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
Springfree Et. Al. v. JumpSport

Springfree Et. Al. v. JumpSport

Ratings: (0)|Views: 10|Likes:
Published by PatentBlast
Springfree et. al. v. JumpSport
Springfree et. al. v. JumpSport

More info:

Published by: PatentBlast on Jul 11, 2014
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved

Availability:

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

07/11/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 
COMPLAINT PAGE 1
 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION SPRINGFREE L.P. and SPRINGFREE TRAMPOLINE USA INC., Plaintiffs, JUMPSPORT, INC., Defendant. CASE NO. ____
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
 Plaintiffs Springfree L.P. and Springfree Trampoline USA Inc. (collectively
“Springfree”)
 allege as follows:
PARTIES
 1.
 
Springfree L.P. is a Canadian limited partnership with a principal place of  business at 3933 N Central Expressway #400, Plano, TX 75023. Springfree Trampoline USA, Inc. is a corporation formed under the laws of Canada with a principal place of business at 151 Whitehall Dr., Unit 2, Markham, Ontario, Canada L3R9T1. 2.
 
JumpSport, Inc.
(“JumpSport”)
is a corporation formed under the laws of California with a principal place of business at 2055 South 7th Street, Suite A, San Jose, CA 95112.
NATURE OF THIS ACTION
 3.
 
Springfree seeks a declaratory judgment that U.S. Patent No. 8,430,795 (“the ’795  patent”) is invalid and is not infringed by Springfree’s tram
 poline enclosures. The relief is
necessary because JumpSport has alleged that Springfree’s trampoline enclosures infringe the ’795 patent and has created a justiciable controversy between Springfree and JumpSport.
 4.
 
This is also an action by Springfree for false advertising, false association, and
 
 
COMPLAINT PAGE 2
 
unjust enrichment in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), Texas Business and Commerce Code § 16.29, and the common law of Texas.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
 5.
 
Jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter of this action is proper in this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 271
et seq.
and 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (actions arising under the laws of the United States), 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a) (actions relating to patents and trademarks), 28 U.S.C. § 1338(b) (claims of unfair competition when joined with a substantial and related claim under  patent or trademark laws), and 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-02 (declaratory judgment actions). This Court also has supplemental jurisdiction over the counterclaims herein that arise under state statutory and common law pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). 6.
 
Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400 because
JumpSport sells its products in this judicial district and JumpSport’s false advertising has taken
 place in this judicial district. 7.
 
This Court has personal jurisdiction over JumpSport under the laws of the State of Texas, including the Texas long-arm statute, TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE §17.042, due at least to its substantial business in this State and judicial district, including: (a) its false advertising activities alleged herein; and (b) regularly doing or soliciting business, engaging in other persistent conduct, and/or deriving substantial revenue from goods sold and services  provided to Texas residents.
FACTS
 8.
 
Springfree was founded more than a decade ago, and since then it has become a leader and innovator in designing and creating safe trampolines. The Springfree Trampoline was invented and designed by New Zealand engineer and professor at the University of Canterbury,
 
 
COMPLAINT PAGE 3
 
Dr. Keith Alexander. The design was commercialized in 2003 and is now sold in over 20 countries, including the United States. 9.
 
Springfree L.P. is headquartered in Plano, Texas, and operates three retail locations in the United States: in Issaquah, Washington; Plano, Texas; and Frisco, Texas. Springfree trampolines are also available online at www.springfreetrampoline.com. 10.
 
As a result of its marketing efforts, innovation, and the reliability and safety features of its products, Springfree and its trampolines have acquired goodwill and a favorable reputation among consumers.
The ’795 Patent
 11.
 
The ’795 patent issued to JumpSport, Inc. on April 30, 2013. The ’795 patent
identifies the inventors as Mark W. Publicover and Donald Strasser.
A copy of the ’795 patent i
s attached as Exhibit A. On information and belief, Mark Publicover is the Chief Executive Officer of JumpSport, Inc. 12.
 
The ’795 patent is within the same patent family as U.S. Patent Nos. 6,261,207 (“the ’207 patent”) and 6,053,845 (“the ’845 patent”).
Each of the
’795, ’207, and ’845
 patents
is entitled “Trampoline or the like with enclosure.”
 JumpSport filed a lawsuit against Springfree in the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, Cause No. 6:13-cv-929-JDL, in which certain Springfree trampoline systems are accused of infringing
the ’207 and ’845 patents.
That case is currently pending. 13.
 
JumpSport recently communicated to Springfree that JumpSport believes
Springfree also infringes the ’795 patent and
that JumpSport intends to assert
the ’795 patent against Springfree’s trampoline
 systems. 14.
 
There is an actual controversy between Springfree and JumpSport regarding

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)//-->