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
Hydro Engineering et. al. v. Petter Investments

Hydro Engineering et. al. v. Petter Investments

Ratings: (0)|Views: 33 |Likes:
Published by PriorSmart
Official Complaint for Declaratory Judgement in Civil Action No. 2:13-cv-00673-EJF: Hydro Engineering et. al. v. Petter Investments. Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, the Hon. Evelyn J. Furse presiding. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l8LL for more info.
Official Complaint for Declaratory Judgement in Civil Action No. 2:13-cv-00673-EJF: Hydro Engineering et. al. v. Petter Investments. Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, the Hon. Evelyn J. Furse presiding. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l8LL for more info.

More info:

Published by: PriorSmart on Jul 22, 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

03/05/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 
Brett L. Foster, 6089
 bfoster@hollandhart.com
Mark A. Miller, 9563
mmiller@hollandhart.com
Christopher B. Hadley, 14055
cbhadley@hollandhart.com
H
OLLAND
&
 
H
ART LLP
 222 S. Main Street, Suite 2200Salt Lake City, Utah 84101Telephone: (801) 799-5800Facsimile: (801) 799-5700
 Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Hydro Engineering, Inc. and CA Cleaning Systems, Inc.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISIONHYDRO ENGINEERING, INC.
,a Utah corporation, and 
CALIFORNIACLEANING SYSTEMS
, a Californiacompany,Plaintiffs,vs.
PETTER INVESTMENTS, INC.
d/b/a
RIVEER
,
 
a Michigan corporation,Defendant.
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORYJUDGMENT AND TRADEMARKINFRINGEMENT
Civil Case No. 2:13-CV-00673-EJFMagistrate Judge Evelyn J. Furse
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiffs Hydro Engineering, Inc. and CA Cleaning Systems, Inc. in support of their Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and Trademark Infringement allege as follows:
NATURE OF ACTION
1.
 
This action arises and is brought under the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C.§§ 2201-2202, and the Trademark Act of July 5, 1946, as amended, commonly known as the
 
 2Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051,
et seq.
, the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 100,
et seq
. and Utah statutory and common law.
PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2.
 
Plaintiff Hydro Engineering. Inc. (“Hydro”) is a Utah corporation having its principal place of business at 865 West 2600 South, Salt Lake City, Utah 84119.3.
 
Plaintiff CA Cleaning Systems, Inc. (“CCS”) is a California company having its principal place of business at 3666 San Gabriel River Parkway, Pico Rivera, California 90660.4.
 
Defendant Petter Investments, Inc. d/b/a Riveer (“Petter”) is a Michigancorporation with a principal place of business at 233 Veterans Boulevard, South Haven,Michigan 49090.5.
 
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1121 and 28U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338, and 2201-2202. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over thefactually-related state law claims in this dispute pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.6.
 
This Court possesses personal jurisdiction over Petter because it regularlytransacts business in the State of Utah directly and/or through a distributor or factoryrepresentative. Petter is also a defendant in Civil Case No. 2:11-cv-00139, a related co-pendingcivil action in this jurisdiction.7.
 
Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because Petter regularly conducts business in this district, and because Petter is a defendant in other pendinglitigation in this district.
 
 3
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
8.
 
Hydro and Petter are direct competitors for aircraft wash and equipment wash pad systems that are sold to both private industry as well as government agencies, both foreign and domestic, particularly their militaries. One of the largest customers for Hydro’s and Petter’s products is the U.S. Military.9.
 
On May 24, 2013, Petter filed suit in the Southern District of California, Case No.13CV1235 LAB WMC, against Hydro, CCS, Enviremedial Services, Inc. (“Enviremedial”) and J&S Equipment (“J&S”), (the “California Complaint”). Petter’s California Complaint alleges patent infringement, false advertising, intentional interference with prospective economicadvantage and unfair competition. A true and correct copy of the California Complaint and allexhibits is attached hereto as Exhibit A.10.
 
The California Complaint alleges infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,164,298 (the“’298 Patent”) by Hydro, CCS, J&S and Enviremedial.11.
 
Enviremedial is a competitor of Hydro.12.
 
CCS and J&S are customers of Hydro’s wash rack products, called Hydropads,and Hydro has indemnified them from Petter’s patent infringement claims. A true and correctcopy of Hydro’s Hydropad website product information is attached as Exhibit B (“Hydropad Product Information”). J&S purchased a Hydropad over 6 years ago, and therefore, and uponinformation and belief, the statutory period for damages has elapsed pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 286.Upon information and belief, J&S has or will be dismissed from the California Complaint, and therefore does not join Hydro and CCS in this Complaint for declaratory relief.

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)//-->