UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY

, Plaintiff, vs. CAO GROUP, INC., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-337 ) ) ) COMPLAINT ) AND JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff, The Procter & Gamble Company (“P&G”), for its claims against CAO Group, Inc. (“CAO”), hereby states and alleges the following: THE PARTIES AND JURISDICTION 1. P&G is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Ohio

that maintains its principal place of business at One Procter & Gamble Plaza, Cincinnati, Ohio 45201. 2. On information and belief, CAO is a corporation organized and existing under the

laws of the State of Utah that maintains its principal place of business at 4628 West Skyhawk Drive, West Jordan, Utah 84084. 3. This Court has personal jurisdiction over CAO under the Ohio long-arm statute

(O.R.C. § 2307.382) because CAO (1) transacts business in this State and in this District; (2) contracts to supply and has supplied tooth whitening strips that infringe P&G’s intellectual property in this State and in this District; and (3) derives substantial revenue from tooth whitening strips that infringe P&G’s intellectual property sold and used in this State and in this District.

4.

Moreover, on information and belief, CAO has injected its infringing products

into the stream of commerce with the expectation that they would be sold and offered for sale in this District. On information and belief, CAO has injected its products into the stream of commerce by, inter alia, (1) distributing them through its exclusive national distributor, Henry Schein, which has distribution facilities in this district; (2) distributing them through national online retailers including, e.g., henryschein.com, amazon.com, smilox.com, dentist.net, sears.com, groupon.com, dentalhealthessentials.com and dentalstores.com; and (3) by providing its products directly to dentists through its own highly interactive website at www.sheerwhiteteeth.com. On information and belief, as a result of these activities, CAO’s products have been sold and/or used in this State and in this District. 5. This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35, United

States Code. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1338(a) and 1331. 6. Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b)(2) and 1400(b). THE PATENTS 7. On November 23, 1999, United States Letters Patent No. 5,989,569 (“the ’569

patent”) entitled “Delivery System For A Tooth Whitener Using A Permanently Deformable Strip Of Material,” was duly and legally issued to P&G as the assignee of the named inventors. Since that date, P&G has been the owner of the ’569 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’569 patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit A. 8. On April 4, 2000, United States Letters Patent No. 6,045,811 (“the ’811 patent”)

entitled “Delivery System For An Oral Care Substance Using A Permanently Deformable Strip Of Material,” was duly and legally issued to P&G as the assignee of the named inventors. Since

2

that date, P&G has been the owner of the ’811 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’811 patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit B. 9. On October 17, 2006, United States Letters Patent No. 7,122,199 (“the ’199

patent”) entitled “Methods For Whitening Teeth,” was duly and legally issued to P&G as the assignee of the named inventors. Since that date, P&G has been the owner of the ’199 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’199 patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit C. THE INFRINGING PRODUCTS 10. CAO currently sells and offers for sale tooth whitening products called “Sheer

White!TM Whitening Films.” On information and belief, CAO knows and intends that consumers will purchase its tooth whitening products to use for whitening their teeth. Photographs of the packaging of the Sheer White! Whitening Films product are attached to this Complaint as Exhibit D. 11. The Sheer White! Whitening Films product includes instructions directing

consumers to use the product to whiten their teeth. A copy of the instructions is attached to the Complaint as Exhibit E. 12. CAO also currently sells and offers for sale a tooth desensitizing product called

“Sheer DesenZTM Desensitizing Films.” On information and belief, CAO knows and intends that consumers will purchase its tooth desensitizing products to use for desensitizing their teeth. Photographs of the packaging of the Sheer DesenZ Desensitizing Films product are attached to this Complaint as Exhibit F. 13. The Sheer DesenZ Desensitizing Films product includes instructions directing

consumers to use the product to desensitize their teeth. A copy of the instructions is attached to the Complaint as Exhibit G.

3

14.

CAO also currently sells and offers for sale a fluoride treatment product called

“Sheer FluorXTM Fluoride Treatment Films.” On information and belief, CAO knows and intends that consumers will purchase its fluoride treatment products to use for treating their teeth with fluoride. Photographs of the packaging of the Sheer FluorX Fluoride Treatment Films product are attached to this Complaint as Exhibit H. 15. The Sheer FluorX Fluoride Treatment Films product includes instructions A copy of the

directing consumers to use the product to treat their teeth with fluoride. instructions is attached to the Complaint as Exhibit I. COUNT I – INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’569 PATENT 16.

P&G incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through

15 as if fully rewritten herein. 17. CAO is infringing the ’569 patent by manufacturing or having manufactured,

using, offering to sell and/or selling products that infringe the ’569 patent, including the “Sheer White! Whitening Films,” without authority or license from P&G. 18. On information and belief, CAO knows, should know, or is willfully blind to the

fact that its infringing products are specially made or adapted for an infringing method. Nevertheless, it has sold, and continues to sell, a material component of the patented invention that is not a staple article of commerce capable of substantial noninfringing use. 19. CAO has been and is currently actively inducing infringement of the ’569 patent

by others, without authority or license from P&G. Among other infringements induced, CAO has actively induced others to use and perform, within the United States, the systems and methods recited by the claims of the ’569 patent. CAO provides instructions to consumers

4

directing them to perform methods that infringe the claims of the ’569 patent. On information and belief, CAO knows that the induced acts constitute patent infringement. 20. As such, CAO has knowingly, or with willful blindness, contributed to and

induced, and continues to contribute to and induce, the infringement of the claims of the ’569 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271. 21. P&G has been damaged, in an amount yet to be determined, by CAO’s acts of

infringement and will continue to be damaged by such acts in the future. COUNT II – INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’811 PATENT 22. P&G incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through

21 as if fully rewritten herein. 23. CAO is infringing the ’811 patent by manufacturing or having manufactured,

using, offering to sell and/or selling products that infringe the ’811 patent, including the “Sheer White! Whitening Films,” “Sheer DesenZ Desensitizing Films” and “Sheer FluorX Fluoride Treatment Films,” without authority or license from P&G. 24. On information and belief, CAO knows, should know, or is willfully blind to the

fact that its infringing products are specially made or adapted for an infringing method. Nevertheless, it has sold, and continues to sell, a material component of the patented invention that is not a staple article of commerce capable of substantial noninfringing use. 25. CAO has been and is currently actively inducing infringement of the ’811 patent

by others, without authority or license from P&G. Among other infringements induced, CAO has actively induced others to use and perform, within the United States, the systems and methods recited by the claims of the ’811 patent. CAO provides instructions to consumers

5

directing them to perform methods that infringe the claims of the ’811 patent. On information and belief, CAO knows that the induced acts constitute patent infringement. 26. As such, CAO has knowingly, or with willful blindness, contributed to and

induced, and continues to contribute to and induce, the infringement of the claims of the ’811 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271. 27. P&G has been damaged, in an amount yet to be determined, by CAO’s acts of

infringement and will continue to be damaged by such acts in the future. COUNT III – INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’199 PATENT 28. P&G incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through

27 as if fully rewritten herein. 29. CAO is infringing the ’199 patent by manufacturing or having manufactured,

using, offering to sell and/or selling products that infringe the ’199 patent, including the “Sheer White! Whitening Films,” without authority or license from P&G. 30. On information and belief, CAO knows, should know, or is willfully blind to the

fact that its infringing products are specially made or adapted for an infringing method. Nevertheless, it has sold, and continues to sell, a material component of the patented invention that is not a staple article of commerce capable of substantial noninfringing use. 31. CAO has been and is currently actively inducing infringement of the ’199 patent

by others, without authority or license from P&G. Among other infringements induced, CAO has actively induced others to use and perform, within the United States, the methods recited by the claims of the ’199 patent. CAO provides instructions to consumers directing them to perform methods that infringe the claims of the ’199 patent. On information and belief, CAO knows that the induced acts constitute patent infringement.

6

32.

As such, CAO has knowingly, or with willful blindness, contributed to and

induced, and continues to contribute to and induce, the infringement of the claims of the ’199 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271. 33. P&G has been damaged, in an amount yet to be determined, by CAO’s acts of

infringement and will continue to be damaged by such acts in the future. PRAYER FOR RELIEF P&G respectfully prays for the following relief: A. That the Court adjudge and decree that CAO has infringed and is infringing the

’569, ’811, and ’199 patents; B. That the Court adjudge and decree that CAO has contributed to and induced

infringement and is actively contributing to and inducing infringement of the ’569, ’811, and ’199 patents; C. That the Court enter preliminary and permanent injunctions enjoining CAO, its

officers, employees, agents, and all others acting in concert with it or participating with it from further acts that infringe the ’569, ’811, and ’199 patents; D. That the Court enter preliminary and permanent injunctions enjoining CAO, its

officers, employees, agents, and all others acting in concert with it or participating with it from actively contributing to or inducing others to infringe the ’569, ’811, and ’199 patents; E. That CAO be ordered by this Court to account for and pay to P&G damages

adequate to compensate P&G for CAO’s infringement, contribution to, and inducement of infringement of the ’569, ’811, and ’199 patents; F. That the Court treble the damages for CAO’s willful infringement of the ’569,

’811, and ’199 patents.

7

G. H. I. and J.

That the Court award pre-judgment interest on the damages; That the Court declare this an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285; That the Court award P&G its costs and attorneys’ fees incurred in this action;

That the Court award such other relief as it deems just and proper. JURY TRIAL DEMAND

Pursuant to Rule 38(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, P&G demands a trial by jury of all issues triable of right by jury.

Dated: May 20, 2013

Respectfully submitted, /s/ David M. Maiorana David M. Maiorana (#0071440) Email: dmaiorana@jonesday.com Susan M. Gerber (#0070945) Email: smgerber@jonesday.com JONES DAY North Point 901 Lakeside Avenue Cleveland, OH 44114 Telephone: (216) 586-3939 Facsimile: (216) 579-0212 Attorneys for Plaintiff The Procter & Gamble Company

8

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful