Godinger Silver Art v. YTD - Complaint

Case 1:21-cv-00198 Document 1 Filed 01/13/21 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1
THE IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
GODINGER SILVER ART LTD. )

Plaintiff, ) CIVIL ACTION NO.: 1:21-cv-198
)
v. )
)
YTD CO., LIMITED D/B/A KOLLEA and )
DINO SONICS CO., LIMITED D/B/A )
AMAZON STOREFRONT TS DRAGON )
Defendants. ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Godinger Silver Art Ltd. (“Godinger” or “Plaintiff”), by and through its
attorneys, hereby alleges for its Complaint for Patent Infringement against YTD Co.,
Limited d/b/a Kollea (“Kollea”) and Dino Sonics Co., Limited (“Dino”) (collectively,
“Defendants”) on personal knowledge as to its own activities and on information and belief
as to all other matters, as follows:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This is an action for patent infringement arising under 35 U.S.C. § 271 due
to Defendants’ infringement of Godinger’s U.S. Patent No. D846,947 (the “’947 Patent”),
and for tortious interference with prospective economic advantage and trade libel by
Defendants.
PARTIES
2. Plaintiff is a New York corporation with a place of business at 63-15
Traffic Avenue, Ridgewood, New York 11385. Plaintiff specializes in handcrafted silver,
pewter, crystal and gift items, focusing on showcase pieces of craftsmanship.
3. Upon information and belief, defendant Dino is a Hong Kong corporation
with a principal place of business at Unit 2,22/F, Richmond Comm. Bldg., 109 Argyle
Street, Mongkok, Kowloon, Hong Kong 999077.
4. Upon information and belief, defendant Kollea is a Hong Kong corporation
with a principal place of business at Flat/Rm 3, 27/F, Ho King Comm Centre, No. 2-16 Fa
Yuen Street, Mongkok, Kowloon, Hong Kong 999077.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5. This is an action for patent infringement arising under the provisions of the
Patent Laws of the United States of America, Title 35 of the United States Code, §§ 100,
et seq., as well as related claims for tortious interference and trade libel.
6. Subject matter jurisdiction over the claims is conferred upon this Court by
28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question jurisdiction), 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a) (patent jurisdiction),
and 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (supplemental jurisdiction).
7. This Court also has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because, upon
information and belief, Defendants maintain continuous and systematic contacts within
the state, derive substantial revenue from the state, and have committed acts giving rise to
this action within New York and within this District.
3
8. The exercise of personal jurisdiction comports with Defendants’ right to
due process, because they have purposefully availed themselves of the privilege of
conducting activities nationally, including within the Eastern District of New York, such
that they should reasonably anticipate being hailed into court here.
9. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and (c) and
§ 1400(b) at least because Plaintiff resides within this District, and Defendants transact
business within this District, including one or more acts of making, selling, using,
importing and/or offering for sale infringing products within this District, thus committing
acts in this District giving rise to this action.
THE PATENT-IN-SUIT
10. The ‘947 Patent, entitled “Drinking Glass with Cigar Holder,” was duly
and legally issued as D846,947 by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on April
30, 2019. A true and correct copy of the ‘947 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
11. Plaintiff is the Assignee of the ‘947 Patent.
THE ACCUSED PRODUCTS
12. Upon information and belief, Defendants manufacture, sell, market, offer
for sale, and/or advertise a drinking glass with a cigar holder, the “Kollea Cigar Glass.”
The Kollea Cigar Glass is offered in a rounded form (the “Round Glass”), and square form
(the “Square Glass”) (the “Round Glass” and “Square Glass” collectively referred to as
the “Infringing Products”). Screenshots of various offerings for sale are attached hereto
as Exhibit B. Exemplary photographs of the Infringing Products are shown below:
4
Square Glass Round Glass
13. Upon information and belief, since July 22, 2019, Kollea has been publicly
selling the Infringing Products.
14. Upon information and belief, the Round Glass is available for purchase at
Amazon.com as ASIN B07VN51X5R and the Square Glass is available for purchase at
Amazon.com as ASIN B089Q2PBSM.
DEFENDANTS’ WILLFUL ACTS
15. Since at least December 6, 2019, Defendants have had indisputable actual
knowledge of the ’947 Patent. Despite knowledge of their infringement, Defendants hid
behind Amazon.com’s wish to avoid involvement as an accuse to continue its infringing
sales of the Infringing Products.
16. Defendants have acted in bad faith, and have continued to infringe since
that time with knowledge, understanding and appreciation of the ‘947 Patent, and the
rights it bestows upon Plaintiff.
5
17. Moreover, upon information and belief, Defendants have continued in a
course of conduct with wanton disregard to their infringement, launching the Square Glass
after knowing of the ‘947 Patent and their already-infringing Round Glass.
18. Defendants’ actions evidence a willful and wanton disregard of Plaintiff’s
rights vis-à-vis the ‘947 Patent and a desire to profit, without regard or respect for U.S.
patent laws.
COUNT I: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. D846,947
19. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates the allegations in each of the
paragraphs in this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
20. Defendants have infringed and continue to infringe the ‘947 Patent at least
through their manufacture, sale, importation, offer for sale and/or marketing of the
Infringing Products, which it offers for sale and sells on Amazon.com, as well as other
online and brick and mortar retail stores.
21. The ‘947 Patent covers the ornamental design for a drinking glass with an
integral cigar holder, as shown in illustrative FIG. 8 of the ‘947 Patent:
6
22. Plaintiff’s products embodied in the ‘947 Patent are well-known, and are
sold throughout the United States and the world. An exemplary embodiment is reproduced
below:
7
23. Plaintiff has extensively promoted, advertised and used its glass with cigar
holder in a variety of media throughout the United States to distinguish its products and
services from those offered by others.
24. A side-by-side comparison is shown below:
Square Glass ‘947 Patent Round Glass
25. Defendants willful infringement is evident, and an ordinary observer,
giving such attention as a purchaser usually gives, would be so deceived by the substantial
similarity between the designs so as to be induced to purchase Defendants’ Infringing
Products, believing to be substantially the same as the Plaintiff’s glass design protected
by the ‘947 Patent.
26. Defendants infringement has damaged and continues to damage and injure
Plaintiff. The injury is irreparable and will continue unless and until Defendants are
enjoined from further infringement.
27. Plaintiff is entitled to a complete accounting of all revenue and profits
derived by Defendants from the unlawful conduct alleged herein, including without
limitation Defendants’ total profits pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 289.
28. Defendants have engaged and are currently engaged in willful and
deliberate infringement of the ‘947 Patent. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to treble
8
damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284. Moreover, such willful and deliberate infringement
qualifies this action as an exceptional case supporting an award of reasonable attorney’s
fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285.
29. Plaintiff is entitled to a permanent injunction preventing Defendants from
further infringement of the ‘947 Patent.
COUNT II: FEDERAL COMMON LAW UNFAIR COMPETITION
30. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates the allegations in each of the preceding
paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
31. Defendants are willfully, fraudulently, oppressively, maliciously and
unlawfully attempting to pass off, and are passing off, the Infringing Products as those
approved and/or authorized by Plaintiff.
32. Defendants use in commerce of the Infringing Products continues to
confuse and deceive consumers as to the source of origin of the goods and services for
which Plaintiff has invested substantial time, effort and money in developing and further
damages Plaintiff’s goodwill and reputation.
33. Upon information and belief, Defendants willfully and purposefully target
their advertisements on Amazon.com, Google.com and other sites to consumers searching
for Plaintiff’s glass with cigar holder.
34. Defendants have been palming off their goods as Plaintiff’s goods.
Consumers have been and continue to be confused as to whether Defendants’ Infringing
Products are affiliated with Plaintiff.
35. The damage suffered by Plaintiff is irreparable and will continue unless
Defendants are restrained by this Court from further infringement.
9
36. Defendants’ willful, deliberate and malicious conduct constitutes unfair
competition with Plaintiff.
37. Such conduct by Defendants are the sole reason for Defendants’ ability to
market and sell their unauthorized Infringing Products, which are unauthorized copies that
embody Plaintiff’s glass with cigar holder.
38. Defendants have been unjustly enriched through their flagrantly unlawful
conduct, and all remedies available at law and in equity are justified.
39. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law in the continuing nature of the
unfair competition, which will result in irreparable harm to Plaintiff should Defendants
not be enjoined from such acts.
COUNT III: UNFAIR COMPETITION UNDER NEW YORK LAW
40. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates the allegations in each of the preceding
paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
41. Defendants are willfully, fraudulently, oppressively, maliciously and
unlawfully attempting to pass off, and are passing off, the Infringing Products as those
approved and/or authorized by Plaintiff.
42. Defendants use in commerce of the Infringing Products continues to
confuse and deceive consumers as to the source of origin of the goods and services for
which Plaintiff has invested substantial time, effort and money in developing and further
damages Plaintiff’s goodwill and reputation.
43. Upon information and belief, Defendants willfully and purposefully target
their advertisements on Amazon.com, Google.com and other sites to consumers searching
for Plaintiff’s glass with cigar holder.
10
44. Defendants have been palming off their goods as Plaintiff’s goods.
Consumers have been and continue to be confused as to whether Defendants’ Infringing
Products are affiliated with Plaintiff.
45. The damage suffered by Plaintiff is irreparable and will continue unless
Defendants are restrained by this Court from further infringement.
46. Defendants’ willful, deliberate and malicious conduct constitutes unfair
competition with Plaintiff.
47. Such conduct by Defendants is the sole reason for Defendants’ ability to
market and sell their unauthorized Infringing Products, which are unauthorized copies that
embody Plaintiff’s glass with cigar holder.
48. Defendants have been unjustly enriched through their flagrantly unlawful
conduct, and all remedies available at law and in equity are justified.
49. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law in the continuing nature of the
unfair competition, which will result in irreparable harm to Plaintiff should Defendants
not be enjoined from such acts.
COUNT IV: DECEPTIVE PRACTICES AND FALSE ADVERTISING

UNDER NEW YORK GEN. BUS. LAW §§ 349-350
51. Defendants’ acts constitute false advertising and deceptive acts and
practices, in violation of New York General Business Law §§ 349-350.
52. Defendants’ advertisement, promotion, manufacture, import, offering for
sale, selling and distributing the infringing products in direct competition with Plaintiff
constitutes activity likely to cause confusion, mistake and deception for and to consumers
11
as to the source of Plaintiff’s products, such that consumers may believe Defendants’
products are sponsored by, endorsed by, approved by, licensed by, authorized by, or
affiliated or connected with Plaintiff.
53. Defendants’ have acted willfully and deliberately and has profited and been
unjustly enriched by sales they would not otherwise have made but for their unlawful
conduct.
54. Defendants have, by virtue of the foregoing, caused Plaintiff to suffer
injuries for which, unless enjoined, Plaintiff will continue to suffer substantial and
irreparable injury for which Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law, including at least
substantial and irreparable injury to the goodwill and reputation for quality associated with
Plaintiff’s products.
55. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief, and Plaintiff is entitled to recover at
least Defendants’ profits, actual damages, enhanced damages, costs, and reasonable
attorney fees under at least 15 U.S.C. §§ 1125(a), 1116, and 1117.
COUNT V: TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH

PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE
57. Plaintiff offers its products for sale on various e-commerce platforms, as
well as brick and mortar establishments. For these reasons, Plaintiff is a party to a valid
contract granting it rights to sell its products on such e-commerce platforms and to
retailers. Plaintiff continues to develop their economic relationship with their sales
channels, and intends to continue selling on the platforms and through their sales channels.
12
Plaintiff further has reasonable expectations of entering into future contracts with its
retailers and e-commerce platforms.
58. Defendants, as sellers themselves on Amazon.com, possesses full
knowledge of Plaintiff’s reasonable expectation of entering into future contracts with its
sales partners to continue selling products.
59. Upon information and belief, Defendants communications with
Amazon.com were out of malice, and used dishonest, unfair and improper means. Despite
the obvious infringement of Plaintiff’s ‘947 Patent, Defendants have stated to
Amazon.com that Plaintiff’s actions were in “bad faith” and “inadequate and deficient.”
60. Defendants’ communications with Amazon.com are an intentional attempt
to cause disruption and/or termination the relationship between Plaintiff and its partners,
including Amazon.com.
61. Defendant, in its actions, attempted to place Plaintiff’s relationship with
Amazon.com at risk. Plaintiff’s relationship with its partners has been permanently
tarnished due to Defendants’ statements.
62. Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer damages due to
Defendants’ tortious interference with its prospective economic advantage.
COUNT VI: TRADE LIBEL
63. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates the allegations of all of the paragraphs
in this complaint as if fully set forth herein.
64. Defendants knowingly, and without justification, made (and/or caused to
be made) materially false representations in writing to third parties, including to
13
Amazon.com, by which Defendants falsely stated that Plaintiff’s infringement allegations
were in bad faith. Due at least to the presence of infringement, such statements are
materially false.
65. Defendants’ statements were false in that, among other things, that they
falsely stated that (a) Plaintiff’s infringement allegations were in bad faith; and (b)
Plaintiff’s allegations were “inadequate and deficient.”
66. Defendants’ materially false representations were calculated to impugn
Plaintiff’s business reputation and that of its products sold on the websites of third party
platforms, and to dissuade others from doing business with Plaintiff and were calculated
to otherwise interfere with Plaintiff’s business relationships.
67. Defendants’ materially false representations were substantial factors in
inducing others, including Amazon.com, to not have business dealings with Plaintiff.
68. Defendants made (and/or caused to be made) such false communications
regarding Plaintiff knowingly, intentionally, in bad faith and motivated solely by
unrestrained self-interest, malice and/or disinterested malevolence, without legal or social
justification.
69. Defendants’ willful and intentional misconduct, without Plaintiff’s
knowledge or consent, irreparably injured and caused damage to Plaintiff in its business
reputation.
70. As a result of Defendants’ aforesaid acts and conduct, Plaintiff has been
irreparably injured in its business and in its good name and character. Plaintiff’s standing
in its business has also been seriously impaired.
71. The false statements affected Plaintiff in its trade, business, and profession.
14
72. As discussed in more detail above, at the time they made the false
statements to Amazon.com, Defendants knew that their statements to Amazon.com were
false or were made with reckless disregard for the truth.
73. Defendants’ statements were not mere statements of opinion.
74. Plaintiff is entitled to damages in excess of $100,000.
75. Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive damages in an amount sufficient
to punish and deter Defendants from engaging in further knowing acts of trade libel.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment
against Defendants as follows:
A. Granting judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants on all
claims;
B. Adjudging that Defendants have infringed the ‘947 Patent in violation of
35 U.S.C. § 271;
C. Adjudging that Defendants infringement was willful;
D. Preliminarily and permanently enjoining Defendants, its officers, agents,
subsidiaries, servants, partners, employees, attorneys, investors, consultants and all others
in active concert or participation with them, from (1) making any use of Plaintiff’s
products, or any designation of origin confusingly similar thereto, including offering to
sell, selling, distributing, or importing into the U.S. glasses confusingly similar thereto;
(2) manufacturing, importing, advertising, marketing, promoting, supplying, distributing,
offering for sale, or selling the Infringing Products or any products confusingly similar
15
thereto; (3) engaging in any other activity constituting unfair competition with Plaintiff,
or acts and practices that deceive consumers, the public, and/or trade, including without
limitation, the use of designations and design elements used or owned by or associated
with Plaintiff; and (4) committing any other act which falsely represents or which has the
effect of falsely representing that Defendants’ Infringing Products are licensed by,
authorized by, offered by, produced by, sponsored by, or in any other way associated with
Plaintiff;
E. Ordering Defendants to recall from any distributors and retailers and to
deliver to Plaintiff for destruction or other disposition all remaining inventory of all
Infringing Products and related items, including all advertisements, promotional and
marketing materials therefore, as well as means of making same;
F. Ordering an accounting by Defendants of all gains, profits and advantages
derived from its wrongful acts;
G. Ordering third party platforms, including Amazon.com, to cease all sales
of the Infringing Products;
H. Ordering third party platforms to freeze Defendants accounts;
I. Order Defendants’, at their own expense, to withdraw from the market,
account for and properly destroy any and all products bearing the trade dress;
J. Order Defendants, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116, to serve on Plaintiff
within thirty (30) days after service on Defendants of preliminary or permanent injunctive
orders, a report in writing, under oath, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which
Defendants have complied with the injunction.
16
K. Order Defendants to account for, and pay over to Plaintiff, Defendants’
profits and all damages sustained by Plaintiff;
L. Increase the amount of damages and/or profits awarded to Godinger, as
provided by law;
M. Award Plaintiff such treble and punitive damages for Defendants’ willful
and intentional acts of patent infringement, unfair competition and infringement of
Plaintiff’s rights that the Court shall deem just and proper;
N. Award Plaintiff the fees, costs and disbursements, and interest, expended
in connection with any actions taken to investigate and confirm the claims made herein;
O. Awarding Plaintiff monetary and any other damages for tortious
interference;
P. Awarding Plaintiff monetary and any other damages, including punitive
damages, for trade libel;
Q. Declaring Plaintiff as the prevailing party and this case as exceptional, and
awarding Plaintiff its reasonable attorneys’ fees, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a);
R. Ordering that Defendants pay all fees, expenses, and costs associated with
this action;
S. Award Plaintiff its reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, disbursements, and
interest, as provided by law; and
T. Grant such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
17
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Pursuant to Rule 38(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff demands a trial
by jury on all claims and issues so triable.
New York, New York

Dated: January 13, 2021
By: /Andrew D. Bochner/

Andrew D. Bochner, Esq.
Bochner IP
295 Madison Avenue, 12th Floor
New York, New York 10017
(646) 971-0685
Attorney(s) for Plaintiff
18
Case 1:21-cv-00198 Document 1-1 Filed 01/13/21 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 18
JS 44 (Rev. 02/19) 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

Godinger Silver Art, Ltd. YTD Co., Limited D/B/A KOLLEA
DINO SONICS CO., LIMITED D/B/A
AMAZON STOREFRONT TS DRAGON
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff QUEENS 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)
BOCHNER IP
295 Madison Ave., 12th Floor
New York, NY 10017 (646) 971-0685
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)
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 ’ 840 Trademark ’ 460 Deportation
Student Loans ’ 340 Marine Injury Product ’ 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) ’ 345 Marine Product Liability LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY Corrupt Organizations
’ 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY ’ 710 Fair Labor Standards ’ 861 HIA (1395ff) ’ 480 Consumer Credit
of Veteran’s Benefits ’ 350 Motor Vehicle ’ 370 Other Fraud Act ’ 862 Black Lung (923) ’ 490 Cable/Sat TV
’ 160 Stockholders’ Suits ’ 355 Motor Vehicle ’ 371 Truth in Lending ’ 720 Labor/Management ’ 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) ’ 850 Securities/Commodities/
’ 190 Other Contract Product Liability ’ 380 Other Personal Relations ’ 864 SSID Title XVI Exchange
’ 195 Contract Product Liability ’ 360 Other Personal Property Damage ’ 740 Railway Labor Act ’ 865 RSI (405(g)) ’ 890 Other Statutory Actions
’ 196 Franchise Injury ’ 385 Property Damage ’ 751 Family and Medical ’ 891 Agricultural Acts
’ 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability Leave Act ’ 893 Environmental Matters
Medical Malpractice ’ 790 Other Labor Litigation ’ 895 Freedom of Information
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS ’ 791 Employee Retirement FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act
’ 210 Land Condemnation ’ 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: Income Security Act ’ 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff ’ 896 Arbitration
’ 220 Foreclosure ’ 441 Voting ’ 463 Alien Detainee 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
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation
(specify)
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
35 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.
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
01/13/2021 /s/ Andrew D. Bochner
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

CERTIFICATION
Case 1:21-cv-00198 DocumentOF
1-3ARBITRATION
Filed 01/13/21 ELIGIBILITY
Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 33
Local Arbitration Rule 83.7 provides that with certain exceptions, actions seeking money damages only in an amount not in excess of $150,000,
exclusive of interest and costs, are eligible for compulsory arbitration. The amount of damages is presumed to be below the threshold amount unless a
certification to the contrary is filed.
Case is Eligible for Arbitration
I, __________________________________________,
Andrew D. Bochner counsel for____________________________,
Godinger Silver Art, Ltd. do hereby certify that the above captioned civil action is ineligible for
compulsory arbitration for the following reason(s):
monetary damages sought are in excess of $150,000, exclusive of interest and costs,
✔ the complaint seeks injunctive relief,
the matter is otherwise ineligible for the following reason
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT - FEDERAL RULES CIVIL PROCEDURE 7.1

Identify any parent corporation and any publicly held corporation that owns 10% or more or its stocks:
None
RELATED CASE STATEMENT (Section VIII on the Front of this Form)

Please list all cases that are arguably related pursuant to Division of Business Rule 50.3.1 in Section VIII on the front of this form. Rule 50.3.1 (a) provides that “A civil case is “related”
to another civil case for purposes of this guideline when, because of the similarity of facts and legal issues or because the cases arise from the same transactions or events, a
substantial saving of judicial resources is likely to result from assigning both cases to the same judge and magistrate judge.” Rule 50.3.1 (b) provides that “ A civil case shall not be
deemed “related” to another civil case merely because the civil case: (A) involves identical legal issues, or (B) involves the same parties.” Rule 50.3.1 (c) further provides that
“Presumptively, and subject to the power of a judge to determine otherwise pursuant to paragraph (d), civil cases shall not be deemed to be “related” unless both cases are still
pending before the court.”
NY-E DIVISION OF BUSINESS RULE 50.1(d)(2)
1.) Is the civil action being filed in the Eastern District removed from a New York State Court located in Nassau or Suffolk
County? Yes ✔ No
2.) If you answered “no” above:

a) Did the events or omissions giving rise to the claim or claims, or a substantial part thereof, occur in Nassau or Suffolk
County? Yes ✔ No
b) Did the events or omissions giving rise to the claim or claims, or a substantial part thereof, occur in the Eastern
District? ✔ Yes No
c) If this is a Fair Debt Collection Practice Act case, specify the County in which the offending communication was
received:______________________________.
If your answer to question 2 (b) is “No,” does the defendant (or a majority of the defendants, if there is more than one) reside in Nassau or
Suffolk County, or, in an interpleader action, does the claimant (or a majority of the claimants, if there is more than one) reside in Nassau or
Yes No
Suffolk County?___________________________________
(Note: A corporation shall be considered a resident of the County in which it has the most significant contacts).
BAR ADMISSION
I am currently admitted in the Eastern District of New York and currently a member in good standing of the bar of this court.
✔ Yes No
Are you currently the subject of any disciplinary action (s) in this or any other state or federal court?
Yes (If yes, please explain ✔ No
I certify the accuracy of all information provided above.
Signature: __________/s/ Andrew D. Bochner__________________________________________
Print Save As... Reset Last Modified: 11/27/2017

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the
Eastern District
__________ of of
District New York
__________
Godinger Silver Art Ltd. )

)
)
)
Plaintiff(s) )
)
v. Civil Action No. 1:21-cv-198
)
YTD CO., LIMITED D/B/A KOLLEA and )
DINO SONICS CO., LIMITED D/B/A )
AMAZON STOREFRONT TS DRAGON )
)
Defendant(s) )
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To: (Defendant’s name and address) DINO SONICS CO., LIMITED D/B/A
Unit 2,22/F, Richmond Comm. Bldg., 109 Argyle Street, Mongkok, Kowloon, Hong
Kong 999077
YTD CO., LIMITED D/B/A KOLLEA
Flat/Rm 3, 27/F, Ho King Comm Centre, No. 2-16 Fa Yuen Street, Mongkok, Kowloon,
Hong Kong 999077
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: Andrew D. Bochner
BOCHNER IP
295 Madison Avenue
12th Floor
New York, NY 10017
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.
DOUGLAS C. PALMER
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. 1:21-cv-198
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

AO 120 (Rev. 08/10)
Mail Stop 8 REPORT ON THE

TO:
Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office FILING OR DETERMINATION OF AN
P.O. Box 1450 ACTION REGARDING A PATENT OR
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 TRADEMARK
In Compliance with 35 U.S.C. § 290 and/or 15 U.S.C. § 1116 you are hereby advised that a court action has been
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York on the following
G Trademarks or G
✔ Patents. ( G the patent action involves 35 U.S.C. § 292.):
DOCKET NO. DATE FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT

1:21-cv-198 1/13/2021 for the Eastern District of New York
PLAINTIFF Format m/d/yyyy DEFENDANT
Godinger Silver Art Ltd. YTD CO., LIMITED D/B/A KOLLEA and
DINO SONICS CO., LIMITED D/B/A AMAZON
STOREFRONT TS DRAGON
PATENT OR DATE OF PATENT

HOLDER OF PATENT OR TRADEMARK
TRADEMARK NO. OR TRADEMARK
1 D846,947 4/30/2019 Godinger Silver Art Ltd.
Format m/d/yyyy
2
Format m/d/yyyy
3
Format m/d/yyyy
4
Format m/d/yyyy
5
Format m/d/yyyy
In the above—entitled case, the following patent(s)/ trademark(s) have been included:
DATE INCLUDED INCLUDED BY
G
Amendment G Answer G Cross Bill G Other Pleading
Format
PATENTm/d/yyyy
OR DATE OF PATENT
HOLDER OF PATENT OR TRADEMARK
TRADEMARK NO. OR TRADEMARK
1
Format m/d/yyyy
2
Format m/d/yyyy
3
Format m/d/yyyy
4
Format m/d/yyyy
5
Format m/d/yyyy
In the above—entitled case, the following decision has been rendered or judgement issued:
DECISION/JUDGEMENT
CLERK (BY) DEPUTY CLERK DATE
Format m/d/yyyy
Copy 1—Upon initiation of action, mail this copy to Director Copy 3—Upon termination of action, mail this copy to Director
Copy 2—Upon filing document adding patent(s), mail this copy to Director Copy 4—Case file copy
Print Save As... Reset

Godinger Silver Art v. YTD - Complaint

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

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

Godinger Silver Art v. YTD - Complaint

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Case 1:21-cv-00198 Document 1 Filed 01/13/21 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1

THE IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

GODINGER SILVER ART LTD. )

as to all other matters, as follows:

NATURE OF THE ACTION

2. Plaintiff is a New York corporation with a place of business at 63-15

pewter, crystal and gift items, focusing on showcase pieces of craftsmanship.

3. Upon information and belief, defendant Dino is a Hong Kong corporation

Street, Mongkok, Kowloon, Hong Kong 999077.

4. Upon information and belief, defendant Kollea is a Hong Kong corporation

Yuen Street, Mongkok, Kowloon, Hong Kong 999077.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question jurisdiction), 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a) (patent jurisdiction),

and 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (supplemental jurisdiction).

this action within New York and within this District.

8. The exercise of personal jurisdiction comports with Defendants’ right to

acts in this District giving rise to this action.

11. Plaintiff is the Assignee of the ‘947 Patent.

THE ACCUSED PRODUCTS

as Exhibit B. Exemplary photographs of the Infringing Products are shown below:

Square Glass Round Glass

selling the Infringing Products.

Amazon.com as ASIN B089Q2PBSM.

DEFENDANTS’ WILLFUL ACTS

behind Amazon.com’s wish to avoid involvement as an accuse to continue its infringing

sales of the Infringing Products.

rights it bestows upon Plaintiff.

17. Moreover, upon information and belief, Defendants have continued in a

18. Defendants’ actions evidence a willful and wanton disregard of Plaintiff’s

COUNT I: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. D846,947

19. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates the allegations in each of the

paragraphs in this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

online and brick and mortar retail stores.

integral cigar holder, as shown in illustrative FIG. 8 of the ‘947 Patent:

services from those offered by others.

24. A side-by-side comparison is shown below:

Square Glass ‘947 Patent Round Glass

25. Defendants willful infringement is evident, and an ordinary observer,

similarity between the designs so as to be induced to purchase Defendants’ Infringing

by the ‘947 Patent.

enjoined from further infringement.

27. Plaintiff is entitled to a complete accounting of all revenue and profits

limitation Defendants’ total profits pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 289.

deliberate infringement of the ‘947 Patent. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to treble

qualifies this action as an exceptional case supporting an award of reasonable attorney’s

fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285.

29. Plaintiff is entitled to a permanent injunction preventing Defendants from

further infringement of the ‘947 Patent.

COUNT II: FEDERAL COMMON LAW UNFAIR COMPETITION

paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.

31. Defendants are willfully, fraudulently, oppressively, maliciously and

approved and/or authorized by Plaintiff.

32. Defendants use in commerce of the Infringing Products continues to

damages Plaintiff’s goodwill and reputation.

their advertisements on Amazon.com, Google.com and other sites to consumers searching

for Plaintiff’s glass with cigar holder.

Consumers have been and continue to be confused as to whether Defendants’ Infringing

Products are affiliated with Plaintiff.

Defendants are restrained by this Court from further infringement.

36. Defendants’ willful, deliberate and malicious conduct constitutes unfair

competition with Plaintiff.

embody Plaintiff’s glass with cigar holder.

not be enjoined from such acts.