You are on page 1of 49

Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 1 of 17 Page ID #:1

1 Michael K. Friedland (SBN 157,217)


michael.friedland@knobbe.com
2 Ali S. Razai (SBN 246,922)
ali.razai@knobbe.com
3 Kim A. Kennedy (SBN 305,499)
kim.kennedy@knobbe.com
4 KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
2040 Main Street, Fourteenth Floor
5 Irvine, CA 92614
Telephone: (949) 760-0404
6 Facsimile: (949) 760-9502
7 Attorneys for Plaintiff
OAKLEY, INC.
8
9
10
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
SOUTHERN DIVISION
13
14
OAKLEY, INC., a Washington ) Civil Action No.
15 corporation, ) 17-cv-00757
)
16 Plaintiff, )
) COMPLAINT FOR
17 v. ) PATENT INFRINGEMENT,
) TRADE DRESS
18 COYOTE VISION USA, INC., a New ) INFRINGEMENT, AND
York corporation, ) UNFAIR COMPETITION
19 )
Defendant. )
20 ) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
)
21 )
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 2 of 17 Page ID #:2

1 Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. (Oakley) hereby complains of Coyote Vision


2 USA, Inc. (Coyote or Defendant) and alleges as follows:
3 I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4 1. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over the claims
5 in this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271 and 281, 15 U.S.C. 1116(a),
6 1121, and 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338 as these claims arise under the laws of
7 the United States. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the claims in
8 this Complaint which arise under state statutory and common law pursuant to 28
9 U.S.C. 1367(a) because the state law claims are so related to the federal claims
10 that they form part of the same case or controversy and derive from a common
11 nucleus of operative facts.
12 2. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because
13 Defendant has a continuous, systematic, and substantial presence within this
14 judicial district including by selling and offering for sale infringing products in
15 this judicial district, and by committing acts of infringement in this judicial
16 district, including but not limited to selling infringing eyewear directly to
17 consumers and/or retailers in this district and selling into the stream of
18 commerce knowing such products would be sold in California and this district,
19 which acts form a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to
20 Oakleys claim.
21 3. Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b),
22 1391(d), and 1400(b).
23 II. THE PARTIES
24 4. Plaintiff Oakley is a corporation organized and existing under the
25 laws of the State of Washington, having its principal place of business at One
26 Icon, Foothill Ranch, California 92610.
27 ///
28 ///
-1-
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 3 of 17 Page ID #:3

1 5. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that


2 Defendant Coyote is a company organized and existing under the laws of the
3 State of New York, having its principal place of business at 3800 Monroe
4 Avenue, Pittsford, New York 14534.
5 6. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
6 Defendant has committed the acts alleged herein within this judicial district.
7 III. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
8 7. Oakley is one of the worlds most iconic brands. The company and
9 its products, particularly in the realm of eyewear, are instantly and universally
10 recognized for their innovative technology and distinctive style. Since its
11 founding, Oakleys engineers and designers have worked continuously to bring
12 new technology and breakthrough designs to the market.
13 8. Oakley has been actively engaged in the manufacture and sale of
14 high quality eyewear since at least 1985. Oakley is the manufacturer and
15 retailer of several lines of eyewear that have enjoyed substantial success and are
16 protected by various intellectual property rights owned by Oakley.
17 9. On January 15, 2013, the United States Patent and Trademark
18 Office (USPTO) duly and lawfully issued United States Design Patent No.
19 D674,434 (the D434 Patent), titled Eyeglass Components. Oakley is the
20 owner by assignment of all right, title, and interest in the D434 Patent. A true
21 and correct copy of the D434 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
22 10. On January 28, 2003, the USPTO duly and lawfully issued United
23 States Design Patent No. D469,458 (the D458 Patent), titled Eyeglass
24 Front. Oakley is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and interest in the
25 D458 Patent. A true and correct copy of the D458 Patent is attached hereto as
26 Exhibit B.
27 ///
28 ///
-2-
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 4 of 17 Page ID #:4

1 11. On October 22, 2013, the USPTO duly and lawfully issued United
2 States Design Patent No. D692,047 (the D047 Patent), titled Eyeglass.
3 Oakley is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and interest in in the D047
4 Patent. A true and correct copy of the D047 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit
5 C.
6 12. On December 4, 2007, the USPTO duly and lawfully issued United
7 States Design Patent No. D556,818 (the D818 Patent), titled Eyeglass
8 Components. Oakley is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and interest
9 in in the D818 Patent. A true and correct copy of the D818 Patent is attached
10 hereto as Exhibit D.
11 13. On May 8, 2012, the USPTO duly and lawfully issued United
12 States Design Patent No. D659,182 (the D182 Patent), titled Eyeglass and
13 Eyeglass Component. Oakley is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and
14 interest in in the D818 Patent. A true and correct copy of the D182 Patent is
15 attached hereto as Exhibit E.
16 14. Defendant makes, uses, sells, offers for sale, and/or imports into
17 the United States eyewear that have infringed Oakleys intellectual property
18 rights, including the D434 Patent, the D458 Patent, the D047 Patent, the D818
19 Patent, and the D182 Patent (the Asserted Patents).
20 15. Oakley has provided the public with constructive notice of its
21 patent rights pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 287.
22 16. Oakley manufactures and sells sunglasses under the mark
23 HOLBROOK bearing distinctive trade dress in the overall design of the
24 sunglasses (HOLBROOK Trade Dress). An example of an Oakley product
25 bearing the distinctive HOLBROOK Trade Dress is depicted in the photograph
26 attached as Exhibit F.
27 ///
28 ///
-3-
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 5 of 17 Page ID #:5

1 17. As a result of Oakleys widespread use and display of the


2 HOLBROOK Trade Dress in association with its eyewear, (a) the public has
3 come to recognize and identify eyewear bearing the HOLBROOK Trade Dress
4 as emanating from Oakley, (b) the public recognizes that products bearing the
5 HOLBROOK Trade Dress constitute high quality products that conform to the
6 specifications created by Oakley, and (c) the HOLBROOK Trade Dress has
7 established strong secondary meaning and extensive goodwill.
8 18. The HOLBROOK Trade Dress is not functional. The design
9 features embodied by the HOLBROOK Trade Dress are not essential to the
10 function of the product, do not make the product cheaper or easier to
11 manufacture, and do not affect the quality of the product. The design of the
12 HOLBROOK Trade Dress is not a competitive necessity.
13 19. Subsequent to Oakleys use and adoption of the HOLBROOK
14 Trade Dress, Defendant has developed, manufactured, imported, advertised,
15 and/or sold products that use trade dress that is confusingly similar to the
16 HOLBROOK Trade Dress.
17 20. Defendants acts complained of herein have caused Oakley to
18 suffer irreparable injury to its business. Oakley will continue to suffer
19 substantial loss and irreparable injury unless and until Defendant is enjoined
20 from its wrongful actions complained of herein.
21 21. Oakley is informed and believes, and on that basis, alleges, that
22 Defendants acts complained of herein are willful and deliberate.
23 IV. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
24 (Patent Infringement)
(35 U.S.C. 271)
25
26 22. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-21 of
27 this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
28 ///
-4-
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 6 of 17 Page ID #:6

1 23. This is a claim for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. 271.


2 24. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and servants has, and
3 continues to, knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringe the D434 Patent by
4 making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a
5 design that would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to
6 the claim of the D434 Patent for example, Defendants BP-5-b model sunglasses
7 as shown below, which were sold and/or offered for sale, for example, on the
8 website http://coyoteusa.com/.
9 Accused Product Oakleys Patent
10 BP-5-b U.S. Patent No. D674,434
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 25. Defendants acts of infringement of the D434 Patent were
18 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Upon information and
19 belief, Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakleys rights in the design claimed
20 in the D434 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs are well-known throughout
21 the eyewear industry, and Defendants BP-5-b model sunglass is a nearly
22 identical copy of Oakleys design. Accordingly, Defendants actions constitute
23 willful and intentional infringement of the D434 Patent. Defendant infringed
24 the D434 Patent with reckless disregard of Oakleys patent rights. Defendant
25 knew, or it was so obvious that Defendant should have known, that its actions
26 constituted infringement of the D434 Patent. Defendants acts of infringement
27 of the D434 Patent were not consistent with the standards of commerce for its
28 industry.
-5-
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 7 of 17 Page ID #:7

1 26. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and servants has


2 knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringed the D458 Patent by making,
3 using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a design that
4 would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to the claim of
5 the D458 Patent, including for example, Defendants MP-08 model sunglasses
6 as shown below, which were sold and/or offered for sale, for example, on the
7 website http://coyoteusa.com/.
8 Accused Product Oakleys Patent
9 MP-08 U.S. Patent No. D469,458
10
11
12
13
14
15 27. Defendants acts of infringement of the D458 Patent were
16 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Upon information and
17 belief, Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakleys rights in the design claimed
18 in the D458 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs are well-known throughout
19 the eyewear industry, and Defendants MP-08 model sunglass is a nearly
20 identical copy of Oakleys design. Accordingly, Defendants actions constitute
21 willful and intentional infringement of the D458 Patent. Defendant infringed
22 the D458 Patent with reckless disregard of Oakleys patent rights. Defendant
23 knew, or it was so obvious that Defendant should have known, that its actions
24 constituted infringement of the D458 Patent. Defendants acts of infringement
25 of the D458 Patent were not consistent with the standards of commerce for its
26 industry
27 28. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and servants has, and
28 continues to, knowingly, intentionally, and willfully directly infringe the D047
-6-
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 8 of 17 Page ID #:8

1 Patent by using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a
2 design that would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to
3 the claim of the D047 Patent, including for example, Defendants Twist model
4 sunglasses as shown below, which were sold and/or offered for sale on
5 Defendants website http://coyoteusa.com/.
6 Accused Product Oakleys Patent
7 Twist U.S. Patent No. D692,047
8
9
10
11
12
13 29. Defendants acts of infringement of the D047 Patent were
14 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Upon information and
15 belief, Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakleys rights in the design claimed
16 in the D047 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs are well-known throughout
17 the eyewear industry, and Defendants Twist model sunglass is a nearly identical
18 copy of Oakleys design. Accordingly, Defendants actions constitute willful
19 and intentional infringement of the D047 Patent. Defendant infringed the D047
20 Patent with reckless disregard of Oakleys patent rights. Defendant knew, or it
21 was so obvious that Defendant should have known, that its actions constituted
22 infringement of the D047 Patent. Defendants acts of infringement of the D047
23 Patent were not consistent with the standards of commerce for its industry.
24 30. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and servants has, and
25 continues to, knowingly, intentionally, and willfully directly infringe the D818
26 Patent by using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a
27 design that would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to
28 the claim of the D818 Patent, including for example, Defendants Amp model

-7-
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 9 of 17 Page ID #:9

1 sunglasses as shown below, which were sold and/or offered for sale on
2 Defendants website http://coyoteusa.com/.
3 Accused Product Oakleys Patent
4 Amp U.S. Patent No. D556,818
5
6
7
8
9
10 31. Defendants acts of infringement of the D818 Patent were
11 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Upon information and
12 belief, Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakleys rights in the design claimed
13 in the D818 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs are well-known throughout
14 the eyewear industry, and Defendants Amp model sunglass is a nearly identical
15 copy of Oakleys design. Accordingly, Defendants actions constitute willful
16 and intentional infringement of the D818 Patent. Defendant infringed the D818
17 Patent with reckless disregard of Oakleys patent rights. Defendant knew, or it
18 was so obvious that Defendant should have known, that its actions constituted
19 infringement of the D818 Patent. Defendants acts of infringement of the D818
20 Patent were not consistent with the standards of commerce for its industry.
21 32. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and servants has, and
22 continues to, knowingly, intentionally, and willfully directly infringe the D182
23 Patent by using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a
24 design that would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to
25 the claim of the D182 Patent, including for example, Defendants Cancun
26 model sunglasses as shown below, which were sold and/or offered for sale on
27 Defendants website http://coyoteusa.com/.
28 ///
-8-
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 10 of 17 Page ID #:10

1 Accused Product Oakleys Patent


2 Cancun U.S. Patent No. D659,182
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 33. Defendants acts of infringement of the D182 Patent were
10 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Upon information and
11 belief, Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakleys rights in the design claimed
12 in the D182 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs are well-known throughout
13 the eyewear industry, and Defendants Cancun model sunglass is a nearly
14 identical copy of Oakleys design. Accordingly, Defendants actions constitute
15 willful and intentional infringement of the D182 Patent. Defendant infringed
16 the D182 Patent with reckless disregard of Oakleys patent rights. Defendant
17 knew, or it was so obvious that Defendant should have known, that its actions
18 constituted infringement of the D182 Patent. Defendants acts of infringement
19 of the D182 Patent were not consistent with the standards of commerce for its
20 industry.
21 34. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants acts of
22 infringement, Defendant has derived and received gains, profits, and advantages
23 in an amount that is not presently known to Oakley.
24 35. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284, Oakley is entitled to damages for
25 Defendants infringing acts and treble damages together with interests and costs
26 as fixed by this Court.
27 36. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285, Oakley is entitled to reasonable
28 attorneys fees for the necessity of bringing this claim.
-9-
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 11 of 17 Page ID #:11

1 37. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 289, Oakley is entitled to Defendants total


2 profits from Defendants infringement of the Asserted Patents.
3 38. Due to the aforesaid infringing acts, Oakley has suffered great and
4 irreparable injury, for which Oakley has no adequate remedy at law.
5 39. Defendant will continue to infringe Oakleys patent rights to the
6 great and irreparable injury of Oakley, unless enjoined by this Court.
7 V. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
8 (Federal Trade Dress Infringement & Unfair Competition)
(15 U.S.C. 1125(a))
9
10 40. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-39 of
11 this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
12 41. This is a claim for trade dress infringement under 15 U.S.C.
13 1125(a).
14 42. Subsequent to Oakleys use and adoption of the HOLBROOK
15 Trade Dress, Defendant has developed, manufactured, imported, advertised,
16 and/or sold products that use trade dress that is confusingly similar to the
17 HOLBROOK Trade Dress. As shown below, for example, Defendants Elwood
18 model sunglasses, which were sold and/or offered for sale on Defendants
19 website http://coyoteusa.com/, are confusingly similar to Oakleys
20 HOLBROOK Trade Dress.
21 Accused Product HOLBROOK Trade Dress
22 Elwood
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 10 -
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 12 of 17 Page ID #:12

1 43. Defendants use of a trade dress that is confusingly similar to the


2 HOLBROOK Trade Dress in connection with its sunglasses is likely to cause
3 confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or
4 association of Defendant with Oakley.
5 44. Defendants use of a trade dress that is confusingly similar to the
6 HOLBROOK Trade Dress without Oakleys consent constitutes a false
7 designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or
8 misleading representation of fact, which is likely to cause confusion, or to cause
9 mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such
10 person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his
11 or her goods or commercial activities by another person in violation of 15
12 U.S.C. 1125(a).
13 45. Such conduct by Defendant is likely to confuse, mislead, and
14 deceive Defendants customers, purchasers, and members of the public as to the
15 origin of the Defendants products or cause said persons to believe that
16 Defendant and/or its products have been sponsored, approved, authorized, or
17 licensed by Oakley or are in some way affiliated or connected with Oakley, all
18 in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1125(a) and constitutes unfair competition with
19 Oakley.
20 46. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
21 Defendants acts of trade dress infringement and unfair competition were
22 undertaken willfully with the express intent to cause confusion, and to mislead
23 and deceive the purchasing public.
24 47. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
25 Defendant has derived and received, and will continue to derive and receive,
26 gains, profits, and advantages from Defendants trade dress infringement and
27 unfair competition in an amount that is not presently known to Oakley. By
28 reason of Defendants actions constituting trade dress infringement, Oakley has
- 11 -
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 13 of 17 Page ID #:13

1 been damaged and is entitled to monetary relief in an amount to be determined


2 at trial.
3 48. Due to Defendants actions constituting trade dress infringement
4 and unfair competition, Oakley has suffered and continues to suffer great and
5 irreparable injury, for which Oakley has no adequate remedy at law.
6 49. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117, Oakley is entitled to damages for
7 Defendants infringing acts, up to three times actual damages as fixed by this
8 Court, and its reasonable attorneys fees for the necessity of bringing this claim.
9 VI. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
10 (Unfair Competition)
11 (California Business & Professions Code 17200 et seq.)
12 50. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-49 of
13 this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
14 51. This claim is for unfair competition, arising under California
15 Business & Professions Code 17200, et seq. and California common law.
16 52. Defendants acts of trade dress infringement complained of herein
17 constitute unfair competition with Oakley under the common law and statutory
18 laws of the State of California, particularly California Business & Professions
19 Code 17200 et seq.
20 53. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
21 Defendant has derived and received, and will continue to derive and receive,
22 gains, profits, and advantages from Defendants unfair competition in an
23 amount that is not presently known to Oakley. By reason of Defendants
24 wrongful acts as alleged in this Complaint, Oakley has been damaged and is
25 entitled to monetary relief in an amount to be determined at trial.
26 54. By its actions, Defendant has injured and violated the rights of
27 Oakley and has irreparably injured Oakley, and such irreparable injury will
28 continue unless Defendant is enjoined by this Court.
- 12 -
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 14 of 17 Page ID #:14

1 WHEREFORE, Oakley prays for judgment in its favor against


2 Defendant for the following relief:
3 A. An Order adjudging Defendant to have willfully infringed the
4 Asserted Patents under 35 U.S.C. 271;
5 B. A preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its
6 respective officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and
7 those persons in active concert or participation with Defendant, from directly or
8 indirectly infringing the D434, D047, D818 and D182 patents in violation of
9 35 U.S.C. 271, including, for example, through the manufacture, use, sale,
10 offer for sale, and/or importation of Defendants BP-5-b, Twist, Amp, and
11 Cancun products, and any products that are not colorably different form these
12 products;
13 C. That Defendant account for all gains, profits, and advantages
14 derived by Defendants infringement of the Asserted Patents in violation of
15 35 U.S.C. 271, and that Defendant pay to Oakley all damages suffered by
16 Oakley and/or Defendants total profit from such infringement pursuant to 35
17 U.S.C. 284 and 289;
18 D. That the Court find for Oakley and against Defendant on Oakleys
19 claims of trade dress infringement and unfair competition under 15 U.S.C.
20 1125(a);
21 E. That the Court issue a preliminary and permanent injunction
22 against Defendant, its agents, servants, employees, representatives, successors,
23 and assigns, and all persons, firms, or corporations in active concert or
24 participation with Defendant, enjoining them from engaging in the following
25 activities and from assisting or inducing, directly or indirectly, others to engage
26 in the following activities:
27 1. Manufacturing, importing, marketing, displaying,
28 distributing, offering to sell, and/or selling Defendants
- 13 -
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 15 of 17 Page ID #:15

1 Elwood product shown above and any products that are not
2 colorably different therefrom;
3 2. using Oakleys HOLBROOK Trade Dress, and any other
4 trade dress that is confusingly similar to Oakleys
5 HOLBROOK Trade Dress;
6 3. unfairly competing with Oakley in any manner whatsoever;
7 4. causing a likelihood of confusion or injuries to Oakleys
8 business reputation
9 5. manufacturing, importing, marketing, advertising,
10 displaying, distributing, offering to sell, and/or selling any
11 goods that infringe Oakleys HOLBROOK Trade Dress;
12 F. That an accounting be ordered to determine Defendants profits
13 resulting from its trade dress infringement and unfair competition;
14 G. That Oakley be awarded monetary relief in an amount to be fixed
15 by the Court under 15 U.S.C. 1117, including:
16 1. all profits received by Defendant from sales and revenues of
17 any kind made as a result of its infringing actions;
18 2. all damages sustained by Oakley as a result of Defendants
19 acts of trade dress infringement, and that such damages be
20 trebled;
21 3. the costs of this action;
22 H. That such damages and profits be trebled and awarded to Oakley
23 pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
24 I. An Order adjudging that this is an exceptional case, including each
25 of Oakleys patent infringement and Lanham Act claims;
26 J. That, because of the exceptional nature of this case resulting from
27 Defendants deliberate infringing actions, this Court award to Oakley all
28 ///
- 14 -
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 16 of 17 Page ID #:16

1 reasonable attorneys fees, costs, and disbursements incurred as a result of this


2 action, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
3 K. That Oakley recover exemplary damages pursuant to California
4 Civil Code 3294;
5 L. An Order for a trebling of damages and/or exemplary damages
6 because of Defendants willful conduct pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284;
7 M. An award to Oakley of the attorney fees, expenses, and costs
8 incurred by Oakley in connection with this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285;
9 N. An award of pre-judgment and post-judgment interest and costs of
10 this action against Defendant; and,
11 O. Such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and
12 proper.
13
14 Respectfully submitted,
15 KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
16
17 Dated: April 27, 2017 By: /s/ Ali S. Razai
Michael K. Friedland
18 michael.friedland@knobbe.com
Ali S. Razai
19 ali.razai@knobbe.com
Kim A. Kennedy
20 Kim.kennedy@knobbe.com
21 Attorneys for Plaintiff
OAKLEY, INC
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 15 -
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 17 of 17 Page ID #:17

1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL


2 Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so
3 triable.
4 Respectfully submitted,
5 KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
6
7 Dated: April 27, 2017 By: /s/ Ali S. Razai
Michael K. Friedland
8 michael.friedland@knobbe.com
Ali S. Razai
9 ali.razai@knobbe.com
Kim A. Kennedy
10 Kim.kennedy@knobbe.com
11 Attorneys for Plaintiff
OAKLEY, INC
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 16 -
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:18

EXHIBIT A
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 2 of 6 Page ID #:19
USO0D674434S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent N0.2 US D674,434 S


Rohrbach (45) Date of Patent: 4* Jan. 15, 2013

(54) EYEGLASS COMPONENTS D58L447 5 11/2008 Yee


D590,432 S 4/2009 Yee
_ . - D597,123 S * 7/2009 Strecker ..................... .. D16/315
(75) Inventor. Tobin A. Rohrbach, Camar1llo, CA 13599335 S 90009 Yee
(Us) D599,836 s 9/2009 Rohrbach
D601,181 S 9/2009 Fuchs
(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) 13607939 5 * 12/2009 Yee Dl6/3l5
D612,412 S * 3/2010 Yee ............................ .. D16/315
_ D623,684 S 9/2010 Yee
(M) Term 14 Years D624,579 s * 9/2010 Rohrbach .................. .. 1316/315
D640,308 S 6/2011 Yang
(21) Appl-No-i 29/423,384 D654,947 s 2/2012 Shin etal.
D655,741 S 3/2012 Yee
(22) Filed: May 31, 2012 * Cited by examiner
(51) LOC (9) Cl. ................................................ .. 16-06
(52) us. Cl. .................................................... .. 1316/315 Primary Examiner * Raphael Barkai
(58) Field of Classi?cation Search ............... .. 1316/101, (74) Allow/6y] Age/1Z1 or Firm * Knobbe Martens 015011 &
1316/3004342, 900; 1329/1094110; 1324/1102; Bear LLP
351/41, 44, 51452, 62, 158, 92, 1034123, (57) CLAIM
351/140, 153, 45*46; 2/426*432, 4473449, The ornamental design for eyeglass components, as shoWn
2/441, 4344437, 13, 15; D21/483, 6594661; and described
Dl4/372
See application ?le for complete search history. DESCRIPTION
(56) References Cited FIG. 1 is a front perspective vieW of eyeglass components of
the present invention;
US. PATENT DOCUMENTS FIG. 2 is a front elevational vieW thereof;
FIG. 3 is a rear elevational vieW thereof;
D399,519 S 10/1998 Yee
D433,437 S 11/2000 Yee et a1. FIG. 4 is a left side elevational vieW thereof, the right side
D450,745 S 11/2001 ThiXton etal. elevational vieW being a mirror image thereof;
D464,982 S 10/2002 ThiXton et a1. FIG. 5 is a top plan vieW thereof; and,
D513,761 S 1/2006 Yee et a1. FIG. 6 is a bottom plan vieW thereof.
D542,329 S * 5/2007 Hester ........................ .. D16/315
D548,268 S 8/2007 Yee The broken line portions of the draWings are for illustrative
D564,568 S 3/2008 Moritz purposes only and form no part of the claimed design.
D567,839 S * 4/2008 Fuchs ........................ .. D16/315
D579,968 S 11/2008 Yee et a1. 1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets

Exhibit A Page 1 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 3 of 6 Page ID #:20

US. Patent Jan. 15, 2013 Sheet 1 of4 US D674,434 S

Exhibit A Page 2 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 4 of 6 Page ID #:21

US. Patent Jan. 15, 2013 Sheet 2 of4 US D674,434 S

FIG. 3

Exhibit A Page 3 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 5 of 6 Page ID #:22

US. Patent Jan. 15, 2013 Sheet 3 of4 US D674,434 S

FIG.

Exhibit A Page 4 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-1 Filed 04/27/17 Page 6 of 6 Page ID #:23

US. Patent Jan. 15, 2013 Sheet 4 of4 US D674,434 S

Exhibit A Page 5 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-2 Filed 04/27/17 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:24

EXHIBIT B
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-2 Filed 04/27/17 Page 2 of 6 Page ID #:25

USO0D469458S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent N0.: US D469,458 S


Baden et al . 45 Date of Patent o >l<>l< Jan 28, 2003
.

(54) EYEGLASS FRONT D366,890 S 2/1996 Arnette


D366,891 S 2/1996 Arnette
(75) Inventors: Colin Baden, Irvine, CA (US); Peter 133697614 5 5/1996 Fukuchi
Yee Irvine CA (Us) D371,152 S 6/1996 Simioni et al.
D372,726 s 8/1996 Simioni
(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) D373781 S 9/1996 Slmlom et a1
(M) Term, 14 Years (List continued on next page.)
OTHER PUBLICATIONS
21 A l. N .: 29 162 825
( ) pp 0 / Asia Paci?c Trading Company, Inc., Asia Paci?c
(22) Filed: Jun. 17, 2002 19992000, pp. 1 (models M0302SD/PM, M16SD and
M1685SD), 2 (models M1824LPM, M2066SD, M2128SD),
Related US- Application Data 3 (model M3991SD), 5 (model M4771SD), 6 (model
M6631PM, M7107SD), 8 Model M8162SD/PM), 10
(62) Division of application No. 29/134,388, ?led on Dec. 20, (models M942150SD/PM, M942240SD/PM, M942242Sd/
2000- pm), 21 (models M942150CP, P4988SD), 24 (model
(51) LOC (7) Cl. .................................................. .. 16-06 M2282SD), 25 (models M5505PM, M60680SD), 35 (mod
(52) US. Cl. ................................... .. D16/326 61s M5409MSG, M7349MSG), and 42 (models M9820IR,
(58) Field of Search D16/101 300_330. M9821IR, M9822IR) unknown publisher and publishing
D29/109, 110; 351/41, 44, 51, 52, 158; date
2/447> 448 (List continued on neXt page.)
(56) References Cited Primary ExaminerRaphael Barkai
(74) Attorney, Agent, or FirmGregory Nelson
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
(57) CLAIM
836,796 A 11/1906 Anderson
1,338,880 A 5/1920 Stevens The ornamental design for an eyeglass front, as shoWn and
2,031,771 A 2/1936 Grier described.
D116,259 S 8/1939 Cook
D145,288 S 7/1946 DiCicco DESCRIPTION
2,482,664 A 9/1949 Gagnon
D168,903 S 2/1953 Neary FIG. 1 is a front perspective vieW of the eyeglass of the
D169,724 S 6/1953 Bauer et al. present invention;
D193,028 S 6/1962 Petitto FIG. 2 is a front elevational vieW;
D199,150 S 9/1964 Carmichael FIG. 3 is a rear elevational vieW thereof;
D204,496 S 4/1966 McCulloch FIG. 4 is a left-side elevational vieW thereof, the right-side
D204,812 S 5/1966 Shindler elevational vieW being a mirror image thereof;
D209,862 S 1/1968 McCracken FIG. 5 is a top plan vieW thereof; and,
D214,292 S 5/1969 Mitchell FIG. 6 is a bottom plan vieW thereof.
D228,026 S 7/1973 Schindler Phantom lining, Where utilized, is for illustrative purposes
5,054,903 A 10/1991 Jannard et al.
D324,394 S 3/1992 Jannard
only and is not intended to limit the claimed design to the
D342,534 S 12/1993 Jannard et al. features shoWn in phantom.
D354,501 S 1/1995 Jannard
D365 591 S 12/1995 Jannard et al. 1 Claim, 3 Drawing Sheets

Exhibit B Page 1 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-2 Filed 04/27/17 Page 3 of 6 Page ID #:26

US D469,458 S
Page 2

Us. PATENT DOCUMENTS M7920SD), 4 (models M88155SD/PM, M88205SD/PM,


D376,381 S 12/1996 Jannard et al. M95005PM, M95007SD/PM), 9 (models M98001MSG,
D378,375 S 3/1997 Tsai
M971MSG), unknown publisher and publishing date.
D383,149 S 9/1997 Simioni Sunglass Hut International, page stamped G00298, Model
D388,816 S 1/1998 Jannard et al. B, unknown publisher and publishing date.
D391,596 S 3/1998 Simioni Alpina, Serious, Perfect Eye Protection, Tatoo model
D392,662 S 3/1998 Jannard et al. top right corner of third page, unknown publisher and
D399,240 S 10/1998 Jannard et al. publishing date.
D399,865 S 10/1998 Jannard et al. Frames, Winter 1997, p. 1151, bottom right corner (Revolt
D406,858 S 3/1999 Arnette model), unknown publisher and publishing date.
D410,667 S 6/1999 Arnette Frames, Summer 1996, p. 1225, second to bottom in right
D414,796 S 10/1999 Arnette
D436,982 S 1/2000 Jannard et al.
column (model GU 5003 Sun), unknown publisher and
D420,036 S 2/2000 Yee et al. publishing date.
D423,035 S 4/2000 Yee et al. Unknown source, p. 90 (model Z5469), 93 (model Z554), 97
D433,437 S * 11/2000 Yee ......................... .. D16/326 (models Z586, Z590, Z585, Z591), 100 (model Z604, Z605,
Z606, Z607, Z608) unnumbered page (models B632, B630),
OTHER PUBLICATIONS 133 (models Z847, Z848), 136 (Model Z873), and 328 (both
models).
Asia Paci?c Trading Company, Inc., Asia Paci?c 2000 US. patent application Ser. No. 29/134388, Baden et al.,
Supplement, pp. 2 (models M5915SD, M5932SD, ?led Dec. 20, 2000.
M5936SD, M5956SD), 3 (models M631SD, M6405SD/PM, * cited by examiner

Exhibit B Page 2 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-2 Filed 04/27/17 Page 4 of 6 Page ID #:27

U.S. Patent Jan. 28,2003 Sheet 1 of3 US D469,458 S

Exhibit B Page 3 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-2 Filed 04/27/17 Page 5 of 6 Page ID #:28

U.S. Patent Jan. 28,2003 Sheet 2 of3 US D469,458 S

Exhibit B Page 4 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-2 Filed 04/27/17 Page 6 of 6 Page ID #:29

U.S. Patent Jan. 28,2003 Sheet 3 0f 3 US D469,458 S

Exhibit B Page 5 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-3 Filed 04/27/17 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:30

EXHIBIT C
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-3 Filed 04/27/17 Page 2 of 7 Page ID #:31
USO0D692047S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent N0.: US D692,047 S


Shin (45) Date of Patent: 4* Oct. 22, 2013

(54) EYEGLASS D581,450 S 11/2008 Yee


D583,404 S 12/2008 Baden et a1.
' . ' D584,335 S 1/2009 Baden et a1.
(71) Appl1cant. Oakley, Inc., Footh1ll Ranch, CA (US) 13599338 S 90009 Rohrbach
(72) Inventor: Jae Shin, Irvine, CA (US) 2 ggilrbach
D604,757 S 11/2009 Yee
(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) D604,758 S ll/2009 Rohrbach et al.
D604,759 S 11/2009 Rohrbach et al.
(**) Term: 14 Years D607,040 S 12/2009 Rohrbach
D610,604 S 2/2010 ThiXton
(21) Appl NO_ 29/444 586 D615,580 S 5/2010 Baden et a1.
(Continued)
(22) F1led: Jan. 31, 2013 OTHER PUBLICATIONS
(51) LOC (9) Cl. ................................................ .. 16-06
(52) U_s_ CL U.S. Appl. No. 29/427,769, ?led Jul. 23, 2012, Shin.
USPC ....................... .. D16/325' D16/326' D16/335
. . . Primary Examiner * Raphael Barkai
(58) Field of Classi?cation Search _
USPC ...... .. D16/101, 3004342, 900; D29/1094110; (74) Mom Age! "r Fm * Knobbe Martens Olson &
351/41, 44, 51452, 62, 158, 92, Bear LLP
35l/l03il23, 140*153, 45*46; 2/426i432,
2/4474449, 441, 4344137, 13, 15, (57) . CLAIM
132N483 659*661, B14672 The ornamental des1gn for an eyeglass, as shoWn and
See application ?le for complete search history. descnbed'
(56) References Cited DESCRIPTION
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS FIG. 1 is a front perspective vieW of an eyeglass showing my
neW design in Which the different shading techniques includ
2 JBflcrllTrgzill' ing theflilrlie shadling in some areas and the stippling in otliier
13548269 S 8/2007 Baden et 31 areas 0 t eeyeg ass representacontrastmappearance, an 1s
13556246 5 11/2007 Yee not intended to represent any speci?c color, texture and/or
D556,818 S 12/2007 Jannard et al. material;
13558316 5 1/ 2008 Yee FIG. 2 is a front elevational vieW thereof;
13561312 S 2/2008 FOX et a1 FIG. 3 is a rear elevational vieW thereof;
D561,813 S 2/2008 Baden et a1. . . . . . .
13564572 S 3/2008 Yee et 31 FIG. 4 1s a left s1de elevat1onal v1eW thereof, the r1ght s1de
D565,088 S 3/2008 Baden et a1, elevational vieW being a mirror image thereof;
D565,089 S 3/2008 Baden et a1. FIG. 5 is a top plan vieW thereof; and,
135721747 S 72008 Baden et a1~ FIG. 6 is a bottom plan vieW thereof;
D572749 S 7 2008 Yee The broken lines in the Figures shoW portions of the eyeglass
D573,172 S 7/2008 Baden et a1. . . .
13575323 S 8/2008 Jannard et a1 Wh1ch form no part of the cla1med des1gn.
D577,759 S 9/2008 Yee
D58l,449 S ll/2008 Yee 1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets

Exhibit C Page 1 of 6
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-3 Filed 04/27/17 Page 3 of 7 Page ID #:32

US D692,047 S
Page2

(56) References Cited D653,699 S 2/2012 Shin


D654,530 s * 2/2012 Markovitz e161. ......... .. D16/326
D659,181 S 5/2012 MOIiIZ
13659,182 s 5/2012 Shin 6161.
D620,970 s 8/2010 Thixton 136621124 5 * 6/2012 Sh!
7,954,942 B2 6/2011 Calilung 6161. 136621967 5 7/2012 Shln ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ B16626
* . D664,l83 s * 7/2012 Stepan e161. D16/309
D645,076 s 9/2011 Markovltz e161. ......... .. D16/326 .
D665,009 s * 8/2012 Nlbaueretal. . D16/326
13648771 S 11/2011 Rohrbach 13676 479 s * 2/2013 Yoo Dl6/326
13650,825 s * 12/2011 Yeeetal. ................... .. D16/326 """"""""""""""" "

D652,442 S l/2012 Yee et a1. * cited by examiner

Exhibit C Page 2 of 6
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-3 Filed 04/27/17 Page 4 of 7 Page ID #:33

US. Patent 0a. 22, 2013 Sheet 1 of4 US D692,047 S

Exhibit C Page 3 of 6
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-3 Filed 04/27/17 Page 5 of 7 Page ID #:34

US. Patent 0a. 22, 2013 Sheet 2 of4 US D692,047 S

Exhibit C Page 4 of 6
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-3 Filed 04/27/17 Page 6 of 7 Page ID #:35

US. Patent 0a. 22, 2013 Sheet 3 of4 US D692,047 S

Exhibit C Page 5 of 6
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-3 Filed 04/27/17 Page 7 of 7 Page ID #:36

US. Patent 0a. 22, 2013 Sheet 4 of4 US D692,047 S

Exhibit C Page 6 of 6
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-4 Filed 04/27/17 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:37

EXHIBIT D
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-4 Filed 04/27/17 Page 2 of 7 Page ID #:38
USO0D556818S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent N0.: US D556,818 S


Jannard et a]. (45) Date of Patent: 4* Dec. 4, 2007

(54) EYEGLASS COMPONENTS D481,063 S * 10/2003 Lane ....................... .. D16/326


D500,781 S * 1/2005 Mage .. .... .. D16/335
(75) Inventors: James H. Jannard, Spieden Island, WA 13534572 5 * 1/2007 Teng ~~~~ ~~ 1316/337
(US); Hans Karsten
_ Moritz,
- Foothill
~ , 2 i (Ting
uang
~ ~ ~ ~ ..
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..
.... ~~

221E265 ms) Coll Baden Imne D536,026 s * 1/2007 Bruck .... .. D16/326
D537,467 S * 2/2007 Teng ....................... .. D16/326

(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) OTHER PUBLICATIONS


(**) Term: 14 Years Pending U.S. Appl. No. 29/227,719, ?led Apr. 13, 2005, Jannard.
* cited by examiner
(21) Appl. No.: 29/272,777 _ _ _
Primary ExammeriRaphael Barkai
(22) Filed; Feb 15, 2007 (74) Attorney, Agent, or FirmiGregory K. Nelson

Related US. Application Data (57) CLAIM


(62) Division OfaPPliCatiOn NO- 29/227,719, ?led On AP1 The ornamental design for an eyeglass components, as
13, HOW Pat. NO. Des. Shown and described_

(51) LOC (8) Cl. ............................................... .. 16-06 DESCRIPTION


(52) US. Cl. ................................... .. D16/326; D16/335 FIG 1 is a from perspective View of the eyeglass COmpO_
(58) Field of Classi?cation Search ..... .. Dl6/300i330, Helm of the present invention;
D16/101,332*338; D29/l09ill0; D24/110.2; FIG 21S a ers ective View thereof
351/41, 44, 51452, 62, 158, 92, 1034111, ' _ p p _ _
351/156, 61 114E119 121E123; 2/426i432 FIG. 3 15 a front elevational VleW thereof;
2/447i449, 441, 436, 4344437 FIG. 4 is a lateral left-side elevational View thereof, the
See application ?le for Complete Search history. lateral right-side elevational View being a mirror image
(56) References Cited thereof;
FIG. 5 is a medial left-side elevational View thereof, the
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS medial right-side elevational View being a mirror image
D193,028 S 6/1962 Petitto thereof;
D199,150 S 9/1964 Carmichael FIG. 6 is a rear elevational View thereof;
D202,658 S 10/1965 Petitto
FIG. 7 is a bottom plan View thereof; and,
D209,862 S 1/1968 McCracken
D268,683 S 4/1983 Tenny FIG. 8 is a top elevational View thereof.
D285,020 S 8/1986 Schmidthaler Phantom lining, Where utilized, is for illustrative purposes
D372,726 S 8/1996 Simioni only and is not intended to limit the claimed design to the
D390,589 S 2/1998 Simioni
D397,351 S 8/1998 Simioni features shoWn in phantom.
D407,099 S 3/1999 Wang
D414,796 S 10/1999 Arnette 1 Claim, 5 Drawing Sheets

Exhibit D Page 1 of 6
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-4 Filed 04/27/17 Page 3 of 7 Page ID #:39

U.S. Patent Dec. 4, 2007 Sheet 1 0f 5 US D556,818 S

Exhibit D Page 2 of 6
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-4 Filed 04/27/17 Page 4 of 7 Page ID #:40

U.S. Patent Dec. 4, 2007 Sheet 2 0f 5 US D556,818 S

Exhibit D Page 3 of 6
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-4 Filed 04/27/17 Page 5 of 7 Page ID #:41

U.S. Patent Dec. 4, 2007 Sheet 3 0f 5 US D556,818 S

Exhibit D Page 4 of 6
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-4 Filed 04/27/17 Page 6 of 7 Page ID #:42

U.S. Patent Dec. 4, 2007 Sheet 4 0f 5 US D556,818 S

FIG. 7

Exhibit D Page 5 of 6
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-4 Filed 04/27/17 Page 7 of 7 Page ID #:43

U.S. Patent Dec. 4, 2007 Sheet 5 0f 5 US D556,818 S

FIG. 8

Exhibit D Page 6 of 6
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-5 Filed 04/27/17 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:44

EXHIBIT E
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-5 Filed 04/27/17 Page 2 of 6 Page ID #:45
USO0D659182S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent N0.: US D659,182 S


Shin et a]. (45) Date of Patent: *4. May 8, 2012

(54) EYEGLASS AND EYEGLASS COMPONENT D536,027 S 1/2007 Paulson


D539,831 S 4/2007 Hsu
(75) Inventors: Jae Shin, Irvine, CA (US); Colin 2 g?ging
BafienaIrV1neCA(US);PeterYee 135472359 s 7/2007 Krakoff et al.
lrvlne, CA (US) D549,764 s * 8/2007 Teng .......................... .. D16/326
D561,811 S 2/2008 FOX et al.
(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) 13561313 5 2/2008 Baden et a1.
D565,088 S 3/2008 Baden et a1.
** . D572,747 S 7/2008 Baden et a1.
( ) Term 14 Years D581,450 s 11/2008 Moritz
D586,379 S 2/2009 ThiXton et al.
(21) APP1- NO-I 29/400,739 D595,333 s 6/2009 MarkovitZ et al.
D599,838 S * 9/2009 Rohrbach .................. .. D16/326
(22) Filed: Aug. 31, 2011 D616,015 S 5/2010 MarkovitZ et a1.
D622,302 S 8/2010 Yee
(51) LOC (9) Cl. ................................................ .. 16-06 13623217 S 90010 Markovitz et a1
(52) U.S. Cl. .................................... .. D16/326; D16/335 D629,830 S 12/2010 Markovitz et a1.
(58) Field of Classi?cation Search ............... .. D16/101, g * ?arllioviiz ~t~~~~l ------------ -- 1316/326
. . . , BI 0V1 Z e a .

D16/3gggiffffoglDgg/g9ggob2Diggl 1102i D652,442 S * 1/2012 Yee et al. ................... .. D16/326


7 f 7 * cited by examiner
351/140, 153, 45446, 2/4264432, 4474449,
2/441 4347437 13 15; 132N483 Primary Examiner * Raphael Barkai
See application ?le for complete search history. (74) Attorney Agent or Firm * Knobbe Martens Olson &
Bear, LLP
(56) References Cited
(57) CLAIM
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS The ornamental design for an eyeglass and eyeglass compo
D150,924 S 9/1948 Bright nent, as shoWn and described.
D158,963 S 6/1950 Jonassen
D192,885 S 5/1962 Petitto DESCRIPTION
D218,569 S 9/1970 McCracken
D300,226 S 3/1989 Ramp
D309,149 S 7/1990 Pouilloux FIG. 1 is a front perspective vieW of an eyeglass and eyeglass
D309,618 S 7/1990 Evans component of the present invention;
D330,395 S 10/1992 Simioni FIG. 2 is a front elevational vieW thereof;
D342,080 S 12/1993 Cargle FIG. 3 is a rear elevational vieW thereof;
5,537,161 A 7/1996 Monroe
D380,766 S 7/1997 Simioni FIG. 4 is a left side elevational vieW thereof, the right side
5,712,697 A 1/1998 Walton elevational vieW being a mirror image thereof;
D390,864 S 2/1998 Mage FIG. 5 is a top plan vieW thereof; and,
D399,238 S 10/1998 Simioni FIG. 6 is a bottom plan vieW thereof.
D409,222 S 5/1999 Raub The broken line portions of the drawings are for illustrative
D427,622 S 7/2000 Conway
D457,182 S 5/2002 Rask purposes only and form no part of the claimed design.
D468,337 S 1/2003 Chen
D514,615 S 2/2006 Mangum 1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets

Exhibit E Page 1 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-5 Filed 04/27/17 Page 3 of 6 Page ID #:46

US. Patent May 8, 2012 Sheet 1 of4 US D659,182 S

Exhibit E Page 2 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-5 Filed 04/27/17 Page 4 of 6 Page ID #:47

Exhibit E Page 3 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-5 Filed 04/27/17 Page 5 of 6 Page ID #:48

US. Patent May 8, 2012 Sheet 3 of4 US D659,182 S

Exhibit E Page 4 of 5
Case 8:17-cv-00757 Document 1-5 Filed 04/27/17 Page 6 of 6 Page ID #:49

US. Patent May 8, 2012 Sheet 4 of4 US D659,182 S

Exhibit E Page 5 of 5