)

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

of the United States, as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 271, 281-285.

design Patent #D661,225 (the 225 Patent") in violation of the Patent Laws

related claims arising out of Defendant's infringement of Plaintiff's U.S.

1. This is an action in law and equity for patent infringement and

INTRODUCTION

Tainer, Inc., alleges as follows:

ATTORNEY AT LAW, P.C., for his Complaint against Defendant, Pro-

Plaintiff, JASON K. LOVETT, by his attorney, J.T HOLLIN

pg. 1

CIVIL ACTION
3:16-cv-135-TCB
FILE NO. __________

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AND

STATE UNFAIR COMPETITION

Defendant.

PRO-TAINER, INC.,

vs.

Plaintiff,

JASON K. LOVETT,

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

NEWNAN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 1 of 11

competition and unfair trade practice in this judicial district and elsewhere.

judicial district and elsewhere; and (3) has committed acts of unfair

Trailer, that literally infringes one or more claims of the 225 Patent in this

offered for sale and has sold a product commercially known as a Rearload

(1) regularly solicits business in this judicial district; (2) has advertised,

Inc. by virtue of the fact that, upon information and belief, Pro-Tainer, Inc:

5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Pro-Tainer,

as set forth in the laws of the State of Georgia, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367.

jurisdiction over the claims of unfair competition and unfair trade practices,

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338. This Court has supplemental

4. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

36th Avenue W., Alexandria, Minnesota 56308.

Minnesota, and having an address and principal place of business at 1301

("Defendant" herein) is a business duly incorporated in the State of

3. Upon information and belief, Defendant Pro-Tainer, Inc.

Georgia 30224.

an address and principal place of business at 102 Fox Road in Griffin

2. Plaintiff Jason K. Lovett ("Plaintiff," herein) is an individual having

PARTIES

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 2 of 11

pg. 2

Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by reference. The 225 Patent is, and at all

10. A true and correct copy of the 225 Patent is attached hereto as

05, 2012.

9. Plaintiff introduced his invention in this District on or about June

Lovett.

patent was duly and legally issued on June 05, 2012 to Plaintiff Jason Keith

which a patent application was filed on April 13, 2011, and for which a

0661,225 (the 225 Patent) entitled Rearload Dumpster Delivery Unit for

design patent owned by Plaintiff, specifically United States Patent No.

8. The Rearload Dumpster Delivery Unit is the subject of a U.S.

ornamental design features.

Rearload Dumpster Delivery Unit. The invention includes certain

7. Plaintiff is the owner of all rights in and to an invention entitled

FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS

least one Rearload Trailer that infringes the Plaintiffs 225 Patent.

acts of patent infringement in this district by selling and offering to sell at

Rearload Trailer that infringes the Plaintiffs 225 Patent, and committing

soliciting business in this district, including with respect to at least one

at least because Pro-Tainer resides in this district by transacting and

6. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 3 of 11

pg. 3

immediately following.
Exhibit 2

Dumpster Delivery Unit are shown in Exhibit 2, Exhibit 3, and Exhibit 4,

11. Exemplary photographic images of the Plaintiffs Rearload

Delivery Unit.

discloses and claims the ornamental design for a Rearload Dumpster

relevant times in the past, has been in full force and effect. The 225 Patent

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 4 of 11

pg. 4

Rearload Trailer are shown in Exhibit 5 and Exhibit 6, as follows:

12. By way of comparison, photographic images of the Defendants

Exhibit 4

Exhibit 3

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 5 of 11

pg. 5

of the claim of the 225 Patent.

marketed and sold by Pro-Tainer, Inc., and infringes the ornamental design

13. Upon information and belief, the Rearload Trailer continues to be

Exhibit 6

Exhibit 5

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 6 of 11

pg. 6

design of the Infringing Trailer to be substantially the same. For example, a

overall appearance of the design of the 225 Patent and the corresponding

18. On information and belief, an ordinary observer will perceive the

corresponding designs of the Infringing Trailer are substantially the same.

17. The overall appearance of the designs of the 225 patent and the

regardless of model name.

Trailer, bearing the same or substantially similar infringing designs,

Trailer includes at least one product identified by the model name: Rearload

violate the 225 Patent (hereafter, the Infringing Trailer). The Infringing

sale, sold, and/or imported into the United States a trailer having designs that

Defendant manufactured, or caused to be manufactured, used, offered for

16. on information and belief, without Plaintiffs authorization,

35 U.S.C. 283.

acts of infringement will continue unless enjoined by this Court according to

and wantonly engaged in acts of infringement of the 225 Patent and such

15. Defendant, Pro-Tainer, Inc. has therefore willfully, deliberately

provided for under 35 U.S.C. 287.

Rearload Dumpster Delivery Unit with appropriate patent numbers as

marked sales materials, marketing materials, and website advertising the

14. Jason K. Lovett, and/or his duly authorized agent(s) have properly

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 7 of 11

pg. 7

COUNT ONE
Patent Infringement Against Defendant

aforementioned acts.

24. Plaintiff seeks both monetary damages and injunctive relief for the

23. Plaintiff is without an adequate remedy at law.

Plaintiff, including diversion of customers, lost sales and lost profits.

the Court, will continue to cause serious irreparable injury and damage to

22. By such wrongful acts, Defendant has, and unless restrained by

infringement thereof.

with full knowledge of the 225 Patent and in willful disregard and willful

21. Upon information and belief, Defendant's actions were undertaken

selling its Infringing Trailer in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271(a).

225 Patent by manufacturing, using, distributing, offering for sale and/or

20. Upon information and belief, Pro-Tainer, Inc. has infringed the

paragraphs 1 through 18 as though fully set forth herein.

19. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation of

above.

photographic images of the Infringing Trailer as shown in Exhibits 5 and 6,

comparison is easily made by viewing Plaintiffs Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 to the

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 8 of 11

pg. 8

goodwill that cannot readily be quantified or recaptured.

business will be harmed, and Plaintiff will lose sales, market share, and

the Defendant will be enriched and benefit from willful deception, Plaintiffs

The infringement is likely to continue to injure the Plaintiff. In particular,

an adverse material effect on the purchasing decisions of potential buyers.

29. Defendants infringing activities have, and will continue to have

Plaintiffs 225 patent.

to the availability, function, ease of use, and quality of the device covered by

is intended to deceive or have the capacity to deceive potential consumers as

28. The deceptive, willful, and deliberate infringement by Defendant

design, layout, and likeness substantially similar to Plaintiffs 225 patent.

2012, began producing, marketing and selling a trailer which is an obvious

27. On information and belief, the Defendant, sometime after June

endeavors through the use of its patented product.

developed a customer base and considerable good will in its business

26. Plaintiff has established, through his agents and licensees, and

paragraphs 1 through 24 as though fully set forth herein.

25. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation of

COUNT TWO
Deceptive And Unfair Trade Practices
Georgia Deceptive Trade Practices Act

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 9 of 11

pg. 9

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Patent;

distributors and customers, from continuing acts of infringement of the 225

and all persons acting in privity or in concert with any of them including

employees, agents, licensees, subsidiaries, successors and assigns, and any

(C) Permanently enjoining Defendant, its affiliates, officers, directors,

393(a);

(B) Adjudicating that Defendant has violated O.C.G.A. sec. 10-1-

(A) Adjudicating that Defendant has infringed the 225 Patent;

Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendant as follows:

aforementioned acts.

33. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages and attorneys fees for such

32. Plaintiff has been damaged by such aforementioned acts.

Georgia Annotated 10-1-393(a).

methods of competition or unfair trade practices pursuant to Official Code of

individual acting on Pro-Tainers behalf or for its benefit, constitute unfair

31. Pro-Tainer's aforementioned acts, or the aforementioned acts of an

including O.C.G.A. 10-1-393(a) .

30. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to all relevant Georgia statutes,

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 10 of 11

pg. 10

Demand for Jury Trial

Ph 770-371-5024
Fax 770-371-5025
Email: jthollin@hollinpatent.com

pg. 11

110 Habersham Drive; Suite 118

Fayetteville, Georgia 30214
Attorney for Defendant

s/ James T. Hollin, Jr.

James T. Hollin, Jr. GA Bar #362625

J.T. Hollin, Attorney at Law, P.C.

Respectfully submitted this 01st day of September, 2016.

Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial for all issues so triable.

deem just and proper.

(I) Awarding Plaintiff such other and further relief as this Court may

in connection with this action; and

(H) Awarding Plaintiff its costs, expenses, and disbursements incurred

pursuant to Official Code of Georgia Annotated 10-393(a);

(G) Awarding Plaintiff its damages, costs and attorneys fees,

reasonable attorneys fees, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285;

(F) Adjudging that this case is exceptional and awarding Plaintiff its

aforesaid damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284;

(E) Adjudging that Defendants are willful infringers and trebling the

judgment and post-judgment interest;

(D) Awarding Plaintiff damages for infringement, together with pre-

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 11 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1-1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 1 of 5

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1-1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 2 of 5

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1-1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 3 of 5

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1-1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 4 of 5

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1-1 Filed 09/01/16 Page 5 of 5

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1-2 Filed 09/01/16 Page 1 of 2

Case 3:16-cv-00135-TCB Document 1-2 Filed 09/01/16 Page 2 of 2