SBD Apparel Ltd. v. Stronghouse Gym - Complaint

Case 2:21-cv-00421 Document 1 Filed 03/12/21 Page 1 of 17
1 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC

JOHN L. KRIEGER
2 Nevada Bar No. 6023
Email: jkrieger@dickinson-wright.com
3 3883 Howard Hughes Pkwy.
4 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
Tel: (702) 550-4400
5 Fax: (844) 670-6009
6 Attorneys for Plaintiff SBD Apparel Limited

7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8 DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9 SBD APPAREL LIMITED, CASE NO.

a United Kingdom Company,
10 Plaintiff,
11 v. COMPLAINT FOR DESIGN
12 PATENT INFRINGEMENT
STRONGHOUSE GYM LLC , a
13 Nevada corporation, TANNER MCBRIDE, an
individual,ERIC AYALA, an individual and DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
14 SCOTT MILLER,
an individual,
15
16 Defendants.
17
18
Plaintiff SBD APPAREL LIMITED (“SBD”) alleges as follows, upon actual knowledge
19
with respect to itself and its own acts, and upon information and belief as to all other matters:
20
INTRODUCTION
21
This is a case for design patent infringement of United States Patent No. D707,361 (the
22
‘361 Patent") under Patent Laws of the United States of America, Title 35, United States Code.
23
Stronghouse Gym LLC received a cease and desist letter from SBD Apparel Limited’s counsel
24
on or about December 2, 2019, alleging infringement of the ‘361 Patent and accusing a product
25
sold by Stronghouse Gym LLC as infringing the ‘361 Patent.
26
///
27
///
28
1 of 17
1 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2 1. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims pursuant to 28
3 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) because this action arises under the patent laws of the United States,
4 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. and is a civil action for patent infringement.
5 2. This Court also has subject matter jurisdiction under the Judicial Code of the
6 United States, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338(a) and 1338(b).
7 3. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining claims pursuant to 28
8 U.S.C. § 1367.
9 4. Upon information and belief, this Court may exercise personal jurisdiction over
10 Defendants, and each of them, because they are all residents of the State of Nevada and are
11 committing acts of patent infringement in the State of Nevada, which they, and each of them,
12 knew or should have known would cause injury in Nevada.
13 5. Defendants, and each of them, have conducted business and directly harmed SBD
14 in this District by using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing products that infringe on
15 SBD’s patent.
16 6. Venue is proper in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada
17 under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because a substantial part of the events giving rise to SBD’s claims
18 occurred in the District of Nevada.
19 7. Pursuant to LR IA 1-6, venue lies in the unofficial Southern Division of this
20 Judicial District.
21 PARTIES
22 8. SBD is a limited company organized and existing under the laws of the United
23 Kingdom, and maintains a principal place of business in Rotherham, England.
24 9. Defendant Stronghouse Gym LLC (“Stronghouse”), is a Nevada limited liability
25 company with a principal place of business located at 939 Spiracle Ave, Henderson, NV 89002.
26 10. Defendant Tanner McBride (“McBride”) is an owner and managing member of
27 Stronghouse, who resides at 939 Spiracle Ave. Henderson, NV 89002.
28
2 of 17
1 11. Eric Ayala (“Ayala”) is an owner and managing member of Stronghouse, who
2 resides at 211 Appian Way, Henderson, NV 89002.
3 12. Scott Miller (“Miller”) is an owner and managing member of Stronghouse, who
4 resides at Maple Oak Avenue, Las Vegas, NV 89139.
5 13. Upon information and belief, Stronghouse, McBride, Ayala, and Miller are each
6 the alter ego of the other, and are the officer, agent, servant, representative, and/or employee of
7 the other, acting in participation with the other, having authority or apparent authority to bind the
8 other.
9 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
10 14. SBD designs and builds superior quality products for world class athletes,
11 coaches, health professionals and consumers.
12 15. SBD’s manufacturing campus is in the heart of Yorkshire, England. SBD has
13 invested heavily in their processes and products to be on the cutting edge of athletic products.
14 16. One of SBD’s products is a pair of joint supports, which take the form of sleeves
15 for the knee, referred to in the industry as the “SBD Knee Sleeves.” The SBD Knee Sleeves
16 provide support compression for a knee joint to promote stability and confidence for recreational
17 lifters, functional fitness athletes, powerlifters, weightlifters, and strongman and strongwoman
18 athletes, to name a few.
19 17. The SBD Knee Sleeves are approved by the International Powerlifting Federation
20 (IPF).
21 18. The SBD Knee Sleeves are also approved by the American Drug-Free
22 Powerlifting Association d/b/a USA Powerlifting (USAPL), a non-profit organizationthat is a
23 leading powerlifting organization in the United States and is a member of the IPF.
24 19. USAPL provides preeminent powerlifting competitions including drug testing of
25 participating athletes.
26 SBD’s Patent
27 20. SBD has taken steps to protect its products and owns United States Patent No.
28 D707,361 (the “ ‘361 Patent ”) a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” The ‘361
3 of 17
1 Patent was duly and legally issued on January 17, 2014, by the United States Patent and
2 Trademark Office.
3 21. SBD is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and interest in and to the ‘361
4 Patent, including the righto recover for any and all past and future infringements thereof.
5 22. Defendants, and each of them, have in the past and continue to infringe the '361
6 Patent by using, making, importing, selling, and/or offering to sell, in this judicial district and
7 elsewhere in the United States, knee sleeve products that infringe the '361 Patent.
8 23. These products include at least the Stronghouse Competition Knee Sleeves
9 (“SCKS”) that are shown in Table 1 below
10 ///
11 ///
12 ///
13 ///
14 ///
15 ///
16 ///
17 ///
18 ///
19 ///
20 ///
21 ///
22 ///
23 ///
24 ///
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
4 of 17
1 Table 1: Infringing SCKS Product
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5 of 17
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6 of 17
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7 of 17
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
8 of 17
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9 of 17
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10 of 17
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
11 of 17
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
24. Other similar products may also be identified as a result of discovery in this case.
23
Such conduct constitutes, at a minimum, patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
24
25. SBD is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendants’
25
infringement of the ‘361 Patent has been and continues to be intentional, willful, and without
26
regard to SBD’s rights.
27
28
12 of 17
1 26. An ordinary observer with knowledge of the prior art would find that Defendants’
2 infringing SCKS product is substantially similar to the ‘361 Patent giving such attention as a
3 purchaser usually gives.
4 27. The acts of infringement of the ‘361 Patent by Defendants, and each of them,
5 have caused damage to SBD, and SBD is entitled to recover from Defendants the damages
6 sustained by SBD as a result of the wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial, including
7 but not limited to an amount of no less than a reasonable royalty.
8 28. SBD provided Defendants with written notice of SBD’s patent rights and has
9 previously demanded that Defendants, and each of them, cease and desist from further sales of
10 the infringing knee sleeves.
11 29. However, Defendants, and each of them, have continued to use, make, and sell the
12 infringing knee sleeves.
13 30. Upon information and belief, Defendants, and each of them, will continue to
14 infringe the '361 Patent unless enjoined by this Court.
15 31. As a consequence of the infringement complained of herein, SBD has been
16 irreparably damaged to an extent not yet determined and will continue to be irreparably damaged
17 by such acts in the future unless Defendants, and each of them, are enjoined by this Court from
18 committing further acts of infringement.
19 32. Defendants’ patent infringement is continuing and willful because Defendants,
20 and each of them, have continued their infringing practices with knowledge of SBD’s patent
21 rights and in a manner that is, at a minimum, objectively reckless.
22 33. SBD never authorized any of the Defendants to use the ‘361 Patent.
23 34. Upon information and belief, Defendants, and each of them, knew of the ‘361
24 Patent before they began making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing infringing
25 products into the United States. In particular, Defendant Stronghouse’s Instagram account
26 highlights one of their own powerlifters wearing the SBD Knee Sleeves as shown below:
27
28
13 of 17
9
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
10
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT No. D707,361
11 (Against All Defendants)
12 35. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the preceding paragraphs as if fully set
13 forth herein.
14 36. The ‘361 Patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and
15 Trademark Office.
16 37. The ‘361 Patent is valid and enforceable.
17 38. Defendants, and each of them, have been and are currently infringing, actively
18 inducing others to infringe, and/or contributing to the infringement of the ‘361 Patent in violation
19 of 35 U.S.C. § 271 by making, using, selling, and/or offering for sale, or causing or inducing
20 others to infringe the same with at least its sale and/or distribution of knee sleeves within the
21 United States that infringe the ‘361 Patent
22 39. Upon information and belief, Defendants, and each of them, will continue to
23 directly and/or indirectly infringe the ‘361 Patent unless and until they are enjoined by this
24 Court.
25 40. Defendants, and each of them, have caused and will continue to cause SBD
26 irreparable injury and damage as a result of their direct and/or indirect infringement of the ‘361
27
28
14 of 17
1 Patent. SBD will suffer further irreparable injury, for which there is no adequate remedy at law,
2 unless and until Defendants, and each of them, are enjoined from infringing the ‘361 Patent.
3 41. SBD is entitled to injunctive relief under 35 U.S.C. § 283.
4 42. SBD is entitled to damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 by virtue of Defendants’
5 infringement of the ‘361 Patent.
6 43. This is an exceptional case warranting an award of attorneys’ fees to SBD under
7 35 U.S.C. § 285.
8 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT
9
(Against All Defendants)
10
44. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the preceding paragraphs as if fully set
11
forth herein.
12
45. The SBD Knee Sleeves have a distinctive, immediately recognizable overall look
13
and feel that constitutes protectable trade dress that distinguishes the SBD Knee Sleeves from
14
those of competitors.
15
46. SBD has invested significant time, money, and effort in developing the SBD Knee
16
Sleeves, which has resulted in significant commercial success and public recognition of its
17
distinctive design, appearance, and trade dress.
18
47. As a result of SBD’s advertising and promotion of the SBD Knee Sleeves by itself
19
and others, the trade and purchasing public have come to associate the distinctive trade dress of
20
the SBD Knee Sleeves with a single producer or source. Accordingly, the SBD Knee Sleeves
21
have acquired secondary meaning in the marketplace as to the origin of the product.
22
48. The distinctive trade dress of the SBD Knee Sleeves is non-functional and
23
ornamental.
24
49. Defendants, and each of them, have manufactured and sold and is continuing to
25
manufacture and sell its knee sleeves which copy and are confusingly similar in appearance to
26
the trade dress of the SBD Knee Sleeves and are, therefore, likely to deceive or confuse the
27
28
15 of 17
1 purchasing public as to the source or origin of the SBD Knee Sleeves in violation of 15 U.S.C. §
2 1125(a).
3 50. Defendants, and each of them, have engaged in such wrongful conduct with the
4 willful purpose of misleading, deceiving, or confusing customers and the public as to the origin
5 and authority of Defendants’ knee sleeves and thereby are trading on SBD’s goodwill,
6 reputation, and creative designs.
7 51. The conduct of Defendants, and each of them, constitutes willful infringement of
8 SBD’s protectable trade dress, making this an exceptional case within the meaning of 15 U.S.C.
9 § 1117.
10 52. The infringing activity of Defendants, and each of them, has caused SBD
11 irreparable injury and money damages. SBD is, therefore, entitled to an award of damages.
12 53. If the infringement by Defendants, and each of them, is not permanently enjoined,
13 SBD will continue to suffer irreparable injury and monetary damages.
14 54. SBD has no adequate remedy at law.
15 55. SBD is, therefore, entitled to injunctive relief.
16 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
17 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays that the Court grant the following relief:
18 A. Enter judgment for Plaintiff and against Defendants, and each of them, for willful
19 infringement of the ‘361 Patent;
20 B. A temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunction against further infringement
21 of the ‘361 Patent by Defendants, and each of them;
22 C. Issuance of an order, pursuant to the Court’s inherent authority, directing the
23 seizure of all infringing products, or any other copy, reproduction, or colorable imitation of the
24 ‘361 Patent that are in Defendants’, and each of their, possession or control, including all
25 advertising and other materials used in furtherance of Defendants’, and each of their,
26 infringements whether in hard copy or electronic form;
27 D. An award of damages adequate to compensate SBD for the patent infringements
28 that have occurred pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, which shall be trebled as a result of Defendants’,
16 of 17
1 and each of their, willful patent infringement, or an award of Defendants’ profits from their
2 infringements pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 289, whichever is greater, together with prejudgment
3 interest and costs;
4 E. An assessment of costs, including reasonable attorney fees and expenses, pursuant
5 to 35 U.S.C. § 285, with prejudgment interest; and
6 F. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
7 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
8 Pursuant to FRCP 28, SBD hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues for which a trial
9 by jury may be had.
10 DATED this 12th day of March, 2021.
11 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC

12
13 /s/ John L. Krieger

JOHN L. KRIEGER
14 3883 Howard Hughes Pkwy., Ste. 800
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169
15 Tel: (702) 550-4400
Fax: (844) 670-6009
16
17 Attorneys for Plaintiff SBD Apparel Limited
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
17 of 17
4845-2114-7615 v1 [96166-1]
Case 2:21-cv-00421 Document 1-1 Filed 03/12/21 Page 1 of 14
SBD APPAREL LIMITED STRONGHOUSE GYM LLC, TANNER MCBRIDE,

ERIC AYALA, AND SCOTT MILLER
(702) 550-4400
John L. Krieger, SBN 6023. Dickinson Wright PLLC
3883 Howard Hughes Pkwy., Suite 800, Las Vegas, NV 89169 Unknown
X
X X
X X
28 U.S.C. Sections 1331 and 1338(a) and 35 U.S.C. Section 1, et seq.
Patent Infringement
3/12/2021 /s/ John L. Krieger

Maple Oak Avenue

Las Vegas, NV 89139
939 Spirable Avenue

Henderson, NV 89002
211 Appian Way

Henderson, NV 89002
939 Spracle Avenue

Henderson, NV 89002

SBD Apparel Ltd. v. Stronghouse Gym - 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

SBD Apparel Ltd. v. Stronghouse Gym - Complaint

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Case 2:21-cv-00421 Document 1 Filed 03/12/21 Page 1 of 17

1 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC

6 Attorneys for Plaintiff SBD Apparel Limited

9 SBD APPAREL LIMITED, CASE NO.

1 JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. and is a civil action for patent infringement.

6 United States, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338(a) and 1338(b).

12 knew or should have known would cause injury in Nevada.

18 occurred in the District of Nevada.

19 7. Pursuant to LR IA 1-6, venue lies in the unofficial Southern Division of this

23 Kingdom, and maintains a principal place of business in Rotherham, England.

24 9. Defendant Stronghouse Gym LLC (“Stronghouse”), is a Nevada limited liability

26 10. Defendant Tanner McBride (“McBride”) is an owner and managing member of

27 Stronghouse, who resides at 939 Spiracle Ave. Henderson, NV 89002.

2 resides at 211 Appian Way, Henderson, NV 89002.

4 resides at Maple Oak Avenue, Las Vegas, NV 89139.

11 coaches, health professionals and consumers.

18 athletes, to name a few.

22 Powerlifting Association d/b/a USA Powerlifting (USAPL), a non-profit organizationthat is a

24 19. USAPL provides preeminent powerlifting competitions including drug testing of

9 (“SCKS”) that are shown in Table 1 below

1 Table 1: Infringing SCKS Product

3 purchaser usually gives.

7 but not limited to an amount of no less than a reasonable royalty.

10 the infringing knee sleeves.

12 infringing knee sleeves.

14 infringe the '361 Patent unless enjoined by this Court.

15 31. As a consequence of the infringement complained of herein, SBD has been

18 committing further acts of infringement.

19 32. Defendants’ patent infringement is continuing and willful because Defendants,

21 rights and in a manner that is, at a minimum, objectively reckless.

3 41. SBD is entitled to injunctive relief under 35 U.S.C. § 283.

4 42. SBD is entitled to damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 by virtue of Defendants’

5 infringement of the ‘361 Patent.

8 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

6 reputation, and creative designs.

13 SBD will continue to suffer irreparable injury and monetary damages.

14 54. SBD has no adequate remedy at law.

15 55. SBD is, therefore, entitled to injunctive relief.

16 PRAYER FOR RELIEF

19 infringement of the ‘361 Patent;

20 B. A temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunction against further infringement

21 of the ‘361 Patent by Defendants, and each of them;

22 C. Issuance of an order, pursuant to the Court’s inherent authority, directing the

26 infringements whether in hard copy or electronic form;

27 D. An award of damages adequate to compensate SBD for the patent infringements

2 infringements pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 289, whichever is greater, together with prejudgment

3 interest and costs;

4 E. An assessment of costs, including reasonable attorney fees and expenses, pursuant

5 to 35 U.S.C. § 285, with prejudgment interest; and

7 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

9 by jury may be had.

10 DATED this 12th day of March, 2021.

11 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC

13 /s/ John L. Krieger

17 Attorneys for Plaintiff SBD Apparel Limited

SBD APPAREL LIMITED STRONGHOUSE GYM LLC, TANNER MCBRIDE,

28 U.S.C. Sections 1331 and 1338(a) and 35 U.S.C. Section 1, et seq.

3/12/2021 /s/ John L. Krieger

Maple Oak Avenue

939 Spirable Avenue

211 Appian Way

939 Spracle Avenue

Вам также может понравиться