabilityCompany; MD5 TECHNOLOGIES, aBusiness Entity of Unknown Status; andDOES 1-10, Inclusive,
Defendants.
Case No.: 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLAx
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINTFOR DAMAGES ANDDECLARATORY RELIEF:
(1) FEDERAL TRADEMARKINFRINGEMENT [15 U.S.C. 1114/Lanham Act 43(a)];
(2) FALSE DESIGNATION OFORIGIN/UNFAIRCOMPETITION/FALSE ORMISLEADING ADVERTISING[15 U.S.C. 1125(a)];
(3) TRADEMARK DILUTION [15U.S.C. 1125(c)];
(4) UNFAIR BUSINESS
PRACTICES [CALIFORNIABUSINESS & PROFESSIONSCODE 17200];
(5) FEDERAL COPYRIGHTINFRINGEMENT [17 U.S.C. 501(a)];and
(6) FEDERAL PATENTINFRINGEMENT [35 U.S.C. 271]
[DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL]
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 1 of 21 Page ID #:137
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
2/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 2 -
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
COMES NOW, Plaintiff SPECULATIVE PRODUCT DESIGN, LLC d/b/a
SPECK PRODUCTS (hereinafter Plaintiff and/or SPECK), and herebyalleges as follows:
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff, is now, and was at the time of the filing of the Complaint,
and at all intervening times, a California Limited Liability Company, duly
authorized and licensed to conduct business in the State of California with its
principal place of business located in San Mateo, California.
2. Plaintiff alleges, on information and belief, that Defendant PATRICK
MATTSON, is now, and was at the time of the filing of the Complaint an
individual residing in and doing business from McKinney, Texas.
3. Plaintiff further alleges, on information and belief, that Defendant
PATRICK MATTSON is the alter-ego, owner and operator of Defendants STU
DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC and MD5 TECHNOLOGIES.
4.
Plaintiff further alleges, on information and belief, that Defendant
STU DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC, is now, and was at the time of the filing
of the Complaint, a Texas Limited Liability Company, with its principal place of
business located in McKinney, Texas.
5. Plaintiff further alleges, on information and belief, that Defendant
MD5 TECHNOLOGIES, is now, and was at the time of the filing of the
Complaint, a business entity of unknown status doing business from McKinney,Texas.
6. Plaintiff further alleges, on information and belief, that at the time of
their creation, now, and at all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendants STU
DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC and MD5 TECHNOLOGIES did not and do
not have sufficient funding to assume responsibility for their foreseeable and
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 2 of 21 Page ID #:138
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
3/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 3 -
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
actual liabilities.
7. Plaintiff further alleges, on information and belief, that since the time
of their creation, now, and at all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendants STU
DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC and MD5 TECHNOLOGIES wereundercapitalized.
8. Plaintiff further alleges, on information and belief, that since the time
of their creation, now, and at all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendants STU
DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC and MD5 TECHNOLOGIES have failed to
observe corporate formalities required by law.
9. Plaintiff further alleges, on information and belief, that Defendants
PATRICK MATTSON, STU DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC, MD5
TECHNOLOGIES, and DOES 1-10, inclusive, conduct business within the
jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Central District of
California by offering counterfeit goods for sale and distributing said goods to
consumers within the Central District of California utilizing services provided by
third-party entities located in the State of California, that infringe upon Plaintiffs
federally registered trademarks, copyright, and design patent.
10. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate,
associate or otherwise, of defendants herein named as DOES 1-10, inclusive, are
unknown to Plaintiff. Plaintiff therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious
names. When the true names and capacities of said defendants have been
ascertained, Plaintiff will amend this pleading accordingly.
11.
Plaintiff further alleges, on information and belief, that DefendantsPATRICK MATTSON, STU DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC, MD5
TECHNOLOGIES, and DOES 1-10, inclusive, sued herein by fictitious names are
jointly, severally and concurrently liable and responsible with the named
Defendants upon the causes of action hereinafter set forth.
/ / /
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 3 of 21 Page ID #:139
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
4/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 4 -
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
12. Plaintiff further alleges, on information and belief, that at all times
mentioned herein Defendants PATRICK MATTSON, STU DISTRIBUTION
SERVICES, LLC, MD5 TECHNOLOGIES, and DOES 1-10, inclusive, and each
of them, were the agents, servants and employees of every other Defendant andthe acts of each defendant, as alleged herein, were performed within the course
and scope of that agency, service or employment (hereinafter collectively
Defendants).
JURISDICTION / VENUE
13. This Court has Federal subject matter jurisdiction over this matter
pursuant to 28 U.S.C.1331 and 1338(a) and (b), in that the case arises out of
claims for trademark infringement, false designation of origin, unfair competition
and dilution under the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq.), copyright
infringement under the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. 501(a)), and design patent
infringement under the U.S. Patent Act(35 U.S.C. 1 et seq.); and this Court has
supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(a) and 1338 (a)(b).
14. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants since
Defendants have committed the tortious and illegal activities of trademark
infringement, copyright infringement, patent infringement, and unfair competition
in this district and/or Defendants have sufficient minimum contacts with this
district such that the exercise of jurisdiction over Defendants by this Court does
not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Among other
things, Defendants have advertised, offered to sell, sold, and distributed products
that infringe the trademarks, copyrights, and design patents of Plaintiff toconsumers within this judicial district. Defendants have also offered to sell, sold,
and distributed counterfeit products (described more fully below) using an
interactive internet website knowing or having reason to know that consumers
throughout the United States, including within this judicial district, would
purchase said counterfeit goods from Defendants, believing that they were
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 4 of 21 Page ID #:140
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
5/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 5 -
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
authentic goods manufactured and distributed by Plaintiff or its authorized
manufacturers.
15. Additionally, supplemental jurisdiction exists over Defendants
because, on information and belief, Defendants conduct business in California andin this judicial district, have purposefully directed action to California and this
district, or have otherwise availed themselves of the privileges and protections of
the laws of the State of California, such that this Courts assertion of jurisdiction
over Defendants does not offend traditional notions of fair play and due process.
16. Venue is proper, inter alia, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) because
on information and belief, a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise
to the claim occurred in this judicial district, and has caused damages to Plaintiff
in this district. The counterfeit Speck-branded products were purchased from
California and Defendants purposefully shipped these counterfeit products into
California. Defendants actions within this district directly interfere with and
damage Plaintiffs commercial efforts and endeavors and harm Plaintiffs
goodwill within this venue. Additionally, Plaintiff conducts substantial business
within this venue.
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
Plaintiff and its Famous Speck-Branded Products
17. Plaintiff is a privately held U.S. corporation founded in Palo Alto
California in 2001 as a form fit cellular telephone case company. Plaintiff creates
cases for the mobile accessories market.
18.
Plaintiff is one of the leading companies in their industry and hasgained numerous awards and recognition for its innovative products and designs.
19. Plaintiff is one of the worlds leading manufacturers of protective
carrying cases for electronic devices, including but not limited to, portable
electronic listening devices and music players, namely, mp3 players, and for
portable computers, global positioning systems (GPS devices), mobile and cellular
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 5 of 21 Page ID #:141
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
6/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 6 -
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
telephones, portable media players, and personal digital assistants.
20. Plaintiff develops and manufactures protective carrying cases for
products such as the Apple iPhone, Apple iPad, Apple iPod, Apple
MacBook, Notebook bags and sleeves, Smartphones including Blackberry,HTC, Sharp, Samsung, and Motorola models, TomTom GPS navigation
devices, portable hard drives such as WD My Passport Elite/Essential, and the
Kindle 3.
21. Plaintiff is continually striving to discover and develop new,
advanced technologies and designs to meet the needs of the ever-advancing
consumer electronics industry. Plaintiff offers over 250 products which are sold
in over 75 countries worldwide.
22. Plaintiff has spent substantial time, money and effort in developing
consumer recognition and awareness of its marks. Through the extensive use of
the Plaintiffs marks, Plaintiff has built up and developed significant goodwill in
its entire product line. A wide array of newspapers, magazines and television
networks has included advertising of Plaintiffs products, which are immediately
identified by Plaintiffs marks.
23. Plaintiff is the exclusive owner of federally-registered and common
law trademarks. The following is a partial (non-exhaustive) list of the registered
trademarks owned by Plaintiff:
A. SPECK, registered trademark number 3,663,010, registered on
August 4, 2009, for use on or in connection with protective carrying cases for
portable electronic listening devices and music players, namely, mp3 players, andfor portable computers, global positioning systems (GPS devices), mobile and
cellular telephones, portable media players, and personal digital assistants, in
Class 9 (U.S. CLS. 21, 23, 26, 36 and 38);
B. [Design Mark], registered trademark number 3,666,082,
registered on August 11, 2009, consisting of an asterisk between parentheses
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 6 of 21 Page ID #:142
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
7/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 7 -
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
followed by the word SPECK in stylized letters; for use on or in co nnection
with protective carrying cases for portable electronic listening devices and music
players, namely, mp3 players, and for portable computers, global positioning
systems (GPS devices), mobile and cellular telephones, portable media players,and personal digital assistants, in Class 9 (U.S. CLS. 21, 23, 26, 36 and 38);
C. [Design Mark], registered trademark number 3,666,072,
registered on August 11, 2009, consisting of an asterisk between parentheses; for
use on or in connection with protective carrying cases for portable electronic
listening devices and music players, namely, mp3 players, and for portable
computers, global positioning systems (GPS devices), mobile and cellular
telephones, portable media players, and personal digital assistants, in Class 9 (U.S.
CLS. 21, 23, 26, 36 and 38); and
D. CANDYSHELL, registered trademark number 3,817,709,
registered on July 13, 2010, for use on or in connection with protective carrying
cases for mp3 players, mobile and cellular telephones, portable media players, and
personal digital assistants in Class 9 (U.S. CLS. 21, 23, 26, 36 and 38). Attached
hereto as Exhibits A-D are true and correct copies of the certificates of
registration for each of the above referenced federally-registered trademarks
owned by Plaintiff (hereinafter Plaintiffs Marks).
24. Plaintiff is also the owner of several international trademarks in the
following locations: Canada, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Malaysia,
European Community, Hong Kong, Intl Registration Madrid Protocol, Taiwan,
Australia, Singapore, Japan, Russian Federation, Thailand, and the PeoplesRepublic of China.
25. Plaintiff is also the exclusive owner of federally-registered copyrights
related to and used in connection with the packaging of its SPECK-branded
products, with the following (non-exhaustive) copyright names, registration
numbers, and registration dates:
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 7 of 21 Page ID #:143
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
8/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 8 -
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
A. CANDYSHELL FOR iPHONE 4, VA1772394 (Registered
May 6, 2011);
B. iPhone 5 CandyShell Core2 Wedge2- Cardstock, VA1879028
(Registered November 20, 2012);C. iPhone 5 CandyShell FLIP Core2 Wedge2- Cardstock,
VA1879012 (Registered November 20, 2012);
D. iPhone 5 CandyShell GRIP Core2 Wedge2- Cardstock,
VA1879031 (Registered November 20, 2012);
E. iPhone 5 CandyShell SATIN Core2 Wedge2- Cardstock,
VA1879076 (Registered November 20, 2012);
F. iPhone 5 CandyShell Apple Packaging Milk Carton,
VA1879009 (Registered November 20, 2012); and
G. iPhone 5 CandyShell Card Apple Packaging Milk Carton,
VA1879036 (Registered November 20, 2012) (hereinafter Plaintiffs
Copyrights).
26. Additionally, Plaintiff owns a valid and lawfully issued United States
Patent, patent no. US 8,204,561 B2, for its one piece co-formed exterior hard
shell case with an elastomeric liner for mobile electronic devices. Attached
hereto as Exhibit Eis a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs registration certificate
for patent no. US 8,204,561 B2 (hereinafter Plaintiffs Patent).
Defendants Wrongful and Infringing Conduct
27. Defendants use, amongst other things, the Internet auction website
known as www.ebay.com (eBay) to sell and distribute products, includingcounterfeit hard goods bearing Plaintiffs Marks, embodying Plaintiffs
Copyrights, and utilizing Plaintiffs Patent described above, to consumers. At any
given time, there are millions of items listed on eBay.com for purchase by its
more than 200 million registered users.
/ / /
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 8 of 21 Page ID #:144
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
9/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 9 -
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
28. Beginning on a date that is currently unknown to Plaintiff and
continuing to the present, Defendants have, without the consent of Plaintiff,
offered to sell and sold within the United States (including within this judicial
district) goods that were neither made by Plaintiff nor by a manufacturerauthorized by Plaintiff (such goods are hereafter referred to as Counterfeit
Goods) using reproductions, counterfeits, copies and/or colorable imitations of
one or more of PlaintiffsMarks, Plaintiffs Copyrights, and PlaintiffsPatent.
29. On information and belief, Plaintiff further alleges that Defendants
imported said Counterfeit Goods into the United States, or encouraged others to
import said Counterfeit Goods into the United States, for the purpose of reselling
the Counterfeit Goods in the United States and within the Central District of
California.
30. Defendants own and operate at least two (2) known web stores on
eBay using the seller IDs drsmartphonesgroup and md5technologies.Through
these web stores, Defendants regularly and systematically used Plaintiffs Marks
in advertising and marketing and distributed and sold Counterfeit Goods bearing
Plaintiffs Marks, embodying Plaintiffs Copyrights, and comprised of Plaintiffs
Design Patent.
31. On or about January 29, 2013, Plaintiff purchased a purported
IPHONE 5 SPECK CANDYSHELL WHITE / BLUE COLOR. NEW, USA
SELLER (Item #300852917445) from Defendants, under eBay seller ID
drsmartphonesgroup, for a cost of $13.53, shipping inclusive, charged to the
PayPal electronic payment account of Plaintiff. Plaintiffs PayPal electronicpayment receipt clearly identifies Plaintiffs payment was made to STU
Distribution Serviceswith a Customer Service URL of http://www.md5tech.com,
and PayPal ID [email protected]. The Counterfeit Goods were
shipped by Defendants into Los Angeles, California within this Courts
jurisdiction and were received with a shipping label identifying the sender as
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 9 of 21 Page ID #:145
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
10/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 10 -
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
Patrick Mattson. A true and correct copy of the PayPal electronic payment
receipt is attached hereto as Exhibit F.
32. The purported IPHONE 5 SPECK CANDYSHELL WHITE / BLUE
COLOR. NEW, USA SELLER (Item #300852917445) purchased fromDefendants was inspected by Plaintiff to determine authenticity. Plaintiffs
inspection of the purchased item using security measures confirmed that the item
Defendants sold to Plaintiff was, in fact, a counterfeit SPECK-branded
CANDYSHELL product.
33. On or about January 29, 2013, Plaintiff purchased a purported
IPHONE 5 SPECK CANDYSHELL DEEP VIOLET / AQUA COLOR. NEW,
USA SELLER (Item #271164615042) from Defendants, under eBay seller ID
md5technologies,for a cost of $18.75, shipping inclusive, charged to the PayPal
electronic payment account of Plaintiff. Plaintiffs PayPal electronic payment
receipt clearly identifies Plaintiffs payment was made to STU Distribution
Services, with a Customer Service URL of http://www.md5tech.com, and
PayPal ID [email protected]. The Counterfeit Goods were shipped
by Defendants into Los Angeles, California within this Courts jurisdiction and
were received with a shipping label identifying the sender as MD5
TECHNOLOGIES. A true and correct copy of the PayPal electronic payment
receipt is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
34. The purported IPHONE 5 SPECK CANDYSHELL DEEP VIOLET
/ AQUA COLOR. NEW, USA SELLER (Item #271164615042) purchased from
Defendants was inspected by Plaintiff to determine authenticity. Plaintiffsinspection of the purchased item using security measures confirmed that the item
Defendants sold to Plaintiff was, in fact, a counterfeit SPECK-branded
CANDYSHELL product.
35. Defendants intentionally and knowingly accepted Plaintiffs money
from a financial institution located in the State of California.
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 10 of 21 Page ID #:146
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
11/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 11 -
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
36. Defendants also intentionally and knowingly delivered the
Counterfeit Goods into the State of California.
37. Through such business activities, Defendants purposely derived
benefit from their interstate commerce activities by expressly targetingforeseeable purchasers in the State of California. But for Defendantsadvertising,
soliciting and selling of counterfeit SPECK-branded CANDYSHELL products
Plaintiff would not have been able to make a purchase of the subject products.
38. Defendants use images and names confusingly similar or identical to
PlaintiffsMarks to confuse consumers and aid in the promotion and sales of their
unauthorized and Counterfeit Goods. Defendants use Plaintiffs Marks, Plaintiffs
Copyrights, and Plaintiffs Patent, without authorization, to import, advertise,
display, offer to sell, sell, and distribute Counterfeit Goods.
39. Defendants use began long after Plaintiffs adoption and use of
Plaintiffs Marks, and after Plaintiff obtained trademark, copyright, and patent
registrations alleged above. Neither Plaintiff nor any authorized agents have
consented to Defendants use of Plaintiffs Marks, Plaintiffs Copyrights, or
Plaintiffs Patent.
40. Defendants actions have confused and deceived, or threatened to
confuse and deceive, the consuming public concerning the source and sponsorship
of the Counterfeit Goods sold and distributed by Defendants. By their wrongful
conduct, Defendants have traded upon and diminished Plaintiffs goodwill.
Furthermore, the sale and distribution of Counterfeit Goods by Defendants have
infringed upon Plaintiffs Marks, PlaintiffsCopyrights and/or Plaintiffs Patent.41. Defendants offering to sell, selling, importing and encouraging
others to import Counterfeit Goods in this manner was and is likely to cause
confusion or to cause mistake and/or to deceive consumers who purchase the
Counterfeit Goods. Defendants also offered to sell, sold, imported, and/or
encouraged others to import for purpose of resale within the United States
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 11 of 21 Page ID #:147
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
12/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 12 -
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
Counterfeit Goods consisting of reproductions and/or copies of products bearing
Plaintiffs Marks, embodying Plaintiffs Copyrights, and utilizing Plaintiffs
Patent. Defendantsuse of such marks, copyrights, and patent was done without
Plaintiffs authorization.FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Trademark Infringement Against Defendants PATRICK MATTSON, STU
DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC, MD5 TECHNOLOGIES, and DOES 1-
10, Inclusive)
[15 U.S.C. 1114/Lanham Act43(a)]
42. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each of the other
allegations set forth elsewhere in this First Amended Complaint as though fully
set forth in this cause of action.
43. Defendants actions as described herein constitute direct and/or
contributory trademark infringement in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1114(1)(a).
44. As a proximate result of Defendants trademark infringement,
Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount to be proven at trial. Further, Plaintiff
alleges on information and belief that, as a proximate result of Defendants
trademark infringement, Defendants have unlawfully profited in an amount to be
proven at trial.
45. At all relevant times, Defendants acted intentionally and/or willfully
in using Plaintiffs Marks on the Counterfeit Goods, knowing that Plaintiffs
Marks belonged to Plaintiff, that the Counterfeit Goods were in fact counterfeit,
and that Defendants were not authorized to use Plaintiffs Marks on theCounterfeit Goods. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to recovery of treble damages
pursuant to 15 U.S.C.1117(a). Further, Defendantsknowing, intentional and/or
willful actions make this an exceptional case, entitling Plaintiff to an award of
reasonable attorney fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117(a).
/ / /
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 12 of 21 Page ID #:148
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
13/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 13 -
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
46. Defendantsactions also constitute the use by Defendants of one or
more counterfeit marks as defined in 15 U.S.C. 1116(d)(1)(B). Plaintiff
therefore reserves the right to elect, at any time before final judgment is entered in
this case, an award of statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C.1117(c)(1) and/or(2).
47. The acts of direct and/or contributory trademark infringement
committed by Defendants have caused, and will continue to cause, Plaintiff
irreparable harm unless they are enjoined by this Court.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(False Designation of Origin, False or Misleading Advertising Against
Defendants PATRICK MATTSON, STU DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC,
MD5 TECHNOLOGIES, and DOES 1-10, Inclusive)
[15 U.S.C. 1125 (a)]
48. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each of the other
allegations set forth elsewhere in this First Amended Complaint as thought fully
set forth in this cause of action.
49.
Defendants actions as described herein constitute direct and/or
contributory violation of 15 U.S.C. 1125(a)(1)(A), as such actions are likely to
cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation,
connection, or association of Defendants with Plaintiff and/or as to the origin,
sponsorship, and/or approval of such Counterfeit Goods by Plaintiff.
50. As a proximate result of Defendantsviolation as described herein,
Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount to be proven at trial. Further, Plaintiffalleges on information and belief that, as a proximate result of defendants direct
and/or contributory trademark infringement, Defendants have unlawfully profited,
in an amount to be proven at trial.
51. Defendantsacts of violating, directly and/or contributorily 15 U.S.C.
1125 have caused, and will continue to cause, Plaintiff irreparable harm unless
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 13 of 21 Page ID #:149
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
14/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 14 -
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
they are enjoined by this Court.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(Trademark Dilution Against Defendants PATRICK MATTSON, STU
DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC, MD5 TECHNOLOGIES, and DOES 1-
10, Inclusive)
[15 U.S.C. 1125(c)]
52. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each of the other
allegations set forth elsewhere in this First Amended Complaint as though fully
set forth in this cause of action.
53. Plaintiffs Marks are distinctive and famous within the meaning of
theLanham Act.
54. Upon information and belief, Defendants unlawful actions began
long after Plaintiffs Marks became famous, and Defendants acted knowingly,
deliberately and willfully with the intent to trade on Plaintiffs reputation and to
dilute Plaintiffs Marks. Defendantsconduct is willful, wanton and egregious.
55. Defendants intentional sale of fake, pirated Counterfeit Goods
bearing Plaintiffs Marks is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or to deceive,
mislead, betray, and defraud consumers to believe that the substandard imitations
are genuine products manufactured by Plaintiff. The actions of Defendants
complained of herein have diluted and will continue to dilute Plaintiffs Marks,
and are likely to impair the distinctiveness, strength and value of Plaintiffs
Marks, and injure the business reputation of Plaintiff and its marks.
56.
Defendants acts have caused and will continue to cause Plaintiffirreparable harm. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law to compensate it fully
for the damages that have been caused and which will continue to be caused by
Defendantsunlawful acts, unless they are enjoined by this Court.
57. As the acts alleged herein constitute a willful violation of section
43(c) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(c), Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 14 of 21 Page ID #:150
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
15/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 15 -
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
relief as well as monetary damages and other remedies provided by 15 U.S.C.
1116, 1117, 1118, and 1125(c), including Defendantsprofits, treble damages,
reasonable attorneys fees, costs and prejudgment interest.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Unfair Competition Against Defendants PATRICK MATTSON, STU
DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC, MD5 TECHNOLOGIES, and DOES 1-
10, Inclusive)
Cali fornia Business & Professions Code17200 et seq.
58. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each of the other
allegations set forth elsewhere in this First Amended Complaint as thought fully
set forth in this cause of action.
59. Defendants actions described herein constitute unlawful, unfair
and/or fraudulent business acts or practices. Defendants actions thus constitute
unfair competition pursuant to California Business & Professions Code 17200.
60. As a proximate result of Defendants actions, Plaintiff has suffered an
injury in fact, including without limitation, damages in an amount to be proven at
trial, loss of money or property, and diminution in the value of its trademarks,
copyrights, and patent. Plaintiff therefore has standing to assert this claim
pursuant to California Business & Professions Code 17204.
61. Defendants actions have caused, and will continue to cause Plaintiff
to suffer irreparable harm unless enjoined by this Court pursuant to California
Business & Professions Code 17203. In addition, Plaintiff requests that the
Court order that Defendants disgorges all profits wrongfully obtained as a result ofDefendants unfair competition, and order that defendant pay restitution to
Plaintiff in an amount to be proven at trial.
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 15 of 21 Page ID #:151
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
16/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 16 -
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
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Federal Copyright Infringement Against Defendants PATRICK
MATTSON, STU DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC, MD5
TECHNOLOGIES, and DOES 1-10, Inclusive)
[17 U.S.C. 501(a)]
62. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each of the other
allegationsset forth elsewhere in this First Amended Complaint as thought fully
set forth in this cause of action.
63. Plaintiff is the exclusive owner of copyrights in and related to the
packaging of SPECK-branded CANDYSHELL products, among others,
having numerous registrations and applications relating to the same pending with
the United States Copyright Office.
64. Defendants did not seek and failed to obtain Plaintiffs consent or
authorization to utilize, manufacture, reproduce, copy, display, prepare derivative
works, distribute, sell, transfer, rent, perform, and/or market packaging
embodying Plaintiffs Copyrights.
65.
Without permission, Defendants intentionally and knowingly
imported, reproduced, counterfeited, copied, displayed, and/or manufactured
Plaintiffs protected works by offering, advertising, promoting, retailing, selling,
and distributing counterfeit SPECK-branded CANDYSHELL products
contained within packaging which is at a minimum substantially similar to
Plaintiffs Copyrights.
66.
Defendants acts as alleged herein, constitute infringement ofPlaintiffs Copyrights, including Plaintiffs exclusive rights to reproduce,
distribute and/or sell such protected material.
67. Defendants knowing and intentional copyright infringement as
alleged herein has caused and will continue to cause substantial and irreparable
harm to Plaintiff and has and will continue to cause damage to Plaintiff. Plaintiff
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 16 of 21 Page ID #:152
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
17/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 17 -
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
is therefore entitled to injunctive relief, damages, Defendants profits, increased
damages, and reasonable attorneys fees and costs.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Federal Patent Infringement Against Defendants PATRICK MATTSON,
STU DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC, MD5 TECHNOLOGIES, and
DOES 1-10, Inclusive)
[35 U.S.C. 71]
68. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference each of the other
allegations set forth elsewhere in this First Amended Complaint as though fully
set forth in this cause of action.
69. Plaintiff is the owner of the federally registered utility patent with the
USPTO Registration No.: US 8,204,561 B2.
70. Defendants have infringed and continue to infringe Plaintiffs Patent
by using, selling and/or offering to sell, in the United States and/or importing into
the United States, Counterfeit Goods which utilize Plaintiffs Patent. By their
conduct, Defendants have violated 35 U.S.C. 271 by direct infringement of
Plaintiffs Patent.
71. On the basis allege, Defendants have gained profits by virtue of its
infringement of PlaintiffsPatent.
72. As a direct and legal result of Defendants wrongful conduct,
Plaintiff has been and will be irreparably and permanently harmed; wherefore
Plaintiff is without an adequate remedy at law. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled
to, among other things, an order enjoining and restraining Defendants from furtherengaging in the infringement of PlaintiffsPatent.
73. Defendantsinfringement of PlaintiffsPatent is and has been willful.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to its monetary damages, in an amount to be
proven at trial, and award of treble damages, and its reasonable attorneys fees and
costs.
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 17 of 21 Page ID #:153
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
18/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 18 -
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
REQUEST FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff SPECULATIVE PRODUCT DESIGN, LLC
hereby respectfully requests the following relief against Defendants PATRICK
MATTSON, STU DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC, MD5 TECHNOLOGIES,and DOES 1-10, inclusive, and each of them as follows:
1. For an award of Defendants profits and Plaintiffs damages in anamount
to be proven at trial for trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C.
1114(a);
2. For an award of Defendants profits and Plaintiffs damages in an amount
to be proven at trial for false designation of origin and unfair competition
under 15 U.S.C.1125(a);
3. For an award of Defendants profits and Plaintiffs damages in an amount
to be proven at trial for trademark dilution under 15 U.S.C. 1125(c);
4. For treble damages suffered by Plaintiff as a result of the willful and
intentional infringements and acts of counterfeiting engaged in by
Defendants, under 15 U.S.C. 1117(b);
5.
In the alternative to actual damages and Defendants profits for the
infringement and counterfeiting of Plaintiffs trademarks pursuant to the
Lanham Act, for statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117(c)
which election Plaintiff will make prior to the rendering of final
judgment;
6. For $2,000,000 per counterfeit mark, per type of goods sold, offered for
sale, or distributed under 15 U.S.C. 1117(c)(2);7. For an award of Defendants profitsand Plaintiffs damages in an amount
to be proven at trial for copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. 501(a);
8. In the alternative to actual damages and Defendants profits pursuant to
17 U.S.C. 504(b), for statutory damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 504(c)
which election Plaintiff will make prior to the rendering of final
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 18 of 21 Page ID #:154
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
19/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 19 -
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
judgment;
9. For $150,000 per work under 17 U.S.C. 504(c)(2);
10.For restitution in an amount to be proven at trial for unfair, fraudulent
and illegal business practices under Business and Professions Code17200;
11.For damages to be proven at trial for common law unfair competition;
12.For an injunction by this Court prohibiting Defendants from engaging or
continuing to engage in the unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business acts
or practices described herein, including the advertising and/or dealing in
any Counterfeit Goods; the unauthorized use of any mark, copyright or
other intellectual property right of Plaintiff; acts of trademark
infringement or dilution; acts of copyright infringement; false designation
of origin; unfair competition; patent infringement; and any other act in
derogation of Plaintiffs rights;
13.For an order from the Court requiring that Defendants provide complete
accountings and for equitable relief, including that Defendants disgorge
and return or pay their ill-gotten gains obtained from the illegal
transactions entered into and or pay restitution, including the amount of
monies that should have been paid if Defendants complied with their
legal obligations, or as equity requires;
14.For an order from the Court that an asset freeze or constructive trust be
imposed over all monies and profits in Defendants possession which
rightfully belong to Plaintiff;15.For destruction of the infringing articles in Defendants possession under
15 U.S.C. 1118 and 17 U.S.C. 503;
16.An order and judgment preliminary and permanently enjoining
Defendants and their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees,
affiliates, attorneys, and all others acting in privity or in concert with
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 19 of 21 Page ID #:155
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
20/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 20 -
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
them, and their parents, subsidiaries, divisions, successors and assigns
from further acts of infringement of Plaintiffs Patent;
17.For an award of Plaintiffs damages and Defendants profits adequate to
compensate Plaintiff for Defendants infringement of Plaintiffs Patent,and in no event less than a reasonable royalty for Defendants acts of
infringement, including all pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as
the maximum rate permitted by law;
18.For an award of all damages, including treble damages, based on any
infringement found to be willful, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284, together
with prejudgment interest;
19.For an award of all profits, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 289 together with
prejudgment interest;
20.For damages in an amount to be proven at trial for unjust enrichment;
21.For an award of exemplary or punitive damages in an amount to be
determined by the Court;
22.For Plaintiffs reasonable attorneys fees;
23.
For all costs of suit; and
24.For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and
equitable.
DATED: November 25, 2014 JOHNSON & PHAM, LLP
By: __/s/Marcus F. Chaney__________Marcus F. Chaney, Esq.
Attorneys for PlaintiffSPECULATIVE PRODUCT DESIGN,LLC d/b/a SPECK PRODUCTS
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 20 of 21 Page ID #:156
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
21/46
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
- 21 -
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
Plaintiff SPECULATIVE PRODUCT DESIGN, LLC, dba SPECK
PRODUCTS, respectfully demands a trial by jury in this action pursuant to Local
Rule 38-1.DATED: November 25, 2014 JOHNSON & PHAM, LLP
By: __/s/Marcus F. Chaney__________Marcus F. Chaney, Esq.Attorneys for PlaintiffSPECULATIVE PRODUCT DESIGN,LLC d/b/a SPECK PRODUCTS
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29 Filed 11/25/14 Page 21 of 21 Page ID #:157
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
22/46
Exhibit A
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 1 of 25 Page ID #:158
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
23/46
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 2 of 25 Page ID #:159
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
24/46
Exhibit B
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 3 of 25 Page ID #:160
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
25/46
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 4 of 25 Page ID #:161
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
26/46
Exhibit C
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 5 of 25 Page ID #:162
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
27/46
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 6 of 25 Page ID #:163
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
28/46
Exhibit D
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 7 of 25 Page ID #:164
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
29/46
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 8 of 25 Page ID #:165
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
30/46
Exhibit E
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 9 of 25 Page ID #:166
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
31/46
llilflilIflrll ffi
illllulftilil
ffiil fl[lllll
fiIfl
flnffi
fiI
ilfl
lffi
l
us00820456182
(rD
{Jnited States Fatent
Mongrn
et
al,
0o)
Pslent
No,:
(4s)
Dotc oflatenl:
LJS 8,204,561 82
Jun.
I9,2012
(50
oNE PIiCE CO.lOlL]ltiD
It\TlitUOR
IIART)
SIELL C^SE
WITS.AN
EtnSTO
[ruC
LINER
FOR
IIIOBTLE ELECTRONIC
DEVICES
fi/1999 Al$au5c.ld.
6/ 000 KllchE .Eadi
Ue000 llosrrd,
t .
le00t
Yoncdct
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
32/46
us
E,204,s61
B2
PoBB
z
6,?71,25?
El
6J71,056
BI
65t4.7:2 Bl
6661,t74
EI
6,78J,566
Ur
6p14,?74 Hl
6,980,7?? R?
688t,589 R2
7,11ff,00{ BZ
7J,ll,lel
Fl
D5 1,319 S
D5 1.?46
S
7.551.r,tt
l]:
7,509,512 n:
7$2t,8rr
Bl
i,647,08?
82
D617,?E{ S
7.9t1,t2 BZ
3mt/0002003
Al
r00i/0(no[
Al
t00l/0068 15 At
1rJ03/00?0r5, At
Il0y00[]094
l
o0l/0r03c24
Al
Iqll/ol
t66
At
20{l,tr00l1l06
Al
?00t0151?t At
2@ 8t74727 it
?00t02?9661 l
?0n6/0040550
l
?u06/0t6t800
Al
t0{t?/00602:.1
A
?0t7/0181?81
A
?008,001 718
A
2008/0019t61 A
3008/00 6610 A
:rxr8/0t17507 A
:00&0Ix84
A
20D9IlOt?33t
A
00t/0080151
,1
:0091011ts'll
A
:{r t/o rr+11{
A
:0tq/0006.iIq
A
t0lu/00?gl.tl
A
?0lq0096t6rt Jl
?0lu/010.t814
A
r0l0/0tr618? A
l' rdell
ki:atry
lbeulnl
Ririllrkor
Hobbsg
fiolllbjlg
Rtchr soo 4al,
lllcluGoE cl nI.
l'l'r4lol
0uc$cl$ct 1.
Hu
Xenppi cr
Mclisnncl
il.
Chu,-.,.-."....---.." 455/5?5,{
Llc
ar
il.
,",..,,,.--.-
4i5/57J.s
'r8i
RictinLo
r
L
Chiincy
cl ol,
U.S. I',ATENT DOCIJMENTS
20t0/01{4411
At
2lt0/01477t5 ,1l
?0tqui:t515
r1l
64010
PcnirEill
612010
Yialioli
cr ol
9E010
vld
cr
al.
FOIIIICN I'IIIIjNL DOC:UMINTS
0zllt6t
At 22w?
OTIIBR PllBLlc/ ]ONS
&/200t
lly20D2
9t?og7
lz200l
84004
7T?oE5
113005
lt2.E6
7EW7
3/30 8
r':00t
('300t
6/?00t
97000
Itv:o0t
I
U 009
l/:010.
dlol0
4/:01r
r2001
?20[]
dlo0:t
4l]001
y 001
(irto0l
&3 01
tn00I
?/:Q05
8/1005
lv 005
1J2UA6
7t2006
x,.-pn1
8/ 007
z 000
z:0 H
,l/1008
t/t008
l0/ 008
teflr9
3/ tD
'v20w
vl l],
tEot0
4110r0
4/:010
,v 0r0
J/r0to
S 0cl
Folccdon
ofFotultu drcuDDic
lFdsctr:
Sl'o* td|loE
EpelrM, dlrE8u
boundry.4rFoEh
Bnd
blyond
ClotEl,
5
(RqrdDI)i
P.pabFoulur,
JMi sullivft ,
PIAT&T
Ildl lrbr, L c r
T.cb-ool,WlFls n EI b.600MlAYc,Itrt lb-zIalttumyllill,NJ,
0?974
(?Epri osh.clMdVbhdoa
199?,vol.4,
N..1,
F,
169-191,
ldpEltrB
lhrucl tolcec. ol
nDnol'lc
.lcctrctlc
t.qiEEi
cs
iluJyolcdlul
phonc.
S. Coyd, S.
UpuFiiDlil
D-V.
Lltlclt-l? d.
a' 01Mchsls Covs
Ddrc:
Ms. ,s,
lt9,
PubliEicc
SttiDls
BlsrorlSSNl0014485l
Sirbjcq;
f'rglBc.dn
shn
F.,[t
ElIlI
F
5]
vol,39
here
I
URL: hlF/,,(rdo1,oB/10.100711r02:l:tlu0
Dotr
I0.l007rBm2l?9300i l0
Fp,
Cindyshdl
Sours brF/
vch0nftivt.o'E/w$n00H
ll l80i5J09/
hfl
F,/1w1l*sFlhrEd
cts.com/nEducltct
dyrbell/rplolc.l ,,
16l,lide l&t008.I
F.
Rllu ol s o L EiInElc sptrugr
i
cllFAic
prD.ticr
r$pL$lor
dill
Cotd,
S.,
Ello'
CEry
w,,
BuErylltli, Elstd
X. l .
brs-
liri@l
JouEd
ofMilBilrliE
uld
El
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
33/46
{.LS. Fatent Jur,
19, 2012
Sheer
I
0f 6
10
us 8,204,561
B2
12
r5
16
13
23
17
18
z6
F[G" {
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 12 of 25 Page ID#:169
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
34/46
{1,S.
Fatent
Jun.
19, 2012 Sheet 2
0f
6
20
13
F$G" 2A
12
us 8,204561
92
20
12
20
13
n--"
"
FEG"
2B
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 13 of 25 Page ID#:170
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
35/46
U.S"lPatent
Jun.19,2012
Sheet3of6
12
20
FEG"
3
us
8,204,561
B2
21
23
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 14 of 25 Page ID#:171
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
36/46
U,S.
Fatent
Jun.
19, ?oI2 sheet 4 of
6
21
F[G.4
20
19
FEG" 6
us
8,204,561 B2
13
12
13
,12
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 15 of 25 Page ID#:172
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
37/46
{.LS.lPatent
Jun.19,2012 sheets016
IJS 8,204,561B2
21
n
19
13
22
12
F[G.5
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 16 of 25 Page ID#:173
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
38/46
U,S,lPatent Jun.19,201?
Sheet6of6
u.
us 8,204,561
82
12
lJ
F$G"
7A
FEG" 78
13
tt
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 17 of 25 Page ID#:174
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
39/46
us
8,204"561 82
72
ONE PII,:CE CO.FoINII|D
g-T{TERIOR
D.ilrD
Dsc 6
lilic
rhc
tdil ot
rs
o.iiBJ
pbodc
usd would
likc
lo
SIIELL
(:rsl;
rYlm, \
l,f,.ASToMEIUC
Elli
0h
dur
fctl
bm still
* l
llmrcsliod
for
rhcir dcdcc.
LINER 'oltMoBILEELECTRONIC ltebrdlmrccrivccxtcdnrshcllofdl'prcscotisv@0oob
-_ DEVICE.5
o
low
cocfficicntofllictior1
Tbis
alloNs
th
dcviccro cosily
bc
J
$lirpral
h
llod our of
poEkcc
catily wi$oul
bccdt{ng
IUifjUfD.^PUUCAIIONS
ollscLld or
wi$oul
Ercxt
rcsist&le.lo
clolhjoE
EDleri |s. r1
rrujor coElhiql.lioE
cuErtrl
(,'lilstc@criu
q.lsc
usJrs.
Tbis lpplication
i5
0 coMINUAIoN
of u.s.
pltctrt
lho
c.se
lmgl
by lbc
ltlccnl
iuvcrtioD
br's
trn
inlcrior
Dppticali;;
Scr,
No. U.,lf6,?69,
lllq.d
f.cb,
6
|
200r,
ll. ;
cD -
cla onc;c
lortior
lh l.
Frovid6.shork
Prclecliod
for lhc
d;b
of
which
is
iDcolronltb
l"r"ir
ry
'.roio*,
r0
da'icc f| D1
d'ofFr.E8;
ljrls'
or
olhcr
iftlnta
TlL
i te'io'
clustoncdc
loaion
nL
o
c{rsurcs thc dcvicc ond thD tasc Jit
'ILOIMCAI-
lil|jLD
OF TIIE INVLN]ION
rogerlrlrrviu o
guire
us
tho
q$c
is
singlc
pictc
ossetbly,
IIID
cre
b 3
0
vcry Eolid
mnorcliotl
lo Io
lhollc
DEd
fcEI6
1tc
prEstlr
iqvcotloE
rluca
$inoElly
ro
llldbrld
Eobilu
lalrcErly hilh
quDlily
ud
li8lnvciShl
elect$iic
drviujr.
sucll I|J{
pcr:onaldicitol
ossislopl, ccllu.
15
\{lul
mokcs
lLdr
cascdiJlcrc[l
ie lhcgcollclry
der u_
Ior
rdlcplouq
lab
top compirtcn nr
poiobl
rliBitr Ercdh
frcluritrgofthecsre Thcc](lcliorhltJdsll :llnsd
ic lorucd
to
plryv.
ttlorc
4ccifiirlly
llie
pnscoi iouurion nlotcs ro a
lil
lhc tlq.jrc cl0$sly wilh n lnnqll
olTFet
lmn
tho
dcviccs
'arulriph+oopincnr
pnxrcLivi:
crsc for mobilc
qlc{trcnic
curlsca
T[c cxlsrior
hard
sllcli rJls
lJotlnd Lha cd8cf oltltc
dEviar,
du'icc it is lbrmd for.
lo
lllow
*rc
6hcll
to
bc
ablc lo bc
:o
lDo olcd
on
d$
devlcc
tllc corluls
ot
lhc
blJtl Ehcll all, cur
opus-
Tlis
alloivs
coc)r
sidqf,all
10
fls
ovty whc d$,ie
is
i'$cncd
srd snlr bnEL
orcc
ir iE
io
CocllTtDuEiflc
r+nr
nr
th'E
crs is
rhnl
6c
elndomeriE
malrdd ls
formud
in
uddillon
lo Uru rlcriorhlrd cll
nn tll
inlcriorof tllEcncrior
hud
slcl, thu cl loolL=lE ltilluri l
lllls ir
Utc
goF
ctd(cd ol
ibe
corqcrs
ollbc srtcdor
hdrd
$cl)
L
rll'iw
dic
Ldrd
r[cl
to
Ilcx
for ]0untioB, Tlc chsllE
ric
roalcriul
is
Frovidcd
inl-hls
loEr ion
tc.auu it hll
mucl,
gE1rlst inlcrcrt fl$db:liry t0n
lhc
trhrlic
Drnul
lollic
cxlcdor blral shull
d
it slilctcs
sulEuicntly
to
.rlLrw
drc
sirlc*nlls ofdrc
qlctior
hard shcu
10
eljll
IL*
r]ray
on
mourtilg.Thk
cl(stcsa olc..pic'cc
c[scdrol
wtats
orDuld
phoru
oro rumobilc
clectronic dcvicc
crto
on
l,ollllrg Dod
plsvcds
difl md Ruid fmo cnrcrioE
whur'
cvlr bossible.
'l
be
clD5toharic lincrolso
can bo
ftmcd
olEr
uru
b'r:ttDns
0n
thc
drouu
whufti
u
us .simply
pirrll5
rbE
clnnofteric
linErmrEr nndils
lo
ll)c
Iloaioo
of
Gc
mb;lc
cbcrNDlc dLryhc lnput
dlol lrdcsircd.
BNEF DESCR]TTJON
OF'fHTi I)IT41VINCS
TIrc srrompDnyhg
dD$in8s, whjc
&c ircorloFlcd
hcrci
Ed
lbnn s pan
o[ 6c
slcsi]icolion.
illuslmt
dre
I'Il,rcol
irrslioo u d,
logrLbcr villl
Urc dr5cril,tion, fuihcr
Ecrvc
l$
uxtloin
d)c
nrinEinlc
ofdlc ilvcllioa
ud'l
ttr
crublc
o
prcon
slillc.t h tltc
Fdhcrt
irn
lo
m*
Erd uc Ib
i[vcrlio&
EIC.Ih
0
pcFpecrivE
vias
ofo bsDdlElddsviEcFml
rcrivc
m9c
delicllo
lhu o0crDll
hld
sLcll loycr
rvi6
cDlcoEcrr
Dod
unor
rlrnomcric lrycr
oftlru
prull.clivs
srrting
qlse
whcrc
illills
io
rc
crt co(llerg ofthc'etlertll
hrd 5Ic1l hyq;
fIGs.
s nnd 2j
lrE
scEriold
eiL.#
ofihDprulo4ivc6tc
ol thc
pnrcor
lnvmdon
slrnvi 8
rhu dcrcnl cr -lllcd by *t
inner cl0nancric
ldyF lor sccudsg
dsvice
in
ro c sc;
$lO,
r
:s
ll
lop
'.Elbes d
yls
of
a
budlcld
dcvicc
Iorcclirr-
cosc dcf,iclirg$c a(cmo) atd
EhcI
lsycrwilL
cu
concts
d irllcrc'dl1orEsic
luycroldLc
pNlelivc crdyiDg
ciro vhctc
is
filh i-o lhr cul comels
oI
l
cKcrnll L0td shcll
hycr dllllsddilionll
I
orBo cllstoDc[ic
ovcrltnd
tor
sccirn
ldg
o
dcvic ;
l;l(1, { iF
sl:cLiooul
vi w
oIUe
pmlEclivc
c 5c Ltftlc
pt tctr
hN'cndo
slowi 8
tlru
)urEc
closloEctic
ovsbrnd
for
s8 ur'
iog
r
duYicli
ljlc.5
is
n
pc$pLYlivc vlc? of
thc
FtDtrttivc
c05c oflhc
niE.icD
Invcnrion
brfurc dsviEc ir
su-Un:] dluI[in;
llC. 6 is Il
pc I 'cdvlt
vjcw ollhc
Irutuclivc
clls(tlllucbcd
lo
a
sompls
dcvic
shorv'irg
&c
dclcol
crslcd
by
lbc
iolcr
cl flomlric
la)'cr
Ior
$cclE irg u
devicc
in
lb', cnsq
md
BACKCIROIJND
OF 1'I
IJi
IIWENIION
Tlcru
ilro
m $y
sJscs for lEndheld
elcclrloic
dcviccs.
]l'ry tall iolD fuu
Elin
crlssedcr
F:hstolrutidtublcr
ekirs,
llJd
plarric
rhilk,
cu lld sLN
$rlctidls
lld
cobi-
lItjori
of fte5c, In
gcncn
l
lbRclaslomcd crscs
llc tiodc
ski
wUc ,
blx[usc
ofttc
flcxjhle lBlurE
ofdru nulcd0l, m
uu\ily
hc
sucrched ovu'
tlc
devico
rnd
dlfr
oncc
illndlql
collorm
closely
tu
tI(.
sbq,o
ol
Uo
qcvicc,
Tle rubtsry
rrurcriul
trrD
pr$vidclcry
EDorl
$o krEiiellucu.
ll)c do$'l-
sidc
offtesc
rypcq
ofc,acr
ii
lbal &c
dlnorcric
llllerial
lns
a
lriglr
.ftED
friclon
scmcilat. tt -c lruJils fiis ryFc oI
crse
dilficuk
lu
llE
io
Dsd
rEeovc
liom
pockcGltodolhci
righl
th@.
Whrris nrL{d is r
devicc
ltul
oncre
llerery
good
stoElirlj3;Irunccofu n
cft
Lelirflrtricerrcwi$oul
w hid]
slrlucc t iclior
.ocllicicot
mo$rs il morc
cowcqil.Ilcc for
Ijhrd
lloltic
rlulls
norDouy
Bro
Ennui0ctlfcd lls roorc
ElnonBplecelosllow
tlEdevircl0 Flideinln
thcc4qcfu loru
bElDgcloscd
jo\r,jlhrsEcoEdlrypllts,Additiunrllythcf
y,ill
a0
oftco llrvc s
lilcr
ofclllromcric
Eulfdul,
Nhldr
h l s
Io
cuslion
te
iLvicc.
Tb
.r
bo
co-mold.d,
Irlo
cldy
sluclEd
nrlloaliog
rrith
thc ne*:fibly. Cul
nad S "w ce{:s
&c
soEtlllly
d0dD
lloh
flli
rto [
matcrid,
wL]cfi k cut
jrlo
lalrenls
uod 0rs L'wtriDlo
u
Elups
lbrllhc
dLaie co
ilido
rr
futo.'ftc
dcaicc
lE
dl,n
llcld
iD
lluuo,
by friclion
or ll
dlrnl
of
soEc fDrE.'l-hc
downsids
o
ttlsc
dcviccs
isrhut it clln bc
difrlulr
ro
lulchcd
u dr{ic{
to
rigiLl
c$e, or+hrfli n casc
hls D sEcoodrry
llEcc
for $jcurlng
s
&vicc,
it
cln &i bull
Io
d'cmmbinndon oldrc dcvlcD
qrd
cIrE
mnkitrg
it imtnctic0l,
l0
AdditioEllt
Ur nni
ullcur
ofcarc'
which uc rlqul$tl
to
bc
cul
uod sc\rh togcthcr
gIthdy
hclcurcs
cosl wh (
is
lll.dlxl
G a
trrEu
tLat combinut bor lad slcli
cEscs oDd
closluEcric E
criul llr
ii
clry
lo
Floducc
ald ruqulrEs
minlor
raolcriDl ;n
lll
pnduclion.
55
SUMMTUTY OF
TIIP I}IWNTION
'[tu
llrtlrn
illvclrtion
is
un
implowncn
Dwr Oe exigllng
flscs bc{ausc il coEbioL.s ll:bcstfEaNftcoIbolhb dcusu 6
and
thc
duroEcriE
6cc \vhjlc tr-ilB ooly
r
siEsic
pln,
which
i5
lJrdicrlt,lrly
uscfbl
fro@ i
cnnsus]cr
vicrvpo_lll
lte
nrcscor
iovcrdon
pmvldcr
s
hld
prulcclivc
cxlcrior
sLtcil,
'Ilir
hld
Frutccdvc
cxlljrior
slrEll
allow3
$c dcvlcr
muxl-
rDuE
luolcclio
lrom idpacrs wiur slurp Dljclli
] e
bllfd d,
Fml{cdvccxlcdorrbcllEjD
cs
UicnnirholsEislirgphoncr,
MPt4
)nyc$.
d i.t
orlcr
Eobilc
clccBodc
dcvicca.
Mrlly
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 18 of 25 Page ID#:175
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
40/46
us 8,204,561
82
34
IICS. ?a
D[d
76 uc
ncrspcllivcvic{rs
oftlc
pnscrl
iqvco-
cur
\yould
bs torE
d
io Uc clostoEedc onlcriol bur thc lkr.
lion
dctlctil8
lhc c.dctDnl
lurd rbell hycr.q,irh
cut
Eolsun iEB
lo slloc o dcvicc tq
6
iNuded
lnto
$clmllcrivc co5c
aDd i (.I cLsrlotluric hycr olrhc
pDlecries
r rryiEEmsci
would('lacGomthDhfitcl.Ertcri
,osdtgrir,cullinglwry
a
rc$lrt,
-sccuring
posilinn
trnd
in
ar
c
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
41/46
us
8,204,s61
B?
56
lt
is
uffrEisrcd lb
dtc oldmurd
dirqcilsiolll
rclDlioo.
thDr
ir
suflicics
y
lsxiblc
lo
cnsblc
tha
co.qoldcd ole.Piecc
rhilE forific
pons
oflhc iovctri; ,
lo i0clude
vdriuli0n
h
sila
,
rsscEbly lo ddorm
ald tcrcby
accclt insstiDtr of 0I.
Irxr'
motcrirls,
Fc,
forr , fulclioo,
ood rn nnur ofolcrJtir)n,
sno'il clcctronic dcvic .
lslsubly
snd
usa,
ors dclmcd rEoaily
ollDnnt
lDd
obviuus
5.
lfi nnc.Iiocc
ctsc
ofchlm
1
,
whut(in
lh
a(lcdor
hlrd
|D dnc oiordirlry
llill
iotcurL urd di iquilElelt rEhlior.
t luyErircludL:r
ul
llrlrl
f0ur6:dc
surtaccslhll illeltEl Io form
shjpr
ro
tlosa illunElcd
jn
rhs
dFwh&s
qrd
dlscribcd
D llc
l
lurs
l
four comcr
Filt6
[[d
bvo
of
Lhc
.o'u.joi ls
coE'
t;va
dllcdltlon urc ittl d ] lo b;cacoEltoatd
hy lfic
] isc
c -m y
ponioDt
d$t
Lq,oec th cD'doldld flsdblc
pnscDr
iEvadion
i ct luyc
'
Flrthcrfloru,
orhcr Mca6 of da
lrloy
b.Dc6t fi$m
lhls
7-
Tlio
onGplccc.ntE
oldois I' wbqrEln lhc
co-EloldBl
rocdrod & d
ldjrsboEls
lo lbs alcsi8 nJr
0.lricilulcd
llos, ro oDE.FlEc usscEbly-iu;hdc
da ovtdunE
e)(EDNEg trum B
tLru
scolc
of ilu iavurrrion r}ouki be
d t @io d
by llta
toF
I
onioa
I
fone
oiinoreofbc
sid
surfDccs
ill
flil-Jlei
lo
lhE
ll'Fodcd
clnimi
fll
drcir lcgrl
quivdmE,
mlll'
dron hy bollom srrfucc oflhE
oocJ,iKc
c sE.
r6i
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
42/46
Exhibit F
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 21 of 25 Page ID#:178
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
43/46
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 22 of 25 Page ID#:179
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
44/46
Exhibit G
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 23 of 25 Page ID#:180
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
45/46
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 24 of 25 Page ID#:181
8/10/2019 Speculative v. Mattson - Amended Complaint
46/46
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
PROOF OF SERVICE
I am a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, andnot a party to the within action. My business address is Johnson & Pham, LLP6355 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 326, Woodland Hills, California 91367. OnNovember 25, 2014, I served the within document(s):
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES ANDDECLARATORY RELIEF
FACSIMILE - by transmitting via facsimile the document(s) listedabove to the fax number(s) set forth on the attached Telecommunications CoverPage(s) on this date before 5:00 p.m.
MAIL - by causing the document(s) listed above to be placed in asealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the United States mail atWoodland Hills, California addressed as set forth below.
PERSONAL SERVICE - by personally delivering the document(s)listed above to the person(s) at the address(es) set forth below.
OVERNIGHT COURIER - by placing the document(s) listed abovein a sealed envelope with shipping prepaid, and depositing in a collection box fornext day delivery to the person(s) at the address(es) set forth below via UNITEDPARCEL SERVICE.
BY E-MAIL/ELECTRONIC DELIVERY - by causing suchdocument(s) to be transmitted by electronic mail transmission to the appropriateelectronic mail address(es) set forth below.
Marina L. Lang, Esq. STU DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, LLC
[email protected] 6803 Preston Rd., Suite 138SoCal IP Law Group, LLP Frisco, TX 75034310 N. Westlake Blvd., Suite 120Westlake Village, CA 91362 MD5 TECHNOLOGIESPhone: (805) 230-1350 6803 Preston Rd., Suite 138Fax: (805) 230-1355 Frisco, TX 75034
Attorneys for DefendantPATRICK MATTSON
I declare that I am a member of the bar of this court.
Executed on November 25, 2014, at Woodland Hills, California.
By: __/s/Marcus F. Chaney__________
Marcus F. Chaney
Case 2:14-cv-06465-ODW-PLA Document 29-1 Filed 11/25/14 Page 25 of 25 Page ID#:182