Post on 07-Jul-2018
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
1/60
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
CAMBRIA COMPANY LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
WILSONART LLC and
DORADO SOAPSTONE LLC,
Defendants.
Civil Action No. _______
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Plaintiff Cambria Company LLC (“Cambria”) files this Complaint and demand for jury
trial seeking relief for patent infringement by Defendants Wilsonart LLC (“Wilsonart”) and
Dorado Soapstone LLC (“Dorado”). Cambria states and alleges the following:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This is an action for infringement of United States Design Patent Nos. D712,670
(the “’670 patent”), D737,058 (the “’058 patent”), D737,576 (the “’576 patent”), D737,577 (the
“’577 patent”), D738,630 (the “’630 patent”), and D713,154 (the “’154 patent”) (collectively, the
“Asserted Patents”) under 35 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq. On information and belief, Defendants
Wilsonart and Dorado make, use, sell and/or offer to sell or import into the United States certain
products (referred to herein as the “Accused Products”) that embody Cambria’s patented designs.
THE PARTIES
2. Plaintiff Cambria is a limited liability company organized under the laws of
Minnesota with its principal place of business at 805 Enterprise Drive East, Suite H, Belle
Plaine, Minnesota, 56011.
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 1 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
2/60
2
3. Cambria owns all rights and title in and to each of the Asserted Patents, including
the right to sue for all infringement thereof, including past infringement.
4. On information and belief, Defendant Wilsonart is a limited liability company
organized under the laws of Delaware with its principal place of business at 2501 Wilsonart Dr.,
Temple, Texas, 76504.
5. On information and belief, Defendant Dorado is a limited liability company
organized under the laws of Colorado with its principal place of business at 940 S. Jason St. Unit
9, Denver, Colorado, 80223.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
6. This action for design patent infringement arises under the Patent Laws of the
United States, specifically 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, 281-285.
7. This civil action asserts claims arising under the Patent Laws of the United States,
35 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and
1338(a).
8.
This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants Wilsonart and Dorado for at
least the following reasons:
a. Defendants Wilsonart and Dorado have established minimum contacts
with this forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over them would not offend traditional
notions of fair play and substantial justice;
b. Defendants Wilsonart and Dorado have done and continue to do business
in Minnesota, including but not limited to sale of the Accused Products. On information and
belief, Defendants Wilsonart and Dorado sell the Accused Products in the State of Minnesota
through company-owned and independent Minnesota distributors;
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 2 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
3/60
3
c. On information and belief, Defendant Wilsonart and Dorado have entered
into contracts with one or more Minnesota residents—specifically, distributors and dealers—to
supply products or services within the State of Minnesota; and
d.
Defendants Wilsonart and Dorado maintain warranty services, which are
referenced on their websites, on Accused Products within the State of Minnesota.
9. As such, upon information and belief, Defendants Wilsonart and Dorado have
intended to benefit by doing business in the State of Minnesota, and personal jurisdiction over
them is appropriate.
10.
Venue is proper in this Judicial District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and (c) and
§ 1400(b), at least because Defendants Wilsonart and Dorado have committed acts of
infringement in this district and Cambria has suffered harm resulting from that infringement in
this district.
BACKGROUND OF THE ACTION
11. Cambria is the leading designer and manufacturer of quartz products, specializing
in quartz stone products. Founded in 2000, Cambria has been at the forefront of the rapidly-
developing United States market for quartz surface products. Cambria’s quartz surface product
success has attracted numerous competitors to the marketplace, including Defendants Wilsonart
and Dorado.
12. Upon information and belief, Defendants Wilsonart and Dorado make, use, sell
and/or offer to sell or import into the United States quartz surface products. Many of those
products embody Cambria’s innovative designs, which are protected under Cambria’s U.S.
design patents. Cambria owns all rights, title and interests in and to the Asserted Patents,
including the rights to recover for past, present, and future infringements and violations thereof.
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 3 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
4/60
4
By virtue of the activities set forth above, Defendants Wilsonart and Dorado infringe one or
more designs claimed in the Asserted Patents.
13. Before launching its collection of quartz surface products in early 2015, Wilsonart
was a distributor of Cambria products for several years and had been in talks with Cambria
regarding a potential business relationship under which Cambria would manufacture and sell
quartz to Wilsonart for distribution under a Wilsonart brand. That relationship did not come to
fruition, however, and Wilsonart chose instead to end its distribution relationship with Cambria
and import and distribute quartz products manufactured by foreign suppliers—many of them
knock-offs of designs claimed in one or more of the Asserted Patents.
14. Rather than develop its own novel designs, Wilsonart and its supplier(s) elected to
produce knock-offs of Cambria’s patented designs, including at least those covered by the ’670
patent, the ’058 patent, the ’576 patent, the ’577 patent, and the ’630 patent. Cambria informed
Wilsonart of its infringement of Cambria’s intellectual property rights, including by a November
19, 2015 letter requesting that Wilsonart cease and desist from importing and selling quartz
products that infringe Cambria’s intellectual property rights. The letter specifically identified
Wilsonart’s “Arno,” “Aurora,” “Badaling,” “Murren,” and “Santiago” designs, among others, as
infringing Cambria’s intellectual property rights. However, Wilsonart has continued to make,
use, sell, import, and/or offer to sell quartz products, including at least its “Arno,” “Aurora,”
“Badaling,” “Murren,” and “Santiago” designs, each of which infringes of the Asserted Patents.
15. On May 22, 2015, Cambria informed Dorado of its infringement of Cambria’s
’154 patent. However, Dorado has continued to make, use, sell, import, and/or offer to sell
quartz products, including at least its Nustone “Tundra” design, that infringe one or more of the
Asserted Patents.
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 4 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
5/60
5
COUNT I: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. DESIGN PATENT NO. D712,670
(WILSONART)
16. Cambria incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-15
above as if repeated here in full.
17. Cambria is the lawful owner of the ’670 patent, entitled “Portion of a Slab.” The
United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally issued the ’670 patent on September
9, 2014. A true and correct copy of the ’670 patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit A.
18. On information and belief, Defendant Wilsonart has actual knowledge of the ’670
patent, at least by virtue of the filing of this Complaint. In addition, Cambria informed Wilsonart,
via a November 19, 2014 cease and desist letter, that it was infringing several of the Asserted
Patents. The letter specifically identified Wilsonart’s “Arno,” “Aurora,” “Badaling,” “Murren,”
and “Santiago” as infringing product designs. Yet, Wilsonart has continued to make, use, sell,
offer to sell, and import those products.
19. On information and belief, Defendant Wilsonart has been and currently is
infringing the design claimed in the ’670 patent by making, using, offering for sale, and/or
selling within or importing into the United States, without authority, products embodying the
patented design claimed in the ’670 patent. Specifically, Wilsonart’s “Arno” products directly
infringe the ’670 patent because an ordinary observer, giving such attention as a purchaser
usually gives, would be deceived by the substantial similarity between the designs so as to be
induced to purchase Wilsonart’s “Arno” products believing them to be the same as the design
embodied and claimed in the ’670 patent. Review of Wilsonart’s “Arno” products demonstrates
that the products literally infringe the ’670 patent:
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 5 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
6/60
6
Photograph Comparing Color Photograph Submitted to the USPTO for U.S.
Design Patent No. D712,670 (left) to Physical Sample of Accused Wilsonart
“Arno” Product (right)
20. On information and belief, with knowledge of the ’670 patent, Defendant
Wilsonart has actively induced and continues to induce direct infringement of the ’670 patent by
others by, among other things, providing third parties, such as distributors and dealers, with the
Accused Products.
21. On information and belief, with knowledge of the ’670 patent, Defendant
Wilsonart has contributed and continues to contribute to the others’ infringement of the ’670
patent by, among other things, providing third parties, such as distributors and dealers, with the
Accused Products.
22. Cambria has suffered and will continue to suffer damage due to Defendant
Wilsonart’s infringement of the ’670 patent. Thus, under 35 U.S.C. § 289, Cambria is entitled to
recover damages adequate to compensate for such infringement, including a recovery of
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 6 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
7/60
7
Defendant Wilsonart’s total profits derived from its unlawful conduct alleged herein or lost
profits, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for infringing the ’670 patent, together with
interest and costs fixed by this Court.
23.
Defendant Wilsonart has engaged and is engaged in willful and deliberate
infringement of the ’670 patent or, at the very least, a reckless disregard for Cambria’s patent
rights. Defendant Wilsonart’s continued infringement following notice of the ’670 patent claims
qualifies as willful, and Cambria is entitled to treble damages, attorney’s fees, and costs incurred
in this action, along with prejudgment interest under 35 U.S.C. §§ 284, 285.
24.
Cambria is entitled to a permanent injunction preventing Defendant Wilsonart
from further infringing the ’670 patent. Defendant Wilsonart’s infringement of the ’670 patent
has caused and will continue to cause irreparable harm to Cambria that will continue unless and
until it is enjoined by this Court.
COUNT II: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. DESIGN PATENT NO. D737,058
(WILSONART)
25. Cambria incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-24
above as if repeated here in full.
26. Cambria is the lawful owner of the ’058 patent, entitled “Portion of a Slab.” The
’058 Patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on
August 25, 2015. A true and correct copy of the ’058 patent is attached to this Complaint as
Exhibit B.
27.
On information and belief, Defendant Wilsonart has actual knowledge of the ’058
patent, at least by virtue of the filing of this Complaint. In addition, Cambria informed Wilsonart,
via a November 19, 2014 cease and desist letter, that it was infringing several of the Asserted
Patents. The letter specifically identified Wilsonart’s “Arno,” “Aurora,” “Badaling,” “Murren,”
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 7 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
8/60
8
and “Santiago” as infringing product designs. Yet, Wilsonart has continued to make, use, sell,
offer to sell, and import those products.
28. On information and belief, Defendant Wilsonart has been and currently is
infringing the design claimed in the ’058 patent by making, using, offering for sale, and/or
selling within or importing into the United States, without authority, products embodying the
patented design claimed in the ’058 patent. Specifically, Wilsonart’s “Aurora” products directly
infringe the ’058 patent because an ordinary observer, giving such attention as a purchaser
usually gives, would be deceived by the substantial similarity between the designs so as to be
induced to purchase Wilsonart’s “Aurora” products believing them to be the same as the design
embodied and claimed in the ’058 patent. Review of Wilsonart’s “Aurora” products
demonstrates that the products literally infringe the ’058 patent:
Photograph Comparing Color Photograph Submitted to the USPTO for
U.S. Design Patent No. D737,058 (left) to Physical Sample of Accused
Wilsonart “Aurora” Product (right)
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 8 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
9/60
9
29. On information and belief, with knowledge of the ’058 patent, Defendant
Wilsonart has actively induced and continues to induce direct infringement of the ’058 patent by
others by, among other things, providing third parties, such as distributors and dealers, with the
Accused Products.
30. On information and belief, with knowledge of the ’058 patent, Defendant
Wilsonart has contributed and continues to contribute to the others’ infringement of the ’058
patent by, among other things, providing third parties, such as distributors and dealers, with the
Accused Products.
31.
Cambria has suffered and will continue to suffer damage due to Defendant
Wilsonart’s infringement of the ’058 patent. Thus, under 35 U.S.C. § 289, Cambria is entitled to
recover damages adequate to compensate for such infringement, including a recovery of
Defendant Wilsonart’s total profits derived from its unlawful conduct alleged herein or lost
profits, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for infringing the ’058 patent, together with
interest and costs fixed by this Court.
32.
Defendant Wilsonart has engaged and is engaged in willful and deliberate
infringement of the ’058 patent or, at the very least, a reckless disregard for Cambria’s patent
rights. Defendant Wilsonart’s continued infringement following notice of the ’058 patent claims
qualifies as willful, and Cambria is entitled to treble damages, attorney’s fees, and costs incurred
in this action, along with prejudgment interest under 35 U.S.C. §§ 284, 285.
33. Cambria is entitled to a permanent injunction preventing Defendant Wilsonart
from further infringing the ’058 patent. Defendant Wilsonart’s infringement of the ’058 patent
has caused and will continue to cause irreparable harm to Cambria that will continue unless and
until it is enjoined by this Court.
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 9 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
10/60
10
COUNT III: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. DESIGN PATENT NO. D737,576
(WILSONART)
34. Cambria incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-33
above as if repeated here in full.
35. Cambria is the lawful owner of ’576 patent, entitled “Portion of a Slab.” The ’576
patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on
September 1, 2015. A true and correct copy of the ’576 patent is attached to this Complaint as
Exhibit C.
36. On information and belief, Defendant Wilsonart has actual knowledge of the ’576
patent, at least by virtue of the filing of this Complaint. In addition, Cambria informed Wilsonart,
via a November 19, 2014 cease and desist letter, that it was infringing several of the Asserted
Patents. The letter specifically identified Wilsonart’s “Arno,” “Aurora,” “Badaling,” “Murren,”
and “Santiago” as infringing product designs. Yet, Wilsonart has continued to make, use, sell,
offer to sell, and import those products.
37. On information and belief, Defendant Wilsonart has been and currently is
infringing the design claimed in the ’576 patent by making, using, offering for sale, and/or
selling within or importing into the United States, without authority, products embodying the
patented design claimed in the ’576 patent. Specifically, Wilsonart’s “Badaling” products
directly infringe the ’576 patent because an ordinary observer, giving such attention as a
purchaser usually gives, would be deceived by the substantial similarity between the designs so
as to be induced to purchase Wilsonart’s “Badaling” products believing them to be the same as
the design embodied and claimed in the ’576 patent. Review of Wilsonart’s “Badaling” products
demonstrates that the products literally infringe the ’576 patent:
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 10 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
11/60
11
Photograph Comparing Color Photograph Submitted to the USPTO for U.S.
Design Patent No. D737,576 (left) to Physical Sample of Accused Wilsonart
“Badaling” Product (right)
38. On information and belief, with knowledge of the ’576 patent, Defendant
Wilsonart has actively induced and continues to induce direct infringement of the ’576 patent by
others by, among other things, providing third parties, such as distributors and dealers, with the
Accused Products.
39. On information and belief, with knowledge of the ’576 patent, Defendant
Wilsonart has contributed and continues to contribute to the others’ infringement of the ’576
patent by, among other things, providing third parties, such as distributors and dealers, with the
Accused Products.
40. Cambria has suffered and will continue to suffer damage due to Defendant
Wilsonart’s infringement of the ’576 patent. Thus, under 35 U.S.C. § 289, Cambria is entitled to
recover damages adequate to compensate for such infringement, including a recovery of
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 11 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
12/60
12
Defendant Wilsonart’s total profits derived from its unlawful conduct alleged herein or lost
profits, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for infringing the ’576 patent, together with
interest and costs fixed by this Court.
41.
Defendant Wilsonart has engaged and is engaged in willful and deliberate
infringement of the ’576 patent or, at the very least, a reckless disregard for Cambria’s patent
rights. Defendant Wilsonart’s continued infringement following notice of the ’576 patent claims
qualifies as willful, and Cambria is entitled to treble damages, attorney’s fees, and costs incurred
in this action, along with prejudgment interest under 35 U.S.C. §§ 284, 285.
42.
Cambria is entitled to a permanent injunction preventing Defendant Wilsonart
from further infringing the ’576 patent. Defendant Wilsonart’s infringement of the ’576 patent
has caused and will continue to cause irreparable harm to Cambria that will continue unless and
until it is enjoined by this Court.
COUNT IV: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. DESIGN PATENT NO. D737,577
(WILSONART)
43. Cambria incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-42
above as if repeated here in full.
44. Cambria is the lawful owner of the ’577 patent, entitled “Portion of a Slab.” The
’577 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on
September 1, 2015. A true and correct copy of the ’577 patent is attached to this Complaint as
Exhibit D.
45.
On information and belief, Defendant Wilsonart has actual knowledge of the ’577
patent, at least by virtue of the filing of this Complaint. In addition, Cambria informed Wilsonart,
via a November 19, 2014 cease and desist letter, that it was infringing several of the Asserted
Patents. The letter specifically identified Wilsonart’s “Arno,” “Aurora,” “Badaling,” “Murren,”
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 12 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
13/60
13
and “Santiago” as infringing product designs. Yet, Wilsonart has continued to make, use, sell,
offer to sell, and import those products.
46. On information and belief, Defendant Wilsonart has been and currently is
infringing the design claimed in the ’577 patent by making, using, offering for sale, and/or
selling within or importing into the United States, without authority, products embodying the
patented design claimed in the ’577 patent. Specifically, Wilsonart’s “Santiago” products
directly infringe the ’577 patent because an ordinary observer, giving such attention as a
purchaser usually gives, would be deceived by the substantial similarity between the designs so
as to be induced to purchase Wilsonart’s “Santiago” products believing them to be the same as
the design embodied and claimed in the ’577 patent. Review of Wilsonart’s “Santiago” products
demonstrates that the products literally infringe the ’576 patent:
Photograph Comparing Color Photograph Submitted to the USPTO for
U.S. Design Patent No. D737,577 (left) to Physical Sample of Accused
Wilsonart “Santiago” Product (right)
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 13 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
14/60
14
47. On information and belief, with knowledge of the ’577 patent, Defendant
Wilsonart has actively induced and continues to induce direct infringement of the ’577 patent by
others by, among other things, providing third parties, such as distributors and dealers, with the
Accused Products.
48. On information and belief, with knowledge of the ’577 patent, Defendant
Wilsonart has contributed and continues to contribute to the others’ infringement of the ’577
patent by, among other things, providing third parties, such as distributors and dealers, with the
Accused Products.
49.
Cambria has suffered and will continue to suffer damage due to Defendant
Wilsonart’s infringement of the ’577 patent. Thus, under 35 U.S.C. § 289, Cambria is entitled to
recover damages adequate to compensate for such infringement, including a recovery of
Defendant Wilsonart’s total profits derived from its unlawful conduct alleged herein or lost
profits, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for infringing the ’577 patent, together with
interest and costs fixed by this Court.
50.
Defendant Wilsonart has engaged and is engaged in willful and deliberate
infringement of the ’577 patent or, at the very least, a reckless disregard for Cambria’s patent
rights. Defendant Wilsonart’s continued infringement following notice of the ’577 patent claims
qualifies as willful, and Cambria is entitled to treble damages, attorney’s fees, and costs incurred
in this action, along with prejudgment interest under 35 U.S.C. §§ 284, 285.
51. Cambria is entitled to a permanent injunction preventing Defendant Wilsonart
from further infringing the ’577 patent. Defendant Wilsonart’s infringement of the ’577 patent
has caused and will continue to cause irreparable harm to Cambria that will continue unless and
until it is enjoined by this Court.
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 14 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
15/60
15
COUNT V: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. DESIGN PATENT NO. D738,630
(WILSONART)
52. Cambria incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-51
above as if repeated here in full.
53. Cambria is the lawful owner of the ’630 patent, entitled “Portion of a Slab.” The
’630 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on
September 15, 2015. A true and correct copy of the ’630 patent is attached to this Complaint as
Exhibit E.
54. On information and belief, Defendant Wilsonart has actual knowledge of the ’630
patent, at least by virtue of the filing of this Complaint. In addition, Cambria informed Wilsonart,
via a November 19, 2014 cease and desist letter, that it was infringing several of the Asserted
Patents. The letter specifically identified Wilsonart’s “Arno,” “Aurora,” “Badaling,” “Murren,”
and “Santiago” as infringing product designs. Yet, Wilsonart has continued to make, use, sell,
offer to sell, and import those products.
55. On information and belief, Defendant Wilsonart has been and currently is
infringing the design claimed in the ’630 patent by making, using, offering for sale, and/or
selling within or importing into the United States, without authority, products embodying the
patented design claimed in the ’630 patent. Specifically, Wilsonart’s “Murren” products directly
infringe the ’630 patent because an ordinary observer, giving such attention as a purchaser
usually gives, would be deceived by the substantial similarity between the designs so as to be
induced to purchase Wilsonart’s “Murren” products believing them to be the same as the design
embodied and claimed in the ’630 patent. Review of Wilsonart’s “Murren” products
demonstrates that the products literally infringe the ’630 patent:
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 15 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
16/60
16
Photograph Comparing Color Photograph Submitted to the USPTO for
U.S. Design Patent No. D737,630 (left) Physical Sample of Accused
Wilsonart “Murren” Product (right)
56. On information and belief, with knowledge of the ’630 patent, Defendant
Wilsonart has actively induced and continues to induce direct infringement of the ’630 patent by
others by, among other things, providing third parties, such as distributors and dealers, with the
Accused Products.
57. On information and belief, with knowledge of the ’630 patent, Defendant
Wilsonart has contributed and continues to contribute to the others’ infringement of the ’630
patent by, among other things, providing third parties, such as distributors and dealers, with the
Accused Products.
58. Cambria has suffered and will continue to suffer damage due to Defendant
Wilsonart’s infringement of the ’630 patent. Thus, under 35 U.S.C. § 289, Cambria is entitled to
recover damages adequate to compensate for such infringement, including a recovery of
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 16 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
17/60
17
Defendant Wilsonart’s total profits derived from its unlawful conduct alleged herein or lost
profits, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for infringing the ’630 patent, together with
interest and costs fixed by this Court.
59.
Defendant Wilsonart has engaged and is engaged in willful and deliberate
infringement of the ’630 patent or, at the very least, a reckless disregard for Cambria’s patent
rights. Defendant Wilsonart’s continued infringement following notice of the ’630 patent claims
qualifies as willful, and Cambria is entitled to treble damages, attorney’s fees, and costs incurred
in this action, along with prejudgment interest under 35 U.S.C. §§ 284, 285.
60.
Cambria is entitled to a permanent injunction preventing Defendant Wilsonart
from further infringing the ’630 patent. Defendant Wilsonart’s infringement of the ’630 patent
has caused and will continue to cause irreparable harm to Cambria that will continue unless and
until it is enjoined by this Court.
COUNT VI: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. DESIGN PATENT NO. D713,154
(DORADO)
61. Cambria incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-60
above as if repeated here in full.
62. Cambria is the lawful owner of the ’154 patent, entitled “Portion of a Slab.” The
’154 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on
September 11, 2014. A true and correct copy of the ’154 patent is attached to this Complaint as
Exhibit F.
63.
On information and belief, Defendant Dorado has actual knowledge of the ’154
patent, at least by virtue of the filing of this Complaint. In addition, Cambria sent Dorado a letter
on Mary 22, 2015, informing it of its infringement. Dorado, however, has continued to make,
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 17 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
18/60
18
use, offer to sell, and/or sell in or import into the United States quartz surface products that
infringe the ’154 patent.
64. On information and belief, Defendant Dorado has been and currently is infringing
the design claimed in the ’154 patent by making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling within or
importing into the United States, without authority, products embodying the patented design
claimed in the ’154 patent.
65. On information and belief, Defendant Dorado has been and currently is infringing
the design claimed in the ’154 patent by making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling within or
importing into the United States, without authority, products embodying the patented design
claimed in the ’154 patent. Specifically, Dorado’s “Tundra” products directly infringe the ’154
patent because an ordinary observer, giving such attention as a purchaser usually gives, would be
deceived by the substantial similarity between the designs so as to be induced to purchase
Dorado’s “Tundra” products believing them to be the same as the design embodied and claimed
in the ’154 patent. Review of Dorado’s “Tundra” products demonstrates that the products
literally infringe the ’154 patent:
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 18 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
19/60
19
Photograph Comparing Color Photograph Submitted to the USPTO for U.S.
Design Patent No. D737,154 (left) to Physical Sample of Accused Dorado
“Tundra” Product (right)
66. On information and belief, with knowledge of the ’154 patent, Defendant Dorado
has actively induced and continues to induce direct infringement of the ’154 patent by others by,
among other things, providing third parties, such as distributors and dealers, with the Accused
Products.
67. On information and belief, with knowledge of the ’154 patent, Defendant Dorado
has contributed and continues to contribute to the others’ infringement of the ’154 patent by,
among other things, providing third parties, such as distributors and dealers, with the Accused
Products.
68. Cambria has suffered and will continue to suffer damage due to Defendant
Dorado’s infringement of the ’154 patent. Thus, under 35 U.S.C. § 289, Cambria is entitled to
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 19 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
20/60
20
recover damages adequate to compensate for such infringement, including a recovery of
Defendant Dorado’s total profits derived from its unlawful conduct alleged herein or lost profits,
but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for infringing the ’154 patent, together with interest
and costs fixed by this Court.
69. Defendant Dorado has engaged and is engaged in willful and deliberate
infringement of the ’154 patent or, at the very least, a reckless disregard for Cambria’s patent
rights. Defendant Dorado’s continued infringement following notice of the ’154 patent claims
qualifies as willful, and Cambria is entitled to treble damages, attorney’s fees, and costs incurred
in this action, along with prejudgment interest under 35 U.S.C. §§ 284, 285.
70. Cambria is entitled to a permanent injunction preventing Defendant Dorado from
further infringing the ’154 patent. Defendant Dorado’s infringement of the ’154 patent has
caused and will continue to cause irreparable harm to Cambria that will continue unless and until
it is enjoined by this Court.
EXCEPTIONAL CASE
71.
This case is exceptional against Defendants Wilsonart and Dorado.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
72. WHEREFORE, Cambria respectfully requests this Court enter:
a. A judgment in favor of Cambria that Defendant Wilsonart has directly
infringed the ’670 patent, the ’058 patent, the ’576 patent, the ’577 patent, and the ’630 patent;
b. A judgment in favor of Cambria that Defendant Wilsonart has induced
infringement of the ’670 patent, the ’058 patent, the ’576 patent, the ’577 patent, and the ’630
patent;
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 20 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
21/60
21
c. A judgment in favor of Cambria that Defendant Wilsonart has contributed
to the infringement of the ’670 patent, the ’058 patent, the ’576 patent, the ’577 patent, and the
’630 patent;
d.
A judgment in favor of Cambria that the Defendant Dorado has directly
infringed the ’154 patent;
e. A judgment in favor of Cambria that the Defendant Dorado has induced
infringement of the ’154 patent;
f. A judgment in favor of Cambria that the Defendant Dorado has
contributed to the infringement of the ’154 patent;
g. A judgment in favor of Cambria that this case is “exceptional” within the
meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285, and an award to Cambria of its reasonable attorneys’ fees,
expenses, and costs incurred in this action;
h. A permanent injunction enjoining Defendants Wilsonart and Dorado and
their officers, directors, agents, servants, affiliates, employees, divisions, branches, subsidiaries,
parents, and all others acting in active concert or participation with them, from infringing,
inducing the infringement of, or contributing to the infringement of the Asserted Patents;
i. A judgment requiring the Defendants Wilsonart and Dorado to pay to
Cambria the extent of Defendants’ total profit and revenue realized and derived from their
infringement of the Assert Patents, and actual damages in an amount not less than a reasonable
royalty for Defendants’ infringement;
j. An award of enhanced damages not less than three times the damages
assessed for Defendants’ infringement of the Asserted Patents, in accordance with 35 U.S.C.
§ 284; and
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 21 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
22/60
22
k. Any and all relief as this Court deems proper and just.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
73. Cambria demands trial by jury on any and all issues so triable.
Dated: April 14, 2016 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
By: /s/ Joseph A. Herriges
Joseph A. Herriges (#390350)3200 RBC Plaza
60 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (612) 335-5070Facsimile: (612) 288-9696
herriges@fr.com
OF COUNSEL:
Ahmed J. Davis ( Pro Hac Vice pending)FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
1425 K Street, NW, 11th Floor
Washington, DC 20005Telephone: (202) 783-5070
Facsimile: (202) 783-2331
davis@fr.com
John S. Goetz ( Pro Hac Vice pending)
Kristen McCallion ( Pro Hac Vice pending)
FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.601 Lexington Avenue, 52nd Floor
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (212)-765-5070goetz@fr.com
mccallion@fr.com
Attorneys for Cambria Company LLC
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 22 of 22
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
23/60
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 1 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
24/60
D
7 697 8
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE
United
States
Patent
and
Trademark Office
February
10,
2016
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT ANNEXED HERETO IS A TRUE COPY FROM
THE
RECORDS
OF THIS
OFFICE
OF:
U.S. PATENT: 712 670
ISSUE DATE:
eptember
09
2014
By
Authority of the
Under Secretary of Commerce
for
Intellectual Property
and
Director
of
the
United
S~(fl~P~f,~t
and Tra~iernark
Office
/SY,~7IA
?_LLEY
Ce~’fffying
Officer
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 2 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
25/60
US00D712670S
1 2
United States
Design
Patent l O P a t e n t N o . :
US D 7 1 2 , 6 7 0 S
Grzeskowiak et al.
4 5 )
Date of
Patent:
ep .
9 , 2014
(54)
PORTION OF
A
SLAB
4,342,805
A
8/1982
cCartney
..................
428/151
5,023,130
A
6/1991
impson
et
al...............
442/408
(71)
Applicant:
Cambria
Company
LLC, Eden Prairie,
5,354,596
A
10/1994
hewetal
....................
428/152
MN
(US)
D370,350
6/1996
padacini
.......................
D5/32
5,556,671
9/1996
iura
et
al.....................
428/15
D453,629 2/2002
raker
(72)
Inventors: on Louis
Grzeskowiak,
Prior Lake,
D484,707
1/2004
raker
MN
(US);
Summer
Lane
Kath, Eden D501,091
*
1/2005
cGahee
.......................
D5/62
Prairie,
MN (US);
Martin
E.
Davis,
D525,434
*
7/2006 angrum .......................
D5/36
Excelsior, MN
(US)
D557,902
*
12/2007 arrish
............................
D5/26
D560,915
*
2/2008
lyeetal........................
D5/62
D615,762 * 5/2010
immel
..........................
D5/62
(73)
Assignee: ambria Company LLC, Eden Prairie,
D631,670
*
2/2011
ackson ..........................
D5/99
MN
(US)
D655,094
*
3/2012
ey
................................
D5/32
D656,323 *
3/2012
eronimo ........................
D5/62
(**)
Term:
14 Years
D663,959 * 7/2012
rookman
......................
D5/62
Continued)
(21)
Appl.
No.:
9/442,513
OTHER
PUBLICATIONS
(22) Filed:
Mar. 15,
2013
Cambria Color ParysTM The Jewel CollectionTM Sample
Book,
Ver-
(51)
LOC (10)
CI
.................................................
05-06
sion 11A-0324,
printed
Apr.
21,
2011,
22
pages.
(52)
U.S.
CI.
USPC
............................................................
D5/44
(Continued)
(58) ield o Classification Search
Primary xaminer
Karen
SAcker
USPC
...........
D5/4, 6, 8, 11, 16, 19,
43,
44, 46, 47,
D5/48, 53,
56,
57, 60-64, 66,
99;
D6/602,
(74) Attorney Agent
or
Firm
Fish
Richardson
P.C.
D6/612,
613,
617;
D19/1,
5;
D25/138;
2/900; 15/208;
28/143,
150,
160,
163;
(57) CLAIM
112/401,416,
439;
428/15,
32,
66.5,
The ornamental
design for a portion ofa
slab,
as
shown and
428/85, 91,151,152, 153,
187, 190, 542.2,
described.
428/542.6;
442/408
See
application
file
for
complete
search
history.
DESCRIPTION
(56)
References
Cited
The
file
of
this
patent
contains
at east
one
dmwing/photo-
U.S.
PATENT
DOCUMENTS
graph
xecuted
n
color.
Copies
of
this
patent
with color
dmwing(s)/photograph(s)
will be
provided
by the Officeupon
1,344,570 A
6/1920 arren ........................
162/126
request and
payment
ofthe
necessary
fee.
D67,245 5/1925 lmer .............................
D5/62
The
sole
FIGURE
is
a
top
plan view
of
a
portion
of
a
slab,
1,596,482
A
8/1926
wen
.............................
264/74
showing
ournew design.
D90,466
8/1933
illheim ........................
D5/62
D162,280
3/1951
arash ............................
D5/62
The
portion ofa
slab is
fiat.
3,515,619
A
6/1970 amette ........................
428/15
D232,595
8/1974
illard
...........................
D5/53
1
Claim,
1 Drawing Sheet
4,248,652 A 2/1981
ivardi
et al.................
156/219
(1 of I
Drawing
Sheet s) Filed
in
Color)
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 3 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
26/60
US D712,670 S
Page
2
(56)
References Cited
D700,440
3/2014
ohnston
.........................
D5/62
2004/0209009
A1
*
0/2004
psommer
et
al.............
428/15
U.S. PATENT
DOCUMENTS
OTHER
PUBLICATIONS
D670,085
*
11/2012
rookmanetal...............
D5/62
D676,979
*
2/2013 anales
etal
................
D25/138
Cambria WaterstoneTM CollectionTM
Sample
Book,
Version
lA-
D679,099
*
4/2013
ohnson
et
al
................... D5/62
0818,
printed Sep.
26,
2011,
23
pages.
D685,999
*
7/2013
ohnsonetal
...................
D5/62
D693,583
*
11/2013
eorgevitch
...................
D5/62
D697,319
*
1/2014
rookmanetal
...............
D5/62
* cited
by
examiner
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 4 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
27/60
U.S. Patent
Sep.
9 ,
2014
US
D712,670
S
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 5 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
28/60
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-1 Filed 04/14/16 Page 6 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
29/60
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-2 Filed 04/14/16 Page 1 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
30/60
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United
States Patent
and
Trademark
Office
February 10,
2016
THIS
IS TO CERTIFY
THAT
ANNEXED
HERETO IS
A
TRUE COPY FROM
THE
RECORDS OF
THIS
OFFICE OF:
U.S.
PATENT:
737 058
ISSUE
DATE:
ugust
25
2015
By Authority of
the
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property
and
Director
of h e c ~ / / .~ ~ / j f ~ / ~ f f . ~ / U n i t e d . ~ ~ s~/ea/A/~-~t nd~.,~~/Tradem,
rk
Office
ylvia
~blley
Certifying
Officer
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-2 Filed 04/14/16 Page 2 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
31/60
US00D737058S
1 2 ) United States Design
Patent
l O )
P a t e n t
N o
US D737,058
S
Davis et al.
45)
Date
of
Patent:
**
ug. 25, 2015
(54)
PORTION OF
A
SLAB
(56)
References
Cited
U.S.
PATENT
DOCUMENTS
(71)
Applicant: ambria Company LLC, Eden Prairie,
MN
(US)
1,344,570
6/1920
arren
D67,245
5/t925
lmer
1,596,482
8/1926 wea
(72)
Inventors:
artin
E. Davis,
Excelsior,
MN
(US);
D90,466
8/1933
illheim
Jon Louis
Grzeskowiak,
II,
Prior Lake,
2,028,948
1/1936
ohlmann
....................
428/203
Dl13,909
3/1939
orowitz
........................
D5/37
MN (US);
Summer
Lane
Kath,
Eden
D162,280
3/1951 arash
Prairie,
MN
(US)
2,565,491
8/1951
rancis,
Jr
.....................
428/152
2,693,658
11/1954
obis
..........................
118/120
3,021,247
2/1962 tephens ......................
156/222
(73)
Assignee: ambria Company LLC, Eden Prairie,
3,515,619
6/1970
amette
MN
(US)
D232,595
8/1974 illard
3,864,193
2/1975 riersonetal................
428/133
D234,646
3/1975 ugent
...........................
D5/62
(**)
Term:
14
Years
4,248,652
2/1981
ivardi et al.
4,342,805
8/1982
cCartney
(21)
App1. No.:
9/474,410
5,023,130
6/1991
impson
et
al.
(Continued)
(22)
Filed:
Sep. 12, 2014
OTHER
PUBLICATIONS
51)
LOC
10) Cl
05-06
Cambria
2010 Collection, 2010, 44 pages.
(52)
U.S.
CI.
(Continued)
USPC ............................................................
D5/44
(58)
Field
of Classification Search
Primary Examiner Karen S Acker
USPC
...........
D5/1,
6,
9,
13,
14, 16, 21,
24,
26-28,
Assistant
Examiner Wendy
Arminio
D5/30,
32,
44, 53, 56,
58~52;
D6/304,
(74) ttorney Agent or Firm Fish
Richardson
P.C.
D6/583-585,
587,
589-591,598,
599,
(57)
CLAIM
The
ornamental
design
for a
portion
of
a
slab,
as
shown
and
D6/620;
D19/1,
5;
D25/138,
151;
D2/505,
described.
D2/506;
2/207,
900;
15/208;
28/143,
150,
DESCRIPTION
28/160,
163; 112/401,416, 439; 428/6,
428/15,
32, 66.5,
85,
91, 151-153, 187,
The file of this patent contains
at east one drawing]photo-
428/190, 542.2,
542.6;
442/408
graph
executed
n
color.
opies
of
this
patent
with color
dmwing(s)/photograph(s)
will be
providedby
the
Officeupon
CPC ..........
B31F
1/07; 32B 3/266;
32B 5/024;
request and
payment
of
the
necessary
fee.
B44F
1/00;
44F
1/02;
44F
1/08;
44F
The sole FIGURE is a top
plan
view of a
portion
of a
slab
1/10;
44F
5/00; 44F 7/00; 44F
9/00;
showing
our new
design.
B44F 9/04; 03D 1/00; 04H
1/00;
10B
The
portion
of
a
slab
is
fiat.
2503/04;
21H
27/02
1
Claim, 1
Drawing Sheet
See
application
file for
complete
search
history.
(1 of I
DrawingSheet s)
Filed
in Color)
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-2 Filed 04/14/16 Page 3 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
32/60
US
D737,058
S
Page 2
(56) References Cited
D670,085
11/2012
rookman
et
al.
D676,979
2/2013
anales
et al.
U.S.
PATENT
DOCUMENTS
D679,099 4/2013 ohnson et al.
D685,999 7/2013
ohnson et al.
5,354,596
10/1994
hewetal.
D693,583
11/2013
eorgevitch
D370,350
6/1996
padaclni
D697,319 1/2014
rookrnan et
al.
5,556,671
9/1996
iuraetal.
D700,440 3/2014
ohnston
5,927,034 7/1999 ole ..............................
52/391
D705,455 5/2014
hoietal....................
D25/151
D453,629
2/2002 xaker
D705,956 5/2014 hoietal....................
D25/151
DI~84,707
1/2004
xaker
D712,667 9/2014 rzeskowiaketal.
01,091
1/2005
cGahee
D712,668
9/2014
rzeskowiaketal
...........
D5/44
6,933,023 2
8/2005
lausen et al..................
428/17
D724,055 3/2015 ice ............................
D14/216
6,946,508
2* 9/2005 uiatwaetal
................
524/401
2002/0016399 I*
2/2002
azur
..........................
524/425
D525,434 7/2006 angrum
2004/0209009
1 10/2004
psommer
etal.
D557,902
12/2007 arrish
2008/0113124
I*
5/2008 arketal........................
428/15
D560,915
2/2008
ryeetal.
2013/0137810
I*
5/2013
hin
.............................
524/437
D572,845 7/2008
axketal.....................
D25/151
2013/0168607 I*
7/2013
eeetal..................
252/301.36
7,645,405
2*
1/2010
uit ..............................
264/140
OTHER
PUBLICATIONS
D615,762
5/2010 immel
D631,670
2/2011
ackson
Cambria2011 Collection,
2011,
26 pages.
D655,094
3/2012
ey
Cambria
2014
Collection,
2014,
42
pages.
D656,323 3/2012
eronimo
D663,959
7/2012 rookrnan
* cited by
examiner
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-2 Filed 04/14/16 Page 4 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
33/60
U.S. Patent
Aug. 25 , 2015
US D737,058 S
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-2 Filed 04/14/16 Page 5 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
34/60
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-2 Filed 04/14/16 Page 6 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
35/60
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-3 Filed 04/14/16 Page 1 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
36/60
D
7 69~ 8
UNITED
STATES
DEPARTMENT
OF COMMERCE
United
States Patent and Trademark Office
February
10,
2016
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT ANNEXED HERETO IS
A
TRUE COPY FROM
THE RECORDS OF THIS OFFICE OF:
U.S. PATENT: 737 576
ISSUE
DATE:
eptember
01
2015
By
Authority of
the
Under Secretary
of
Commerce
for
Intellectual Property
and
Director
of
the
United
Stat.g~,P~ent
and
Trademark
Office
/S~ 5IA HOLLEY
64
Ce~ifying Officer
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-3 Filed 04/14/16 Page 2 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
37/60
US00D737576S
1 2 United States Design Patent
l O
P a t e n t
N o . :
US D 7 3 7 , 5 7 6 S
Davis
et
al.
4 5 ) Date of
Patent:
ep . 1, 2015
(54)
PORTION
OF
A
SLAB
(56) References
Cited
U.S.
PATENT
DOCUMENTS
(71)
Applicant:
Cambria Company LLC Eden Prairie,
MN (US) 1,344,570 A
6/1920 arren
1,474,653
11/1923
om o
...........................
427/204
(72) Inventors:
artin E;
Davis, Excelsior,
MN (US);
D67,245 5/1925 lmer
1,568,070 1/1926 ennens
.........................
264/42
Jon
Louis
Grzeskowiak,
II,
Prior Lake,
1,596,482
8/1926
we n
MN
(US); Summer
Lane Kath, Eden
D90,466
8/1933 illheim
2,507,020 5/1950 ullmer et al ................
428/148
Prairie, MN
(US)
D162,280 3/1951 arash
2,565,491
8/1951 rancis,
Jr
.....................
428/152
(73)
Assignee:
ambria Company LLC,
Eden
Prairie,
2,693,658
A
11/1954
obis
..........................
118/120
D190,647
6/1961
Allen
..........................
D25/163
M’N
(US)
3,010,859 i 111961 Stephens et al ..............
428/40.1
3,021,247 2/1962
Stephens ......................
156/222
(**)
Term:
14Years
3,515,619
6/1970
Bamette
D232,595
8/1974
Willard
3,864,193
2/1975
Frierson et a l ................
428/133
(21)
Appl.
No.:
9/474,414
,248,652
2/1981
Civardietal.
4,342,805
8/1982
McCartney
(22)
Filed:
Sep. 12,
2014
(Continued)
(51)
LOC
(10)
CI.................................................
05-06
OTHER
PUBLICATIONS
(52)
U.S.
C1 .
Cambria
2010
Collection,
2010,
44 pages.
USPC ............................................................
D5/44
(Continued)
58)
Field of Classification Search
USPC ...........
D5/1,
6 ,
9 3, 4 , 6 ,
21,
24,
26-28
Primary
Examiner
Karen S Acker
Assistant Examiner WendyArminio
D5/30,
32,
44, 53, 56,
5842;
D6/304
(74)
Attorney Agent or Firm
Fish Richardson P.C.
D6/583-585, 587, 589-591,598, 599
(57) LAIM
D6/620;
D19/1,
5;
D25/138, 51; D2/505
The
ornamental design
for
a
portion
of
a
slab,
as
shown
and
D2/506;
2/207,
900;
5/208;
28/143,
50
described.
28/160,
63;
112/401,416,
439; 428/6
DESCRIPTION
428/15,
32,
66.5, 85, 91, 51-153, 87
4281190, 542.2, 542.6; 442/408
The
file
of
this
patent
contains t
least
one
drawing/photo-
graph xecuted n olor. Copies of
this patent with olor
CPC
..........
B31F
/07;
B32B
31266;
B32B
51024;
drawing(s)/photograph(s)willbeprovidedbytheOfficeupon
B44F 1/00; B44F 102; B44F /08; B44F
request
and
payment
of
the
necessary
fee.
1/10; B44F
5/00; 44F
7/00;
B44F
9/00;
The
sole
FIGURE
is
a top
plan
view
of
a
portion
of
a
lab
B44F
9/04;
D03D /00; D04H
1/00;
D10B
showing
our
new
design.
2503/04; D21H
27/02
1
Claim,
1
Drawing
Sheet
See
application
file
for
complete
search
history.
(1
of
I
Drawing Sheet s) Filed in Color)
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-3 Filed 04/14/16 Page 3 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
38/60
US
D737,576
S
Page 2
(56) References
Cited D676,979
2/2013
anales
et
al.
D679,099
4/2013 ohnsonetal.
U.S.
PATENT
DOCUMENTS
D685,999
S
7/2013
ohnson et al.
D693,583
11/2013
eorgevitch
4,877,656
10/1989 askin ...........................
428/15
D697,319
1/2014
rookmanetal.
5,023,130
A
6/1991
impson
et
al.
D700,440 3/2014
ohnston
5,354,596
A
10/1994
hewetal.
D705,455
*
5/2014 hoietal
....................
D25/151
D370,350
6/1996 padacini
D712,665
*
9/2014
rzeskowiaketal
...........
D5/44
5,556,671 9/1996 iuraetal.
D712,667
9/2014
rzeskowiaketal.
5,927,034
A
*
7/1999
ole
..............................
52/391
D712,671
*
9/2014 rzeskowiaketal...........
D5/44
D453,629
2/2002
raker
D714,559
*
10/2014
cCuaig
........................
D5/44
D484,707
1/2004
raker
D715,562 * 10/2014
eamer
...........................
D5/44
D501,091
1/2005
cGahee
D715,564 * 10/2014
eamer
...........................
D5/44
D525,434
7/2006
angmrn
D716,561 * 11/2014
eamer ...........................
D5/44
D557,902
12/2007 arrish
D724,055 * 3/2015 ice
............................
D14/216
D560,915 2/2008
ryeetal.
2004/0209009
1
10/2004
psommeretal.
2013/0137810
I*
/2013
hin .............................
24/437
D610,269
/2010
anales
.....................
25/138
2013/0168607 I* /2013 eeetal..................
52/301.36
D615,762
5/2010 immel
D631,670
2/2011
ackson
OTHER
PUBLICATIONS
D653,357
* 1/2012
artinetal.................
D25/138
D655,094
3/2012
ey
Cambria
2011
Collection,
2011,
26
pages.
D656,323
3/2012
eronimo
Cambria
2014
Collection, 2014,
42
pages.
D663,959
7/2012 rookman
D670,085 11/2012
rookmanetal.
*
citedby
examiner
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-3 Filed 04/14/16 Page 4 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
39/60
U.S. Patent
Sep.
1,
2015
U
D737,576
S
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-3 Filed 04/14/16 Page 5 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
40/60
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-3 Filed 04/14/16 Page 6 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
41/60
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-4 Filed 04/14/16 Page 1 of 7
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
42/60
UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT
OF
COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
February 18, 2016
THIS
IS
TO
CERTIFY
THAT ANNEXED
HERETO
IS A TRUE COPY FROM
THE
RECORDS OF THIS
OFFICE
OF:
U.S. PATENT:
737 577
ISSUE
DATE:
eptember
01
2015
By Authority of the
Under
Secretary
of Commerce for Intellectual
Property
and Director of the
United
States
Patent
and Trademark Office
Certifying
Officer
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-4 Filed 04/14/16 Page 2 of 7
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
43/60
US00D737577S
1 2 United
States
Design
Patent l o P a t e n t
N o . :
US D737 ,577 S
Davis
et
al .
4 5 ) Date
of
Patent:
**
ep .
1 ,
2015
(54)
PORTION
OF A SLAB
(56)
References
Cited
U.S.
PATENT
DOCUMENTS
(71)
Applicant: Cambria Company LLC,
Eden
Prairie,
MN
q_IS)
1,344,570
6/1920 arren
D67,245
5/1925
lmer
(72)
Inventors:
artin
E.
Davis, Excelsior, MN
(US);
1,596,482
8/1926 wen
D90,466
8/1933 illheim
Jon
Louis
Grzeskowiak,
II, Prior Lake,
2,507,020
*
5/1950
ullmer
et
al................
428/148
MN
US);
Summer
Lane
Kath,
Eden
D162,280
3/1951
arash
2,693,658
*
11/1954
obis ..........................
118/120
Prairie, MN 0_IS)
D190,647
*
6/1961 llen
..........................
D25/163
3,515,619 6/1970
arnette
(73)
Assignee:
ambria
Company
LLC,
Eden
Prairie,
D232,595 8/1974 illard
4,248,652
2/198 ivardi
et
al.
MN (US)
4,342,805 8/1982 cCartney
5,023,130
6/1991
impsonet
al.
(**)
Term:
14
Years
5,354,596
10/1994
hew
et
al.
D370,350
6/1996
padacini
5,556,671
9/1996
iura
et al.
(21)
Appl. No.: 9/474,415
5,693,141
*
12/1997 ramont
......................
118/211
(Continued)
(22)
Filed:
Sep. 12, 21)14
OTHER
PUBLICATIONS
51)
LOC 10) CI
.................................................
05-06
Cambria 2010
Collection,
44 pages.
(52)
U.S. CI.
(Continued)
USPC
............................................................
D5/44
(58)
Field
of
Classification
Search
Primary Examiner
Karen
SAcker
USPC
...........
D5/1, 6, 9, 13, 14, 16,
21,
24, 26-28,
Assistant
Examiner Wendy
Arminio
D5/30,
32,
44, 53, 56,
58~52;
D6/304,
(74) ttorney Agent or
Firm Fish &Richardson P.C.
D6/583-585,
587, 589-591,598, 599,
(57)
CLAIM
The
ornamental
design
for a
portion
of
a slab,
as
shown and
D6/620;
D19/1, 5;
D25/138,
151;
D2/505,
described.
D2/506;
2/207,
900;
15/208;
28/143,
150,
DESCRIPTION
28/160,
163;
112/401,416,
439;
428/6,
428/15,
32, 66.5, 85, 91,151-153, 187,
The
file of this patent contains
at
east
one drawing/photo-
428/190, 542.2,
542.6;
442/408
graph executed n
color.
opies
f
this patent with
color
drawing(s)/photograph(s)
will be
provided
by
the
Officeupon
CPC
..........
B31F
1/07; 32B
3/266;
32B
5/024;
request
and
payment
of
the
necessary
fee.
B44F
1/00; 44F 1/02; 44F 1/08; 44F
The
sole
FIGURE
is a
top
plan view of a portion
of
a slab
1/10; 44F
5/00; 44F 7/00;
44F 9/00;
showing ournew design.
B44F 9/04; 03D
1/00; 04H
1/00;
10B
The
portion
of
a
slab
is
flat.
2503/04; 21H 27/02
1
Claim, 1
Drawing Sheet
See
application
file
for complete
search
history.
(1
of
I
Drawing Sheet s) Filed
in
Color)
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-4 Filed 04/14/16 Page 3 of 7
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
44/60
US
D737,577 S
Page 2
56)
References Cited
D685,999
7/2013
ohnson
et
al.
D693,583
11/2013 eorgevitch
U.S.
PATENT
DOCUMENTS
D697,319 1/2014
rookmanetal.
D700,440
3/2014
ohnston
D453,629
2/2002
raker
D705,455
*
5/2014
hoietal
....................
D25/151
6,531,009
BI*
3/2003
rior
..............................
156/63
D712,665
*
9/2014
rzeskowiaketal
...........
D5/44
1M84,707
1/2004
raker
D712,667 *
9/2014
rzeskowiaketal
...........
D5/44
D501,091
1/2005
cGahee
D712,671
* 9/2014 rzeskowiaketal........... D5/44
6,933,023
2*
8/2005
lausenetal
..................
428/17
D713,154
* 9/2014
rzeskowiaketal........... D5/44
6,946,508
B2* 9/2005
ukawaetal
................
524/401
D714,559
*
10/2014 cCuaig
........................
D5/44
D525,434
7/2006
angrum
D715,562 * 10/2014
eamer
...........................
D5/44
D557,902
12/2007 arrish
D715,563 * 10/2014 eamer ...........................
D5/44
D560,915
2/2008 ~eetal.
D715,564 *
10/2014 eamer ........................... D5/44
D610,269
*
2/2010 anales
......................
D25/138
D716,560
*
11/2014
Boghosian
......................
D5/43
D615,762
5/2010
immel
D724,055
*
3/2015 Tice
............................
D14/216
D631,670
2/2011
ackson
2004/0209009 1
10/2004
Opsommeretal.
D641,557
*
7/2011 alenteetal....................
D5/62
2013/0137810
I*
5/2013
Shin
.............................
524/437
D653,357
*
1/2012
artinetal.................
D25/138
D655,094
3/2012
ey
OTHER
PUBLICATIONS
D656,323
3/2012
eronimo
D663,959
7/2012
rookman
Cambria2011
Collection, 26
pages.
D670,085
11/2012
rookman
et
al.
Cambria
2014
Collection,
42
pages.
D676,979
2/2013
anales et al.
D679,099
4/2013
ohnsonetal.
*
cited
by
examiner
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-4 Filed 04/14/16 Page 4 of 7
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
45/60
U.S. Patent
Sep. 1 ,
2015
US D737,577 S
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-4 Filed 04/14/16 Page 5 of 7
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
46/60
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-4 Filed 04/14/16 Page 6 of 7
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
47/60
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-4 Filed 04/14/16 Page 7 of 7
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
48/60
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-5 Filed 04/14/16 Page 1 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
49/60
D
7 697 8
UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE
United
States
Patent and Trademark Office
February
10,
2016
THIS
IS TO
CERTIFY
THAT ANNEXED HERETO
IS
A TRUE COPY
FROM
THE
RECORDS OF THIS
OFFICE
OF:
U.S. PATENT:
738 630
ISSUE DATE: eptember 15
2015
By Authority of
the
Under Secretary of
Commerce for Intellectual Property
and
Director
of
the
United Sta~
P~flat
and
Trade~grk
Office
Cer~ing Officer
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-5 Filed 04/14/16 Page 2 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
50/60
US00D738630S
1 2
United
States
Design
Patent l O P a t e n t N o . :
US D 7 3 8 , 6 3 0 S
Grzeskowiak,
II
et
al .
4 5 )
Date of
Patent:
**
ep .
15, 2015
(54)
ORTION OF
A
SLAB
D121,355
7/1940
uhl
...............................
D5/62
D124,284
12/1940
ltarsh
...........................
D5/62
(71)
Applicant: ambria Company LLC,
Eden
Prairie,
D124,945
1/1941
eldman .......................
D6/582
3,159,525
12/1964
inger
..........................
428/152
MN
(US)
D234,646
*
3/1975
ugent ...........................
D5/62
D244,804 *
6/1977 ies ................................
D5/53
(72)
Inventors: onLouisGrzeskowiak,
II,
PriorLake,
D253,434
*
11/1979
ittmanetal..................
D5/53
MN (US);
Summer Lane Kath, Eden
4,248,652
*
2/1981
Civardi
et
al
.................
156/219
13441,467
*
5/2001
Boone .........................
D25/163
Prairie, MN
(US);
Martin
E.
Davis,
D453,629
2/2002
Kraker
Excelsior,
MN (US)
D455,221
* 4/2002
Smith
.........................
D25/152
D474,897
*
5/2003
Clausen
et
al...................
D5/62
(73)
Assignee: ambria Company LLC,
Eden
Prairie,
1)484,707
1/2004
Kraker
D485,078
*
1/2004
Tuso
D5/62
MN
(US)
D486,922
* 2/2004
Baxter ........................
D25/163
6,737,148 I*
5/2004
Smith ..........................
428/131
(**)
Term: 14 Years
D572,846
7/2008 Parket al.....................
D25/151
D582,061
12/2008
Parketal.....................
D25/151
(21)
Appl.
No.:
9/442,516
(Continued)
(22)
Filed:
Mar. 15,
2013
OTHER PUBLICATIONS
51 )
L O C 10 ) C l .................................................
05-06
Cambria
Color ParysTM The Jewel CollectionTM Sample Book,
Vet-
(52)
U.S.
CI.
sion
11A-0324,
printed Apr.
21,
2011,
22
pages.
USPC
............................................................
D5/44
Continued)
(58) ield o Classification Search
USPC
...........
D5/4,
6,
8, 1, 6, 9,
43,
44, 46, 47,
D5/48, 53, 56, 57, 60-64, 66,
99;
D6/602,
Primary xaminer
Karen
S Acker
D6/612,
613, 617;
D19/1,
5; D25/138;
(74) ttorney Agent orFirm Fish
&
Richardson
P.C.
2/900;
15/208;
28/143,
50,
160,
163;
(57)
CLAIM
112/401,416,
439;
428/15,
32,
66.5,
The
ornamental design
for
a
portion
of
a
slab,
as
hown
and
428/85, 91,151,152, 153,
87,
190, 542.2,
described.
428/542.6; 442/408
CPC
..........
B31F
1/07;
32B 3/266;
32B
5/024;
DESCRIPTION
B44F
1/00;
44F
1/08;
44F
5/00;
44F
9/00; 44F
9/04;
03D
1/00;
04H
1/00;
The
file of
this
patent
contains
at east one drawing/photo-
D10B
2503/04;
21H
27/02
graph
executed
n olor.
opies
f
this
patent
with color
See
application
file
for complete search history,
drawing(s)/photograph(s)
will
be
provided by the
Officeupon
request
and
payment
of
the
necessary
fee.
(56)
References
Cited
The sole FIGURE is a top plan
view
of
a
portion
of
a lab,
U.S.
PATENT
DOCUMENTS
showing
our new
design.
The
portion
of
a slab
is
fiat.
D49,423
7/1916
lliot ..............................
D5/62
1
Claim, 1
Drawing Sheet
Dl11,124
8/1938
afner
............................
D5/47
(1 of 1 Drawing Sheet s)
Filed
in
Color
CASE 0:16-cv-00989 Document 1-5 Filed 04/14/16 Page 3 of 6
8/18/2019 Cambria v. Wilsonart - Complaint
51/60
US
D738,630
S
Page 2
(56)
References Cited
2013/0157012
I*
/2013 inetal.......................
428/1