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
Eclipse IP v. Patagonia

Eclipse IP v. Patagonia

Ratings: (0)|Views: 4 |Likes:
Published by PriorSmart
Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. None: Eclipse IP LLC v. Patagonia, Inc. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l9m3 for more info.
Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. None: Eclipse IP LLC v. Patagonia, Inc. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l9m3 for more info.

More info:

Published by: PriorSmart on Oct 24, 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

02/26/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 
1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
 ECLIPSE IP LLC, ))Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. ______________ )v. )) Jury Trial DemandedPATAGONIA, INC., ))Defendant. ))
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
For its Complaint, Plaintiff Eclipse IP LLC (“Eclipse”), by and through theundersigned counsel, alleges as follows:
 
THE PARTIES
1.
 
Eclipse is a company organized and existing under the laws of Florida andhaving a principal place of business address at 115 NW 17th Street, Delray Beach,Florida 33444.2.
 
Patagonia, Inc. (“Defendant”) is a corporation organized and existingunder the laws of California with, upon information and belief, a place of business at
 
259West Santa Clara Street, Ventura, California 93001.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1.
 
This is a suit for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of theUnited States, Title 35 of the United States Code § 1
et seq
.2.
 
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.§§ 1331 and 1338(a).
 
 
23.
 
Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C.§§ 1391(c) and 1400(b).4.
 
Upon information and belief, Defendant conducts substantial business inthis forum, directly or through intermediaries, including: (i) at least a portion of theinfringements alleged herein; and (ii) regularly doing or soliciting business, engaging inother persistent courses of conduct and/or deriving substantial revenue from goods andservices provided to individuals in this judicial district.
THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
5.
 
On January 20, 2009, United States Patent No. 7,479,899, entitled,“Notification Systems and Methods Enabling a Response to Cause Connection Between a Notified PCD and a Delivery or Pickup Representative” was duly and legally issued bythe United States Patent and Trademark Office. A true and correct copy of the ‘899 patent is attached as Exhibit A to this complaint.6.
 
On October 10, 2006, United States Patent No. 7,119,716 (“the ‘716 patent”), entitled “Response Systems and Methods for Notification Systems for Modifying Future Notifications,” was duly and lawfully issued by the U.S. Patent andTrademark Office. A true and correct copy of the ‘716 patent is attached as Exhibit B.7.
 
On January 25, 2011, United States Patent No. 7,876,239 (“the ‘239 patent”), entitled “Secure Notification Messaging Systems and Methods UsingAuthentication Indicia,” was duly and lawfully issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. A true and correct copy of the ‘239 patent is attached as Exhibit C.
 
 
38.
 
Eclipse is the assignee and owner of the right, title and interest in and tothe ‘899, ‘716, and ‘239 patents including the right to assert all causes of action arisingunder said patents and the right to any remedies for infringement of them.
COUNT I – INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,479,899
9.
 
Eclipse repeats and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 8 asif fully set forth herein.10.
 
Without license or authorization and in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a),Defendant has infringed and continues to infringe the ‘899 patent by making, using,offering for sale and/or selling within this district and elsewhere in the United States,computer-based notification systems and methods which at least monitor travel data inconnection with orders placed via Defendants’ website, www.patagonia.com, initiatenotifications to customers, and enable such customers to select whether or not tocommunicate with Defendant.11.
 
Eclipse is entitled to recover from Defendant the damages sustained byEclipse as a result of Defendant’s infringement of the ‘899 patent in an amount subject to proof at trial, which, by law, cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together withinterest and costs as fixed by this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.12.
 
Prior to the filing of this Complaint, Eclipse, by letter dated August 28,2013, informed Defendant of Defendant’s infringement of the ‘899 patent.13.
 
Thus, Defendant has been on notice of the ‘899 patent since at least thedate it received Eclipse’s letter dated August 28, 2013.14.
 
Upon information and belief, Defendant has not altered its infringingconduct after receiving Eclipse’s letter dated August 28, 2013.

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)//-->