Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Procter & Gamble Company v. CAO Group

Procter & Gamble Company v. CAO Group

Ratings: (0)|Views: 150 |Likes:
Published by PriorSmart
Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-00337-SAS: The Procter & Gamble Company v. CAO Group, Inc. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, the Hon. S Arthur Spiegel presiding. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l8sp for more info.
Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-00337-SAS: The Procter & Gamble Company v. CAO Group, Inc. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, the Hon. S Arthur Spiegel presiding. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l8sp for more info.

More info:

Published by: PriorSmart on May 21, 2013
Copyright:Public Domain

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/14/2013

pdf

text

original

 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIOWESTERN DIVISIONTHE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY,Plaintiff,vs.CAO GROUP, INC.,Defendant.))))))))) Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-337
COMPLAINTAND JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff, The Procter & Gamble Company (“P&G”), for its claims against CAO Group,Inc. (“CAO”), hereby states and alleges the following:
THE PARTIES AND JURISDICTION
 1.
 
P&G is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Ohiothat maintains its principal place of business at One Procter & Gamble Plaza, Cincinnati, Ohio45201.2.
 
On information and belief, CAO is a corporation organized and existing under thelaws of the State of Utah that maintains its principal place of business at 4628 West Skyhawk Drive, West Jordan, Utah 84084.3.
 
This Court has personal jurisdiction over CAO under the Ohio long-arm statute(O.R.C. § 2307.382) because CAO (1) transacts business in this State and in this District; (2)contracts to supply and has supplied tooth whitening strips that infringe P&G’s intellectual property in this State and in this District; and (3) derives substantial revenue from toothwhitening strips that infringe P&G’s intellectual property sold and used in this State and in thisDistrict.
 
 
24.
 
Moreover, on information and belief, CAO has injected its infringing productsinto the stream of commerce with the expectation that they would be sold and offered for sale inthis District. On information and belief, CAO has injected its products into the stream of commerce by,
inter alia
, (1) distributing them through its exclusive national distributor, HenrySchein, which has distribution facilities in this district; (2) distributing them through national on-line retailers including,
e.g.
, henryschein.com, amazon.com, smilox.com, dentist.net, sears.com,groupon.com, dentalhealthessentials.com and dentalstores.com; and (3) by providing its productsdirectly to dentists through its own highly interactive website at www.sheerwhiteteeth.com. Oninformation and belief, as a result of these activities, CAO’s products have been sold and/or usedin this State and in this District.5.
 
This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35, UnitedStates Code. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1338(a) and1331.6.
 
Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b)(2) and 1400(b).
THE PATENTS
7.
 
On November 23, 1999, United States Letters Patent No. 5,989,569 (“the ’569 patent”) entitled “Delivery System For A Tooth Whitener Using A Permanently DeformableStrip Of Material,” was duly and legally issued to P&G as the assignee of the named inventors.Since that date, P&G has been the owner of the ’569 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’569 patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit A.8.
 
On April 4, 2000, United States Letters Patent No. 6,045,811 (“the ’811 patent”)entitled “Delivery System For An Oral Care Substance Using A Permanently Deformable StripOf Material,” was duly and legally issued to P&G as the assignee of the named inventors. Since
 
3that date, P&G has been the owner of the ’811 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’811 patentis attached to this Complaint as Exhibit B.9.
 
On October 17, 2006, United States Letters Patent No. 7,122,199 (“the ’199 patent”) entitled “Methods For Whitening Teeth,” was duly and legally issued to P&G as theassignee of the named inventors. Since that date, P&G has been the owner of the ’199 patent. Atrue and correct copy of the ’199 patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit C.
THE INFRINGING PRODUCTS
10.
 
CAO currently sells and offers for sale tooth whitening products called “Sheer White!
TM
Whitening Films.” On information and belief, CAO knows and intends that consumerswill purchase its tooth whitening products to use for whitening their teeth. Photographs of the packaging of the Sheer White! Whitening Films product are attached to this Complaint asExhibit D.11.
 
The Sheer White! Whitening Films product includes instructions directingconsumers to use the product to whiten their teeth. A copy of the instructions is attached to theComplaint as Exhibit E.12.
 
CAO also currently sells and offers for sale a tooth desensitizing product called“Sheer DesenZ
TM
Desensitizing Films.” On information and belief, CAO knows and intends thatconsumers will purchase its tooth desensitizing products to use for desensitizing their teeth.Photographs of the packaging of the Sheer DesenZ Desensitizing Films product are attached tothis Complaint as Exhibit F.13.
 
The Sheer DesenZ Desensitizing Films product includes instructions directingconsumers to use the product to desensitize their teeth. A copy of the instructions is attached tothe Complaint as Exhibit G.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->