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
0Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Neurowave Medical Technologies v. Mann

Neurowave Medical Technologies v. Mann

Ratings: (0)|Views: 9 |Likes:
Published by PatentBlast
Neurowave Medical Technologies v. Mann
Neurowave Medical Technologies v. Mann

More info:

Published by: PatentBlast on Aug 16, 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

08/16/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEEAT KNOXVILLENEUROWAVE MEDICALTECHNOLOGIES LLC, an Illinois LimitedLiability Company,Plaintiff,v.THOMAS MANN, an individual,Defendant.))))))))))))Case No. ________JudgeJURY DEMANDCOMPLAINT
Neurowave Medical Technologies LLC (“Neurowave”) files this Complaint againstThomas Mann (“Defendant”) for infringement of United States Patent Nos. 6,076,018(hereinafter “the ‘018 patent”), 6,567,695 (hereinafter “the ‘695 patent”), and 7,127,288(hereinafter “the ‘288 patent”). The ‘018, ‘695 and ‘288 patents are each individually referred toas an “Asserted Patent” and collectively as the “Asserted Patents.”
THE PARTIESNeurowave Medical Technologies LLC
1.
 
Neurowave is a limited liability company organized and existing under thelaws of the State of Illinois with its principal place of business at 200 East Randolph Street,Suite 2200, Chicago, Illinois 60601.2.
 
Neurowave, formerly known as Relief Band Medical Technology LLC (seename-change document at Exhibit A), is a privately held neuroscience company thatdevelops, manufactures, and commercializes patented transdermal neuromodulationdevices for the treatment of a wide range of acute and chronic clinical conditions.
 
 3.
 
Prior to 2010, Neurowave marketed and sold its patented transdermalneuromodulation devices on both a prescription basis (“RX Devices”) and an over-the-counter basis (“OTC Devices”). In an effort to obtain a Current Procedural Terminology(CPT) code from the CPT Editorial Panel of the American Medical Association for its RXDevices to enable patients to obtain reimbursement for the devices from insurance,Neurowave temporarily ceased marketing its OTC Devices in the US market in September2010.4.
 
Since December 2012, when it became apparent that a new CPT code wouldnot be granted for the RX Devices, Neurowave has been planning for re-entry of its OTCDevices into the market.5.
 
Neurowave’s efforts to reintroduce its patented OTC Devices into the markethave been materially hindered by Comfort Quest’s selling of the Accused Products toNeurowave’s former customer of the OTC Devices.
Defendant Thomas Mann
6.
 
Upon information and belief, Defendant Thomas Mann is an individualresiding at 1909 Hidden Meadow Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee, 37922.7.
 
Upon information and belief, Defendant Mann is currently an officer and/ordirector of Comfort Quest, Inc. a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business at41 Post St., San Jose, CA 95113. In his role at Comfort Quest, Mr. Mann knowingly andactively assisted in Comfort Quest’s infringement of the Asserted Patents.8.
 
ComfortQuest, Inc. has and continues to import, sell, and/or offer to sell theComfort Quest Morning Sickness Relief device (Model: CQ-P3, as shown in Exhibit
 
 B) and the Comfort Quest Anti Motion Sickness Band (Model: CQ-M3, as shown inExhibit C) at least for resale by various retailers in this Judicial District and through websitethat can be accessed by residents of this Judicial District for purchase.9.
 
Defendant Mann worked for Plaintiff Neurowave’s predecessor company,Woodside Biomedical Inc, from January 1997 through 2003, then for Neurowave fromDecember 2006 through January 2010. At Woodside Biomedical Inc., Mr. Mann wasExecutive Vice President of Operations, and he was later retained as a consultant forNeurowave regarding its OTC Devices and RX Devices. In both roles, Mr. Mann hadaccess to Neurowave’s confidential and proprietary product and business information, andwas integrally involved in the sales and marketing strategies of Neurowave. Mr. Mannalso had intimate knowledge of Neurowave’s patent portfolio relating to its transdermalneuromodulation devices, including the Asserted Patents, and knew or should have knownhis actions would induce Comfort Quest to infringe.10.
 
This cause of action arises under the patent laws of the United States, and inparticular, 35 U.S.C. §§ 271,
et seq.
 J
URISDICTION AND VENUE
11.
 
Jurisdiction is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 (FederalQuestion) and 1338(a) (Patents) because this is a civil action for patent infringement arisingunder the United States’ patent statutes, 35 U.S.C. § 101
et seq.
 12.
 
Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(c) and 1400(b) because Defendanthas committed acts of infringement in this district and is deemed to reside in this district.13.
 
This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant and venue is proper inthis district because Defendant has committed, and continues to commit, acts of infringement

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)//-->