Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/139839693/Tennier-Industries-v-American-Recreation-Products
Timestamp: 2017-08-22 17:40:52
Document Index: 222301955

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1', '§ 1331', '§ 1391', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 283', '§ 284', '§ 284', '§ 283', '§ 284', '§ 284', '§ 283', '§ 284', '§ 284', '§ 284']

Tennier Industries v. American Recreation Products | Patent Infringement | Lawsuit
Tennier Industries v. American Recreation Products
Description: Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 3:13-cv-00247: Tennier Industries Inc. v. American Recreation Products LLC et. al. (TV1). Filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern...
Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 3:13-cv-00247: Tennier Industries Inc. v. American Recreation Products LLC et. al. (TV1). Filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, the Hon. Thomas A Varlan presiding. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l8fz for more info.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE ---------------------------------------------------------------) ) TENNIER INDUSTRIES, INC., ) Plaintiff, ) ) v.
) ) AMERICAN RECREATION PRODUCTS, LLC; AMRON ) INTERNATIONAL, INC.; AMERICAN DISCOVERY ) TEXTILE MANUFACTURING LLC, ) ) Defendant. ) ---------------------------------------------------------------)
COMPLAINT PATENT INFRINGEMENT (Trial by Jury Demanded)
Plaintiff, Tennier Industries, Inc. (“Tennier”), for its Complaint against Defendants American Recreation Products, LLC (“American Recreation”), Amron International, Inc. (“Amron”), American Discovery Textile Manufacturing LLC (“ADTM,” and collectively with American Recreation and Amron, “Defendants”), alleges as follows: THE PARTIES 1. Tennier is a New York corporation with principal places of business at 441 East Monticello Pike, Huntsville, TN 37756 and Burrville Road, Sunbright, TN 37872. 2. Upon information and belief, American Recreation is a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business at 600 Kellwood Parkway, Chesterfield, Missouri 63017, and regularly conducts business throughout the United States and within this judicial district. 3. Upon information and belief, Amron is a California corporation with a principal place of business at 1380 Aspen Way, Vista, CA 92081-8349, and regularly conducts business throughout the United States and within this judicial district.
Upon information and belief, ADTM is a Missouri corporation with a principal place of business at 302 Hawthorn Drive, Glasgow, Missouri 65254, and regularly conducts business throughout the United States and within this judicial district. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq.
This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action based on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338.
Venue in this Court is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b)-(c) and 1400(b). Plaintiff’s patent infringement claims against the Defendants arose out of the same transactions and occurrences, and questions of fact common to all defendants will arise in this action. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
United States Patent No. 5,533,216 (“the ‘216 Patent”), entitled “MODULAR SLEEPING BAG,” was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on July 9, 1996. A true and correct copy of the ‘216 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Tennier is the owner of the ‘216 Patent. Tennier is a well-known manufacturer of military products, including the Modular Sleep System covered by Tennier’s ‘216 Patent (“Tennier’s Patented Sleeping Bags”).
Upon information and belief, American Recreation has manufactured, used, offered for sale, and/or sold in the United States sleeping bags, including the Slumberjack MSS Complete Modular Sleep System, that infringe Tennier’s ‘216 Patent. 2
Upon information and belief, employees of defendant American Recreation saw one or more of Tennier’s Patented Sleeping Bags prior to the design and initial manufacture and sale in the United States by or for defendant American Recreation of Defendants’ infringing sleeping bags, including the Slumberjack MSS Complete Modular Sleep System.
Upon information and belief, employees of defendant American Recreation were aware of the ‘216 patent prior to the design and initial manufacture by defendant American Recreation of Defendants’ infringing sleeping bags, and prior to any sale in the United States of Defendants’ infringing sleeping bags.
On February 19, 2013, Tennier sent defendant American Recreation a letter notifying American Recreation of its infringement of Tennier’s ‘216 Patent.
Upon information and belief, after receipt of the letter dated February 19, 2013, defendant American Recreation continued to manufacture, use, offer for sale, and/or sell in the United States sleeping bags that infringe the ‘216 Patent.
Upon information and belief, Amron has manufactured, used, offered for sale, and/or sold in the United States sleeping bags, including the Slumberjack MSS Complete Modular Sleep System, that infringe Tennier’s ‘216 Patent.
Upon information and belief, employees of defendant Amron saw one or more of Tennier’s Patented Sleeping Bags prior to the design and initial manufacture and sale in the United States by or for defendant Amron of Defendants’ infringing sleeping bags, including the Slumberjack MSS Complete Modular Sleep System.
Upon information and belief, employees of defendant Amron were aware of the ‘216 patent prior to the design and initial manufacture of Defendants’ infringing sleeping bags, and prior to any sale in the United States of defendants’ infringing sleeping bags.
On February 19, 2013, Tennier sent defendant Amron a letter notifying Amron of its infringement of Tennier’s ‘216 Patent.
Upon information and belief, after receipt of the letter dated February 19, 2013, defendant Amron continued to manufacture, use, offer for sale, and/or sell in the United States sleeping bags that infringe the ‘216 Patent.
Upon information and belief, ADTM has manufactured, used, offered for sale, and/or sold in the United States sleeping bags, including the Slumberjack MSS Complete Modular Sleep System, that infringe Tennier’s ‘216 Patent.
Upon information and belief, employees of defendant ADTM saw one or more of Tennier’s Patented Sleeping Bags prior to the design and initial manufacture and sale in the United States by or for defendant ADTM of Defendants’ infringing sleeping bags, including the Slumberjack MSS Complete Modular Sleep System.
Upon information and belief, employees of defendant ADTM were aware of the ‘216 patent prior to the design and initial manufacture by defendant ADTM of Defendants’ infringing sleeping bags, and prior to any sale in the United States of Defendants’ infringing sleeping bags.
On February 19, 2013, Tennier sent defendant ADTM a letter notifying ADTM of its infringement of Tennier’s ‘216 Patent.
Upon information and belief, after receipt of the letter dated February 19, 2013, defendant ADTM continued to manufacture, use, offer for sale, and/or sell in the United States sleeping bags that infringe the ‘216 Patent. COUNT I – CLAIM FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AGAINST AMERICAN RECREATION
Tennier incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-26 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
Upon information and belief, American Recreation has made, used, offered for sale, and/or sold, and continues to make, use, offer for sale, and/or sell in Tennessee and elsewhere in the United States, sleeping bags, including the Slumberjack MSS Complete Modular Sleep System, that infringe one or more claims of the ‘216 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, and will continue such infringement unless enjoined by this Court.
Upon information and belief, the acts of infringement by American Recreation alleged herein were and are willful, intentional, and in conscious disregard of Tennier’s rights under the ‘216 Patent.
As a result of American Recreation’s infringement of the ‘216 Patent, American Recreation has made and will continue to make unlawful gains and profits, and Tennier has been and will continue to be deprived of revenue that it would otherwise have generated but for such infringement.
Tennier has been and will continue to be irreparably harmed by American Recreation’s infringement of the ‘216 Patent.
As a result of American Recreation’s acts of infringement, American Recreation has unjustly profited and Tennier has been damaged.
COUNT II – CLAIM FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AGAINST AMRON 33. Tennier incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-32 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 34. Upon information and belief, Amron has made, used, offered for sale, and/or sold, and continues to make, use, offer for sale, and/or sell in Tennessee and elsewhere in the United States, sleeping bags, including the Slumberjack MSS Complete Modular Sleep System, that infringe one or more claims of the ‘216 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, and will continue such infringement unless enjoined by this Court. 35. Upon information and belief, the acts of infringement by Amron alleged herein were and are willful, intentional, and in conscious disregard of Tennier’s rights under the ‘216 Patent. 36. As a result of Amron’s infringement of the ‘216 Patent, Amron has made and will continue to make unlawful gains and profits, and Tennier has been and will continue to be deprived of revenue that it would otherwise have generated but for such infringement. 37. Tennier has been and will continue to be irreparably harmed by Amron’s infringement of the ‘216 Patent. 38. As a result of American Recreation’s acts of infringement, American Recreation has unjustly profited and Tennier has been damaged.
COUNT III – CLAIM FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AGAINST ADTM 39. Tennier incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-38 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 40. Upon information and belief, ADTM has made, used, offered for sale, and/or sold, and continues to make, use, offer for sale, and/or sell in Tennessee and elsewhere in the United States, sleeping bags, including the Slumberjack MSS Complete Modular Sleep System, that infringe one or more claims of the ‘216 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, and will continue such infringement unless enjoined by this Court. 41. Upon information and belief, the acts of infringement by ADTM alleged herein were and are willful, intentional, and in conscious disregard of Tennier’s rights under the ‘216 Patent. 42. As a result of ADTM’s infringement of the ‘216 Patent, ADTM has made and will continue to make unlawful gains and profits, and Tennier has been and will continue to be deprived of revenue that it would otherwise have generated but for such infringement. 43. Tennier has been and will continue to be irreparably harmed by ADTM’s infringement of the ‘216 Patent. 44. As a result of ADTM’s acts of infringement, ADTM has unjustly profited and Tennier has been damaged. JURY DEMAND Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(b), Tennier requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, Tennier prays for relief as follows: 7
As to American Recreation: A. B. A judgment that American Recreation has infringed the ‘216 Patent; An order enjoining and restraining American Recreation, its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, affiliates, attorneys, and all others in active concert or participation with American Recreation, from infringing the ‘216 Patent, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283; C. An accounting of American Recreation’s sales of sleeping bags that infringe the ‘216 Patent, including those sales that have occurred after the close of fact discovery in this action; D. A judgment awarding Tennier its damages, but not less than a reasonable royalty, resulting from American Recreation’s infringement of the ‘216 Patent, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, including damages suffered by Tennier as a result of American Recreation’s acts of infringement of the ‘216 Patent subsequent to the close of fact discovery in this action; E. A judgment that American Recreation’s infringement of the ‘216 Patent has been and is in willful, knowing, and deliberate disregard of Tennier’s patent rights, and awarding Tennier enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284; As to Amron: F. A judgment that Amron has infringed the ‘216 Patent;
An order enjoining and restraining Amron, its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, affiliates, attorneys, and all others in active concert or participation with Amron, from infringing the ‘216 Patent, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283;
An accounting of Amron’s sales of sleeping bags that infringe the ‘216 Patent, including those sales that have occurred after the close of fact discovery in this action;
A judgment awarding Tennier its damages, but not less than a reasonable royalty, resulting from Amron’s infringement of the ‘216 Patent, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, including damages suffered by Tennier as a result of Amron’s acts of infringement of the ‘216 Patent subsequent to the close of fact discovery in this action;
A judgment that Amron’s infringement of the ‘216 Patent has been and is in willful, knowing, and deliberate disregard of Tennier’s patent rights, and awarding Tennier enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284; As to ADTM:
A judgment that ADTM has infringed the ‘216 Patent; An order enjoining and restraining ADTM, its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, affiliates, attorneys, and all others in active concert or participation with ADTM, from infringing the ‘216 Patent, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283;
An accounting of ADTM’s sales of sleeping bags that infringe the ‘216 Patent, including those sales that have occurred after the close of fact discovery in this action;
A judgment awarding Tennier its damages, but not less than a reasonable royalty, resulting from ADTM’s infringement of the ‘216 Patent, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, including damages suffered by Tennier as a result of ADTM’s acts of infringement of the ‘216 Patent subsequent to the close of fact discovery in this action;
A judgment that ADTM’s infringement of the ‘216 Patent has been and is in willful, knowing, and deliberate disregard of Tennier’s patent rights, and awarding Tennier enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284; As to all Defendants:
A judgment awarding Tennier its costs, disbursements, and attorneys’ fees incurred in prosecuting this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 284 and/or 285;
A judgment awarding Tennier pre- and post-judgment interest on any monetary award; and
Such other relief as the Court may deem just, equitable, and proper. MARCUM & PETROFF, P.C.
By: s/. Stephen A. Marcum PO Box 240 Huntsville, TN 37756
Phone: (423)663-9755 Fax: (423)663-2111 smarcum@marcumlaw.net and COZEN O’CONNOR Martin B. Pavane (pro hac vice motion to be filed) Michael C. Stuart (pro hac vice motion to be filed) Darren S. Mogil (pro hac vice motion to be filed) 277 Park Avenue New York, New York 10172 mpavane@cozen.com mstuart@cozen.com dmogil@cozen.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Tennier Industries, Inc.
LEGAL\15592648\2
Documents Similar To Tennier Industries v. American Recreation Products
Smart Search Concepts LLC
Zodiac Pool Systems v. Zag Pools
Schaeffler Technologies GmbH & Co. KG v. GT Technologies
Internet Media Interactive v. E.W. Scripps Company
Cascades Computer Innovation v. Hynix Semiconductor
BillingNetwork Patent v. Azalea Health Innovations
Delphix v. Actifio
Phoenix Licensing et. al. v. Travelers Companies et. al.
Klausner Technologies v. Broadvox Holding Company
Cpumate v. Dell
MacroSolve v. Inter-Continental Hotels et. al.
Klausner Technologies v. Microsoft
CUTV Forensics v. Linear
Bluebonnet Telecommunications v. Sonim Technologies
Klausner Technologies v. Bright House Networks
TerrraSpark Geosciences v. Paradigm et. al.
Klausner Technologies v. Schmooze Com
Klausner Technologies v. Clearwire Communications
Klausner Technologies v. MetroPCS Communications et. al.
SmartFit Solutions v. Freemotion Fitness
Richmond v. Winchance Solar Fujian Technology et. al.
Technology Properties v. Kingston Technology
Telecomm Innovations v. Kyocera Document Solutions et. al.