COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL

UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Marshall A. Lerner (State Bar No. 55,224)
mlerner@kleinberglerner.com
Vivian Z. Wang (State Bar No. 289,870)
vwang@kleinberglerner.com
Steven J. Kim (State Bar No. 297,235)
skim@kleinberglerner.com
KLEINBERG & LERNER, LLP
1875 Century Park East, Suite 1150
Los Angeles, California 90067-2501
Telephone: (310) 557-1511
Facsimile: (310) 557-1540

Attorney for Plaintiffs Skechers U.S.A., Inc. and Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA-WESTERN DIVISION
SKECHERS U.S.A., INC., a Delaware
Corporation, and SKECHERS U.S.A.,
INC. II, a Delaware Corporation

Plaintiffs,

v.

REEBOK INTERNATIONAL LTD., a
Massachusetts Corporation and Does 1 –
10 inclusive,

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.:

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR:

(1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT [35
U.S.C. § 271];
(2) FEDERAL UNFAIR
COMPETITION AND TRADE
DRESS INFRINGEMENT [15
U.S.C. § 1125(a)];
(3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 1 of 31 Page ID #:1

-1-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Plaintiffs Skechers U.S.A., Inc. and Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II (collectively
"Skechers") for their complaint against defendant Reebok International Ltd., allege as
follows:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This is an action for design patent infringement, trade dress infringement,
and unfair competition.
2. Skechers is a multi-billion-dollar global leader in the lifestyle footwear
industry. Skechers is also a high-performance footwear brand and a world leader in
designing cutting-edge footwear. It has invested and spent hundreds of millions of
dollars creating and promoting its new shoe designs. One such new ornamental design is
embodied in its SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe. The SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe
has been heavily advertised on TV, in magazines, and the Internet. In approximately the
last year alone, Skechers has spent more than $10 million promoting, marketing and
advertising its SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe. The shoe has been featured in several
widely aired television commercials and has been the subject of a number of magazine
articles. The innovative design of the SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe has significantly
contributed to the success of the Skechers GO series of footwear culminating in a Brand
of the Year award from Footwear News in late 2013. See Exhibit 1. The fame and
popularity of the SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe can be measured by the fact that
millions of pairs of SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoes have been sold since its
introduction on the market.
3. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has acknowledged the
novel, non-obvious, and ornamental appearance of the shoe upper of the SKECHERS
GO WALK
®
shoe by issuing U.S. Patent, No. D661,884 S (Exhibit 2, the " '884 patent")
therefor to Skechers.
4. In order to identify certain of its shoes, including the SKECHERS GO
WALK
®
shoe, as emanating from a single source, Skechers created a new and unique
trade dress embodied in the SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe.
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 2 of 31 Page ID #:2

-2-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5. Defendant has been, and presently is, willfully infringing the '884 patent by
making and selling shoes that embody the patented invention disclosed in the '884
patent.
6. Defendant's WALK AHEAD RS shoe infringes Skechers' SKECHERS GO
WALK
®
shoe trade dress. Defendant's conduct is likely to cause confusion, mistake and
deception among the general purchasing public. Defendant has profited and is profiting
from such trade dress infringement and unfair competition.
PARTIES
7. Plaintiff Skechers U.S.A., Inc. is a corporation duly organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Delaware with a principal place of business located at 228
Manhattan Beach Blvd., Manhattan Beach, California 90266.
8. Plaintiff Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II is a corporation duly organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with a principal place of business
located at 228 Manhattan Beach Blvd., Manhattan Beach, California 90266. Skechers
U.S.A., Inc. II is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Skechers U.S.A., Inc.
9. Defendant Reebok International Ltd. is a Massachusetts corporation having
an office and place of business at 1895 J.W. Foster Blvd., Canton, Massachusetts.
10. Defendants Does 1 – 10, inclusive, are sued herein under fictitious names.
Their true names and capacities are unknown to Skechers. When their true names and
capacities are ascertained, Skechers will amend this complaint by inserting their true
names and capacities. Skechers is informed and believes and thereon alleges, that Does
1 – 10, and each of them are responsible in some manner for the occurrences alleged
herein and that Skechers’ damages were proximately caused by such defendants.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
11. Jurisdiction in this Court arises under the patent laws of the United States,
35 U.S.C. §§271 and 289 and the provisions of 15 U.S.C. §§1121 and 1125. This
complaint also alleges violations of state law and common law. This Court has
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 3 of 31 Page ID #:3

-3-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

jurisdiction over these claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1338(a) and (b), 1367(a), and
1400(b).
12. This Court has personal jurisdiction over defendants because they have
committed one or more of the infringing acts complained of herein in California and in
this district, they have multiple sales outlets in California and in this district, and they do
regular business in California and in this district.
13. Venue in this Court is proper under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b)
and (c) because a substantial part of the claims arose in this district.
SKECHERS’ SKECHERS GO WALK
®
SHOE UPPER
DESIGN PATENT
14. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has acknowledged the
novel, non-obvious, and ornamental appearance of the shoe upper of the SKECHERS
GO WALK
®
shoe by issuing U.S. Patent, No. D661,884 S (Exhibit 2, the " '884 patent")
therefor to Skechers. Defendant's infringement of the '884 patent can be seen in the
comparison below which show sample figures of the shoe upper from the '884 patent
next to defendant's WALK AHEAD RS shoe upper.












Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 4 of 31 Page ID #:4

-4-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28





























Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 5 of 31 Page ID #:5

-5-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

SKECHERS GO WALK
®
SHOE TRADE DRESS
15. Skechers created a new and unique trade dress embodied in the
SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe.
16. An example of the SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress is shown in
the following photographs:






















Fig. 1 - SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Shoe Trade Dress
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 6 of 31 Page ID #:6

-6-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

17. This SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress has an ornamental
configuration that uniquely identifies the shoe as emanating from a single source,
namely, Skechers. As can be seen in the following photographs, the distinctive
ornamental features of the SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress are (1) the
honeycomb-like textured fabric shoe upper (depicted by a red square in Fig. 2), (2) the
unique styling of the slip-on upper giving an observer the illusion of a tongue (as
indicated by a red oval in Fig. 3) with (3) a C-shaped outline of the tongue in flat lock
stitching (outlined in red in Fig. 4), (4) the distinct curvature of the upper edge of the
"tongue" (outlined in a red line in Fig. 5) which indents into the shoe upper at the medial
and lateral sides of the foot (depicted by the red arrows in Fig. 5), (5) the reduced toe cap
edging at the edge of the upper toe line (as indicated by a red oval in Fig. 6), with (6) a
slight protrusion of the outsole periphery into the reduced toe cap edging at the front tip
of the shoe (outlined in a red line in Fig. 7), and (7) the etched wave-like groove that
creates a curved periphery surface in the outsole periphery (as indicated by the red oval
in Fig. 8):












Fig. 2 - SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Honeycomb-Like Textured Fabric Upper
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 7 of 31 Page ID #:7

-7-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28













Fig. 3 - SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Unique Styling of the Slip-On Upper Giving an
Observer the Illusion of A Tongue (As Indicated By A Red Oval)












Fig. 4 - SKECHERS GO WALK
®
C-Shaped Outline of the Tongue in Flat Lock
Stitching (Outlined in Red)
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 8 of 31 Page ID #:8

-8-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28


























Fig. 5 - SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Distinct Curvature of the Upper Edge of the "Tongue"
(Outlined in Red) Which Indents Into the Shoe Upper at the Medial And Lateral Sides of
the Foot (Depicted By the Red Arrows)
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 9 of 31 Page ID #:9

-9-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28










Fig. 6 - SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Reduced Toe Cap Edging At the Edge of the Upper
Toe Line (As Indicated By a Red Oval)















Fig. 7 - SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Slight Protrusion of the Outsole Periphery into the
Reduced Toe Cap Edging at the Front Tip of the Shoe (Outlined in Red)
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 10 of 31 Page ID #:10

-10-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28













Fig. 8 - SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Etched Wave-Like Groove That Creates a Curved
Periphery Surface in the Outsole Periphery (As Indicated By the Red Oval)













Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 11 of 31 Page ID #:11

-11-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

18. The unique ornamental appearance of the SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe
trade dress, combined with Skechers' extensive advertising, promotion, and sales, has
resulted in the SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe acquiring distinctiveness among shoe
buyers. In the mind of the typical shoe buyer, the SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade
dress is believed to emanate from a single source, namely, Skechers. This acquired
distinctiveness is protectable, proprietary trade dress owned exclusively by Skechers.
19. Rather than undertake the hard work and financial risks involved in
developing their own shoe trade dress, defendant simply copied Skechers' SKECHERS
GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress. In this regard, the defendant's WALK AHEAD RS shoe
is shown below.









Fig. 10 - Defendant Reebok's WALK AHEAD RS Shoe

20. As can be seen in the photographs below, the defendant's WALK AHEAD
RS shoe bears (1) the same honeycomb-like textured fabric shoe upper (depicted by a
red square in Fig. 11(a) and (b)), (2) the same unique styling of the slip-on upper giving
an observer the illusion of a tongue (as indicated by a red oval in Fig. 12(a) and (b)) with
(3) the same C-shaped outline of the tongue in flat lock stitching (outlined in red in Fig.
13(a) and (b)), (4) the same curvature of upper edge of the "tongue" (outlined in a red
line in Fig. 14(a) and (b)) which indents into the shoe upper at the medial and lateral
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 12 of 31 Page ID #:12

-12-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

sides of the foot (depicted by the red arrows in Fig. 14(a) and (b)), (5) the same reduced
toe cap edging at the edge of the upper toe line (as indicated by a red oval in Fig. 15(a)
and (b)), with (6) the same slight protrusion of the outsole periphery into the reduced toe
cap edging at the front tip of the shoe (outlined in a red line in Fig. 16(a) and (b)), and
(7) the same etched wave-like groove that creates a curved periphery surface in the
outsole periphery (as indicated by the red oval in Fig. 17 (a) and (b)):








Fig. 11(a) - Reebok WALK AHEAD RS' Honeycomb-Like Textured Fabric Upper
(Depicted by a Red Square)









Fig. 11(b) - Comparison of SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Trade Dress Honeycomb-Like
Textured Fabric Upper to Reebok WALK AHEAD RS

Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 13 of 31 Page ID #:13

-13-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28













Fig. 12(a) – Reebok WALK AHEAD RS' Styling of the Slip-On Upper Giving an
Observer the Illusion of a Tongue (as indicated by the red oval)










Fig. 12(b) – Comparison of SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Trade Dress Unique Styling of
the Slip-On Upper Giving an Observer the Illusion of a Tongue to Reebok WALK
AHEAD RS
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 14 of 31 Page ID #:14

-14-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28













Fig. 13(a) – Reebok WALK AHEAD RS’ C-Shaped Outline of the Tongue in Flat Lock
Stitching (Outlined in Red)











Fig. 13(b) - Comparison of SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Trade Dress C-Shaped Outline of
the Tongue in Flat Lock Stitching to Reebok WALK AHEAD RS

Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 15 of 31 Page ID #:15

-15-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

























Fig. 14(a) – Reebok WALK AHEAD RS' Curvature of the Upper Edge Of The
"Tongue" (Outlined In Red) Which Indents Into the Shoe Upper At the Medial And
Lateral Sides of the Foot (Depicted By The Red Arrows)

Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 16 of 31 Page ID #:16

-16-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

























Fig. 14(b) - Comparison of SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Trade Dress Distinct Curvature of
the Upper Edge Of The "Tongue" (Outlined In Red) Which Indents Into the Shoe Upper
At the Medial And Lateral Sides of the Foot (Depicted by Red Arrows) to Reebok
WALK AHEAD RS
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 17 of 31 Page ID #:17

-17-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28












Fig. 15(a) - Reebok WALK AHEAD RS’
Reduced Toe Cap Edging at the Edge of the Upper Toe Line













Fig. 15(b) - Comparison of SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Trade Dress Reduced Toe Cap
Edging at the Edge of the Upper Toe Line to Reebok WALK AHEAD RS
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 18 of 31 Page ID #:18

-18-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28









Fig. 16(a) – Reebok WALK AHEAD RS’ Slight Protrusion of the Outsole Periphery
into the Reduced Toe Cap Edging at the Front Tip of the Shoe (Outlined in a Red Line)















Fig. 16(b) - Comparison of SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Trade Dress Slight Protrusion of
the Outsole Periphery into the Reduced Toe Cap Edging at the Front Tip of the Shoe to
Reebok WALK AHEAD RS
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 19 of 31 Page ID #:19

-19-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28










Fig. 17(a) - Reebok WALK AHEAD RS' Etched Wave-Like Groove That Creates a
Curved Periphery Surface in the Outsole Periphery (As Indicated By the Red Oval)

















Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 20 of 31 Page ID #:20

-20-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28























Fig. 17(b) - Comparison of SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Trade Dress Etched Wave-Like
Groove That Creates a Curved Periphery Surface in the Outsole Periphery to Reebok
WALK AHEAD RS Outsole Periphery



Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 21 of 31 Page ID #:21

-21-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

21. By using Skechers’ SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress on
defendant's shoes, defendant deceives consumers into buying defendant's shoes in the
mistaken belief that defendant's shoes emanate from Skechers and are genuine Skechers
shoes.
22. The trade dress embodied in the SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe are shown
in comparison to the WALK AHEAD RS shoe below.






















Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 22 of 31 Page ID #:22

-22-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28





























Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 23 of 31 Page ID #:23

-23-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Design Patent Infringement, Patent No. US D661,884 S)
23. Skechers realleges and incorporates by reference the full text of all of the
foregoing numbered paragraphs, photographs and figures as though each such
paragraph, photograph and figure has been fully set forth hereat.
24. On June 19, 2012, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued
United States Patent, Patent No. US D661,884 S(herein after the " '884 patent"). At all
times since the date of issue of the '884 patent, Skechers has been, and currently is, the
exclusive owner of the entire right, title and interest in and to the '884 patent. Skechers'
ownership of the '884 patent includes without limitation the exclusive right to enforce
the '884 patent, the exclusive right to file actions based on infringement of the '884
patent, and the exclusive right to recover damages or other monetary amounts for
infringement of the '884 patent and to be awarded injunctive relief pertaining to the '884
patent. Skechers has owned the '884 patent at all times during defendants' infringement
of the '884 patent.
25. Defendant has been, and presently is, infringing the '884 patent within this
judicial district and elsewhere by making and selling shoes that embody the patented
invention disclosed in the '884 patent. Defendant's infringement of the '884 patent is
willful. Defendant's infringing shoes are referred to as WALK AHEAD RS.
Defendant will continue to manufacture and sell their WALK AHEAD RS shoes unless
enjoined by this Court.
26. The shoe upper of defendant's WALK AHEAD RS shoe so closely
resembles the invention disclosed in the '884 patent that an ordinary observer would be
deceived into purchasing the WALK AHEAD RS shoe in the mistaken belief that it
includes the invention disclosed in the '884 patent. Defendant's WALK AHEAD RS
shoe infringes the '884 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. §§271 and 289.
27. Due to Defendant's infringement of the '884 patent, Skechers has suffered,
is suffering, and will continue to suffer irreparable injury for which Skechers has no
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 24 of 31 Page ID #:24

-24-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

adequate remedy at law. Skechers is therefore entitled to a permanent injunction against
defendant's further infringing conduct.
28. Defendant has profited and is profiting from its infringement of the '884
patent and Skechers has been and is being damaged and losing profit by such
infringement. Skechers is therefore entitled to recover damages from the defendant and
the total profit derived from such infringement, all in an amount to be proven at trial.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(SKECHERS GO WALK
®
Shoe Trade Dress - Federal Unfair Competition and
Trade Dress Infringement; 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))
29. Skechers realleges and incorporates by reference the full text of all of the
foregoing numbered paragraphs, photographs and figures as though each such
paragraph, photograph and figure has been fully set forth hereat.
30. Skechers has acquired exclusive and protectable trade dress rights
embodied in its SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress. By the acts and omissions
set forth above, defendant is violating Lanham Act § 43(a), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) and is
unfairly competing with Skechers. Defendant's use in commerce of the SKECHERS
GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress on its WALK AHEAD RS shoe constitutes a false
designation of origin and a false and misleading representation of fact which is likely to
cause confusion, and to cause mistake, and to deceive by wrongly suggesting that
defendants’ WALK AHEAD RS shoe has some affiliation, connection, or association
with Skechers. Such use by defendants of their WALK AHEAD RS shoe is also likely
to cause confusion, and to cause mistake, and to deceive as to the origin, sponsorship, or
approval of defendant's WALK AHEAD RS shoe. Such use by defendant of its WALK
AHEAD RS shoe constitutes trade dress infringement in violation of Lanham Act §
43(a), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
31. Defendant has infringed, and continues to infringe, Skechers' SKECHERS
GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress. Defendant's WALK AHEAD RS shoe infringes
Skechers' SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress.
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 25 of 31 Page ID #:25

-25-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

32. Defendant's conduct is likely to cause confusion, mistake and deception
among the general purchasing public, and interfere with Skechers' ability to sell and
profit from its SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress.
33. Defendant's conduct as described above is also likely to harm or extinguish
the current ability of Skechers' SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress to indicate
that that trade dress emanates from a single source. Defendant's conduct as described
above harms the goodwill and reputation associated with Skechers’ SKECHERS GO
WALK
®
shoe trade dress.
34. Skechers has suffered, is suffering, and will continue to suffer irreparable
injury for which Skechers has no adequate remedy at law. Skechers is therefore entitled
to a permanent injunction against defendant's further infringing conduct.
35. Defendant has profited and is profiting from such trade dress infringement
and unfair competition, and Skechers has been and is being damaged and losing profit by
such infringement and unfair competition. Skechers is therefore entitled to recover
damages and profits from defendants in an amount to be proved at trial as a consequence
of defendants' violations of Lanham Act § 43(a), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(Common Law Unfair Competition)
36. Skechers realleges and incorporates by reference the full text of all of the
foregoing numbered paragraphs, photographs and figures as though each such
paragraph, photograph and figure has been fully set forth hereat.
37. Defendant is willfully, fraudulently, oppressively, maliciously and
unlawfully attempting to pass off, and are passing off, their infringing footwear as those
approved and/or authorized by Skechers.
38. Defendant's use in commerce of the WALK AHEAD RS shoe continues to
confuse and deceive consumers as to the source of origin of the goods and services for
which Skechers has invested substantial time, effort and money in developing and
further damages Skechers' goodwill and reputation.
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 26 of 31 Page ID #:26

-26-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

39. Defendant has been palming off their goods as Skechers' goods.
Consumers have been and continue to be confused as to whether defendants’ WALK
AHEAD RS shoe is affiliated with Skechers.
40. The damage suffered by Skechers is irreparable and will continue unless
defendant is restrained by this Court from the commission of these acts.
41. Defendant's willful, deliberate and malicious conduct constitutes unfair
competition with Skechers.
42. Such conduct by defendant is the sole reason for defendant's ability to
market and sell their unauthorized copies of shoes that embody Skechers' SKECHERS
GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress.
43. Defendant is being unjustly enriched through such flagrantly unlawful
conduct and should be punished therefor.
44. Skechers has no adequate remedy at law in that the continuing nature of the
unfair competition will result in irreparable harm to Skechers should defendants not be
enjoined from their acts of unfair competition.
45. A complete recitation of the damages suffered by Skechers as a result of
this unfair competition must await discovery of defendant's books and records.
REQUEST FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Skechers U.S.A., Inc. and Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II
respectfully demand a judgment against defendants as follows:
1. A judgment declaring that defendants have:
a. Infringed Skechers' '884 patent;
b. Infringed Skechers' SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress;
c. Competed unfairly with Skechers;
d. Injured Skechers' business reputation by the unauthorized use of Skechers'
SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress;
e. Willfully violated the applicable laws of the United States and of the states
where defendant's goods have been sold, all to the detriment of Skechers;
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 27 of 31 Page ID #:27

-27-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2. That the defendant, its officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys,
assigns and all persons in active concert with or participation with them be forthwith
preliminarily and thereafter permanently enjoined and restrained from:
a. Infringing or inducing infringement of the Skechers' '884 patent;
b. Infringing or inducing infringement of Skechers' SKECHERS GO WALK
®

shoe trade dress;
c. Using Skechers' SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress alone or in
combination with any other elements, to advertise or identify defendant's
goods or services;
d. Unfairly competing with Skechers in any manner whatsoever;
e. Causing likelihood of confusion, or injury to Skechers' business and to the
reputation of Skechers' marks, symbols, labels, or forms of advertising or
promotion;
f. Engaging in any acts or activities directly or indirectly calculated to trade
upon Skechers' SKECHERS GO WALK
®
shoe trade dress or the
reputation or goodwill of Skechers, or in any way to compete unfairly with
Skechers;
3. For a judgment directing that any shoes, goods, labels, emblems or packaging
in the possession or under the control of defendants which infringe the '884 patent or
any colorable imitation or facsimile thereof, but not emanating from Skechers, be
delivered up and destroyed within 10 days of entry of judgment, and that all
instrumentalities used in the production of such shoes, goods, labels, emblems or
packaging, including any and all items, objects, tools, machines, and equipment used in
such production, be delivered up and destroyed within 10 days of entry of judgment;
4. For a judgment directing defendants to recall all infringing goods and any other
materials sold, distributed, advertised or marketed which infringe any and all of the '884
patent or any colorable imitation or facsimile thereof, but not emanating from Skechers;
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 28 of 31 Page ID #:28

-28-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR: (1) PATENT INFRINGEMENT, (2) FEDERAL
UNFAIR COMPETITION AND TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT, AND (3) COMMON LAW UNFAIR
COMPETITION; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5. For a judgment against defendants awarding Skechers damages, lost profits,
reasonable royalties, and other monetary amounts including without limitation:
a. All damages sustained by Skechers as a result of defendants' unlawful
infringement of the '884 patent, together with appropriate interest on such
damages and that such damages be trebled, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;
b. Defendants' total profit from defendants' sales of footwear that infringes the
'884 patent, and all other remedies provided by 35 U.S.C. § 289;
c. All remedies provided for by 15 U.S.C. § 1117 (a), including but not
limited to all damages sustained by Skechers as a result of defendant's
unlawful infringement of the Skechers' SKECHERS GO WALK
®
trade
dress together with appropriate interest on such damages and that such
damages be trebled;
d. All remedies provided for by 15 U.S.C. § 1117 (a), including but not
limited to all profits derived by each of the defendants from the sale of
goods by the direct or indirect use of any of the shoes that embody
Skechers' SKECHERS GO WALK
®
trade dress or any colorable imitations
or facsimiles thereof, and that such profits be trebled;
e. All damages sustained by Skechers on account of unfair competition, lost
business opportunities and any other damage suffered by Skechers as a
result of defendant's acts described in this complaint, and that such damages
be trebled;
6. For an order directing defendants to pay punitive damages to Skechers;
7. For an order directing defendants to pay restitution to Skechers;
8. For an award of attorneys’ fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117 and pursuant to
35 U.S.C. § 285;
9. For an award of pre-judgment interest at the maximum rate allowed by law;
10. For the costs of suit herein; and
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 29 of 31 Page ID #:29
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 30 of 31 Page ID #:30
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 31 of 31 Page ID #:31






EXHIBIT 1
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1-1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 1 of 4 Page ID #:32
12/2/13 1:02 PM Markets - Footwear News - WWD.com
Page 1 of 3 http://www.wwd.com/footwear-news/markets/brand-of-the-year-skechers-go-7295253/print-preview/
Marathoner Meb Keflezighi in a Skechers Go ad.
Photo By Courtesy Photo
Skechers GoRun 3 for women.
Photo By Courtesy Photo
WWD.com/footwear-news/markets/brand-of-the-year-skechers-go-7295253
December 2, 2013
Brand of the Year: Skechers Go
By GERALD FLORES
Skechers Go has gone a long distance in a short period of time.
Since entering the performance market two years ago with
GoRun, the company has broadened the series to span training,
walking and, most recently, golf. Now the firm’s athletic products
have helped spur topline growth.
“We have key products driving sales in our performance lines for
men, women and kids, and these success stories are translating to
markets around the world,” said Skechers President Michael
Greenberg, adding that demand for Go helped drive a 20-percent
gain in net sales during the third quarter. “Across all divisions, we
are firing on all cylinders, and we know we have the right
product, creative marketing and distribution to build on our
success for years to come.”
Still, getting Skechers Go off the ground wasn’t easy. Known
more for its accessibly priced footwear, the firm had to make
adjustments to start developing performance-based products.
“It took six months of working on philosophically changing the
way we built shoes,” said David Raysse, VP of design for
Skecher’s Performance Division. “We had to make it lightweight,
and that became the benchmark for all the shoes that have come
about from the line.”
The running collection also has expanded to include a signature
line for brand endorser and Olympic marathoner Meb Keflezighi,
who recently re-signed with Skechers through 2016.
“Having personally raced in the Skechers GoRun and set personal
records wearing them, I can attest to the fact that the brand is
hitting the right chord with this line, and they are what runners
are looking for in a shoe,” Keflezighi said. “I am proud to have
been an early adopter, supporter and ambassador since the
launch, and I know this is just the beginning of what’s to come
from Skechers Performance.”
Rick Higgins, VP of merchandising and marketing for the
Skechers Performance Division, said the Go series is obtainable
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1-1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 2 of 4 Page ID #:33
12/2/13 1:02 PM Markets - Footwear News - WWD.com
Page 2 of 3 http://www.wwd.com/footwear-news/markets/brand-of-the-year-skechers-go-7295253/print-preview/
for the mass market, which explains its overwhelming success.
“We’ve brought innovation to the market at a price point that’s easily accessible for mainstream consumers,” he
said.
A variety of marketing has garnered major buzz as well. During this year’s Super Bowl, the brand touted GoRun
in a 30-second commercial.
And grassroots tactics have enhanced the strategy. Skechers participated in 12 Rock ’n’ Roll marathons this year
and acted as the key footwear and apparel sponsor for the Houston Marathon.
“These have been significant for us because the core consumers have been easy adopters of our brand when we’ve
shown up at those venues,” Higgins said. “We’ve been able to grow our specialty running account base. They see
our willingness to be in this business for the long term.”
A Runner’s Mind in San Francisco and San Luis Obispo, Calif., just brought in the shoes last month after
Skechers provided pairs for fun runs hosted by the store.
“In the beginning, I was hesitant when they approached us. Being a running store, you don’t want to lose
credibility by bringing in any iffy product,” said Faisal Javed, store manager at A Runner’s Mind. “But we took it
out, hammered out some miles and it was something I enjoyed running in and could stand behind. And the
response [has been] positive: We put it on 30 to 40 people for a fun run, and two or three people actually wanted
to put in orders that day.”
Raysse said that due to competition in the performance segment from more-established brands, making a name
will take time for Skechers.
“When it comes to performance, you’re talking about purist consumers who are very knowledgeable and brand
loyal,” he said. “We’re still at a point where many people don’t know that we make performance product, but
we’re encouraged by the success we’ve had in a little amount of time.”
SportsOneSource analyst Matt Powell said he foresees Skechers’ walking segment as having the most long-term
potential. The analyst estimated that GoWalk already accounts for about $300 million in sales for the brand.
“GoRun is a very credible performance product, but [those] retailers are difficult to break into,” Powell said. “Go-
Walk is much more suited to the more traditional Skechers retailers — family footwear, moderate department
stores — and that’s where the real success has been.”
Famous Footwear’s Jason Short, VP and DMM of footwear, said Skechers has capitalized on the idea for the Go
series and created a whole stable of successful lines.
“Skechers Go, in particular GoWalk, has transformed the walking category overnight with our consumers,” said
Short. “Skechers is able to take its Go technology across categories quickly. This benefit, combined with the
shoe’s fashion sensibility, gives Skechers a great competitive advantage.”
Looking ahead, Skechers plans to enter more performance categories, as well as expand its golf line. Marketing
also will ramp up next year, with a new digital campaign in partnership with Google and several TV spots with
Keflezighi.
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1-1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 3 of 4 Page ID #:34
12/2/13 1:02 PM Markets - Footwear News - WWD.com
Page 3 of 3 http://www.wwd.com/footwear-news/markets/brand-of-the-year-skechers-go-7295253/print-preview/
WWD Copyright © 2013 Fairchild Fashion Media. All rights reserved.
“We’ve just started to tap into the success of Go,” said Higgins, “and it will continue to grow for us as we expand
into different categories in the future.”
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1-1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 4 of 4 Page ID #:35






EXHIBIT 2
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1-2 Filed 06/18/14 Page 1 of 8 Page ID #:36
( 1 2 ) United States Design Patent ( 1 0 ) Patent N 0 . 2
USO0 D661 884S
US D661 , 884 S
Raysse ( 45 ) Date o f Patent: 4* J u n. 1 9 , 2 0 1 2
( 5 4) SHOE UPPER D5 46, 5 3 4 S 7 / 2 0 0 7 B el l ey et a1 .
D5 63 , 63 4 S * 3 / 2 0 0 8 Del l aVal l e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D2 / 9 2 3
. - D5 64, 1 9 3 S 3 / 2 0 0 8 Ho rne et a1 .
( 7 5 ) l nvemo r- Davl d Rayssel o sAnge/ l es?Aws) 1 3 5 669 44 S . 1 40 0 0 8 B eneyet a1 ‘ “““““““““ “ 1 3 2 / 9 69
. D5 69 , 5 9 7 S * 5 / 2 0 0 8 Mt' . . . . . . . . . . D2 / 9 69
Assignee: Skechers U. S. A. , Inc. II, Manhattan D5 7 2 , 45 4 S > 1 < 7 / 2 0 0 8 ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ “ 1 3 2 / 9 69
B each, CA ( US) 1 3 5 7 4, 1 3 5 s * 8/ 2 0 0 8 Weisbl y . . . . . . . . . 1 3 2 / 9 69
D5 80 , 1 5 0 S * 1 1 / 2 0 0 8 Andersen et a1 . D2 / 9 69
( * * ) Term: Years S * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D5 86, 1 0 7 S 2 / 2 0 0 9 B el l ey et a1 .
_ D5 86, 9 9 6 S 2 / 2 0 0 9 Ho rne et a1 .
( 2 1 ) APPLN O" 2 9 / 41 1 3 0 4 D5 88, 3 42 s * 3 / 2 0 0 9 Graber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3 2 / 9 0 7
_ D60 5 , 3 88 S 1 2 / 2 0 0 9 St- Lo u is etal .
( 2 2 ) F il ed: J an. 1 9 , 2 0 1 2 1 3 61 3 , 0 43 s * 4/ 2 0 1 0 Wal to n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D2 / 9 0 2
( 5 1 ) LOC( 9 ) Cl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 2 - 9 9 1 3 649 1 7 5 1 5 * 1 2 / 2 0 1 1 Lo nigan ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 3 2 / 9 2 3
( 5 2 ) u s. Cl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D2 / 9 69 * Cited by examiner
( 5 8) F iel d o f Cl assi?catio n Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D2 / 89 6, P _ E _ D . . S.
1 3 2 / 9 0 2 , 9 0 649 0 8, 9 2 3 , 9 43 , 9 44, 9 46, 9 47 , “my xammerf o n?“ “no ne _
AZ Z Orney, AgenZ , Ol ’ F l l ’ m Lerner; Marvin
M’ R, 83 , 88, K l e1 nberg; K l e1 nberg & Lerner, 3 6/ 2 5 R42 5 A
See ap p l icatio n ?l e f o r co mp l ete search histo ry. ( 5 7 ) . CLAIM
The o rnamental design f o r a sho e u p p er, as sho Wn and
( 5 6) Ref erences Cited descnbed'
U. S. PATEN TDOCUMEN TS
D1 1 0 , 81 1 S * 8/ 1 9 3 8 K ent, J r. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D2 / 9 2 3
D1 1 1 , 69 1 S * 1 0 / 1 9 3 8 Wo o d D2 / 9 2 3
D1 5 3 , 2 5 6 S * 4/ 1 9 49 B raga D2 / 9 2 3
D1 86, 1 5 5 S * 9 / 1 9 5 9 B ianchini D2 / 9 2 3
D2 1 7 , 9 5 0 S * 7 / 1 9 7 0 Einstein D2 / 9 2 3
D2 45 , 1 2 7 S * 7 / 1 9 7 7 F u ku o ka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D2 / 9 2 3
D3 1 6, 1 7 4 S 4/ 1 9 9 1 Hat?el d
D3 49 , 3 9 4 S 8/ 1 9 9 4 Hat?el d
D42 4, 2 9 1 S 5 / 2 0 0 0 Matis
D42 4, 2 9 2 S 5 / 2 0 0 0 B esanceney, III et a1 .
D42 5 , 2 9 0 S 5 / 2 0 0 0 Matis
D42 5 , 69 2 S 5 / 2 0 0 0 Matis
D43 8, 3 67 S 3 / 2 0 0 1 Hu ard
D467 , 0 63 S 1 2 / 2 0 0 2 Chen
D49 0 , 2 2 1 S 5 / 2 0 0 4 Edau w
D5 1 1 , 87 8 S * 1 1 / 2 0 0 5 Del l aVal l e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D2 / 9 0 8
DESCRIPTION
F IG. 1 is a p ersp ective vieW o f a sho e u p p er in acco rdance
With my neW design.
F IG. 2 is a l ef t side vieW thereo f ;
F IG. 3 is a right side vieW thereo f ;
F IG. 4 is a to p p l an vieW thereo f ;
F IG. 5 is a bo tto m p l an vieW thereo f ;
F IG. 6 is a rear el evatio n vieW thereo f ; and,
F IG. 7 is a f ro nt el evatio n vieW thereo f .
B ro ken l ines sho wing the remainder o f the sho e in the ?gu res
are f o r il l u strative p u rp o ses o nl y and f o rm no p art o f the
cl aimed inventio n.
1 Cl aim, 6 Drawing Sheets
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1-2 Filed 06/18/14 Page 2 of 8 Page ID #:37
US. Patent J u n. 1 9 , 2 0 1 2 Sheet 1 o f 6 US D661 , 884 S
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1-2 Filed 06/18/14 Page 3 of 8 Page ID #:38
US. Patent J u n. 1 9 , 2 0 1 2 Sheet 2 o f 6 US D661 , 884 S
. . 1 . 2 . . 2 . . 2 2 2 . 2 42 . 2 2 1 . 2 3 4 2 . ? .
. 5 2 . . . 5 A. . . . 1 . . . < . . . . > 2 . . . . . .
. . . . . { $ 2 . . 2 . . . . .
. . . 2 . 7 . 3 . 1 . > . . .
. . i1 1 . . . . 5 4. . . . 5 . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t. 2 . . . 3 3
. . . < S. . . . . . . . t. : 1 I. . . Hi. . .
. % . . . . . n3 . 5 . . 2 5 2 . . . . 2 . . . . 2 . 2 2 . . 2 . . 2 . . 2 . . . . . . . 5 . 2 .
H. . w. . . . . . . . ( a. . 3 3 . 2 x A. . . 4. . . . . x. . 2 5 . 1 3 . 3 . 2 . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . 1 3 . .
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1-2 Filed 06/18/14 Page 4 of 8 Page ID #:39
US. Patent J u n. 1 9 , 2 0 1 2 Sheet 3 o f 6 US D661 , 884 S
a. i x. . . 5 . . . . . . e. . . 5 . . . » . . . 3 . . . } . a. . . 5 . . . . . . K . . w
w.
. 1 . x. Q 1 ". . . . 5 . \ \ e. . . < > . 5 . Rz ?. in. . 3 2 1 . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > h. . .
: . ; . . 1 2 .
i. i. . < . . . . . , . _ 5 . 1 . . . 5 . . . . . . 46. . . . . . 4. . .
. . > . . . . k. . . . . . . \
. q . I. . . 1 . . . I. s. . . 5 . . . . . . . 1 . t. 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z . 5 . . Z
i. . . ‘ 5 . . . . . . . i. i. . c. . . . . . . . . . $ . . $ . $ 3 . 5 5 . . . . ? . . . . . . 9 . . . :
. 5 . . . 6. . .
m.
2 . . . .
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1-2 Filed 06/18/14 Page 5 of 8 Page ID #:40
US. Patent J u n. 1 9 , 2 0 1 2 Sheet 4 o f 6 US D661 , 884 S
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1-2 Filed 06/18/14 Page 6 of 8 Page ID #:41
US. Patent J u n. 1 9 , 2 0 1 2 Sheet 5 o f 6 US D661 , 884 S
6. 2 2 . 1 . . . . é
. 5 ,
vi)
1 . .
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1-2 Filed 06/18/14 Page 7 of 8 Page ID #:42
US. Patent J u n. 1 9 , 2 0 1 2 Sheet 6 o f 6 US D661 , 884 S
. 3 5 . 5 . . 5 . . 5 . . . 5 . . . . . 5 . 5 . . 5 . . . . 5 . . . 5 . . . 5 . 5 . . . . . 5 . 5 . . . 5 . . 5 . 5 . . . . 5 5 5 . 5 . . 5 . . 5 . . . 5 . . . . 5 . 5 . . 5 . . 5 . . . . . . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 . . 5 5 . 5 . . 5 . 5 . . . 5 . . . . . 5 . 5 . . 5 ) . . . . > 5 . . . 5 . . 5 . . . . \
W, . . . . W,
. . < . . 1 5 . . . . .
1 . 2 . 2 . . 1 £ 5 . \ a. 5
. . 5 . A. . . r. . . a. . . . 5 . t. . .
5 . . . . . . 5 .
i.
. . . . . 5 . . . .
. . . . t. z . . . . . . . x. . . . . . . . . v. ~ . . . . \ . . . l $ > .
r. . .
a)
sh. i. . .
5 S .
L. . . . . . .
. . 3 . . . . . . . . 5 i‘ . . .
. 4. . . $ 5 . 4. . . > > 1 . . . . . .
. 5 . . . 5 . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . 5 . 5 . . 5 . . 5 5 . . . } . 5 . 5 . 5 . . . 5 . 5 . . 5 . . . 5 . . . 5 . . . . 5 . 5 . . 5 . . 5 . . . 5 . . . 5 . 5 . 5 . . ; 5 .
X 5 6.
. 1 .
5 . . . 5 . . . . . 5 . 5 . . 5 . . . . . . 4:
Case 2:14-cv-04722 Document 1-2 Filed 06/18/14 Page 8 of 8 Page ID #:43