Source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/134760073/Angel-Guard-Products-v-Sewell-Development
Timestamp: 2014-09-22 00:44:22
Document Index: 340466477

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 271', '§ 1331', '§ 1391', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271']

P. 1Angel Guard Products v. Sewell DevelopmentAngel Guard Products v. Sewell DevelopmentRatings: (0)|Views: 50
|Likes: 0Published by PriorSmartOfficial Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 4:13-cv-40041: Angel Guard Products, Inc. v. Sewell Development Corp. Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l7Xd for more info.Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 4:13-cv-40041: Angel Guard Products, Inc. v. Sewell Development Corp. Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l7Xd for more info.More info:Categories:Types, Business/Law, Court FilingsPublished by: PriorSmart on Apr 08, 2013Copyright:Public DomainAvailability:Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate content|Add to collectionSee moreSee lesshttp://www.scribd.com/doc/134760073/Angel-Guard-Products-v-Sewell-Development05/03/2014pdftextoriginal {Client Files\LIT\011245\0100\PLD\02671795.DOC;1}
1UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTSANGEL GUARD PRODUCTS, INC., )Plaintiff, ))v. ))SEWELL DEVELOPMENT CORP., )Defendant. )CIVIL ACTION NO.
Plaintiff Angel Guard Products, Inc. (“Angel Guard”), through its attorneys, brings thisaction against Defendant Sewell Development Corp. (“Sewell”) as follows:
1. This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of theUnited States, 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).2. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Sewell because Sewell is committingacts of infringement in this District.3. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and 1400(b).
4. Angel Guard is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of theCommonwealth of Massachusetts with a principal place of business in Worcester,Massachusetts.5. Upon information and belief, Sewell is a corporation organized and existing underthe laws of the State of Utah, having a principal place of business at 3877 N. 200 E, Provo, Utah84604.
{Client Files\LIT\011245\0100\PLD\02671795.DOC;1}
6. On March 19, 1999 Carlos Jimenez (“Jimenez”) filed a patent application directedto an invention that provided a cover to secure electrical cords to looped carpets. On May 29,2001, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office duly and lawfully issued United States Patent No.6,237,198 (the “`198 Patent”).7. Angel Guard and Jimenez executed an exclusive license for the patent on March1, 2004, which provided Angel Guard with the sole and exclusive right to the Patent.8. A true and correct copy of the `198 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A and isincorporated by reference.9. A true and accurate copy of the License Agreement is attached hereto as ExhibitB and is incorporated by reference.10. Sewell has been selling a product through its on line distribution business thatinfringes the `198 Patent. Specifically, Sewell has offered for sale and sold in this District aproduct named “Carpet Velcro Cable Organizer” Part # SW-30222.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTIONDirect Infringement of the `198 Patent Under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a)
11. Angel Guard realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth inparagraphs 1 through 10 above.12. Sewell has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe the `198 Patent bymaking, using, importing, offering for sale, and selling products that embody the patentedinvention, and will continue to do so unless enjoined by this Court.
313. As a direct and proximate consequence of Sewell’s infringement of the `198Patent, Angel Guard has suffered, and will continue to suffer, substantial damages in an amountnot yet ascertained but to be proven at trial.14. As a result of Sewell’s infringement, Angel Guard has suffered and will continueto suffer irreparable injury, for which Angel Guard has no adequate remedy at law.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTIONInduced Infringement of the `198 Patent Under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b)
15. Angel Guard realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth inparagraphs 1 through 14 above.16. Sewell distributes and sells its products in a manner that infringes one or moreclaims of the `198 Patent.17. Sewell has actively induced and continues to actively induce infringement of the`198 Patent.18. Sewell’s inducement of the `198 Patent has been and continues to be willful.19. As a direct and proximate consequence of Sewell’s inducement of infringement of the `198 Patent, Angel Guard has suffered, and will continue to suffer, substantial damages in anamount not yet ascertained but to be proven at trial.20 As a result of Sewell’s inducement of infringement of the `198 Patent, AngelGuard has suffered and will continue to suffer irreparable injury, for which Angel Guard has noadequate remedy at law.
WHEREFORE, Angel Guard respectfully requests the following relief from this Court:A.
A finding that Sewel has infringed, directly and/or indirectly, one or more claimsof the `198 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(a) and (b);