-
7/28/2019 Seidio v. Boxwave et. al.
1/9
1
ORIGNAL COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
John Karl Buche (SBN 239477)
Lindsay D. Molnar (SBN 275156)BUCHE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
875 Prospect, Suite 305
La Jolla, California 92037Phone: (858) 459-9111
Fax: (858) [email protected]
[email protected]
Attorneys for ComplainantSEIDIO, INC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF
CALIFORNIA
SEIDIO INC., a Texas corporation
Complainant,
v.
BOXWAVE CORPORATION, a
evada corporation, and WINGONN LUM, an individual.
Defendants.
Case No. _______________
COMPLAINT FORPATENT
INFRINGEMENT
DEMANDFORJURYTRIAL
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
Complainant, Seidio, Inc., (hereinafter "Seidio") hereby
complains of
Defendants, Boxwave Corporation (hereinafter Boxwave) and Wing
Onn Lum
(hereinafter Lum) (hereinafter collectively, Defendants), and
states as follows:
'13CV1390 JMALAB
-
7/28/2019 Seidio v. Boxwave et. al.
2/9
2
ORIGNAL COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I. PARTIES1. Seidio is a Texas Corporation doing business in the
Southern District of
California. Seidios address is 10415 Westpark Dr., Suite B,
Houston, TX 77042.
2. Defendant, Boxwave, is a Nevada corporation doing business in
the Stateof California and in the Southern District of California,
with its principal place of
business in Kirkland, Washington.
3. Defendant, Lum, is an individual residing in Washington and
activelyinduced infringing actions in the state of California.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE4. This Court has subject matter
jurisdiction over this action pursuant to
28 U.S.C. 1331 (federal question) and 1338(a) (action arising
under an Act of
Congress related to patents).
5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants
becauseDefendants have a continuous, systematic, and substantial
presence within this
judicial district. In particular, Defendants have purposefully
directed activities to
this judicial district by committing acts of patent
infringement, including but not
limited to selling infringing protective covers and cases for
cell phones, portable
media players, and personal digital assistants directly to
consumers and/or retailers
in this district and selling into the stream of commerce knowing
such products
would be sold in California and this district, which give rise
to Seidios claim.
-
7/28/2019 Seidio v. Boxwave et. al.
3/9
3
ORIGNAL COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
1391(b),1391(c) and 1400(b) because a substantial part of the
events giving rise to the
claims occurred in this District, Defendants have sufficient
contacts with this
District to subject them to personal jurisdiction, and
Defendants have committed
acts of infringement and conduct business in this District.
III. BACKGROUND7. Seidio is the seller of several lines of
protective covers and cases for
personal media devices, which are protected by design patents
owned by Seidio.
8. On May 7, 2013, the United States Patent and Trademark Office
dulyand lawfully issued United States Patent No. D681,624 S (the
624 patent),
entitled PROTECTIVE COVER. Seidio owns all right, title, and
interest in the
624 patent. A true and correct copy of the 624 patent is
attached hereto as
Exhibit 1.
9. On May 21, 2013, the United States Patent and Trademark
Officeduly and lawfully issued United States Patent No. D682,815 S
(the 815 patent),
entitled CASE. Seidio owns all right, title, and interest in the
815 patent. A true
and correct copy of the 815 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit
2.
10. On information and belief, Defendants manufacture, sell,
offer for saleand/or import into the United States protective cases
that infringe the 624 patent
without license or authorization from Seidio. Defendants
products clearly feature
-
7/28/2019 Seidio v. Boxwave et. al.
4/9
4
ORIGNAL COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
the ornamental design of the 624 patent. True and correct copies
are attached
hereto as Exhibit 3 and 4.
11. On information and belief, Defendants manufacture, sell,
offer for saleand/or import into the United States protective cases
that infringe the 815 patent
without license or authorization from Seidio. Defendantsproducts
clearly feature
the ornamental design of the 815 patent. True and correct copies
are attached
hereto as Exhibit 3 and 4.
12. The manufacture and sale by Defendants of the protective
caseinfringes Seidios 624 patent.
13. The manufacture and sale by Defendants of the protective
caseinfringes Seidios 815 patent.
14. On information and belief, the infringing embodiments of the
624patent are being sold and used by Defendants in this judicial
district and
throughout the United States.
15. On information and belief, the infringing embodiments of the
815patent are being sold and used by Defendants in this judicial
district and
throughout the United States.
16. Defendant, Lum, is well aware of Seidio and has been the
active andconscious force in inducing Boxwave to infringe patented
products that Seidio
designed.
-
7/28/2019 Seidio v. Boxwave et. al.
5/9
5
ORIGNAL COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
IV. CAUSE OF ACTION17. Seidio, Inc. incorporates the allegations
of paragraphs 1-16 as though
fully set forth herein.
18. This is a claim for patent infringement of the 624 patent
and 815patent arising under 35 U.S.C. 271.
19. On information and belief, Defendants have actively
inducedinfringement of and/or contributed to the infringement of
the 624 patent by others.
20. On information and belief, Defendants have actively
inducedinfringement of and/or contributed to the infringement of
the 815 patent by others.
21. Each ofthe Defendants infringing activities is without the
consent of,authority of, or license from Seidio.
22. On information and belief, Defendants have infringed the
ornamentaldesign of the 624 patent either literally or under the
Doctrine of Equivalents.
23. On information and belief, Defendants have infringed the
ornamentaldesign of the 815 patent either literally or under the
Doctrine of Equivalents.
24. Defendants infringement of the 624 patent has been willful,
knowingand deliberate.
25. Defendants infringement of the 815 patent has been willful,
knowingand deliberate.
26. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants infringement
of the
-
7/28/2019 Seidio v. Boxwave et. al.
6/9
6
ORIGNAL COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
624 patent, Seidio has been damaged in an amount that cannot yet
be fully
ascertained.
27. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants infringement
of the815 patent, Seidio has been damaged in an amount that cannot
yet be fully
ascertained.
28. Seidio is entitled to damages and/or Defendants total
profits fromDefendants infringement of the 624 patent.
29. Seidio is entitled to damages and/or Defendants total
profits fromDefendants infringement of the 815 patent.
30. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284 Seidio is entitled to damages
includingbut not limited to Seidios lost profits, and/or reasonable
royalty for Defendants
infringing acts with interests and costs fixed by this
court.
31. An award of Seidios treble damages for willful, knowing,
anddeliberate infringement of the 624 patent.
32. An award of Seidios treble damages for willful, knowing,
anddeliberate infringement of the 815 patent.
33. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285 Seidio is entitled to reasonable
attorneysfees for the necessity of bringing this claim.
34. Unless permanently enjoined, Defendants will continue to
engage inthe aforementioned acts to Seidios further and continuing
damage. Such
-
7/28/2019 Seidio v. Boxwave et. al.
7/9
7
ORIGNAL COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
continuing acts, unless enjoined, will cause irreparable damage
in that Seidio will
have no adequate remedy at law to compel Defendants to cease
such acts.
V. PRAYER FORRELIEFWHEREFORE, Seidio prays that the Court enter
judgment in its favor and
against Defendants, including:
1. Entry of a preliminary and permanent injunction
enjoiningDefendants, its officers, agents, servants, employees and
attorneys, and those
persons in active concert or participation with it who receive
actual notice thereof,
from directly or indirectly infringing, or inducing, or
contributing to the
infringement of the 624 patent under 35 U.S.C. 271;
2. Entry of a preliminary and permanent injunction
enjoiningDefendants, its officers, agents, servants, employees and
attorneys, and those
persons in active concert or participation with it who receive
actual notice thereof,
from directly or indirectly infringing, or inducing, or
contributing to the
infringement of the 815 patent under 35 U.S.C. 271;
3. Judgment in favor of Seidio, and against Defendants for
infringementof the 624 patent;
4. Judgment in favor of Seidio, and against Defendants for
infringementof the 815 patent;
5. An award of Seidios damages for patent infringement of the
624
-
7/28/2019 Seidio v. Boxwave et. al.
8/9
8
ORIGNAL COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
patent against Defendants in an amount adequate to compensate,
but in no event
less than a reasonable royalty;
6. An award of Seidios damages for patent infringement of the
815patent against Defendants in an amount adequate to compensate,
but in no event
less than a reasonable royalty;
7. An award of Seidios treble damages for willful, knowing
anddeliberate infringement of the 624 and 815 patents pursuant to
35 U.S.C. 284;
8. An award to Seidio of the costs and attorneys fees incurred
by Seidioin connection with this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
285;
9. An award in favor of Seidio for such other and further relief
as theCourt deems proper;
10. Seizure and/or destruction of infringing merchandise
pursuant to 15U.S.C. 1116(d)(1)(A) and 15 U.S.C. 1118.
-
7/28/2019 Seidio v. Boxwave et. al.
9/9
9
ORIGNAL COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Seidio hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so
triable.
Respectfully submitted,
Date: June 13, 2013 BUCHE &ASSOCIATES, P.C.:
/s/ John K. Buche
____________________________________John Karl BucheLindsay D.
Molnar
Attorneys for Complainant
SEIDIO, INC.
