1

__________ District of

__________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION

DESIGN BASICS, LLC

11112 John Galt Boulevard

Omaha, NE 68137-2385

Plaintiffs,

v.

SCHMIDT BUILDERS, LLC

Registered Agent Alan Schmidt Jr.

9679 Cincinnati-Columbus Road

Cincinnati, OH 45241

SCHMIDT BUILDERS, INC.

Registered Agent Alan Schmidt Sr.

10094 Cliffwood CT

Cincinnati OH 45241

SCHMIDT HOMES, INC.

Registered Agent Alan Schmidt Jr.

9679 Cincinnati-Columbus Road

Cincinnati, OH 45241

ALAN SCHMIDT CONSTRUCTION, INC. 

Registered Agent Alan Schmidt Sr.

10094 Cliffwood CT

Cincinnati OH 45241

ALAN SCHMIDT HOMES, INC.

Registered Agent Alan Schmidt Sr.

10094 Cliffwood CT

Cincinnati OH 45241

BLACKSTONE DEVELOPMENT, LLC

Registered Agent Alan Schmidt Jr.

9679 Cincinnati-Columbus Road

Cincinnati, OH 45241

§ Case No. _____________________

§

§ Hon. _________________________

§

§ 

§ Douglas M. Morehart (OH 0038668)

§ Haverkamp, Riehl, & Michel, Co., 

§ 5856 Glenway Avenue

§ Cincinnati, OH 45238

§ Tel: 513-922-3200

§ Fax: 513-922-8096

§

§ Dana A. LeJune (TX 12188250)

§ Email: dlejune@triallawyers.net

§ LeJune Law Firm

§ 6525 Washington Avenue, Suite 300

§ Houston, TX 77007

§ Telephone: (713) 942-9898

§ Fax: (713) 942-9899

§

§ Attorneys for Plaintiff

§ Design Basics, LLC

§

§

§ 

§

§

§

§

§ 

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 1 of 16 PAGEID #: 1
2

STONEWOOD DEVELOPMENT, LLC

Registered Agent Alan Schmidt Jr

9679 Cincinnati-Columbus Road

Cincinnati, OH 45241

MIAMISBURG DEVELOPMENT, LLC

Registered Agent Alan Schmidt Jr

9679 Cincinnati-Columbus Road

Cincinnati, OH 45241

HERITAGE LAND, LLC

Registered Agent Alan Schmidt Jr

9679 Cincinnati-Columbus Road

Cincinnati, OH 45241

ALAN G. SCHMIDT JR

4339 E. Chase Run

Liberty TWP, OH 45011

ALAN G. SCHMIDT SR

9557 Short Line CT

West Chester, OH 45241

RICHARD BONETT

4282 Stone Meadow Dr

Liberty TWP, OH 45011

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, Design Basics, LLC (“DB or “Plaintiff”) by and through its attorneys, Dana A. 

LeJune and Douglas Morehart, file this cause of action against the Defendants, Schmidt 

Builders, LLC (“SBL”); Schmidt Builders, Inc. (“SBI”); Schmidt Homes, Inc. (“SHI”), Alan 

Schmidt Construction, Inc. (“ASCI”); Alan Schmidt Homes, Inc. (“ASHI”); Blackstone 

Development, Inc. (“BDI”); Stonewood Development, LLC (“SDL”); Miamisburg Development, 

LLC (“MDL”); and Heritage Land, LLC (“HLL”) (collectively the “Entity Defendants”); as well 

as against the Defendants Alan G. Schmidt, Jr, individually (“Schmidt JR”); Alan G. Schmidt 

SR, individually (“Schmidt SR”) and Richard Bonett, individually (“Bonett”)(collectively, the 

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 2 of 16 PAGEID #: 2
3

“Individual Defendants”)(all parties together – the Entity Defendants and Individual Defendants 

– henceforward will be collectively referred to as “Defendants”) and show:

Jurisdiction and Venue

1. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction in this action pursuant to 28 USC §1331 

and §1338(a) as this case arises under the U.S. Copyright Act.

2. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 USC §1400(a) as the Defendants 

reside and/or maintain a principal place of business in this District.

Parties

3. Plaintiff, DB is a Nebraska limited liability company engaged in the business of 

creating, publishing and licensing architectural plans and designs, with its principal office 

located in Omaha, Nebraska.

4. The Defendant, SBL is a for-profit Ohio limited liability company with its 

principal office located in Cincinnati, Ohio. SBL is in the business of marketing, development, 

construction and sales of residential houses. SBL is registered for service at the above-captioned 

address.

5. The Defendant, SBI is a for-profit Ohio corporation with its principal office 

located in Cincinnati, OH. SBI is in the business of marketing, development, construction, and 

sales of residential houses. SBI is registered for service at the above-captioned address. 

6. SHI is a for-profit Ohio Corporation with its principal office located in Cincinnati, 

Ohio. SHI is in the business of marketing, development, construction, and sales of residential 

houses. SHI is registered for service at the above-captioned address.

7. ASCI is a for-profit Ohio corporation with its principal office located in 

Cincinnati, Ohio. ASCI is in the business of marketing, development, construction and sales of 

residential houses. ASCI is registered for service at the above-captioned address.

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 3 of 16 PAGEID #: 3
4

8. ASHI is a for-profit Ohio corporation with its principal office located in 

Cincinnati, Ohio. ASHI is in the business of marketing, development, construction and sales of 

residential houses. ASHI is registered for service at the above-captioned address.

9. BDI is a for-profit Ohio limited liability company with its principal office located 

in Cincinnati, Ohio. BDI s in the business of marketing, development, and sales of residential 

houses, lots, and subdivisions. DBI is registered for service at the above-captioned address.

10. SDL is a for-profit Ohio limited liability company with its principal office located 

in Cincinnati, Ohio. SDL is in the business of marketing, development, and sales of residential 

houses, lots, and subdivisions. SDL is registered for service at the above-captioned address.

11. MDL is a for-profit Ohio limited liability company with its principal office 

located in Cincinnati, Ohio. MDL is in the business of marketing, development, and sales of 

residential houses, lots, and subdivisions. MDL is registered for service at the above-captioned 

address.

12. HLL is a for-profit Ohio limited liability company with its principal office located 

in Cincinnati, Ohio. HLL s in the business of marketing, development, and sales of residential 

houses, lots, and subdivisions. HLL is registered for service at the above-captioned address.

13. Schmidt Jr is an individual, and an officer, director, manager and/or principal of 

SBL, SHI, BDI, SDL, MDL, and/or HLL who resides in Liberty TWP, Ohio.

14. Schmidt Sr is an individual, and an officer, director, manager and/or principal of 

SBI, ASCI, and/or ASHI who resides in West Chester, Ohio. 

15. Bonett is an individual and lead architectural designer, officer, director, manager 

and/or principal of SBL who resides in Liberty TWP, Ohio. 

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 4 of 16 PAGEID #: 4
5

Facts

16. Since the early 1980’s, DB has been a major publisher of plan catalogs, in which

its works are marketed. Since the advent of the internet, DB has marketed its works through

publishing its designs on DB’s website, www.designbasics.com, and through its marketing

partners. Consequently, DB’s designs have become ubiquitous in the marketplace.

17. DB is the sole original author and owner of a large number of architectural works,

including those entitled the “2236 Bermier” (or the “Copyrighted Work”).

18. Exhibit 1 attached hereto is a true and correct copy of the Registration Certificate

issued by the U.S. Copyright Office for DB 2236 the “Bermier;”

19. The Copyrighted Work described in paragraphs 18 above was independently 

created by – and are original to – DB and PPI. In creating these works, DB met the required 

“minimal degree of creativity” in architectural design, both as pictorial works and to the design

itself as an architectural work.

20. Pursuant to the U.S. Copyright Act §101, an “architectural work” protected under 

the Act includes “the design of a building as embodied in any tangible medium of expression, 

including a building, architectural plans, or drawings.” 

21. Pursuant to the U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §101, the scope of protection 

afforded architectural works under the Act “include the overall form as well as the arrangement 

and composition of spaces and elements in the design, but does not included individual standard 

features.” 

22. Consequently, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §101, DB does not claim any copyright 

protection over any individual standard features contained with the Copyrighted Work identified 

in paragraph 18 above, such as individual doors, windows, walls, closets, bathrooms, trims, 

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 5 of 16 PAGEID #: 5
6

finishes, cabinets or fixtures, when considered individually and separately apart from the overall 

architectural work.

23. Generally and without exclusivity or limitation, the arrangement and composition 

of the spaces and elements, taken together, as a whole, considering the overall form of the 

Copyrighted Work (the plans for which, are attached hereto and incorporated herein in their 

entirety), are protectable under the U.S. Copyright Act as follows:

a. First floor, consisting, et al., of five rooms (a master bedroom, dining room, kitchen, 

breakfast room, and great room); two bathrooms (a master bath with whirlpool bath, 

double sink and walk-in closet; and a half bath); three closets (a master closet and 

two coat/linen closets); entry/foyer; stairway; laundry room, pantry; desk, fireplace; 

covered porch; a two-car garage; windows; doors; cabinets; fixtures; and counters.

i. Overall location in two-dimensional plan of virtually every single room 

and its associated relationships with other spaces and elements; 

ii. Location of virtually every room in overall three-dimensional relationship 

of spaces; 

iii. Plan program; i.e. the number of rooms and elements; 

iv. Relative feature and fixture locations;

v. Stair configuration and location;

vi. Locations of interstitial space (e.g. halls/gallery or alcoves);

b. Second floor, consisting, et al., of three bedrooms; one bathroom; hallway; 

attic/potential bonus space; three closets; windows; doors; cabinets; fixtures; and 

counters. 

i. Overall location in two-dimensional plan of virtually every single room 

and its associated relationships with other spaces and elements; 

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 6 of 16 PAGEID #: 6
7

ii. Location of virtually every room in overall three-dimensional relationship 

of spaces; 

iii. Plan program; i.e. the number of rooms and elements; 

iv. Relative feature and fixture locations;

v. Stair configuration and location;

vi. Locations of interstitial space (e.g. hallway and alcoves);

c. Front elevation

i. Large massing

ii. Smaller massing

iii. Gable locations

iv. Relative window locations

v. Relative door locations

d. The three-dimensional alignment of spaces and elements of the first floor, second 

floor, as well as the outside elevations in large massing, small massing, fenestrations 

and openings. 

24. Defendants engaged, at least in part, in the business of drafting, publishing, 

distributing, and advertising residential home designs through traditional print media and on the 

internet on sites such as www.schmidtbuilders.com. On September 2, 2015 Plaintiffs first 

became aware that the Defendants had violated their copyrights in one or more distinct ways. 

On said date, while in Cincinnati for unrelated business, a DB employee saw several constructed 

infringements of its Copyrighted Work in a neighborhood in the greater-Cincinnati 

neighborhood. Subsequently DB discovered that said house had been constructed by “Schmidt 

Builders,” prompting DB to visit the website www.schmidtbuilders.com. On said website, DB 

saw plans for Defendants’ “Jamestown II” being advertised and/or marketed by Defendants, and 

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 7 of 16 PAGEID #: 7
8

DB preserved such advertisements by making screen captures (Exhibit 2). The works 

discovered at that time were:

25. Since October 17, 1995, Defendants1have collectively ordered and received at 

least eight (8) of DB’s plan catalogs and purchased a construction license for one (1) DB plan 

and an advertising license for one (1) of DB’s plan designs. The specific Copyrighted Work at 

issue in this case was within one or more of the design plan catalogs ordered and received by 

Defendants. Despite this, when DB checked its records, it found that none of the Defendants had 

ever licensed the Copyrighted Work. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is Defendants’ Customer

Order History forms with DB.

26. The Copyrighted Work within these plan catalogs and/or publications which were 

mailed to and received by Defendants, prominently displayed DB’s copyright management 

information (“CMI”), ensuring that anyone who received said plan catalogs and/or publications 

knows that DB owns all rights and title to the Copyrighted Work. Additionally, each of these 

plan catalogs prominently displays the URL for DB’s website, and explains that without the 

purchase of a license, use of the designs displayed in the catalogs is copyright infringement. 

(Exhibit 4). 

27. Additionally, all of DB’s plan designs, including the Copyrighted Work, have 

been marketed for years on a nationwide basis, including in this District, by means of the 

widespread distribution of design plan catalogs, periodicals, and other publications including by 

third-party marketers, as well as through internet marketing efforts, including but not limited to 

the website, www.designbasics.com. At all times material to this case, Defendants have had a 

reasonable opportunity to have viewed the Copyrighted Work. 

 

1 Through their principal and individual Defendants, Alan Schmidt. Jr. 

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 8 of 16 PAGEID #: 8
9

28. In addition to posting infringing copies of DB’s Copyrighted Work on

Defendants’ website for the purposes of advertising, marketing, and promotion, on information 

and belief, one or more of the Defendants received revenue attributable to the construction, 

marketing, and/or sale of one or more three-dimensional infringing copies (houses) of this work, 

and/or from the development of subdivisions where such revenue was realized through the sales 

of lots. 

29. Each three-dimensional copies constructed by Defendants, as alleged in paragraph 

24 above, constitutes a derivative work infringing on DB copyright-protected work in violation 

of 17 U.S.C. §§106(2) and 501. 

Contributory and/or Vicarious Liability of Principals

30. Because the Individual Defendants are principals, owners, officers, and/or 

manages of the Entity Defendants, or otherwise had control of them, they had knowledge of the 

Entity Defendants’ infringing activities, and/or materially contributed to the infringement by 

providing real estate development, management, appraisal, advertising, marketing, sales and/or 

other services in furtherance of the Entity Defendant’s copying, distributing, marketing, 

construction, and/or sales of known infringing designs and houses.

31. The conduct of the Entity Defendants described above, was performed and/or 

accomplished through the direction, control and conduct of the Individual Defendants personally, 

as owners, officers, directors and/or managers of the Entity Defendants. The Individual 

Defendants had the right and ability to supervise the infringing activities, including but not 

limited to preventing the Entity Defendants from infringing DB’s Copyrighted Work, and/or 

stopping the infringements once they began. Additionally, on information and belief, the 

Individual Defendants received direct financial benefit from the acts of infringement by the 

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 9 of 16 PAGEID #: 9
10

Entity Defendants. Accordingly, Individual Defendants are personally liable to DB as joint 

and/or contributory infringers, or are otherwise vicariously liable.

32. The illicit acts of the Defendants, described in paragraphs 24 through 29 above 

were done without permission or license from DB, and in violation of DB’s exclusive copyrights 

in said work.

33. Upon information and belief, Defendants have infringed DB’s copyrights in other 

original architectural works, the scope and breadth of which infringing activities will be 

ascertained during the course of discovery.

Causes of Action for Non-Willful Copyright Infringement

Count One

34. DB re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 33 above as if fully set forth 

herein 

35. Defendants, without knowledge or intent, infringed DB’s copyrights in DB’s Work

identified and described in paragraphs 18 through 23 above, by scanning, copying, 

and/or reproducing unauthorized copies thereof, in violation of 17 U.S.C. §106(1), and 

on information and belief, have done so with others of DB’s works which are as yet 

undiscovered.

Count Two

36. DB re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 33 above as if fully set forth 

herein. 

37. Defendants, without knowledge or intent, infringed DB’s copyright in DB’s Work

identified and described in paragraphs 18 through 23 above, by publicly displaying, on 

their web site(s) and elsewhere, for purposes of advertising and marketing, 

unauthorized copies or derivatives thereof, in violation of 17 U.S.C. §106(5), and on 

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 10 of 16 PAGEID #: 10
11

information and belief, have done so with others of DB’s works which are as yet 

undiscovered.

Count Three

38. DB re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 33 above as if fully set forth 

herein. 

39. Defendants, without knowledge or intent, infringed DB’s copyrights in DB’s Work 

identified and described in paragraphs 18 through 23 above, by creating derivatives of 

DB’s work in the form of two dimensional plans and fully constructed residences, in 

violation of 17 U.S.C. §106(2), and on information and belief, have done so with 

others of DB’s works which are as yet undiscovered.

Count Four

40. DB re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 33 above as if fully set forth 

herein. 

41. Defendants, without knowledge or intent, infringed DB’s copyrights in DB’s Work

identified and described in paragraphs 18 through 23 above, by advertising, marketing 

and/or selling one or more houses based upon copies or derivatives of said works, in 

violation of 17 U.S.C. §106(3), and on information and belief, have done so with 

others of DB’s works which are as yet undiscovered.

Alternative Causes of Action for Willful Copyright Infringement

Count Five

42. DB re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 41 above as if fully set forth 

herein.

43. Alternatively, Defendants willfully infringed DB’s copyrights in DB’s Work identified 

and described in paragraphs 18 through 23 above, by scanning, copying, and/or 

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 11 of 16 PAGEID #: 11
12

reproducing unauthorized copies thereof, in violation of 17 U.S.C. §106(1), and on 

information and belief have done so with others of DB’s works which are as yet 

undiscovered. 

Count Six

44. DB re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 41 above as if fully set forth 

herein. 

45. Alternatively, Defendants willfully infringed DB’s copyrights in DB’s Work identified 

and described in paragraphs 18 through 23 above, by publicly displaying, on their web 

site(s) and elsewhere, for purposes of advertising and marketing, unauthorized copies 

or derivatives thereof, in violation of 17 U.S.C. §106(5), and on information and 

belief, have done so with others of DB’s works which are as yet undiscovered.

Count Seven

46. DB re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 41 above as if fully set forth 

herein. 

47. Alternatively, Defendants willfully infringed DB’s copyrights in DB’s Work identified 

and described in paragraphs 18 through 23 above, by creating derivatives therefrom in 

the form of two dimensional plans and fully constructed residences in violation of 17 

U.S.C. §106(2), and on information and belief, have done so with others of Plaintiffs’

works which are as yet undiscovered.

Count Eight

48. DB re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 41 above as if fully set forth 

herein.

49. Alternatively, Defendants willfully infringed DB’s copyright in DB’s Work identified 

and described in paragraphs 18 through 23 above, by advertising, marketing and/or 

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 12 of 16 PAGEID #: 12
13

selling one or more houses based upon copies or derivatives of said works, in violation 

of 17 U.S.C. §106(3) and on information and belief, have done so with others of DB’s 

works which are as yet undiscovered.

Violations of DMCA § 1202

Count Nine

50. DB re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 49 above as if fully set forth 

herein. Additionally and alternatively, one or more of the Defendants violated §1202 

et seq. of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), 17 U.S.C. §1202.

51. In creating the drawings identified above, one or more of said Defendants intentionally 

removed and omitted DB’s copyright management information (“CMI”), or had them 

removed or omitted from copies of DB’s Copyrighted Work.

52. One or more of said Defendants thereafter distributed copies or derivatives of such 

works knowing that such CMI had been removed or omitted without authorization.

53. At the time said Defendants removed DB’s CMI from copies of their works, and at the 

time they distributed copies of the works from which the CMI had been removed or 

omitted, said Defendants knew or had reasonable grounds to know that such behavior 

would induce, enable, facilitate or conceal the infringement of DB’s copyrights.

54. DB is entitled and seek to recover from Defendants statutory damages not exceeding 

$25,000 for each act committed in violation of their rights under 17 U.S.C. §1202, et 

seq.

55. Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §1203(b)(5), DB is entitled to and seeks to recover its

reasonable attorneys’ fees.

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 13 of 16 PAGEID #: 13
14

Conclusion and Prayer

WHEREFORE, DB deamnds that judgment be entered in its favor and against the 

Defendants jointly and severally, as follows:

A. For an accounting by Defendants of their activities in connection with 

their infringements of DB’s copyrights in and to the above-described 

work, as well as of the gross profits and revenue attributable to their 

infringement(s);

B. For DB’s actual damages, in an amount to be determined at trial;

C. For Defendants’ direct and indirect profits attributable to their 

infringements, including but not limited to those direct and indirect profits 

derived from the construction, advertising, promotion, marketing, 

appraisal and sale of infringing structures in an amount to be determined at 

trial;

D. In the alternative, at DB’s option an award of statutory damages in lieu of 

actual damages for the infringement of its Work described above, in an 

amount to be determined at trial;

E. An award of statutory damages for each and every violation by 

Defendants of the DMCA, 17 U.S.C. §1202, et seq.;

F. DB’s actual attorney fees, court costs, taxable costs, and the cost 

associated with the retention, preparation and testimony of expert 

witnesses;

G. For both temporary and permanent injunctions barring Defendants, their 

agents, employees and/or servants, from infringing DB’s copyrights in any 

manner whatsoever, including the advertising, marketing, construction, 

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 14 of 16 PAGEID #: 14
15

and sale of infringing structures, and further barring said Defendants from 

publishing through any visual media, and from selling, marketing or 

otherwise distributing copies of DB’s plans and/or derivatives thereof;

H. An order requiring Defendants to produce, for impounding during the 

pendency of this action and for destruction thereafter, all house plans and 

elevations which infringe DB’s copyrights, including all photographs, 

blueprints, film negatives, magnetic tapes, digitally scanned and/or stored 

images, and all machines and devices by which such infringing copies 

may be reproduced, viewed or disseminated, which are in the possession 

of, or under the direct or indirect control of the Defendants;

I. An order permanently enjoining the current owners of all infringing 

structures sold by Defendants from leasing, renting, selling and/or 

otherwise placing into the stream of commerce the infringing structures, 

based upon the application of the first sale doctrine; and

J. For such other relief as the Court determines to be just and equitable.

Date: August 24, 2018 LEJUNE LAW FIRM

By: /S Dana A. LeJune

Dana A. LeJune

Texas Bar No.: 12188250

email: dlejune@triallawyers.net

6525 Washington Avenue

Suite 300

Houston, Texas 77007

Tel: 713.942.9898 Telephone

Fax: 713.942.9899 Facsimile

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 15 of 16 PAGEID #: 15
16

HAVERKAMP, RIEHL, &

MICHEL, CO., LPA

By: /s/ Douglas M. Morehart

Douglas M. Morehart

Ohio Bar No.: 0038668

Admitted in S.D. of Ohio

email: dmorehart@hrm-law.com

5856 Glenway Avenue

Cincinnati, Ohio 45238

Tel: 513-922-3200

Fax: 513-922-8096

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff Design Basics, LLC demands trial by jury. 

By: /S Dana A. LeJune

Dana A. LeJune

An Attorney for Plaintiff, 

Design Basics, LLC 

Case: 1:18-cv-00610-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/28/18 Page: 16 of 16 PAGEID #: 16