Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
AG Findings v. Bodega - Complaint

AG Findings v. Bodega - Complaint

Ratings: (0)|Views: 19 |Likes:
Published by slburstein
http://bit.ly/13UOZFJ
http://bit.ly/13UOZFJ

More info:

Published by: slburstein on Jul 20, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

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

11/14/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 Page 1 of 10UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDACASE NO.: _____________________________________A.G. FINDINGS & MFG. CO., INC., d/b/aBALLISTIC CASE CO., a Florida corporation,Plaintiff,v.BODEGA CORP. D/B/A CASE-OLOGY, aCalifornia corporation,Defendants.______________________________________/ 
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR PATENTAND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENTAND UNFAIR COMPETITIONJURY DEMANDVERIFIED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, A.G. FINDINGS & MFG. CO., INC., d/b/a BALLISTIC CASE CO., a Floridacorporation (hereinafter “A.G. Findings”), by and through its undersigned counsel, herebyalleges in its Complaint against Defendant, BODEGA CORP. D/B/A CASE-OLOGY, aCalifornia corporation (hereinafter “Bodega”), as follows:
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1.
 
This is an action for patent and trade dress infringement and unfair competitionarising under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) and the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1125(a)(1)(A).2.
 
This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action under 28 U.S.C.§§ 1331 and 1338(a)-(b), and 15 U.S.C. § 1121(a), and the laws of the State of Florida, includingviolations of the State of Florida’s unfair competition laws under the Deceptive and Unfair TradePractices Act, Fla. Stat. §§ 501.201 to 501.213.3.
 
Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §1391(b)(2) as a substantial partof the events giving rise to the claims occurred in this District.
Case 0:13-cv-61559-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/19/2013 Page 1 of 10
 
 Page 2 of 104.
 
Defendant is subject to the specific personal jurisdiction of this Court underFlorida law, at least including Florida’s long-arm statute. F.S. § 48.193 (1)(b), (f)(1)-(2) andFederal Rule of Civil Procedure 4.
THE PARTIES
5.
 
A.G. Findings is a Florida corporation with its principal place of business inSunrise, Florida.6.
 
Bodega is a California corporation with its principal place of business at 20160Paseo Del Prado, # F, Walnut, California 91789.7.
 
Upon information and belief, Bodega is in the business of importing, making,selling, and offering to sell infringing mobile device cases in this District and throughout theUnited States, including in online catalogs accessible throughout the State of Florida.
FACTUAL BACKGROUNDA.G. Findings
8.
 
A.G. Findings is well-known in the United States for designing andmanufacturing creative and protective mobile device cases. Using state-of-the-art materials andfashionable designs, A.G. Findings is recognized in the industry for providing superior qualityand stylish products.9.
 
A.G. Findings markets, offers for sale, and sells protective mobile device casesunder the trademarks BALLISTIC® and SG
. The SG
cases feature a distinctive combinationof protective and aesthetic features that have made the SG
cases popular amongst consumersand retailers. Indeed, sales of the SG
cases eclipsed twenty million dollars since their first saleand the SG
cases are sold by service providers, such as AT&T® and SPRINT® throughout the
Case 0:13-cv-61559-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/19/2013 Page 2 of 10
 
 Page 3 of 10United States and in this District, as well as by major retailers, such as Sam’s Club. A.G.Findings has further spent over one million dollars marketing its SG
cases throughout theUnited States.10.
 
The SG
case is offered for several makes and models of cell phones includingSamsung, Motorola, Apple, Blackberry, among others. A screenshot of an Apple iPhone 4/4SSG
is shown in Exhibit A as an exemplary A.G. Findings SG
case make and model.11.
 
Each of the SG
cases include aesthetic, non-functional features that consumersrecognize as emanating from A.G. Findings, or its Florida registered fictitious name, Ballistic.In particular, each SG
case includes aesthetic features on its corners, back and side portions,and further includes an aesthetic arrangement of alternating lower durometer material withhigher durometer material, that make the overall appearance of the SG
cases, regardless of themake and model, recognizable by the consumers.12.
 
Owing to its distinctive aesthetic features, its substantial sales, and the vastexpenditure of advertising by A.G. Findings, the SG
case has acquired secondary meaning withconsumers seeking to purchase a protective and stylish cell phone case, and who recognize theaesthetic features and overall appearance of the SG
case as emanating from Ballistic.Accordingly, A.G. Findings has unregistered trade dress rights to its SG
case.13.
 
A.G. Findings is the owner by assignment of U.S. Design Patent No. D682,260issued on May 14, 2013 entitled MOBILE DEVICE CASE (“the ‘260 Patent”). Exhibit B. The‘260 Patent is in full force and effect. The sole claim of the ‘260 Patent is directed toward amobile device case as shown in the drawings of the ‘260 Patent.
Case 0:13-cv-61559-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/19/2013 Page 3 of 10

You're Reading a Free Preview

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