HID Global et. al. v. Somerli Pinnock et. al.

7/27/2019 HID Global et. al. v. Somerli Pinnock et. al.

1/30

HID GLOBAL CORPORATION, aDelaware corporation; and ASSAABLOY AB, a Swedish LimitedLiability Company,Plaintiffs,

VS.SOMERLI PINNOCK, an individual;JOSEPH PINNOCK, an individual;PROXCARDPRO.COM, an entity ofunknown form; and DOES 1 through 10,inclusive,

Defendants.

Michael T. Hornak (State Bar No. 81936)email: [email protected] P. Oines (State Bar No. 145016)email: [email protected] A. Chapin (State Bar No. 232885)email: bcha Dingrutan.comRUTAN & TUCKER, LLP611 Anton Boulevard, Fourteenth FloorCosta Mesa, California 92626-1931Telephone: 714-641-5100Facsimile: 714-546-9035Attorneys for Plaintiffs HID GLOBALCORPORATION and ASSA ABLOY AB

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTCENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

1234567

910111213141516171819202122232425262728

Case No. SACV13 - 0115 5 PSG (JEMx)COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIONAND DAMAGES FOR1 . PATENT INFRINGEMENT2 . T OEM ' INFRINGEMENT3 . FALSE ADVERTISING4. FAIR COMPETITIONDEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

A

2118/025100-00075957619,1 a07/30/13

COMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT, ETC.

Case 8:13-cv-01155-PSG-JEM Document 1 Filed 07/31/13 Page 1 of 30 Page ID #:17


2/30

Plaintiffs HID GLOBAL CORPORATION ("HID") and ASSA ABLOY AB("AAAB") (collectively, "Plaintiffs"), for their Complaint against defendantsSOMERLI PINNOCK, JOSEPH PINNOCK, PROXCARDPRO.COM , and DOE S 1through 10, inclusive (collectively, "Defendants"), allege as follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE1 . This is an action involving claims of, among other things, patent

infringement under Title 35, United States Code, and trademark and unfaircompetition under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051, et seq. This Court hasjurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a) and (b).

2 . Venue is proper with this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and(c), as Defendants reside in this judicial district, a substantial part of the events,omissions and acts which are the subject matter of this action occurred within theCentral District of California, and a substantial part of the property that is thesubject of the action is located in the Central District of California.

3 . Defendants have operated a website at www.proxcardpro.com , onwhich they have advertised, offered to sell and sold the products that are allegedherein to infringe upon Plaintiffs' intellectual property described below. Recently,Defendants apparently took down that website after Plaintiffs obtained anAdministrative Panel Decision from the World Intellectual Property Organization("WIPO"), finding that the domain www.proxcardpro.com is confusingly similar toPlaintiff's "PROXCARD" trademark discussed further below. Shortly thereafter,Defendants began operating their business from www.cardsandkeyfobs.com . At thisnew domain address, Defendants continued advertising, offering to sell and sellingthe infringing products described below. At both of these domain addresses,customers can shop for, buy, and have delivered to anywhere in the United States,including in this Judicial District, the infringing products that are the subject of thisaction. On information and belief, Defendants have delivered products to thisJudicial District,2118/025100-00075957619.1 a07/30/13

COMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT

1234567

9101 11213141516171819202122232425262728



3/30

THE PARTIES4. HID is a Delaware corporation having its principal place of business

located at 15370 Barranca Parkway, Irvine, California.5 . AAAB is a Limited Liability Company established under the laws of

Sweden and having a principal place of business in Stockholm, Sweden. AAAB isHID's parent company.

6 . Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that SomerliPinnock is an individual who lives in Idaho.

7 . Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that JosephPinnock is an individual who lives in Idaho.

8 . Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, thatPROXCARDPRO.COM is an entity of unknown form, and is owned and operatedby Somerli Pinnock. Defendants' address is P.O. Box 232, Parker, ID 83438.

9 . Defendants are subject to the jurisdiction of this Court because theyoperate the two websites identified below through which anyone in the UnitedStates, including in this Judicial District, can access the website, order the productsthat are the subject of this action, and have them shipped to anywhere in the UnitedStates. On information and belief, Defendants have sold the products that are thesubject of this action to residents of this judicial district, and have delivered suchproduct to this judicial district.

1 0 . The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associateor otherwise, of defendants DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, are unknown toPlaintiffs, which therefore sue said defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiffswill seek leave of this Court to amend this Complaint to include their proper namesand capacities when they have been ascertained. Plaintiffs are informed and believe,and based thereon allege, that each of the fictitiously named defendants participatedin and is in some manner responsible for the acts described in this Complaint andthe damage resulting therefrom.2118/025100-00075957619.1 a07/30/13 -2 -

COMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT , ETC.

23456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728



4/30

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

1 1 . Plaintiffs allege on information and belief that each of the defendantsnamed herein as Does 1 through 10, inclusive, performed, participated in, or abettedin some manner, the acts alleged herein, proximately caused the damages allegedhereinbelow, and are liable to Plaintiffs for the damages and relief sought herein.

1 2 . Plaintiffs allege on information and belief that, in performing the actsand omissions alleged herein, and at all times relevant hereto, each of theDefendants was the agent and employee of each of the other Defendants and was atall times acting within the course and scope of such agency and employment withthe knowledge and approval of each of the other Defendants.

HID'S BUSINESS1 3 . HID is a leader in the delivery of secure identity solutions for millions

of customers throughout the world. HID's identity solutions are used in a variety ofapplications, including physical access control, logical access control, access cardprinting and personalization, highly secure government identification and animalidentification. HID's products, solutions and services are sold through a well-established network of OEMs, developers, systems integrators and distributorsworldwide. End users of HID's products, solutions and services include businessesand organizations in virtually all industry sectors, including government, healthcare,retail, industrial, commercial, airports, ports, finance and education.

1 4. HID's physical access control products and solutions are sold underHID' s well-known brands, including iCLASSO, SmartIDO, HIDO Prox andIndalat Prox. These industry leading products, include radio frequencyidentification ("RFID") readers and credentials that operate at low frequency(i.e., 125 kHz), high frequency (i.e., 13.56 MHz), or both.

DEFENDANTS' INFRINGING AND UNLAWFUL CONDUCT1 5 . Defendants have launched a business pursuant to which they are

egregiously advertising, offering to sell and selling products that are blatant knock-offs of Plaintiffs' products in violation of Plaintiffs' intellectual property rights.

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT2118/025100-0007NFRINGEMENT, ETC.

5957619.1 a07/30/13 3 -



5/30

1 6 . For example, Plaintiffs own United States patent no. D647,810 (the"810 Patent"), entitled "Key Tag." A true and correct copy of the '810 Patent isattached hereto as Exhibit A. The '810 Patent issued on November 1, 2011.Defendants are advertising, offering to sell and selling a key tag that is nearlyidentical to the key tag disclosed in the '810 Patent and, therefore, infringes the '810patent.

1 7 . Additionally, HID has sold since at least 1999 an RFID reader with aparticular product configuration as shown, for example, in United States TrademarkRegistration No. 4,051,851 (the "851 Registration"). A true and correct copy of the'851 Registration is attached hereto as Exhibit B. HID's use of this trade dress hasbeen continuous and exclusive since that time. HID has expended a significantamount of money and resources in advertising, promoting and selling these readers.This reader configuration is also protected by United States Trademark RegistrationNo. 4,051,821 (the '821 Registration"), a true and correct copy of which is attachedas Exhibit C. Defendants are advertising, offering to sell and selling RFID readersthat are virtually identical to HID's trade dress, as depicted in the '851 and '821registrations. As a result, Defendants have infringed and are infringing Plaintiffs''851 and '821 registrations.

1 8 . HID also owns numerous registered and unregistered trademarks thatDefendants use in commerce by imbedding them in meta tags and/or using them assearch "keywords" on or in connection with Defendants websites referred to below.For exam ple, HID has for numerous years used the marks "HIDED ,""DUOPROXO," "PROXKEYO," "ISOPROVD" and "MICROPROX," amongothers. Plaintiffs own United States Trademark Registrations for each of thesemarks. Plaintiffs' HID mark is registered as no. 2,249,625, which issued on June1, 1999. Plaintiffs' DUOPROX0 mark is registered as no. 2,106,847, which issuedon October 21, 1997. Plaintiffs' PROXKEY mark is registered as no. 2,356,123,which issued on June 6, 2000. Plaintiffs' ISOPROX mark is registered as no.

COMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT, ETC.-4-

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

2118/025100-00075957619.1 a07130/13



6/30

2,106,844, which issued on October 21, 1997. Plaintiffs' MICROPROX mark isregistered as no. 2,877, 609, which issued on August 24, 2004. Defendants' use ofthese marks is likely to cause confusion and, therefore, constitutes trademarkinfringement under the Lanham Act.

1 9 . HID for numerous years has used continuously and exclusively certainnumbers to identify certain of its products, including for example, 1336, 1346, 1386,1391 and 1586. HID has expended a significant amount of money and resources inadvertising, promoting and selling these products under these numbers. As such, theconsuming public recognizes these numbers as identifying the source of theseproducts, namely HID. These numbers are protected trademarks. Defendants useeach of these marks in commerce by imbedding them in meta tags and/or using themas search "keywords" on or in connection with Defendants websites referred tobelow. Defendants also use these marks in commerce by identifying their ownproducts with Plaintiffs' marks. Defendants use of these marks is likely to causeconfusion and constitutes infringement under the Lanham Act.

20 . Additionally, since at least 1986, HID has used the trademark"PROXCARD" in connection with certain products. HID' s use of this trademarkhas been continuous and exclusive since that time. HID has expended a significantamount of money and resources in advertising, promoting and selling productsunder the PROXCARD mark. Plaintiffs own United States Trademark RegistrationNo. 1,727,117 (the "117 Registration") for the PROXCARD mark. Defendantshave used and are using Plaintiffs' PROXCARD mark in connection withDefendants' business, including in its domain address www.proxcardpro.com . OnMay 17, 2013, Plaintiff Assa Abloy AB filed a Complaint with WIPO relating toDefendants' domain www.proxcardpro.com . On July 11, 2013, WIPO issued anAdministrative Panel Decision finding that Defendants' use of "proxcardpro" in itsdomain is confusingly similar to Plaintiffs' PROXCARD mark, and thatDefendants' use of the mark was in bad faith. Defendants' domain also violates

COMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT, ETC.-5 -

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

2118/025100-00075957619.1 a07/30/13



7/30

Plaintiffs' trademark rights under the Lanham Act.21 . In addition to the patent and trademark infringements described above,

Defendants have made, and continue to make numerous false and misleadingstatements about their products. For example, Defendants claim that their productsare "HID compatible," "ProxCard II compatible," "ProxKey II compatible," IsoProxI compatible" and "DuoProx II compatible."

22 . These statements are false and misleading. First, the term "HIDcompatible" is false and misleading because, on information and belief, the productsabout which this statement is made are not fully compatible with the technologies atissue. Moreover, it is nonsensical to identify a product as "HID compatible,"because "HID" identifies the entity HID Global Corporation, which sells numerousaccess security and other products.

23 . It is also false and misleading to use the ten - ns "ProxCard IIcompatible," "ProxKey II compatible," IsoProx I compatible" and "DuoProx IIcompatible." "ProxCard II," "ProxKey II," "IsoProx I" and "DuoProx II" refer tocertain RFID cards sold by HID. It is nonsensical to state that knock of cards soldby Defendants are "compatible" with H1D's RFID cards.

24. On information and belief, these false and misleading statements have atendency to deceive, and have actually deceived, a substantial segment of theconsuming public or others. Such deception is material and likely to influencepurchasing decisions.

25 . Defendants have made these statement in interstate commerce, andhave caused Defendants' falsely advertised goods to be sold in interstate commerce.On information and belief, HID has been injured by such false statements by thedirect diversion of sales and by harm to HID's business, reputation and good will.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF(Patent Infringement '81 0 Patent)

26 . Plaintiffs reallege each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1COMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT, ETC.

-6-

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

2118/025100-00075957619.1 a07130/13



8/30

through 25, inclusive, and incorporate them herein by this reference.27 . Defendants make, use, sell, offer for sale, and/or import into the United

States products that infringe the design disclosed in the '810 Patent.28 . Plaintiffs have marked relevant products and/or product literature with

the '810 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 287. On information and belief, Defendantshave had actual knowledge of the '810 Patent before and during their infringementof the '810 Patent. On information and belief, Defendants' infringement of the'810 Patent has been and will continue to be willful, wanton and deliberate with fullknowledge and awareness of Plaintiffs' patent rights.

29 . Plaintiffs have been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial,but which is no less than a reasonable royalty, and irreparably injured byDefendants' infringing activities. Plaintiffs will continue to be so damaged andirreparably injured unless such infringing activities are enjoined by this Court.

3 0 . Additionally, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 289, Plaintiffs are entitled toDefendants' profits associated with Defendants' infringement.

3 1 . Moreover, in light of the willful nature of Defendants' conduct, thiscase should be deemed "exceptional" under the Patent Laws. As a result, in additionto damages, Plaintiffs are entitled to enhanced damages and their attorneys' fees andcosts incurred herein.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF(Federal Trademark Infringement 1 5 U.S.C. 111 4)

3 2 . Plaintiffs reallege each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1through 25, inclusive, and incorporate them herein by this reference.

3 3 . Defendants' unauthorized use of Plaintiffs' design marks protected bythe '851 and '821 registrations, and Plaintiffs' PROXCARD, HID, DUOPROX,PROXKEY, ISOPROX and MICROPROX marks constitutes trademarkinfringement under the Lanham Act. These acts have caused significant damages,including lost sales and profits in an amount to be determined, and irreparable harm

COMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT, ETC.-7-

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

2118/025100-00075957619.1 a07/30/13



9/30

to Plaintiffs. Moreover, Defendants' conduct has caused and will cause significantharm to Plaintiffs' reputation and goodwill which Plaintiffs have established throughyears of effort and expense.

3 4. Defendants' conduct has been willful with full knowledge of Plaintiffs'trademark rights. Defendants will continue such willful and intentional conductunless enjoined by this Court. In light of the willful nature of Defendants' conduct,this is an "exceptional" case under the Lanham Act, which entitles Plaintiffs to theirattorneys' fees in this action.

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF(Federal Trademark Infringement 1 5 U.S.C. 11 25 )


3 6 . Defendants' unauthorized use of Plaintiffs' 1336, 1346, 1386, 1391 and1586 marks constitutes trademark infringement under the Lanham Act. These actshave caused significant damages, including lost sales and profits in an amount to bedetermined, and irreparable harm to Plaintiffs. Moreover, Defendants' conduct hascaused and will cause significant harm to Plaintiffs' reputation and goodwill whichPlaintiffs have established through years of effort and expense.

3 7 . Defendants' conduct has been willful with full knowledge of Plaintiffs'trademark rights. Defendants will continue such willful and intentional conductunless enjoined by this Court. In light of the willful nature of Defendants' conduct,this is an "exceptional" case under the Lanham Act, which entitles Plaintiffs to theirattorneys' fees in this action.

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF(False Advertising and Unfair Competition 15 U.S.C. 11 25 )


3 9 . Defendants' conduct described above constitutes a violation of 15COMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT, ETC.

-8 -

123456789

101 11213141516171819202122232425262728

2118/025100-00075957619.1 a07/30/13



10/30

U.S.C. 1125 of the Lanham Act. These acts have caused significant damages,including lost sales and profits in an amount to be determined, and irreparable harmto Plaintiffs. Moreover, Defendants' conduct has caused and will cause significantharm to Plaintiffs' reputation and goodwill which Plaintiffs have established throughyears of effort and expense.

40 . Defendants' aforesaid acts constitute deliberate and intentionalviolations of 15 U.S.C. 1125, causing damages, as well as irreparable harm toPlaintiffs for which there is no adequate remedy at law. Given the willful nature ofDefendants' conduct, this is an "exceptional" case under the Lanham Act, entitlingPlaintiffs to their attorneys' fees incurred herein. Plaintiffs are informed andbelieve, and thereon alleges that unless restrained by this Court, Defendants willcontinue the acts herein complained of.

FIFTH CLAIM FO R R ELIEF(Common Law Unfair Competition)

41 . Plaintiffs reallege each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1through 25, inclusive, and incorporate them herein by this reference.

42 . The foregoing acts and conduct of Defendants constitute unfaircompetition under California common law.

43 . Defendants' acts have caused damage to Plaintiffs, including incidentaland general damages, lost profits, and out-of-pocket expenses in an amount to bedetermined, and irreparable harm to Plaintiffs. Moreover, Defendants' conduct hascaused and will cause significant harm to Plaintiffs' reputation and goodwill whichPlaintiffs have established through years of effort and expense.

44. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, thatDefendants' conduct was done with a conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiffsand with the intent to vex, injure, or annoy such as to constitute oppression, fraud, ormalice under California Civil Code section 3294 and/or the common law ofCalifornia, entitling Plaintiffs to punitive damages in an amount appropriate to

COMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT, ETC.

-9 -

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

2118/025100-00075957619.1 a07/30/13



11/30

punish or set an example of Defendants.45 . As a proximate result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintiffs have suffered

and will suffer immediate and irreparable injury not compensable by moneydamages, such that preliminary and permanent injunctions should issue againstDefendants. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege that unlessrestrained by this Court, Defendants will continue the acts herein complained of.

SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF(California Business And Professions Code 17200 et seq.)

46 . Plaintiffs reallege each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs 1through 25, inclusive, and incorporate them herein by this reference.

47 . The foregoing acts and conduct of Defendants constitute unfair tradepractices and unfair competition under California Business and Professions CodeSection 17200 et seq. and have no valid or legitimate purpose except to benefitDefendants at the expense of Plaintiffs.

48 . Defendants' acts have caused damage to Plaintiffs, including incidentaland general damages, lost profits, and out-of-pocket expenses. Defendants shouldtherefore be required to disgorge and restore to Plaintiffs all profits earned byDefendants from their unlawful conduct. Plaintiffs further seek an injunction toenjoin Defendants from continuing said unfair business practices.

PRAYER FOR RELIEFWHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants as follows:1 . That Defendants, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees,

and all persons and entities in active concert or participation with them, or any ofthem, be preliminarily and permanently enjoined and restrained from furtherinfringement of the '810 Patent;

2 . A judgment by the Court that Defendants have infringed and areinfringing the '810 Patent;

3 . An award of damages for infringement of the '810 Patent, andCOMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT, ETC.-10-

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

2118/025100-00075957619.1 a07/30/13



12/30

Defendants' profits, together with prejudgment interest and costs, said damages tobe trebled by reason of the intentional and willful nature of Defendants'infringement, as provided by 35 U.S.C. 284;

4. A determination that this case is "exceptional" under 35 U.S.C. 285,and an award of Plaintiffs' reasonable attorneys' fees;

5 . That Defendants, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees,and all persons and entities in active concert or participation with them, or any ofthem, be preliminarily and permanently enjoined and restrained from infringing orotherwise using without Plaintiffs' authorization Plaintiffs' marks by manufacturingor causing to be manufactured, by purchasing or causing to be purchased, byadvertising or causing to be advertised, or by offering for sale or selling goods orservices bearing or incorporating Plaintiffs' marks or any confusingly similar markor design, including any use in a domain name, meta tags or keyword advertising;

6 . That Defendants be ordered to transfer the domain namewww.proxcardpro.com to P laintiffs;

7 . That Defendants be required to forthwith deliver up to Plaintiffs fordestruction any and all merchandise in their possession, custody, or control thatwould otherwise violate any of the aforesaid injunctions;

8 . That Defendants be further required to deliver up to Plaintiffs fordestruction any and all boxes, containers, labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers,advertising, promotional and other material in their possession, custody or controldisplaying or promoting any merchandise bearing or incorporating Plaintiffs' Marksor any confusingly similar mark or design;

9 . That Defendants be ordered pursuant to Section 34 of the Lanham Act,15 U.S.C. 1116(a), to file with the Court and serve upon Plaintiffs' counsel, withinthirty (30) days of the entry of the injunctions and orders prayed for herein, a writtenreport under oath setting forth in detail the form and manner in which they havecomplied with said injunctions and orders;2118/025100-00075957619.1 a07/30/13


123456789

101 11213141516171819202122232425262728



13/30

1 0 . That Defendants account for all profits realized as a consequence oftheir unlawful acts of deliberate and intentional trademark infringement, unfaircompetition and other violations, as alleged herein, and that the amount of profitsrealized by Defendants by reason of their unlawful acts be trebled, as provided bylaw pursuant to Section 35 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1117;

1 1 . That Plaintiffs be awarded damages in the full amount Plaintiffs havesustained as a consequence of Defendants' acts, trebled where provided by law,pursuant to Section 35 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1117;

1 2 . That Plaintiffs have and recover from Defendants reasonable attorneys'fees, costs and disbursements of this action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;

1 3 . That this case be deemed "exceptional" under the Lanham Act;1 4. That the Court grant Plaintiffs restitution from Defendants by

disgorgement of all profits earned through unlawful sales of infringing goods;1 5 . That Defendants, their officers, directors, agents, servants, employees,

and all persons and entities in active concert or participation with them, or any ofthem, be preliminarily and permanently enjoined and restrained from publishingfalse or misleading statements, as alleged herein;

1 6 . That the Court grant Plaintiffs restitution from Defendants bydisgorgement of all profits earned through Defendants conduct;

1 7 . For restitution of any money or property Defendants wrongfullyobtained, pursuant Business and Professions Code section 17203;

1 8 . For punitive damages;1 9 . That any monetary award include pre- and post-judgment interest at the

highest rate allowed by law;20 . For costs of suit; and21 . For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

2118/025100-00075957619.1 a07/30/13 -12-


123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728



14/30

onal P inesAttorneys for Plaintiffs HID GLOBALCORPORATION and ASSA ABLOYAB

Dated: July 31, 2013 RUTAN & TUCKER, LLPMICHAEL T. HORNAKRONALD P. OINESBRADLEY A. CHAPIN123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

2118/025100-00075957619.1 a07/30/13 -13-COMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT , ETC.



15/30

By:Ronald P. OinesAttorneys for Plaintiffs HID GLOBALCORPORATION and ASSA ABLOYAB

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIALPursuant to Local Rule 38-1 of the Local Rules of the United States District

Court for the Central District of California, Plaintiffs hereby demand a jury trial inthis action.Dated: July 31, 2013 RUTAN & TUCKER, LLPMICHAEL T. HORNAKRONALD P. OINESBRADLEY A. CHAPIN

2118/025100-00075957619,1 a07/30/13 -14-COMPLAINT FOR PATENTINFRINGEMENT, ETC.

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728



16/30

EXHI IT A



17/30

(12) United States DesignBohrer atent (10 ) Patent No.:S D647,810 S(45) Date of Patent:* Nov. 1, 201 11 I I I I I I I I II I(1, 5) Term:4 Years(56) References Cited

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1US00D647810S

(54) KEY TAG(75) Inventor: Jason Christopher Rohrer, L,adera

Ranch, CA (US)(73) Assignee: Assa Abloy AB (SE)

(21) Appl. No.: 29/359,904(22) Filed:pr. 16, 2010( 5 1 ) LOC (9) Cl .10-05( 5 2 ) U.S. CI.D10/106 .9(58) Field of Classification SearchD10/106.9 ,

D10/106,91; D8/35 4, 35 6, 364, 373 , 380 ;D13113 7.1 , 137.2, 138.1; 340/572.8, 572.1 ,340/578.9 , 568.1 , 825.5 4

See application file for complete search history.

U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS5,617,751 A * 4/1997 Song701456RD431,341 S * 9/2000 DiPaolo et al,D99/346,248,451 B1* 6/2001 Smith428/542.2D500,808 S * 1/2005 HowardD20/28 D548,956 S * 8/2007 RimonD3/207D635,483 S * 4/2011 Charles et al.D11/792010 /0328071 A U ' ` 12/2010 Schmidt et a l.340/568.1FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTSRU2821/ 2006OTHER PUBLICATIONSOfficial Action with Eng lish translation for Russia Patent ApplicationNo. 201050 3049, i ssued May 16, 2011 5 pages.cited by examinerPrimary Examiner Caron D VeynarAssistant Examiner George D Kirschbaum(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm Sheridan Ross P.C.(57)LAIMThe ornamental design for a key tag, as shown and described,DESCRIPTIONFIG. 1 is a perspective view of a key tag;FIG . 2 is a front plan view thereof;FIG. 3 is a right side elevational view thereof;FIG. 4 is a left side elevational view thereof;FIG. 5 is a top elevational view thereof;FIG. 6 is a bottom elevational view thereof; and,FIG. 7 is a back plan view thereof.The portions of the key tag illustrated in broken lines form nopart of the claimed design.1 Claim, 3 Drawing Sheets

O W . B T _ 1 1 :\A :Case 8:13-cv-01155-PSG-JEM Document 1 Filed 07/31/13 Page 17 of 30 Page ID #:33


18/30

U.S. Patentov. 1, 2011heet 1 of 3S D647,810 SFig. 2

E , X H 1 I TLJCase 8:13-cv-01155-PSG-JEM Document 1 Filed 07/31/13 Page 18 of 30 Page ID #:34


19/30

U.S. Patentov. 1, 2011heet 2 of 3S D647 ,810 SFig.

Fig. 5) jFig. 6

E X H BTi L P A 1 7



20/30

U.S. Patentov. 1, 2011heet 3 of 3S D647,810 SFig.

L O B T _ 8t,



21/30

EXHIE r B



22/30

n t t g b fptateo Vatent anb Trabernath W te

Reg. No. 4,051,85 1Registered Nov. 8, 2011Int. Cl.: 9

ASSA A141,0Y AR (SWEDEN CORPORA TION)P.O. BOX 70340, SE-107 23STOCKH OLM ; SWEDENFOR : R A DIO FR E Q UE NCY IDE NTIFICATION (R E ID) R E ADE R S, IN CLASS 9 (U .S . CLS.21 ,23 , 26 , 36 AND 38) .

TRADEMARKIRST TJSE 5-27-1999 ; IN COMMERCE 5 -27-1999 .PRINCIPAL REGISTERHE MARK CONSISTS OF A THREE DIMF,NSTONAL CONFTGURATION OF AN RFDR E ADE R COMPR ISING A R E CTANGULAR I IOUSING W ITII A FR O NT FACE , TWO SIDEEACHS AND TOPAND BOTTOM . THE FRONT EACH INCLUDESA TOPANGLED SURFACE,AND A BOTTOM ANGLED SURFACE WITH THE SIDE FACES TAPERED AT THE TOPAND BOTTOM AT THE ANGLED PORTIONS OE' THE FRONT LACE. ALL FORWARD FA-CING EDGES THAT TRANSITION BETWEEN SURFACES ARE ROUNDED. SIX HORIZONT-AL GR OO VE S AR E FOR ME D WITH IN TH E FR ONT FACE WITH TH E SE COND GR OVEFROM THE TOP BEING SHORTER AND A CIRCLE PLACED TO THE RIGHT OF THESHORTER GROO VE. A GAP IS SET BETWEEN THE BOTTO M FOUR LINES AND THE TOPTWO LINE S. TH E MATTE R SH OWN IN BR OKE N OR DOTTE D LINE S IS NOT PAR T OFTHE MARK AND SERVES ONLY TO SHOW THE POSITION OR PLACEMENT OF THEMARK .SEC. 2(E).SER. NO. 85-142 ; 173, FILED 9-30-2010.ADA HAN, EXAMINING ATTORNEY .

Director of the United Stales Patent and Taidernmic Offic

A M B I T



23/30

REQUIREMENTS TO MAINTAIN YOUR FEDERALTRADEMARK REGISTRATIONWARNING: YOUR REGISTRATION WILL BE CANCELLED IF YOU DO NOT FILE THE

DOCUMENTS BELOW DURING THE SPECIFIED TIME PERIODS.Requirements in the First Ten Years*What and When to File:

First Filing Deadline: You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) between the5 th and 6th years after the registration date, Se e 15 U.S.C. 1058, 1141k, If the declaration isaccepted, the registration will continue in force for the remainder of the ten-year period, calculatedfrom the registration date, unless cancelled by an order of the Com missioner for Trademarks or afederal court.Second Filing Deadline: You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) and anApplication for Renew al between the 9 th and 10 th years after the registration date.*See 15U .S.C. 1059.

Requirements in Successive Ten-Year Periods*What and When to File:

You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) and an Application for Renewal betweenevery 9th and 10 th-year period, calculated from the registration date.*

Grace Period Filings*The abo ve documents w ill be accepted as timely if filed within six months after the deadlines listed abovewith the paym ent of an additional fee.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will NOT send you any future notice orreminder of these filing requirements.

*ATTE NTION IVIADRID PRO TOC OL REG ISTRA NTS: T he holder of an internat ional registrat ion withan extension of protection to tile United States under the Madrid Protocol must timely file the Declarationsof Use (or Ex cusable Notruse) referenced above directly with the USPTO . The time periods for filing arebased on the U.S. registration date (not the international registration date). The deadlines and grace periodsfor the Declarations of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) are identical to those for nationally issued registrations.See 15 U.S.C. 10 5 8, 11 41k. How ever, owners of international registrations do not file renewal applicationsat the USPTO. Instead, the holder must file a renewal of the underlying international registration at theInternational Bureau of the World Intellectual Property Organization, under Article 7 of the M adrid Protocol,before the expiration of each ten-year tern of protection, calculated from the date of the internationalregistration. See 15 U.S . C. 11 41j. For more information and renewal forms for the international registration,see http://www .wipo.int/madrid/en/.NOTE: Fees and requirements for maintaining registrations are subject to change. Please check theUSPTO website for further information. With the exception of renewal applications for registeredextensions of protection, you can file the registration maintenance documents referenced above onlineat littp://www .uspto,gov.

Page: 2 / RN # 4,051,851



24/30

EXHI IT C



25/30

t e a t1 L b i t t e b #tetteO Vateut anb rabentath

O c I A A : o tDirector of the linked Slates Patent and fradernark Office

ASSA AF1LOY AB (SWEDEN CORPORATION)P.O. BOX 70340, SE-107 23STOCKHOLM, SWEDENFOR : R ADIO FR E Q UE NCY IDE NTIFICATION (R E E ) ) R E ADE R S, IN CLASS 9 (U .S . CLS.21 , 23 , 26 , 36 AND 38) .FIRST TJSE 5 -27-1999; IN COMMER CE 5-27-1999.THE MARK CONSISTS OF SIX HORIZONTA L LINES ANT) A CIRCLE, WHERE THE LINESECOND FROM THE TOP IS SIIORTER THAN TILE REMAINING LINES, AND IIAS ACIRCLE TO THE RIGHT. TRH DOTTED LINES ARE NOT PART OF NTH:MARK AND SERVEONLY TO SI IOW T IE PLACEME NT OF T IE MAR K UPON TIE FR ONT OF TIE PR ODUCT.SEC. 2(F).SER. NO. 85-136 ,450 , FILED 9-23-2010 ,ADA HAN, EXA_MINING ATTORNEY

Reg. No. 4,051,821Registered Nov. 8, 2011Int.TRADEMARKPRINCIPAL REGISTER

E X H I B I TCase 8:13-cv-01155-PSG-JEM Document 1 Filed 07/31/13 Page 25 of 30 Page ID #:41


26/30

REQUIREMENTS TO MAINTAIN YOUR FEDERALTRADEMARK REGISTRATION

WARNING: YOUR REGISTRATION WILL BE CANCELLED IF YOU DO NOT FILE THEDOCUMENTS BELOW DURING THE SPECIFIED TIME PERIODS.

Requirements in the First Ten Years*What and When to File:

First Filing Deadline: You must file a Declaration of Usc (or Excusable Nonuse) between the5 th and 6th years after the registration date. See 15 U.S.C. 1058, 1141k. If the declaration isaccepted, the registration will continue in force for the remainder of the ten-year period, calculatedfrom the registration date, unless cancelled by an order of the Commissioner for Trademarks or afederal court,Second Filing Deadline: You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) and anApplication for Renew al between the 9 th and 10 th years after the registration date.*

See 15 U .S.C. 1059.

Requirements in Successive Ten-Year Poiods*What and When to File:You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) and an Application for Renewal betweenevery 9th and 10 th-year period, calculated from the registration date.*

Grace Period Filings*The above documents will be accepted as timely if filed within six months after the deadlines listed abovewith the payment of an additional fee,

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will NOT send you any future notice orreminder of these filing requirements.

*ATTENT ION M ADRID PROTO COL REGISTR ANTS: T he holder of an international registrat ion withan extension of protection to the U nited States under the M adrid Protocol must timely file the Declarationsof Use (or Excusable N onuse) ieferenced above directly with the USPT O. The time periods for filing arebased on the U.S. registration date not the international registration date). The deadlines and grace periodsfor the Declarations of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) are identical to those for nationally issued registrations.Se e 15 U S. c. 1058, 1 lit 1 k. However, owners of international registrations do not file renewal applicationsat the USPTO. Instead, the holder must file a renewal of the underlying international registration at theInternational Bureau of the W orld Intellectual Property Organization, under Article 7 of the Madrid Protocol,before the expiration of each ten-year term of protection, calculated from the date of die internationalregistration See 15U .S.C. 1141 .j. For more information and renewal forms for the international registration,see http://www wipo.int/madrid/en.NOTE: Fees and requirements for maintaining registrations are subject to change. Please check theUSPTO website for further information. With the exception of renewal applications for registeredextensions of pmtection, you can file the registration maintenance documents referenced above onlineat littp://www.uspto.gov .

Page: 2 / RN #4,051 ,821

OBIT



27/30

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTCENT A L DISTACT OF CAL:70 IA

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE GE FOR DISCOVERY

This case has been assigned to District Judge Philip S. Gutierrez and the assigneddiscovery M agistrate Judge is John E . M cDermott.The case number on all documents filed with the Court should read as follows:

CV13- 1155 PSG (JEMx)Pursuant to General Order 05 -07 of the United States District Court for the CentralDistrict of California, the Magistrate Judge has been designated to hear discovery related

motions.

All discovery related motions should be noticed on the calendar of the Magistrate Judge

NOTICE TO COUNSELA copy of this notice must be served with the summons and complaint on all defendants (if a removal action isfiled, a copy of this notice must be served on all plaintiffs).Subsequent documents must be filed at the following location:Li Western Division312 N. Spring St., Rm. G-8Los Angeles, CA 90012

u Southern Division411 West Fourth St., Rm. 1-053Santa Ana, CA 92701-4516[I Eastern Division3470 Twelfth St., Rm. 134Riverside, CA 92501

Failure to f i le at the proper location wil l result in your documen ts being returned to you.

CV-18 (03/06)O TICE OF ASSIGNMENT TO UNITED STAT ES MAGISTRAT E JUDGE FO R DISCOVERYCase 8:13-cv-01155-PSG-JEM Document 1 Filed 07/31/13 Page 27 of 30 Page ID #:43


28/30

HID GLOBAL CORPORATION, a Delawarecorporation; and ASSA ABLOY AB, a SwedishLimited Liability Company,

PLAINTIFF(S)V .

SOMERLI PINNOCK, an individual; JOSEPHP1NNOCK, an individual; PROXCARDPRO.COM , anentity of unknown form; and DOES 1 through 10,inclusive, DEFENDANT(S).

CASE NUMBERSACV13 - 0115 5 PSG ( IF :gx)

SUMMONS

Michael T. Hornak SBN 81936, [email protected] P. Oines SBN 145016, [email protected] A. Chapin SBN 232885, [email protected] & TUCKER, LLP611 Anton Boulevard, Fourteenth FloorCosta Mesa, CA 92626Telephone: (714) 641-5100 / Fax: (714) 546-9035Attorneys for Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTCENT L DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TO: DEFENDANT(S):A lawsuit has been filed against you.Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it), you

must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached M complaint amended complaintI I counterclaimcross-claim or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answeror motion must be served on the plaintiffs attorney, Michael T. Hornal(EsA adleyA. Chapin, Esq., Rutan & Tucker, LLP, whose address is 611 Anton Boulevard, Fourreenth Floor, Costa Mesa,CA 92626. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in thecomplaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

Clerk, U.S. District CourtD O D J I E L A GDated:y: Deputy Clerk

(Seal of the Court)

[Use 60 d ays if the defendant is the United States or a U nited States agency, or is an officer or employee of the Un ited States. Allowed60 days by R ule 12 (a)(3)1.

CV-01A (10/11 UMMONS American LegalNet, Inc.www.FormsWorkFlow.com

3



29/30

UNITED S ES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICTALIFORNIACIVIL COVER SHEETCheck box if you are representing yourself C 1 )HID GLOBAL CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation;and ASSA ABLOY AB, a Swedish Limited LiabilityCompany, DEFENDANTS Check box if you are representing yourself Li )SOMERLI PINNOCK, an individual; JOSEPH PINNOCK, anindividual; PROXCARDPRQ.COM , an entity of unknown form;and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,(b) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address and Telephone Number. If youare representing yourself, provide same.)(Firm Nam e, Address and T elephone Numbe r, If yourepresenting yourself, provide sa me.)

Michael T. Hornak SBN 81936 / Ronald P. Oines SBN 145016Bradley A. Chapin SBN 232885RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP, 611 Anton Boulevard, 14 th FloorCosta Mesa, CA 92626Telephone: (714) 641-5100

(Place an X in one bo x only.)1. U.S. Government. Federal Question (U.S.Plaintiffovernment Not a Party)

2. U.S. Government4. Diversity (Indicate CitizenshipDefendantf Parties in Item III) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES-For Diversity Cases O nly(Place an X in one box for plaintiff and one for defendant)PT FEFIPEFCitizen of This Statel 1I 1ncorporated or Principal Place4of Business in this StateCitizen of Another State2I] 2ncorporated and Principal Place CI 5iBusiness in Another StateCitizen or Subject of aForei g n Country1 7 3l 3orei g n Nationl 6l 6. ORIGIN (Place an X in one box only.)1. Ori g inall 2. Removed fromi 3. Remanded from

Proceedin gtate Courtppellate Court 1 1 1 4. Reinstated orReopened 5. Transferred from Anotherl 6. Multi- DistrictDistrict (Specify)iti g ation. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT: JURY DEMAND:es 1 1 1 No (Check "Yes" only if demanded in complaint.)EI Yes El NoONEY DEMANDED IN COMPLAINT: $ According to proof.I. CAUSE OF ACTION (Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filin g and write a brief statement of cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversit y .)This action involves claims of patent infringement under Title 35, United States Code, and trademark and unfair competitionunder the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C, Section 1051 et seq.NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in one box only).OTHER STATUTES CONTRACT REAL PROPERTY CONT. IMMIGRATION PRISONER PETITIONS PROPERTY RIGHTS

375 False Claims Act- 400 StateReapportionment

10 Antitrust430 Banks and Bankin gi 450 Commerce/ICCRates/Etc.

460 DeportationI 470 Racketeer Influ-

enced & Corrupt Or g . 480 Consumer Credit

490 Cable/Sat TVi 850 Securities/Corn-modities/Exchan g e90 Other Statutor yActions

91 A g ricultural Acts93 EnvironmentalMatters895 Freedom of Info.Act896 Arbitration899 Admin. ProceduresAct/Review of Appeal ofAg ency Decision

950 Constitutionalit y ofState Statutes

i IIII

L I I I 110 Insurance120 Marine130 Miller Act140 Neg otiableInstrument

Li 150 Recovery ofOverpa y ment &Enforcement ofJudgment

Li 151 Medicare ActLi 152 Recovery of

Defaulted StudentLoan (Excl. Vet.)153 Recovery ofOverpa y ment ofVet. Benefits

Li 160 Stockholders'Suits

Li 190 OtherContract

Li 195 ContractProduct Liabilit y

240 Torts to Land U 462 Naturalization Habeas Corpus:463 Alien Detainee510 Motions to VacateSentence

EI 530 General535 Death Penalty

Other:IIIII 540 Mandamus/Other

III 820 CopyrightsL i45 Tort ProductLiability290 All Other RealProperty

Application465 OtherImmi g ration Actions

830 Patent840 Trademark

TORTS SOCIAL SECURITYTORTS PERSONAL PROPERTY 861 HIA (1395ff)

862 Black Lun g (923)863 DIWC/DIVVW (405 ( g ))864 SSID Title XVI

Li 865 RSI (405 (g ))

PERSONAL INJURY 370 Other FraudLII 310 Airplane

315 AirplaneProduct LiabilityLi 320 Assault, Libel &

SlanderLi 330 Fed. Employ ers'Liabilit y

340 Marine345 Marine ProductLiability

Li 350 Motor Vehicle355 Motor VehicleProduct Liability

Li 360 Other PersonalInjury

Li 362 Personal Injur y -Med Malpratice365 Personal Injury -Product Liabilit y367 Health Care/PharmaceuticalPersonal InjuryProduct Liability

371 Truth in Lending380 Other PersonalPropert y Dama g e385 Property Damag eProduct Liabilit y

EN 550 Civil Rights555 Prison Condition560 Civil DetaineeConditions ofConfinement FEDERAL TAX SUITS

BANKRUPTCY FORFEITURE/PENALTY Li870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff orDefendant)871 IRS-Third Party 26 USC7609

Li 422 Appeal 28USC 158Li 423 Withdrawal 28

USC 157

Ei 625 Dru g RelatedSeizure of Propert y 21USC 881690 OtherIVIL RIGHTS

Li 440 Other Civil Ri g ht sL i 441 Votin gLi 442 Employment

LABORIIIII 710 Fair Labor Standards

Act720 Labor/M g mt .Relations740 Railwa y Labor ActL i 751 Famil y and MedicalLeave Act

Li 790 Other LaborLit i g ation791 Emplo y ee Ret. Inc.Security Act

443 Housin g /11111 196 Franchise Accomodations445 American withDisabilities-Employment

Li 446 American withDisabilities-Other448 EducationaEMr)

REAL PROPERTYLi 210 Land

CondemnationL i 220 ForeclosureLi 230 Rent Lease &

EjectmentIII 368 Asbestos

Personal InjurySACIVIXLI-01 1155 Pi,

R O FFICE USE O NLY: Case Number,AFTER COMPLET ING PAGE 1 OF FO RM CV-71, COMPL EE THE INFORMATIO N REQUESTED O N PAGE 2.

IV IL CO VER SHEET a g e 1 of 2



30/30

UNITED ATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL E. RICT OF CALIFORNIACIVIL CO VER SHEETHas this action been previously filed in this court and dismissed, remanded or closed?A NOl YESIf yes, list case number(s):

Have any cases been previously filed in this court that are related to the present case?1 NOl YESIf yes, list case number(s):

Civil cases are deemed related if a previously filed case and the present case:(Check all boxes that apply)l A. Arise from the same or closely related transactions, happenings, or events; orEl B. Call for determination of the same or substantially related or similar questions of law and fact; orEl C. For other reasons would entail substantial duplication of labor if heard by different judges; or

El D. Involve the same patent, trademark or copyright, and one of the factors identified above in a, b or c also is present.(When completing the following information, use an additional sheet if necessary.)

) List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other than California; or Foreign Country, in which EACH named

Check here if the government, its agencies or employees is a named plaintiff. If this box is checked, go to item (b).California County outside of this District; State, if other than California; or ForeignCountry

Assa Abloy AB resides in Stockholm, Sweden) List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other than California; or Foreign Country, in which EACH named

California County outside of this District; State, if other than California; or ForeignCountryDefendants Somerli Pinnock and Joseph Pinnock reside inIdaho. Defendant Proxcardpro.com resides in the CentralDistrict of CA pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1391(c)(2)

List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other than California; or Foreign Country, in which EACH claim arose.In land condemnation cases, use the location of the tract of land involved.California County outside of this District; State, if other than California; or ForeignCountry

In land condemnation cases, use the location of the tract of land involvedDATE: 7 1 ' 1 3Ro ald P. Oi es

law. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required pursuant to Local Rule 3-1 is not filed

Nature of Suit Code Abbreviationubstantive Statement of Cause of ActionAll claims for health insurance benefits (Medicare) under Title 18, Part A, of the Social Security Act, as amended. Also,86 1IAnclude claims by hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, etc., for certification as providers of services under the program.(42 U.S.C. 1935FF(b))All claims for "Black Lung" benefits under Title 4, Part B, of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969. (30 U.S.C.923)All claims filed by insured workers for disability insurance benefits under Title 2 of the Social Security Act, as amended; pluall claims filed for child's insurance benefits based on disability. (42 U.S.C. 405 (g))All claims filed for widows or widowers insurance benefits based on disability under Title 2 of the Social Security Act, asamended. (42 U.S.C. 405 (g))All claims for supplemental security income payments based upon disability filed under Title 16 of the Social Security Act, a

862L863IVVC863IINVV


HID Global et. al. v. Somerli Pinnock et. al.

Documents