1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

LIFETIME INDUSTRIES, INC. )

53208 Columbia Drive )

Elkhart, Indiana 46514 )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 3:13-cv-819

)

TRIM –LOK, Inc. )

6855 Hermosa Circle ) JURY TRIAL DEMAND

Buena Park, CA 90622 )

)

Defendant. )

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Plaintiff, Lifetime Industries, Inc. ("LTI"), by and through the undersigned counsel,

files this Second Amended Complaint for patent infringement against, Trim-Lok, Inc. (the 

“Defendant”), and hereby alleges as follows:

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This is a civil action for patent infringement. Plaintiff’s claims are based on the 

unauthorized, infringing manufacture, use, sale and offer for sale by Defendant of seal products

including, for example, the two-part seal for a slide-out room product.

THE PARTIES

2. LTI (“Plaintiff”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the

State of Minnesota having a principal place of business at 53208 Columbia Drive, Elkhart, 

Indiana 46514.

3. Defendant is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of

California having a principal place of business at 6855 Hermosa Circle, Buena Park, CA 90622.

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 1 of 13
2

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This is an action for patent infringement of United States Patent No. 6,966,590

("the '590 patent") arising under the provisions of the Patent Laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. 

§§ 271, 281 and 283-285. Plaintiff owns the '590 patent and holds rights to sue and recover 

damages for infringement thereof, including past infringement. This Court has subject matter 

jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).

5. Defendant makes, offers for sale and sells infringing products which are the

subject of the patent infringement cause of action set forth herein.

6. Defendant has made, offered for sale and sold infringing products within this

judicial district.

7. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant. Defendant does and has done 

substantial business in this District by placing its products, including those that infringe 

Plaintiff’s patent, into the stream of commerce. Plaintiff has committed and continues to commit 

acts of patent infringement in this district.

8. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1391 and 1400(b) because 

Defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction in this district and has committed and continues to 

commit acts of patent infringement that give rise to the claims alleged within this district.

PATENT-IN-SUIT

9. On November 22, 2005, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and

legally issued the '590 patent, titled “Two-Part Seal for a Slide-Out Room”. A true and correct 

copy of the ‘590 patent is attached to this complaint as Exhibit A. 

10. Plaintiff is the owner of all right, title and interest in and to the '590 patent,

including the right to sue for and recover all past, present and future damages for infringement of

the '590 patent.

11. All maintenance fees for the ‘590 patent which have come due have been paid and 

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 2 of 13
3

the patent has not expired.

12. Forest River (“Forest River”) manufactures and sells recreational vehicles and 

mobile living quarters (each an “RV”) from its facilities in Elkhart County, Indiana. A 

nationwide network of distributors and resellers offer RVs manufactured by Forest River for sale 

to the general public.

13. Plaintiff currently produces, sells, and distributes two-part seals covered by the 

‘590 patent under the name EK-Seal and KE-Seal (collectively, “LTI Seals”). The LTI Seals 

include a mounting portion and a separate bulb portion that is slidably connected to the mounting 

portion. LTI Seals as covered by the ‘590 patent are shown in Exhibit B.

14. Defendant makes, uses, sells, and offers for sale a two part seal (“Accused 

Product”) that infringes one or more claims of the '590 patent under United States law. The 

Accused Product is shown in Exhibit B. 

15. In or around June 2013, Defendant’s employees or representatives or agents 

assisted with the installation, directed the installation, or directly installed the Accused Product on 

an RV at Forest River for use with a slide-out room.

16. Ed Ksiezopolski, a representative of Plaintiff, discovered the Accused Product

upon a visit to Forest River at its Elkhart, IN manufacturing plant in June 2013. The Accused 

Product was installed on an RV manufactured by Forest River. Plaintiff learned at that time that 

Defendant was offering for sale the Accused Product specifically for installation and use on a 

slide-out opening on an RV. The Accused Product was mounted adjacent to the opening for the 

slide-out room on the Forest River RV.

17. Andrew Busch (“Busch”), an engineer employed by LTI, left LTI on or around 

March 1, 2013. Busch had knowledge of the ‘590 patent and products covered thereby. Busch 

participated in the design of the LTI Seals while employed by LTI. Within one month of leaving 

LTI, Busch began employment at Defendant. Defendant had notice of the ‘590 patent at the time 

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 3 of 13
4

Busch began employment at Defendant. Busch was employed by Defendant before June, 2013

and continues to be employed by Defendant.

18. Daryl Torrey (“Torrey”), an engineer employed by LTI, left LTI on or around May 

3, 2013. Torrey had knowledge of the ‘590 patent and the products covered thereby. Torrey 

participated in the design of the manufacturing equipment and tooling for LTI products covered 

by the ‘590 patent while employed at LTI. Within one month of leaving LTI, Torrey began 

employment at Defendant. Torrey was employed by Defendant before June, 2013 and continues 

to be employed by Defendant.

19. Trim-Lok has gained knowledge of LTI’s ‘590 patent from at least one former LTI 

employee before June, 2013.

20. Defendant has sold or offered for sale the Accused Product to at least one 

manufacturer, Forest River, who manufactures RVs with slide-out rooms. Defendant has 

acknowledged that it has actively offered the Accused Product for sale and use with RV slide-out 

rooms.

21. A cease and desist letter was sent to Dan Whitener, the marketing manager of

Defendant, on July 12, 2013. As least as early as the receipt of that letter, Defendant had

knowledge of the ‘590 patent and Plaintiff’s accusation of infringement. Defendant has 

acknowledged receipt of this letter. The cease and desist letter (Exhibit C) specifically referenced

the ‘590 patent and Accused Product. 

22. Defendant continued to make, offer for sale and sell the Accused Product after 

receiving the cease and desist letter.

23. Defendant has not offered to buy or license the ‘590 patent from LTI.

24. Defendant has offered the Accused Product for sale to RV manufacturers, 

specifically for use with slide-out rooms. 

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 4 of 13
5

COUNT 1: INFRINGEMENT OF THE '590 PATENT

25. Paragraphs 1 through 24 of Plaintiff’s complaint are incorporated into Count 1 of 

Plaintiff’s Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

26. Defendant, without authorization by Plaintiff, has directly infringed and continues 

to infringe at least one claim of the '590 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. §271(a), literally or by 

doctrine of equivalents by making, using, offering for sale and selling the Accused Product on 

RVs, or by combining the Accused Product with RVs having slide out rooms in the United States. 

27. Claim 1 of the ‘590 patent covers a resilient seal used in combination with mobile 

living quarters, which includes RVs. An RV according to Claim 1 has a slide-out room defining 

an interior space, and having a first sidewall having an exterior side with an opening through the

first sidewall in which the slide-out room is shifted between open and closed positions. The 

slide-out room includes a second sidewall spaced from the first sidewall and an end wall defining 

interior space within the slide-out room. The slide out room includes a peripheral flange that 

overlaps the first sidewall when the slide-out room is in its closed position. The seal according to 

Claim 1 has a mounting portion attached to the first sidewall along the opening and a separate 

bulb portion. The bulb portion is slidably connected to the mounting portion for compressible 

contact with the flange of the exterior wall when the slide-out room is in its closed position. The 

Accused Product is manufactured for use with an RV with a slide-out room and was found to be 

installed by persons other than LTI on a Forest River RV with in combination with a slide-out 

room. The Accused Product has a mounting portion (Ex. B, Mounting Portion), which was 

attached to the first sidewall. The Accused Product further contains a separate bulb portion (Ex. 

B, Bulb Portion) that is slidably connected to the mounting portion (Ex. B, Mounting Portion). 

As installed on the RV at Forest River, the bulb portion has compressible contact with the flange 

of the exterior wall. The Accused Product contains each and every element of Claim 1, and 

therefore infringe Claim 1.

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 5 of 13
6

28. Claim 2 of the ‘590 patent depends from Claim 1 and further specifies a tongue 

and groove connection between the bulb and mounting portion. The Accused Product utilizes a 

tongue and groove design to connect the bulb portion to the mounting portion (EX. B, Page 2). 

The Accused Product contains each and every element of Claim 2, and therefore infringe Claim 

2.

29. Claim 3 of the ‘590 patent depends from Claim 1 and further specifies a wiper 

portion to slide along the side wall of the slide-out room. The Accused Product includes a wiper 

portion (Ex. B, Wiper Portion). The Accused Product contains each and every element of Claim 

3, and therefore infringes Claim 3.

30. Claim 4 of the ‘590 patent depends from Claim 3 and further specifies a fastener 

through the mounting portion for attaching the mounting portion to the first sidewall, and an 

adhesive between the mounting portion and the first sidewall, and the fastener is covered by the

bulb portion. The Accused Product includes an adhesive (Ex. B, Adhesive) and was attached to 

the first sidewall of the RV manufactured by Forest River using fasteners. The Accused Product

contains each and every element of Claim 4, and therefore infringe Claim 4.

31. Claim 5 of the ‘590 patent depends from Claim 4 and further specifies the 

mounting portion is attached to the exterior side of the first sidewall. As installed on the RV 

manufactured by Forest River, the mounting portion is installed on the exterior side of the first 

sidewall. The Accused Product contains each and every element of Claim 5, and therefore 

infringes Claim 5.

32. Claim 6 of the ‘590 patent covers a method of attaching a seal to mobile living 

quarters having a slide-out room defining an interior space, and having a first sidewall having an 

exterior side with an opening through first sidewall in which the slide-out room is shifted between 

open and closed positions. The slide-out room includes a second sidewall spaced from the first 

sidewall and an end wall defining interior space within the slide-out room. The slide out room 

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 6 of 13
7

includes a peripheral flange that overlaps the first sidewall when the slide-out room is in its 

closed position. The seal includes an elongated mounting portion and an elongated bulb seal 

portion, Claim 6 includes the following steps:

a) affixing the mounting portion to the first wall adjacent to the opening using both 

adhesive and mechanical fasteners;

b) attaching the bulb seal portion to locate the bulb portion in compressed engagement 

with and between the first sidewall and the flange when the slide-out room is in its closed 

position;

c) sliding the bulb seal along the attached mounting to a selected position; and

d) maintaining the selected position of the bulb seal portion to the mounting portion by 

fastening the bulb seal portion to the mounting portion.

Defendant installed the Accused Product according to the steps of Claim 6, and therefore 

infringes Claim 6.

33. At least one representative, agent, or employee of the Defendant visited an 

Elkhart, Indiana, Forest River manufacturing plant where RVs are manufactured in or around 

June 2013. This individual was acting on behalf of the Defendant. While at Forest River, 

Defendant’s representative, agent, or employee assisted with the installation, directed the 

installation, or directly installed the Accused Product on an RV having a slide-out room. The 

installation was for the purpose of test fitting the Accused Product on a Forest River RV having a 

slide-out room and to solicit sales of the Accused Product to Forest River.

34. Defendant was aware Forest River would only use the Accused Product on RVs 

having slide-out rooms and the RV at Forest River was chosen to have the Accused Product

installed upon it because it had a slide-out room.

35. After installing the Accused Product in a Forest River RV, the individual installing 

the Accused Product attempted to conceal his or her activities by gathering gather all scraps of 

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 7 of 13
8

the Accused Product left from cutting the same to fit the Forest River RV and removed the scraps 

from Forest River’s facility. 

36. Plaintiff will knowingly continue to engage in infringing behavior unless enjoined

by this Court and has made, offered for sale and sold the infringing Accused Product after 

knowing of the ‘590 patent. This case is exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285. 

COUNT 2: INDUCED INFRINGEMENT OF THE '590 PATENT

37. Paragraphs 1 through 36 of Plaintiff’s Complaint are incorporated in Count 2 of 

Plaintiff’s Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

38. Defendant, without authorization by Plaintiff, has knowingly induced and 

continues to induce Forest River Inc. (“Forest River”) to infringe at least one claim of the '590 

patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. §271(b), by encouraging Defendant’s customers, resellers, and

distributors, to make, use, offer for sale and sell the Accused Product in combination with RVs

having slide-out rooms in the United States. Defendant knowingly caused Forest River to 

incorporate the Accused Product into RVs having slide-out rooms and intentionally caused Forest 

River to commit acts which constituted direct infringement of the ‘590 patent. The activities of 

the Defendant with regard to Forest River constituted induced infringement by the Defendant.

39. The Accused Product as installed on an RV infringes at least one claim of the ‘590 

patent. 

40. Forest River’s making, using, offering for sale and selling of an RV having the 

Accused Product constitutes infringement.

41. Defendant knowingly targeted Forest River, to incorporate the Accused Product

into RVs with slide-out rooms. Defendant knew that Forest River would incorporate the Accused 

Product into an RV having a slide-out room.

42. Defendant influenced Forest River to include the Accused Product as a component 

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 8 of 13
9

of their RVs, knowing that such combination would fulfill all elements of at least one claim of the 

‘590 patent. Further, Defendant possessed specific intent to encourage another’s infringement by 

encouraging the use of the Accused Product on RVs with slide-out rooms. 

43. Because employees or representatives or agents of Defendant assisted in the 

installation, directed the installation the Accused Product at Forest River, Defendant has shown 

intent to induce infringement of the ‘590 patent by Forest River. 

44. Defendant’s intent to make, use, offer for sale and sell Accused Product was 

specific for use on RVs having slide-out rooms. Defendants only solicited sales of Accused 

Product to Forest River for making RVs with slide-out rooms.

45. It can be inferred from the Defendant’s sales calls, visits, and installation of the 

Accused Product on RVs with slide-out rooms that Defendant intended the Accused Product be 

used on RVs with slide-out rooms.

46. By supplying Forest River with the Accused Product, the Forest River 

incorporated the Accused Product into an RV and therefore were induced to infringe the ‘590 

patent.

COUNT 3: CONTRIBUTORY INFRINGEMENT OF THE '590 PATENT

47. Paragraphs 1 through 46 of this Complaint are incorporated in Count 3 of 

Plaintiff’s Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

48. Defendant, without authorization by Plaintiff, has and continues to knowingly 

contribute to infringement by Forest River of at least one claim of the '590 patent in violation of 

35 U.S.C. § 271(c), by making, using, offering for sale and selling the Accused Product on RVs

with slide-out rooms in the United States. Such making, using, offering for sale and selling the

Accused Product to Forest River the United States with the knowledge that it is especially 

adapted for infringing constitutes contributory infringement by Defendant. Defendant knows, for 

the reasons described above, that the Accused Product is made specifically and adapted for 

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 9 of 13
10

infringing the ‘590 patent. 

49. The Accused Product as installed on an RV infringes at least one claim of the ‘590 

patent. 

50. Forest River’s making, using, offering for sale and selling of an RV having the 

Accused Product constitutes infringement.

51. Because employees or representatives or agents of Defendant assisted in the 

installation, and directed the installation of the Accused product at Forest River, Defendant has 

shown intent to contribute and contributed to the infringement of the ‘590 patent by Forest River. 

52. Defendants intended the installation of the Accused Product in in an infringing 

manner and this is shown by production of Accused Product and sales calls to Forest River, 

regarding the Accused Product and Defendant’s knowledge that Forest River would install the 

Accused Product on RVs having slide-out rooms. 

53. It can be inferred from the Defendant’s sales calls, visits, and installation of 

Accused Product on RVs with slide-out rooms that Defendant knew the accused product would 

be used on RVs with slide-out rooms.

54. Defendant, through its influence and control, knowingly took active steps to 

contribute to another’s infringement by assisting RV manufactures to include the Accused 

Product in their RVs having slide-out rooms, thereby contributing to others in making infringing 

products.

55. Defendant was aware Forest River could only use the Accused Product on RVs 

having slide-out rooms. 

56. Forest River requested a quote from Defendants on the Accused Product for use on 

RVs having slide-out rooms. Further, Forest River only installed the Accused Product on RVs 

having slide-out rooms.

57. All components of the Accused Product are not staple articles of commerce 

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 10 of 13
11

suitable for non-infringing use, at least because the components or assembly of the Accused 

Product has no use apart from sealing a slide-out room. Defendant’s customers, including Forest 

River, only intend the Accused Product to be used on their RVs having slide-out rooms. 

58. Forest River was aware of or participated in the aforementioned installation of the 

Accused Product on the Forest River RV. 

DEMAND FOR JURY T R I A L

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 38(b), LTI demands a trial by jury.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, LTI respectfully prays that this Court enter judgment in its favor:

a) declaring the '590 patent is directly infringed by Defendant;

b) declaring the Defendant induced infringement of the ‘590 patent;

c) declaring the Defendant has contributorily infringed the ‘590 patent;

d) declaring Defendant's infringement of the '590 patent has been willful;

e) declaring Defendant be preliminarily and permanently enjoined from manufacturing, 

using, selling and offering to sell the infringing products in the United States prior to

the expiration of the '590 patent;

f) awarding damages adequate to compensate it for Defendant's infringement of the '590

patent including lost profits, but in an amount no less than a reasonable royalty, and that

such damages be trebled according to 35 U.S.C. § 284;

g) awarding all costs and expenses of this action, including reasonable attorneys' fees; and

h) awarding Plaintiff such further relief as the Court may deem just, necessary, and

proper.

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 11 of 13
12

S/Michael D. Marston

Michael D. Marston

Dated: October 13, 2014 Respectfully submitted,

S/Michael D. Marston___

Michael D. Marston

Botkin & Hall, LLP

Suite 400, Jefferson Centre

106 East Jefferson Blvd.

South Bend, IN 46601-1913

Phone: (574) 234-3900

Facsimile: (574) 236-2839

E-mail mmarston@bhlawyers.net

________________________

Mark D. Boveri

Krieg DeVault LLP

4101 Edison Lakes Parkway Suite 100

Mishawaka, IN 46545

Telephone: (574) 485-2007

E-mail mboveri@kdlegal.com

Attorneysfor Plaintiff, Lifetime Industries,Inc.

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 12 of 13
13

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing 

document was filed electronically with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which 

will send notification of such filing to all parties of record.

S/Michael D. Marston

 Michael D. Marston

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-00819-RLM-MGG document 32 filed 10/13/14 page 13 of 13