Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/154767447/Icon-Health-and-Fitness-v-Polar-Electro-Oy-et-al
Timestamp: 2017-03-30 17:15:00
Document Index: 749558767

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1331', '§ 1338', '§ 1391', '§ 1400', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 283', '§ 283', '§ 283', '§ 284', '§ 284', '§ 284', '§ 285', '§ 1961', 'arty 26', 'art0']

Icon Health and Fitness v. Polar Electro Oy et. al. | Patent
BrowseInterestsStay InformedCareerPersonal GrowthFiction & BiographiesHealth & FitnessLifestyleCultureBrowse byBooksAudiobooksNews & MagazinesSheet MusicBrowse allUploadSign inJoinCase 8:13-cv-01066-AG-AN Document 1 Filed 07/17/13 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:4Larry R. Laycock (Utah State Bar No. 4868; Pro Hac Vice Forthcoming) llavcock@rnabr. corn David R. Wright (Utah State Bar No. 5164; Pro Hac Vice Forthcoming) dwright@mabr.com Tyson K. Hottinger (California State Bar No. 253221) thottinger@rnabr.com Taylor J. Wright (California State Bar No. 288609) t)t)r1ltJ),flabr.cOrn
& 201 South Main Street, Suite 600 20 Pacifica, Suite 1130 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Irvine, California 92618 Telephone: (435) 252-1360 Telephone: (949) 202-1900 Facsimile: (435) 252-1361 Facsimile: (949) 453-1104 Attorneys for Plaintiff ICON Health & Fitness, Inc. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ICON HEALTH & FITNESS, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff,
Case No.: SACV13-01066 AG (ANx)
POLAR ELECTRO OY, a Finland limited liability company; and POLAR ELECTR...[NC a New York corporation, Defendants.
2 against Polar Electro OY and Polar Electro Inc. (collectively "Polar" or "Defendants") 3 for the causes of action alleged as follow: 4 5 1. THE PARTIES ICON is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of
6 Delaware with its principal place of business located at 1500 South 1000 West, Logan, 7 Utah, 84321. 8 2. Polar Electro Oy is a company organized and existing under the laws of 5, 90440 Kempele, Finland,
10 and its United States headquarters at 1111 Marcus Avenue, Lake Success, NY 11042. 11 3. Polar Electro Inc. is a corporation duly organized and existing under the
12 laws of the State of New York, with its principal place of business located at 1111 13 Marcus Avenue, Lake Success, NY 11042. 14 15 4. JURISDICTION AND VENUE This is a civil action by ICON for patent infringement arising under the
19 pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a). 20 6. ICON further alleges on information and belief that Defendants sold or
2 and sell their products through their active website, which is available to persons within 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 the State of California and this judicial district. 9. California. 10. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to, at least, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). FACTUAL BACKGROUND 11. Kenneth and Greg Anderson (the "Andersons") are life-long fitness and ICON maintains a place of business located in the Central District of
10 running enthusiasts with knowledge and expertise in designing running footwear and 11 devices for measuring and tracking athletic performance parameters. 12 12. The Andersons filed a patent application on January 6, 1995 for a foot
13 mounted apparatus and method to measure locomotive performance parameters of a 14 person during physical exercise, in particular jogging or running. A patent issued upon 15 that application on February 24, 1998 as U.S. Patent No. 5,720,200 (the "Anderson
16 Patent"). 17 13. ICON is a global leader in the field of exercise and fitness equipment,
18 selling products under numerous well-recognized brands, one of which is the shoe brand 19 Altra Footwear. Altra Footwear is an innovative shoe brand dedicated to running shoes 20 and attire, fitness, and health. Altra Footwear products are distributed from ICON’s place 21 of business located within the Central District of California. 22 14. ICON also is an innovator in fitness monitoring technology, as evidenced by
23 its iFit website and compatible devices and machines. This technology allows users to 24 measure and monitor key exercise parameters and customize workouts based on these 25 26 parameters. 15. Defendants are direct competitors to ICON in the market of fitness
Case 8:13-cv-01066-AG-AN Document 1 Filed 07/17/13 Page 4 of 12 Page ID #:7
17. ICON has not licensed Defendants to practice the Anderson Patent, and
2 Defendants have no right or authority to license others to practice the Anderson Patent. 3 18. ICON alleges upon information and belief that Defendants import, make,
4 use, sell, or offer for sale within the United States and within California, either directly or 5 6 through established distribution channels, products that give rise to infringement of the Anderson Patent, including by way of example and not limitation, the S 1 Foot Pod and
7 S3+ stride sensor and compatible devices such as the FT60 and FT80 sports watches. 8 9 19. The Polar S 1 foot pod and S3+ stride sensor measure and calculate performance parameters, such as speed and distance. The performance parameters are
10 wirelessly communicated and displayed on compatible devices, such as the FT60 and 11 FT80 sports watches (the "Accused Products"). 12 20. On information and belief, ICON alleges that Defendants have had
13 knowledge of the Anderson patent at least since June 19, 2013. 14 21. Use of the Accused Products infringes the Anderson Patent and the Accused
15 Products do not have any substantial non-infringing uses. 16 17 18 19 22. Since learning of the Anderson Patent, Polar has continued to infringe. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Infringement of the Anderson Patent Against Defendants) 23. By this reference ICON realleges and incorporates the foregoing paragraphs
20 as though fully set forth herein. 21 24. Defendants have directly infringed and continue to directly infringe the
22 Anderson Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271 by making, using, selling, offering for sale within 23 the United States, or importing into the United States systems and products that embody 24 one or more of the claims of the Anderson Patent. 25 25. Defendants have indirectly infringed and continue to indirectly infringe the
26 Anderson Patent under 35 U.S.C. § § 271 (b) and (c) by actively inducing infringement of, 27 or contributorily infringing, the Anderson Patent. 28
Case 8:13-cv-01066-AG-AN Document 1 Filed 07/17/13 Page 5 of 12 Page ID #:8
26. ICON alleges that Defendants provide devices that are especially made to be
2 used, are intended to be used, and are in fact used by Defendants’ customers, in a way 3 that infringes the Anderson Patent, and that have no substantial non-infringing uses. 4 5 6 27. Since at least about June 19, 2013, Defendants have known or should have known that their customers or users of their products infringe the Anderson Patent. 28. Because of Defendants’ knowledge of the Anderson Patent, Defendants
7 have, and continue to have, the specific intent to induce their customers to infringe the 8 Anderson Patent. 9 ’ 29. Defendants’ customers do in fact infringe the Anderson Patent, of which
10 infringement Defendants know or should have known. For example, Defendants instruct 11 their customers to use the Accused Products in a way that infringes the Anderson Patent. 12 Customers are instructed to pair the 51 foot pod or S3+ stride sensor with a compatible 13 watch via ANT+. The foot pod or stride sensor calculates acceleration based, in part, on 14 the customer’s movements. The customer is able to view performance parameters on the 15 compatible watch during use of the Accused Products. 16 30. Despite their knowledge of the Anderson Patent, Defendants have continued
17 to infringe and induce others to infringe the Anderson Patent. 18 20 281. 21 32. ICON alleges on information and belief that Defendants have manufactured, 31. The conduct of Defendants as set forth hereinabove gives rise to a cause of
19 action for infringement of the Anderson Patent, pursuant to at least 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 and
22 used, sold, and offered for sale Accused Products despite an objectively high likelihood 23 that their actions constitute infringement of the Anderson Patent. 24 25 26 33. ICON alleges on information and belief that Defendants’ manufacture, use, sale, and offer for sale of Accused Products has been both willful and deliberate. 34. Defendants’ acts of infringement have caused damage to ICON, and ICON
27 is entitled to recover the damages sustained as a result of Defendants’ wrongful acts in an 28 amount subject to proof at trial. Defendants’ infringement of ICON’s rights under the
Case 8:13-cv-01066-AG-AN Document 1 Filed 07/17/13 Page 6 of 12 Page ID #:9
1 Anderson Patent will continue to damage ICON’s business, causing irreparable harm, for 2 which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless it is enjoined by this Court. 3 35. By reason of the foregoing, ICON is entitled to injunctive and monetary
4 relief against Defendants, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 283-285. 5 6 7 A. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, ICON prays for judgment against Defendants as follows: A judgment finding Defendants liable for infringement of the Anderson
8 Patent; 9 B. An imposition of constructive trust on, and an order requiring a full
10 accounting of, the sales made by Defendants as a result of their wrongful or infringing 11 acts alleged herein; 12 C. An order of this Court pursuant to at least 35 U.S.C. § 283 permanently
13 enjoining Defendants, their agents and servants, and any and all parties acting in concert 14 with them, from: directly or indirectly infringing in any manner the Anderson Patent, 15 whether by making, using, selling, offering to sell, or importing into the United States 16 any product falling within the scope of any of the claims of the Anderson Patent; 17 engaging in acts constituting contributory infringement of any of the claims of the 18 Anderson Patent; or inducing others to engage in any of the aforementioned acts or 19 otherwise; 20 D. An order of this Court pursuant to at least 35 U.S.C. § 283 directing
21 Defendants to destroy their entire stock of infringing products; 22 E. An award of damages to ICON, in an amount to be proven at trial, pursuant
23 to at least 35 U.S.C. § 284; 24 25 F. Trebling of ICON’s damages in view of the willful infringement by
Defendants, and the award of such trebled damages to ICON, pursuant to at least 35
26 U.S.C. § 284; 27 28
Case 8:13-cv-01066-AG-AN Document 1 Filed 07/17/13 Page 7 of 12 Page ID #:10
An award to ICON of its costs in bringing this action, pursuant to at least 35 That this Action be declared an exceptional case, and that ICON be awarded
2 U.S.C. § 284, and Rule 54(d)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; 3 I.
4 its attorneys’ fees and expenses, pursuant to at least 35 U.S.C. § 285; 5 6 I and 7 K. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just, proper, and J. An award of post-judgment interest, pursuant to at least 28 U.S.C. § 1961 (a);
8 equitable. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
DEMAND FOR JURY ICON demands TRIAL BY JURY of all causes so triable. DATED: July 17, 2013 Larry R. Laycock David R. Wright Tyson K. Hottinger Taylor J. Wright
Case 8:13-cv-01066-AG-AN Document 1 Filed 07/17/13 Page 8 of 12 Page ID #:11
This case has been assigned to District Judge Andrew Guilford and the assigned discovery Magistrate Judge is Arthur Nakazato. The case number on all documents filed with the Court should read as follows: SACV13 1066 AG (ANx) Pursuant to General Order 05-07 of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, the Magistrate Judge has been designated to hear discovery related motions.
Subsequent documents must be filed at the following location: [] Western Division 312 N. Spring St., Rm. G-8 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Southern Division 411 West Fourth St., Rm. 1-053 Santa Ana, CA 92701-4516 [ ] Eastern Division 3470 Twelfth St., Am. 134 Riverside, CA 92501
Case 8:13-cv-01066-AG-AN Document 1 Filed 07/17/13 Page 9 of 12 Page ID #:12
for the Central District of California ICON HEALTH & FITNESS, INC., a Delaware corporation, ) )
Plaintiff(s) V,
Civil Action No. ) ) )
POLAR ELECTRO OY, a Finland limited liability company; and POLAR ELECTRO INC., a New York corporation,
A lawsuit has been filed against you. Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) - or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) - you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiffs attorney, whose name and address are: Tyson K. Hottinger Larry R. Laycock David R. Wright Maschoff Brennan 20 Pacifica, Suite 1130, Irvine, CA 92618 (949) 202-1900 If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court.
Lu _________________
Signatzi of Cleric or Deputy Clerk
[CR1 WAGERS
Case 8:13-cv-01066-AG-AN Document 1 Filed 07/17/13 Page 10 of 12 Page ID #:13
Civil Action No. PROOF OF SERVICE (This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (1)) This summons for (name of individual and title, if any) was received by me on (date) 13 I personally served the summons on the individual at (place) on (date) U I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with
,a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address, or , who is , or ; or
13 1 served the summons on (name of individual) designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization) On (date) 13 I returned the summons unexecuted because 13 Other (specify):
for services, for a total of$
Case 8:13-cv-01066-AG-AN Document 1 Filed 07/17/13 Page 11 of 12 Page ID #:14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CIVIL COVER SHEET
ICON HEALTH & FITNESS, INC., a Delaware Corporation CALIFORNIA
POLAR ELECTRO OY, a Finland limited liability company; and POLAR ELECTRO INC., a
(b) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address and Telephone Number. If are representing yourself, provide same.) MASCHOFF BRENNAN -Tyson K. Hottinger 20 Pacifica, Suite 1130, Irvine, CA 92618 (949) 202-1900
1. U.S. Government Plaintiff 2 US G overnmen Defendant (Place an Xin one box only.) 3. Federal Question (U.S. Government Not a Party)
PARTIES-For Diversity Cases Only (Place an X in one box for plaintiff and one for defendant) PTF DEF PTF DEF Incorporated or Principal Place Citizen of This State of Business in this State III. Citizen of Another State
. . . . .. 4. Diversity (Indicate Citizenship Citizen or Subject of a Foreign Country of Parties in Item Ill)
fl 2 Incorporated and Principal Place of Business in Another State
’ 6 LI 6
3 Foreign Nation 6. MuItJDistrict Litigation
box only.)
ii 3. Remanded from Appellate Court 4. Reinstated or Reopened
S.Transferied from Another District (Specify)
ii 1. Original Proceeding
1.i 2. Removed from State Court
V. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT: JURY DEMAND: CLASS ACTION under F R Cv P 23 VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Yes
(Check "Yes" only
if demanded in
complaint.) $ subject to
MONEY DEMANDED IN COMPLAINT
(Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing and Write a brief statement of cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity.) Patent Infringement under 35 U S C 271
VII NATURE OF SUIT
OTHERSTATUTES j 375 False Claims Act
CONTRACT 110 Insurance
400 State Reapportionment i 410 Antitrust 430 Banks and Banking 450 Commerce/ICC Rates/Etc 460 Deportation
CA anne
130 Miller Act 140 Negotiable Instrument l5o Recovery of Overpayment & Enforcement of Judgment 151 Medicare Act 152 Recovery o f Defaulted Student Loan (Excl. Vet.) 153 Recovery of Overpayment of Vet. Benefits 160 Stockholders’ Suits 190 Other Contract 195 Contract Product Liability 196 Franchise REAL PROPERTY 210 Land Condemnation
470 Racketeer lnfluenced & Corrupt Org. 480 Consumer Credit 490 Cable/Sat TV 850 Securities/Corn-
. El. modities/Excharige
890 Other Statutory Actions 891 Agricultural Acts 893 Environmental Matters 895 Freedom of Info Act 896 Arbitration 899 Admin. Procedures Act/Review of Appeal of Agency Decision
220 Foreclosure 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment
PROPERTY RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS IMMIGRATION REAL PROPERTY CONT. Habeas Corpus: 462 Naturalization 240 Torts to Land 820 Copyrights r-i Application 463 Alien Detainee Tort Product d 5j 830 Patent ri 465 Other Sio Motions to Vacate Liability L.J Immigration Actions A Sentence 840 Trademark 290 All Other Real F-i 530 General SOCIAL SECURITY Property TORTS 535 Death Penalty 861 HIA (1395ff) TORTS PERSONAL PROPERTY Other: PERSONAL INJURY 370 Other Fraud kL Lung 923 U 8 62 Black 540 Mandamus/Other LI 310 Airplane 371 Truth in Lending 863 DIWC/DIWW(405(g)) LI 550 Civil Rights 315 Airplane c, i Product Liability 380 Other Personal LI 864 SSID Title XVI 555 Prison Condition El Property Damage 320 Assault, Libel & [] 865 RSI (405 (g)) 560 Civil Detainee LI Slander 385 Property Damage Conditions of mp oyers’ 330 Fed, Employers Product Liability FEDERAL TAX SUITS Confinement El Liability. BANKRUPTCY FORFEITURE/PENALTY 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff or LI Defendant) LI 340 Marine 422 Appeal 28 625 Drug g Related U ne Product d uct USC 158 E] Seizure of Property 21 871 IRS-Third Party 26 USC El Liability ia ii 5’ 423 Withdrawal 28 USC 881 7609 El F] 350 Motor Vehicle USC 157 RIGHTS E] 690 Other LI Product Liability LI 440 Other Civil Rights LABOR 360 Other Personal E] 441 Voting 710 Fair Labor Standards LI Act E] 442 Employment 362 Personal Injury Labor/Mgmt LI Med Malpratice LI 720 Relations Housing/ 365 Personal Injury LI Accomodations El Product Liability LI 740 Railway Labor Act 445 American with 367 Health Care/ 751 Family and Medical Disabilities Pharmaceutical Leave Act Employment Personal Injury 790 Other Labor 446 American with Product Liability r i LI Litigation L_J Disabilities Other 368 Asbestos 791 Employee Ret Inc Personal Injury 448 Education Security Act Product I ability
LI LI LI El
OFFICE USE ONLY: Case Number:
SACV13010bb P
/-\I 4 A)
Case 8:13-cv-01066-AG-AN Document 1 Filed 07/17/13 Page 12 of 12 Page ID #:15
If yes, list case number(s): Filed concurrently. A separate Notice of Related Cases will be filed upon receiving case numbers.
fl LI LI
A. Arise from the same or closely related transactions, happenings, or events; or B. Call for determination of the same or substantially related or similar questions of law and fact; or C. For other reasons would entail substantial duplication of labor if heard by different judges; or D. Involve the same patent, trademark or copyright ,and_one of the factors identified above in a, b or c also is present.
(a) List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other than California; or Foreign Country, in which plaintiff resides.
Check here if the government, its agencies or employees is a named plaintiff. If this box
is checked, go to item (b).
California County outside of this District; State, if other than California; or Foreign Country Delaware and Utah
(b) List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other than California; or Foreign Country, in which defendant resides. Check here if the government, its agencies or employees
is a named defendant. If this box is checked, go to item (c).
California County outside of this District; State, if other than California; or Foreign Country Finland; New York
(c) List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other than California; or Foreign Country, in which
"Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, Santa Barbara, or San Luis Obispo Counties
9 " dt
other papers as required by law. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required pursuant to Local Rule 3-1 is not filed but is used by the Clerk of the Court for the purpose of statistics, venue and initiating the civil docket sheet. (For more detailed instructions, see separate instructions sheet). Key to Statistical codes relating to Social Security Cases:
All claims for health insurance benefits (Medicare) under Title 18, Part A, of the Social Security Act, as amended. Also, include claims by hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, etc., for certification as providers of services under the program. (42 U.S.C. 1935FF(b)) All claims for "Black Lung’ benefits under Title 4, Part B, of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969. (30 U.S.C. 923) All claims filed by insured workers for disability insurance benefits under Title 2 of the Social Security Act, as amended; plus all claims filed for child’s insurance benefits based on disability. (42 U.S.C. 405 (g)) All claims filed for widows or widowers insurance benefits based on disability under Title 2 of the Social Security Act, as amended. (42 U.S.C. 405 (g)) All claims for supplemental security income payments based upon disability filed underTitle 16 of the Social Security Act, as amended. All claims for retirement (old age) and survivors benefits under Title 2 of the Social Security Act, as amended. (42 U.S.C. 405 (g)) CIVIL COVER SHEET Page 2 of 2
Sign up to vote on this titleUsefulNot usefulIcon Health and Fitness v. Polar Electro Oy et. al. by PriorSmart0.0 (0)EmbedDownloadDescriptionOfficial Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 8:13-cv-01066-AG-AN: Icon Health and Fitness Inc v. Polar Electro Oy et. al. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of ...Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 8:13-cv-01066-AG-AN: Icon Health and Fitness Inc v. Polar Electro Oy et. al. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the Hon. Andrew J. Guilford presiding. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l8Lg for more info.Interests: Types, Business/Law, Court FilingsRead on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.Copyright: Public DomainDownload as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentShow moreShow less
RelatedQuality Night Lights v. Energizer Holdingsby PatentBlastQuality Night Lights v. Northeastern Plasticsby PatentBlastQuality Night Lights v. Amplicby PatentBlastExitExchange v. WZ Communicationsby PatentBlastOakley v. Seaver Companyby PriorSmartMeadows Financial Systems, LLCby PriorSmartMeadows Financial Systems, LLCby PriorSmartDiscovery Inc. v. Lisi Group - Complaintby slbursteinActivision TV v. Cinemarkby PatentBlastWisconsin Technology Venture Group v. MyCouponsby PriorSmartOptical Devices v. Toshiba et. al.by PriorSmartOptical Devices LLC v. Samsung Electronic Co.ltdby PatentBlastBest Energy Reduction Technologies v. Boss Controls et. al.by PriorSmartCR Bard v. Smiths Medical ASDby PriorSmart v. Wingard et. al.by PriorSmartElectronic Design for Industry v. Coulson Compression & Measurementby PriorSmartLaurmark Enterprises v. Kinderhook Industries et. al.by PriorSmartUntitledby PriorSmartREC Software v. Casio America et. al.by PriorSmartREC Software v. Motorola Mobilityby PriorSmartLandmark Technology v. Lumber Liquidators Holdingsby PriorSmartAutomated Facilities Management v. Ventyxby PriorSmartSky Alpine v. G3 Genuine Guide Gearby PatentBlast v. Crown Motor Companyby PriorSmartChannell Commercial v. Pencell Plasticsby PriorSmartPenovia v. Ricohby PriorSmartLandmark Technology v. Brinker International Et. Al.by PatentBlastBraun et. al. v. Dr. Dennis Gross Skincareby PriorSmartSimilar To Icon Health and Fitness v. Polar Electro Oy et. al.Skip carouselQuality Night Lights v. Energizer HoldingsQuality Night Lights v. Northeastern PlasticsQuality Night Lights v. AmplicExitExchange v. WZ CommunicationsOakley v. Seaver CompanyMeadows Financial Systems, LLCMeadows Financial Systems, LLCDiscovery Inc. v. Lisi Group - ComplaintActivision TV v. CinemarkWisconsin Technology Venture Group v. MyCouponsOptical Devices v. Toshiba et. al.Optical Devices LLC v. Samsung Electronic Co.ltdBest Energy Reduction Technologies v. Boss Controls et. al.CR Bard v. Smiths Medical ASD v. Wingard et. al.Electronic Design for Industry v. Coulson Compression & MeasurementLaurmark Enterprises v. Kinderhook Industries et. al.UntitledREC Software v. Casio America et. al.REC Software v. Motorola MobilityLandmark Technology v. Lumber Liquidators HoldingsAutomated Facilities Management v. VentyxSky Alpine v. G3 Genuine Guide Gear v. Crown Motor CompanyChannell Commercial v. Pencell PlasticsPenovia v. RicohLandmark Technology v. Brinker International Et. Al.Braun et. al. v. Dr. Dennis Gross SkincarePATEMT 043Form v. Meridien AccentsIcon Health and Fitness v. Polar Electro Oy et. al.