IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

HOLLYMATIC CORPORATION, an Illinois corporation, and JAMES AZZAR, a Michigan resident, Plaintiffs, v. INTERSTATE MEAT & PROVISION d/b/a STERLING MEAT COMPANY, Defendant.

: : : : : : : : : : : : :

Civil Action No. ___________________

COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

Plaintiffs, Hollymatic Corporation (Hollymatic) and James D. Azzar (Azzar) (collectively, Plaintiffs), by their attorneys, as and for their Complaint against Defendant, Interstate Meat & Provision d/b/a Sterling Meat Company (Sterling), alleges upon personal knowledge as to their own actions, and upon information and belief as to all other matters, as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. This is an action for patent infringement arising under 35 U.S.C. 271 for

Sterlings infringement of Plaintiffs United States Letters Patent No. Re. 36,091 (the 091 Reissue Patent) (attached as Exhibit 1). THE PARTIES 2. Hollymatic is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of

Illinois with its principal office and place of business at 600 E. Plainfield Road, Countryside, Illinois 60525. Azzar is an individual having a residence in and being a citizen of the State of Michigan.

3.

Upon information and belief, Sterling is a corporation organized and existing

under the laws of the State of Nevada, having a place of business at 6114 Scott Way, Commerce, California 90040. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4. Plaintiffs bring this patent infringement action pursuant to the Patent Laws of the

United States, 35 U.S.C. 1 et seq. This Court has jurisdiction over the aforesaid patent infringement matters alleged in this complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 (federal question jurisdiction), and 28 U.S.C. 1338(a) (original jurisdiction under the Patent and Trademark Laws). 5. Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b), (c), and

(d) (general venue statute); 28 U.S.C. 1400 (venue for patent infringement claims); and because Sterling is subject to the personal jurisdiction of the courts of this state. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 6. Hollymatic is engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling machines and

equipment for the processing of food products, particularly meat products, and supplies, including the patented paper used in such machines that is the subject of the 091 Reissue Patent. Azzar is the owner of Hollymatic. Sterling is a processor of protein food products and a customer of Hollymatics products. 7. On October 17, 1995, U.S. Patent No. 5,458,952 (the 952 Patent) was duly and

legally issued naming inventors Richard C. Wagner and James D. Azzar, and disclosing and claiming an invention entitled SHEET-FORMING PAPER AND METHOD OF FABRICATING SAME (attached as Exhibit 2).

8.

On February 9, 1999, the 091 Reissue Patent was issued upon petition for reissue

of the 952 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 251. 8. Hollymatic has manufactured and sold its patented paper for several years. This

product is covered by one or more of the claims of the 091 Reissue Patent. 9. Sterling is at least using and/or selling a paper product that infringes at least claim

17 of the 091 Reissue Patent. COUNT I PATENT INFRINGEMENT OF THE 091 REISSUE PATENT 10. Complaint. 11. Plaintiffs are the owners of all right, title, and interest in and to the 091 Reissue Plaintiffs reassert and incorporate herein by reference paragraphs 1-9 of this

Patent, and have the right to sue and recover for all infringements thereof, including the right to recover for past infringement. 12. Sterling has, in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271, infringed the 091 Reissue Patent at

least by using, offering for sale, and/or selling the invention claimed in the 091 Reissue Patent, and/or by directing, contributing to, and/or inducing others to do the same. Such infringement has caused and will continue to cause irreparable damage to Plaintiffs, which will continue unless enjoined by this Court. 13. Upon information and belief, such infringement of the 091 Reissue Patent was

and continues to be willful, deliberate, and in knowing disregard of Plaintiffs patent rights. Plaintiffs have complied with the marking requirements of 35 U.S.C. 287 and have repeatedly given actual notice to Sterling of the 0912 Reissue Patent, but Sterlings activities have not ceased.

14.

Plaintiffs have in the past been damaged and continue to suffer irreparable injury

as a result of Sterlings actions. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that this Court grant judgment as follows: A. B. that Sterling has infringed United States Letters Patent No. Re. 36,091; that Plaintiffs be awarded damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284, including treble

damages for willful infringement, as provided by 35 U.S.C. 284, together with prejudgment interest and costs; C. that Plaintiffs recover their reasonable attorneys fees and costs incurred in this

litigation, including a declaration that this is an exceptional case, and an award of reasonable attorneys fees and litigation expenses to Plaintiffs, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285; D. that an injunction issue enjoining Sterling from continued infringement of the

091 Reissue Patent; and E. any and all such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and appro-

priate, including the costs of this action. JURY DEMAND Plaintiffs demand a jury for all matters triable thereby. Respectfully submitted, Dated: August 30, 2011 s/Steven L. Underwood Steven L. Underwood (P60111) Matthew J. Gipson (P60169) PRICE HENEVELD LLP 695 Kenmoor, S.E. | P.O. Box 2567 Grand Rapids, Michigan 49501 Tel: 616.949.9610 Fax: 616.957.8196 sunderwood@priceheneveld.com mgipson@priceheneveld.com

Paul A. McCarthy RHOADES MCKEE PC 161 Ottawa Avenue, N.W., Suite 600 Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503 Tel: 616.235.3500 Fax: 616.233.5269 pamccart@rhoadesmckee.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs