Taylor Precision Products v. Double A Concepts - Complaint

Case 1:18-cv-02427-JMS-DLP Document 1 Filed 08/08/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
TAYLOR PRECISION PRODUCTS, INC.; )

THE CHEF’N CORPORATION )
) Cause No.:__________________
Plaintiffs )
) JURY TRIAL DEMAND
v. )
)
DOUBLE A CONCEPTS LLC, AARON )
FARNSWORTH, GEMINI FARNSWORTH )
)
Defendants )
)
COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs Taylor Precision Products, Inc. and THE CHEF’N Corporation by its attorneys,
as and for its complaint against Defendants Double A Concepts LLC, Aaron Farnsworth and
Gemini Farnsworth (hereinafter “Defendants”) allege as follows:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This is an action for Patent Infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271 and §289.
2. As alleged in detail below, Defendants have engaged in a conscious, systematic, and
willful pattern of patent infringement, to the damage of Plaintiff.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3. This court has jurisdiction over the patent infringement claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
1331 and 1338(a).
4. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1400 as Defendants reside in this
District and Defendants have committed acts of infringement and have a regular and established
place of business in this District.
1
THE PARTIES
5. Plaintiff TAYLOR PRECISION PRODUCTS, INC. (hereinafter, “Taylor”) is a Delaware
corporation with a business address of 2311 West 22nd Street, Suite 200, Oak Brook, IL 60523.
6. Plaintiff THE CHEF’N CORPORATION (hereinafter, “Chef’n”) is a Washington
corporation with a business address of 830 4th Ave S, St. 400, Seattle, WA 98134.
7. Taylor and Chef’n are both subsidiaries of Lifetime Brands, Inc., a leading provider of
home products in the U.S. and worldwide, including kitchen utensils and kitchen gadgets.
8. Upon information and belief, Defendant DOUBLE A CONCEPTS LLC is an Indiana
Limited Liability Company with a place of business at 431 Tulip Drive, Mooresville, IN 46158.
9. Upon information and belief, Defendant AARON FARNSWORTH is an individual
having an address of 431 Tulip Drive, Mooresville, IN 46158.
10. Upon information and belief, Defendant GEMINI FARNSWORTH is an individual
having an address of 431 Tulip Drive, Mooresville, IN 46158. (Defendants Double A Concepts
LLC, Aaron Farnsworth and Gemini Farnsworth collectively being referred hereinafter as the
"Defendants”).
11. Defendants own and operate a store named “Friendly Cooking” having a website at
www.friendlycooking.com. The Defendants’ Friendly Cooking store sells kitchen products,
including a 3 Piece Clip on Strainer Set, which includes the infringing herb stripping tool and a 4
Piece Spatula Set.
PLAINTIFFS’ PATENTS
12. Plaintiff Chef’n owns U.S. Patent No. 9,718,198 for a “STRIPPING TOOL FOR LEAFY
VEGETABLES AND HERBS” which was filed on September 8, 2015 claiming the benefit of
2
Provisional Application No. 62/047,493 filed on September 8, 2014, and issued on August 1,
2017, in accordance with an assignment recorded with the United States Patent and Trademark
Office on reel/frame 036947/0205 on November 3, 2015 (hereinafter the “’198 Patent”). A copy
of the ‘198 Patent is annexed as Exhibit A.
13. Plaintiff Taylor owns U.S. Design Patent No. D776,991 for a “STRIPPING TOOL FOR
LEAFY VEGETABLE AND HERBS” which was filed on September 8, 2014, and issued on
January 24, 2017, in accordance with an assignment recorded with the United States Patent and
Trademark Office on reel/frame 040593/0033 on December 7, 2016 (hereinafter, the “’991
Patent”). A copy of the ‘991 Patent is annexed as Exhibit B.
DEFENDANTS’ INFRINGING ACTS
14. Defendants have been offering to sell and have sold a 3 Piece Clip on Strainer Set which
includes an herb stripping tool. Screenshots of Defendants’ webpage which show the herb
stripping tool being marketed and sold as part of the 3 Piece Clip on Strainer Set are annexed as
Exhibit C (the “Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool”).
15. The Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool includes each and every limitation recited in at
least independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2-5 of the ‘198 Patent. Therefore, the
Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool is a literal infringement of the ‘198 Patent.
16. For example, claim 1 of the ‘198 Patent recites as follows:
“A hand-operated device for use in removing foliage from a stem of a leafy vegetable or
an herb, the device comprising:
3
a unitary, elongated body having no moving parts, the elongated body being sized to be
held comfortably in a user's hand, the elongated body having opposing curved edges, at least a
portion of each edge following a convex curve;
at least a portion of one of the convexly curved edges of the elongated body formed as a
convexly curved sharp edge, the other of the convexly curved edges of the elongated body
formed as a convexly curved dull edge opposite the sharp edge;
a plurality of apertures of different sizes extending through the body, the apertures being
spaced apart from each other along the opposing curved edges, such that a user can select an
aperture large enough to allow the stem of a selected leafy vegetable or herb to pass through the
aperture but too small for the foliage of the leafy vegetable or the herb to pass through, and
whereby a user can pass the selected leafy vegetable or the herb through the selected aperture to
remove the foliage therefrom, and then cut the foliage to a desired size by holding the body with
the convexly curved dull edge against the user's hand and rocking the convexly curved sharp
edge along its length over the foliage”.
17. As is evident by the photographs of the Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool annexed hereto
as Exhibit C, the Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool literally infringes the ‘198 patent by including
all of the limitations of the stripping tool for leafy vegetables and herbs as recited in independent
claim 1.
18. Alternatively, even if some feature of claims 1-5 of the ‘198 Patent are not literally met
by the Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool, the Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool infringes claims 1-
5 of the ‘198 Patent under the Doctrine of Equivalents.
19. Furthermore, an ordinary observer would think that the Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool
is substantially the same as the design of the ‘991 Patent. Indeed, as the side-by-side comparison
4
shown below reveals, Defendants have misappropriated and infringed the patented stripping tool
for leafy vegetables and herbs. A top plan view of the ‘991 Patent is shown on the left with a
corresponding view of the infringing Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool on the right.
20. Therefore, the Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool infringes the ‘991 Patent.
COUNT I:
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NOS. 9,718,198 and D776,991
21. Paragraphs 1 through 20 are incorporated by reference herein.
22. Plaintiff Chef’n is the owner of all right, title, and interest in the ‘198 Patent.
23. Taylor is the owner of all right, title, and interest in the ‘991 Patent.
24. Defendants are, or have been, directly infringing the ‘198 Patent and ‘991 Patent by,
among other things, using, offering to sell, and selling in the United States, or importing into the
United States, the Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool that is covered by the ‘198 Patent and ‘991
Patent.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for relief as follows:
1. For a judgment declaring that Defendants have infringed U.S. Patent No. 9,718,198 and
U.S. Design Patent No. D776,991;
5
2. For a permanent and preliminary injunction against Defendants under 35 U.S.C. § 283,
enjoining and restraining Defendants from further infringing the ‘198 Patent and ‘991
Patent;
3. For a judgment awarding Plaintiff Chef’n compensatory damages as a result of
Defendants’ infringement of the ‘198 Patent, together with interest and costs, and in no
event less than a reasonable royalty, under 35 U.S.C. § 284;
4. For a judgment awarding Plaintiff Taylor compensatory damages as a result of
Defendants’ infringement of the ‘991 Patent, together with interest and costs, and in no
event less than a reasonable royalty, under 35 U.S.C. § 284;
5. For a judgment awarding Plaintiff Taylor all of Defendants’ profits deriving from the sale
of products that infringe the ‘991 Patent;
6. For a judgment declaring that Defendants’ infringement of Plaintiffs’ patent rights has
been willful and deliberate;
7. For a judgment awarding Plaintiffs treble damages and pre-judgment interest under 35
U.S.C. § 284 as a result of Defendants’ willful and deliberate infringement of Plaintiffs’
patent rights;
8. For a judgment declaring that this case is exceptional and awarding Plaintiffs their
expenses, costs, and attorney fees in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 284 and § 285 and Rule
54(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
9. That Plaintiffs have such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
This the 8th day of August, 2018.
6
Respectfully submitted,
MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK, LLC
s/Michael A. Swift
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Michael A. Swift
Harold C. Moore
One Indiana Square, Suite 2200
Indianapolis, IN 46204
E-mail: maswift@maginot.com
E-mail: hcmoore@maginot.com
7
Case 1:18-cv-02427-JMS-DLP Document 1-1 Filed 08/08/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 8
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT C
JS 44 (Rev. 06/17) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

TAYLOR PRECISION PRODUCTS, INC., DOUBLE A CONCEPTS LLC, AARON FARNSWORTH and
THE CHEF'N CORPORATION GEMINI FARNSWORTH
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
MICHAEL A. SWIFT and HAROLD C. MOORE
MAGINOT,MOORE & BECK, LLP
(317) 638-2922
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
’ 1 U.S. Government ’ 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State ’ 1 ’ 1 Incorporated or Principal Place ’ 4 ’ 4
of Business In This State
’ 2 U.S. Government ’ 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State ’ 2 ’ 2 Incorporated and Principal Place ’ 5 ’ 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a ’ 3 ’ 3 Foreign Nation ’ 6 ’ 6

Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
’ 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY ’ 625 Drug Related Seizure ’ 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 ’ 375 False Claims Act
’ 120 Marine ’ 310 Airplane ’ 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 ’ 423 Withdrawal ’ 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
’ 130 Miller Act ’ 315 Airplane Product Product Liability ’ 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
’ 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability ’ 367 Health Care/ ’ 400 State Reapportionment
’ 150 Recovery of Overpayment ’ 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS ’ 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury ’ 820 Copyrights ’ 430 Banks and Banking
’ 151 Medicare Act ’ 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability ’ 830 Patent ’ 450 Commerce
’ 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability ’ 368 Asbestos Personal ’ 835 Patent - Abbreviated ’ 460 Deportation
Student Loans ’ 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application ’ 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) ’ 345 Marine Product Liability ’ 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
’ 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY ’ 480 Consumer Credit
of Veteran’s Benefits ’ 350 Motor Vehicle ’ 370 Other Fraud ’ 710 Fair Labor Standards ’ 861 HIA (1395ff) ’ 490 Cable/Sat TV
’ 160 Stockholders’ Suits ’ 355 Motor Vehicle ’ 371 Truth in Lending Act ’ 862 Black Lung (923) ’ 850 Securities/Commodities/
’ 190 Other Contract Product Liability ’ 380 Other Personal ’ 720 Labor/Management ’ 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange
’ 195 Contract Product Liability ’ 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations ’ 864 SSID Title XVI ’ 890 Other Statutory Actions
’ 196 Franchise Injury ’ 385 Property Damage ’ 740 Railway Labor Act ’ 865 RSI (405(g)) ’ 891 Agricultural Acts
’ 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability ’ 751 Family and Medical ’ 893 Environmental Matters
Medical Malpractice Leave Act ’ 895 Freedom of Information
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS ’ 790 Other Labor Litigation FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act
’ 210 Land Condemnation ’ 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: ’ 791 Employee Retirement ’ 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff ’ 896 Arbitration
’ 220 Foreclosure ’ 441 Voting ’ 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act or Defendant) ’ 899 Administrative Procedure
’ 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment ’ 442 Employment ’ 510 Motions to Vacate ’ 871 IRS—Third Party Act/Review or Appeal of
’ 240 Torts to Land ’ 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision
’ 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations ’ 530 General ’ 950 Constitutionality of
’ 290 All Other Real Property ’ 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - ’ 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION State Statutes
Employment Other: ’ 462 Naturalization Application
’ 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - ’ 540 Mandamus & Other ’ 465 Other Immigration
Other ’ 550 Civil Rights Actions
’ 448 Education ’ 555 Prison Condition
’ 560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
’ 1 Original ’ 2 Removed from ’ 3 Remanded from ’ 4 Reinstated or ’ 5 Transferred from ’ 6 Multidistrict ’ 8 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
35 U.S.C. §271 and §289
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Patent infringement
VII. REQUESTED IN ’ CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: ’ Yes ’ No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
08/08/2018 s/Michael A. Swift
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE
Print Save As... Reset

JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 06/17)
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:
I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and
then the official, giving both name and title.
(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land
condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)
(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section "(see attachment)".
II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes
precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
cases.)
III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
section for each principal party.
IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code
that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.
When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.
Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing
date.
Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or
multidistrict litigation transfers.
Multidistrict Litigation – Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C.
Section 1407.
Multidistrict Litigation – Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to
changes in statue.
VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service
VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.
VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket
numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.
Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the
Southern District
__________ District of
of Indiana
__________
TAYLOR PRECISION PRODUCTS, INC.,and )

THE CHEF'N CORPORATION )
)
)
Plaintiff(s) )
)
v. Civil Action No.
)
DOUBLE A CONCEPTS LLC, and )
AARON FARNSWORTH, GEMINI FARNSWORTH )
)
)
Defendant(s) )
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To: (Defendant’s name and address) DOUBLE A CONCEPTS LLC

AARON FARNSWORTH, REGISTERED AGENT
GEMINI FARNSWORTH
431 TULIP DRIVE
MOORESVILLE, IN 46158
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 plaintiff’s attorney,
whose name and address are: MICHAEL A. SWIFT
HAROLD C. MOORE
MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK, LLP
ONE INDIANA SQUARE, SUITE 2200
INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46204
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.
CLERK OF COURT
Date:
Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)
Civil Action No.
PROOF OF SERVICE
(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))
This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .
’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or
’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)
, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,
on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or
’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)
on (date) ; or
’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or
’ Other (specify):
.
My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ 0.00 .
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date:
Server’s signature
Printed name and title
Server’s address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:
Print Save As... Reset

Taylor Precision Products v. Double A Concepts - Complaint

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Taylor Precision Products v. Double A Concepts - Complaint

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Case 1:18-cv-02427-JMS-DLP Document 1 Filed 08/08/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

TAYLOR PRECISION PRODUCTS, INC.; )

Gemini Farnsworth (hereinafter “Defendants”) allege as follows:

NATURE OF THE ACTION

2. As alleged in detail below, Defendants have engaged in a conscious, systematic, and

willful pattern of patent infringement, to the damage of Plaintiff.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1331 and 1338(a).

place of business in this District.

5. Plaintiff TAYLOR PRECISION PRODUCTS, INC. (hereinafter, “Taylor”) is a Delaware

6. Plaintiff THE CHEF’N CORPORATION (hereinafter, “Chef’n”) is a Washington

8. Upon information and belief, Defendant DOUBLE A CONCEPTS LLC is an Indiana

9. Upon information and belief, Defendant AARON FARNSWORTH is an individual

having an address of 431 Tulip Drive, Mooresville, IN 46158.

10. Upon information and belief, Defendant GEMINI FARNSWORTH is an individual

www.friendlycooking.com. The Defendants’ Friendly Cooking store sells kitchen products,

Piece Spatula Set.

of the ‘198 Patent is annexed as Exhibit A.

Trademark Office on reel/frame 040593/0033 on December 7, 2016 (hereinafter, the “’991

Patent”). A copy of the ‘991 Patent is annexed as Exhibit B.

DEFENDANTS’ INFRINGING ACTS

Exhibit C (the “Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool”).

Defendants’ Herb Stripping Tool is a literal infringement of the ‘198 Patent.

16. For example, claim 1 of the ‘198 Patent recites as follows:

an herb, the device comprising:

portion of each edge following a convex curve;

formed as a convexly curved dull edge opposite the sharp edge;

edge along its length over the foliage”.

5 of the ‘198 Patent under the Doctrine of Equivalents.

INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NOS. 9,718,198 and D776,991

21. Paragraphs 1 through 20 are incorporated by reference herein.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for relief as follows:

U.S. Design Patent No. D776,991;

3. For a judgment awarding Plaintiff Chef’n compensatory damages as a result of

event less than a reasonable royalty, under 35 U.S.C. § 284;

4. For a judgment awarding Plaintiff Taylor compensatory damages as a result of

event less than a reasonable royalty, under 35 U.S.C. § 284;

of products that infringe the ‘991 Patent;

been willful and deliberate;

U.S.C. § 284 as a result of Defendants’ willful and deliberate infringement of Plaintiffs’

54(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

This the 8th day of August, 2018.

MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK, LLC

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

Citizen or Subject of a ’ 3 ’ 3 Foreign Nation ’ 6 ’ 6

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

Print Save As... Reset

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

TAYLOR PRECISION PRODUCTS, INC.,and )

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address) DOUBLE A CONCEPTS LLC

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.