Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 21 PageID #: 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
SHANE ROSADO,
Plaintiff,
-v-
Civil Action No.:
NY2O, LLC, NEW DUTCH WATER CORP.,

ELIAS SLUBSKI and ESTHER SLUBSKI,
Defendants.
COMPLAINT
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF DEMANDED
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff, SHANE ROSADO, sues Defendants NY2O, LLC, NEW DUTCH WATER
CORP., ELIAS SLUBSKI and ESTHER SLUBSKI, and states the following in support thereof:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1.
This is an action for correction of inventorship of four design patents for a bottle
design issued to defendant Esther Slubski and assigned to defendant New Dutch Water Corp.
(New Dutch), US Patent Nos. D576,495, D596,037, D611,819 and D663623 (collectively the
Bottle Patents).
2.
Shane Rosado brings this action because Rosado, not Esther Slubski, is the true
sole inventor of the Bottle Patents, the designs for which were misappropriated by Elias Slubski
and Esther Slubski for the benefit of New Dutch and NY2O, LLC without the permission or
authority of Shane Rosado.
3.
Rosado seeks a determination from the Court that based upon the evidence of his
conception of the designs in the Bottle Patents Rosado is the inventor of the Bottle Patents.
Rosado also seeks restitution from defendants Elias Slubski, New Dutch and NY2O, LLC who
have been unjustly enriched by their use of and patenting of Rosados bottle design, an
accounting and the placement of a constructive trust on the Bottle Patents, and damages for loss
of income from royalties, loss of reputational interests, and other damages in an amount to be
proven at trial.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4.
This is an action arising under the Patent Act for Correction of Inventorship
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 256.

5.
This Court has exclusive subject matter jurisdiction of plaintiffs patent claims
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a).

6.
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the non-federal claims alleged in
this action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(a), because such claims are so related to the federal
claim alleged in this action that they form part of the same case or controversy.
7.
In the alternative, this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the non-federal
claims alleged in this action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332(a), because complete diversity of
citizenship exists between the parties and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive
of interest and costs.
8.
Defendants are citizens of New York and subject to personal jurisdiction in New
9.
Venue is proper in this district, pursuant 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2), because the
York.
wrongful acts of Defendants, as discussed infra, occurred, in substantial part, in this judicial
district.
10.
In the alternative, venue is proper in this district, pursuant 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(3),
because Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this judicial district.
PARTIES
11.
Shane Rosado is an individual who resides in the State of New Jersey.
12.
NY2O, LLC is a New York limited liability company with its principal place of
business in Elmsford, New York.

13.
New Dutch Water Corp. is a New York corporation with its principal place of
business in Old Bethpage, New York.
14.
Elias Slubski is an individual who resides in Old Bethpage, New York.
15.
Esther Slubski is an individual who resides in Old Bethpage, New York.

FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS
16.
Shane Rosado is an accomplished industrial and product designer. Rosado studied
industrial and product design first at the Art Institute of Ft. Lauderdale, and thereafter at the Pratt
Institute School of Design. Rosados industrial and product design experience includes a myriad
of automotive accessories including wheel covers, floor mats, steering wheel covers, seat covers,
automotive LED lights, automotive speakers, amplifiers, mini-bikes, mini-choppers, and
packaging design for all these products and others.
17.
Elias Slubski (Elias) is an entrepreneur. Elias incorporated New Dutch on April
21, 2005. Elias is the Chief Executive Officer of New Dutch and the Manager of NY2O, LLC.
18.
Esther Slubski (Esther) is an architect and also is Eliass mother.
19.
Rosado and Elias attended junior high school and high school together in Mill
Basin, Brooklyn. Rosado and Elias met in sixth grade, became friends, and continued their
friendship throughout junior high school and high school. After high school, the two kept in
touch and saw each other often. Elias was a groomsman in Rosados wedding in March of 2003.
20.
Elias was aware of Rosados skills and abilities in industrial and product design.
In the summer of 2006, Elias contacted Rosado and requested his assistance with a matter in
Rosados area of expertise. Elias explained to Rosado that he was preparing to launch a
company to sell bottled water and wanted a unique bottle design that would distinguish his
product from the other bottled waters in the marketplace. Elias told Rosado that he had hired
Pentgram Design, a well known and highly regarded design firm with offices in Manhattan, to
design a bottle. Elias had agreed to pay Pentagram just under $100,000 for their design work,
and had already paid $33,000 to prepare initial concepts.
21.
Elias said he was disappointed in Pentagrams initial concept work on the bottle.
Elias asked Rosado to accompany him to a meeting with Petagram because he thought Rosado,
with his extensive design experience, could be of assistance. Rosado agreed and attended a
meeting with Elias at Petagrams offices. After the meeting, Elias told Rosado that he was still
unhappy with Pentagrams concepts.
22.
Elias asked Rosado if Rosado would design a bottle for Elias instead of
Pentagram. Rosado agreed to help his friend. Thereafter, Elias fired Pentagram.
23.
Rosado began work on his bottle design in September of 2006. Rosado worked
on a PC computer in SolidWorks, a three-dimensional computer aided design (CAD) software

program commonly used by industrial and product designers. SolidWorks is very technical
and requires extensive training and a high level of proficiency to use and produce designs that
can be employed in product manufacturing. Rosado is experienced in SolidWorks, having
used it to design many products.
24.
Rosado worked on his bottle design throughout the fall of 2006. Elias visited
Rosados home in New Jersey on several occasions to view his progress. Elias told Rosado that
he planned to bottle water from the Catskill watershed where New York Citys water originates.
Elias told Rosado he planned to call his water NY2O. Elias asked Rosado if he could also
design a logo for Eliass NY2O product and Rosado again agreed to help his friend.
25.
At a certain point in the design process, Rosado advised Elias that prototypes of
his bottle design could be made. Rosado contacted a prototyping company in New Jersey and
gave the prototyping company his SolidWorks file containing his bottle design for their use in
making the prototypes. When they were ready, Rosado picked up the sample bottles and showed
Elias. Elias was pleased with the samples and with Rosados design.
26.
In or about February of 2007 Rosados bottle design was complete. Rosado is in
possession of his final SolidWorks file for his bottle design and it reflects that he made his last
modifications to the design on February 13, 2007. That same month, Rosado gave his bottle
design in SolidWorks format and a logo design he created to Elias. Elias paid Rosado by
check approximately $6,000 for his work as an independent contractor. Rosado has not heard
from Elias since.
27.
At no time prior to, during or after Rosado created his bottle design did Elias ever
inform Rosado that Elias intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosados
bottle design.
28.
Elias, acting on behalf of New Dutch, concealed from Rosado that Elias intended
to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosados bottle design.

29.
Elias and New Dutch owed Rosado a duty to disclose to Rosado that they
intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs pursuant to the
Patent Act which requires the truthful disclosure of inventorship in connection with every
application for a patent.
30.
Elias owed Rosado a duty to disclose to Rosado that he intended to file patent
applications and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs pursuant to their close personal
relationship of over twenty years during which time the two friends frequently reposed trust and
confidence in each other.
31.
At no time prior to, during or after Rosado created his bottle design did he ever
assign his rights in his bottle design to Elias or New Dutch.

THE BOTTLE PATENTS
32.
On May 4, 2007, less than three months after Eliass receipt of Rosados bottle
design, Esther filed U.S. design patent application number 29/279,662 entitled Bottle (the
662 Application). The 662 Application claims the ornamental design for a bottle and
contains 6 drawings.
33.
On September 9, 2008, U.S. Patent No. D576,495, which is based upon the 662
Application, was issued to Esther and assigned to New Dutch (the 495 Patent). A copy of the
495 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
34.
On September 8, 2008, Esther filed U.S. design application number 29/324,244
entitled Bottle (the 244 Application). The 244 Application claims the ornamental design
for a bottle and contains 6 drawings. The 244 Application was filed as a continuation-in-part of
the 662 Application and claims priority based upon it.
35.
On July 14, 2009, U.S. Patent No. D596,037, which is based upon the 244
36.
On September 9, 2008, Esther filed U.S. design application number 29/324,227
entitled Removable Elastic Band on a Bottle (the 227 Application). The 227 Application
claims the ornamental design for a removable elastic band on a bottle and contains 6 drawings.
The 227 Application was filed as a continuation-in-part of the 662 Application and claims
priority based upon it.
37.
On March 16, 2010, U.S. Patent No. D611,819, which is based upon the 227
38.
On December 23, 2010, Esther filed U.S. design application number 29/381,816
entitled Bottle (the 816 Application). The 816 Application claims the ornamental design
for a bottle and contains 6 drawings.
39.
On July 17, 2012, U.S. Patent No. D663,623, which is based upon the 816
ROSADOS INVENTORSHIP
40.
Rosado did not discover the existence of the Bottle Patents until recently.
41.
Rosado is the sole inventor of the Bottle Patents.
42.
The 495 Patent, the 037 Patent, and the 623 Patent are directed to designs for a
43.
Rosado conceived of his bottle design prior to the filing of the 662 Application,
bottle.
the 244 Application, and the 816 Application.

44.
The 819 Patent is directed to the design of a removable elastic band on a bottle.
45.
Rosado conceived of his design for a removable elastic band on a bottle prior to
the filing of the 227 Application.
46.
Rosado reduced his bottle design and his design for a removable elastic band on a
bottle to practice prior to the filing of the 662 Application, the 244 Application, the 227
Application, and the 816 Application, by creating his bottle design in SolidWorks and by
producing prototypes of his design.
47.
Exhibits 5, 6, 7, and 8 attached hereto show side-by-side comparisons of Rosados
bottle design and each drawing sheet of the 495 Patent, the 037 Patent, the 819 Patent and the
623 Patent.
48.
As demonstrated in Exhibits 5, 6, 7, and 8 attached hereto, Rosado is the true
inventor of the 495 Patent, the 037 Patent, the 819 Patent and the 623 Patent.
49.
Esther is not an inventor of the Bottle Patents.
50.
Esther was named as the inventor of the Bottle Patents through error without any
deceptive intent on the part of Rosado.

THE SUCCESS OF NY2O AT ROSADOS EXPENSE
51.
In 2009, New Dutch launched the NY2O bottled water product using the Rosado
bottle design.
52.
On July 6, 2012, Elias formed NY2O, LLC to market and sell NY2O bottled
53.
The NY2O bottled water product has enjoyed great success in the marketplace.
water.
The success of NY2O has been due, in significant part, to Rosados innovative bottle design. On
its website at www.ny2o.com and in press releases, the company has touted Rosados bottle
design as a key product attribute. The home page of the NY2O website devotes as much space to
laudatory statements praising Rosados bottle design as it does to descriptions of the water inside
the bottle. Superimposed over images of Rosados bottle design, the NY2O website homepage
proclaims in all capitals and large type:
A VESSEL AS ICONIC AS THE CITY
FROM THE MOMENT YOU HOLD NY2O IN YOUR HAND,
YOU CAN FEEL THE SPIRIT OF INNOVATION. THE SHAPE
CALLS TO MIND THE OUTLINE OF NEW YORKS FAMOUS
SKYLINE. THE CONTEMPORARY DESIGN
CONSIDERATIONS REFLECT THE ARTISTRY AND VISION
OF ONE OF THE CITYS ORIGINAL ARCHITECTS, WHO
ALSO HAPPENS TO BE ONE OF OUR FOUNDERS.1
54.
On the NY2O website, and on Facebook, Twitter and elsewhere, Elias and his
companies have repeatedly publicized the numerous international design awards that the Rosado
bottle design has received since the NY2O product was launched. To date, at least two
international awards for excellence in design have been bestowed upon the Rosado bottle design
for NY2O:
The 2013 Global Bottled Water Award for Best Package Design or Label
awarded by Zenith International, a leading international food and drinks
consultancy. According to NY2O, Zenith chose the Rosado bottle design because
NY2Os packaging achieves an effective stand-out through excellent and
original design.
The 2014 Silver Pentaward for Beverages, recognizing excellence in creative

packaging, a juried prize awarding creativity, innovation, impact, branding,
communication and quality of execution in packaging design. The Pentaward
jury is composed of thirteen personalities from the world of packaging design,
This appears to be a reference to Esther Slubski claiming, falsely, that she conceived of the Rosado bottle design.
including designers, design agency directors, and packaging design officials from
large commercial brands.
The 2013 Global Bottled Water Award and the 2014 Silver Pentaward rightfully belong to
Rosado because they laud the Rosado bottle design, favorably distinguish the Rosado bottle
design from those designed by other designers, and are a tribute to Rosados skills as an
industrial and product designer.
55.
The NY2O bottle as originally launched in 2009 was identical to the Rosado
bottle design.
56.
Since its launch, the NY2O bottle has been modified slightly from Rosados
original bottle design. However, in the eyes of an ordinary observer, giving such attention as a
purchaser usually gives, the current NY2O bottle is substantially the same as the Rosado bottle
design. Exhibits 9, 10, 11 and 12 attached hereto show side-by-side comparisons of each drawing
sheet of the 495 Patent, the 037 Patent, the 819 Patent and the 623 Patent and the NY2O
product bottle. As demonstrated in Exhibits 9, 10, 11 and 12 attached hereto, the NY2O bottled
water product offered and sold by New Dutch is based upon the claims of the 495 Patent, the
037 Patent, the 819 Patent, and the 623 Patent, respectively.
57.
Rosado has engaged the undersigned attorneys and agreed to pay them a
reasonable fee.
COUNT I CORRECTION OF INVENTORSHIP OF THE 495 PATENT
58.
Rosado repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 57 as
though fully set forth herein.

59.
This is a count against Esther Slubski and New Dutch for correction of
inventorship pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 256.
10
60.
Rosado is the sole inventor of the claims in the 495 Patent.
61.
Through omission and error, Rosado was not listed on the 495 Patent as the
inventor.
62.
The omission of Rosado as the inventor on the 495 Patent was without any

63.
Rosado has an expectation of ownership of the 495 Patent based upon his sole
inventorship and because he retained ownership of, and did not assign away, his bottle design.
64.
Rosado has a concrete financial interest in the 495 Patent based upon his rightful
ownership of the 495 Patent, his financial interest in royalties from the 495 Patent as well as
damages in the form of an infringers profits earned from use of the 495 Patent, and from his
reputational interests that accrue from being named the sole inventor of the 495 Patent.
65.
Based on the foregoing, Rosado prays that this Court issue an Order to the
Director of the USPTO and Defendants requiring that Rosado be listed as the sole inventor of the
495 Patent.
COUNT II CORRECTION OF INVENTORSHIP OF THE 037 PATENT
66.

67.

68.
69.
inventor.
11
70.

71.
72.
73.
037 Patent.
COUNT III CORRECTION OF INVENTORSHIP OF THE 819 PATENT
74.

75.

76.
77.
inventor.
78.
12
79.
inventorship and because he retained ownership of, and did not assign away, his design for a
removable elastic band on a bottle.
80.
81.
819 Patent.
COUNT IV CORRECTION OF INVENTORSHIP OF THE 623 PATENT
82.

83.

84.
85.
inventor.
86.

87.
13
88.
89.
623 Patent.
COUNT V UNJUST ENRICHMENT
90.

91.
This is a count for common law unjust enrichment against New Dutch, NY2O,
LLC and Elias Slubski.

92.
Rosado expended substantial time, labor, and skill to develop his bottle design.
93.
Elias never disclosed to Rosado his intention to apply for patents on Rosados
bottle design.
94.
Elias paid Rosado a de minimus sum of money for his bottle design.
95.
Elias, New Dutch and NY2O, LLC were enriched by their use of and patenting of
Rosados bottle design.

96.
Elias, New Dutch and NY2O, LLC obtained immediate, direct, and substantial
commercial advantages from Rosados bottle design and the patents on Rosados bottle design.
These advantages include, but are not limited to, (i) not having to invest extensive significant
money, time, labor, or skill to develop Rosados bottle design, and (ii) preventing New Dutchs
and NY2O, LLCs direct competitors from copying and exploiting Rosados bottle design.
14
97.
Defendants aforementioned unjust enrichment was at the expense of Rosado.
98.
Specifically, as result of Elias, New Dutchs and NY2O, LLCs use of and
patenting of Rosados bottle design, Rosado has been damaged, and continues to suffer damages
including, but not limited to, loss of income from royalties that he could have earned from the
licensing of his bottle design, as well as the reputational interests that would have accrued from
being named the sole inventor of the Bottle Patents.
99.
Accordingly, by misappropriating Rosados bottle design, Defendants have been
unjustly enriched.
100.
Based on the forgoing, equity and good conscience dictate that Defendants make
restitution to Rosado in an amount to be determined at trial.

COUNT VI FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT
101.

102.
This is a count for fraudulent concealment under New York common law against
New Dutch and Elias Slubski.

103.
Elias and Rosado had a close personal relationship that lasted over twenty years
during which time the two friends frequently reposed trust and confidence in each other.
104.
Elias asked Rosado to utilize his skills and experience to create a bottle design for
105.
Elias, acting on behalf of himself and New Dutch, concealed from Rosado that
Elias.
Elias intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosados bottle design.
15
106.
Elias, acting on behalf of himself and New Dutch, possessed superior knowledge,
not readily available to Rosado, that New Dutch intended to file patent applications and obtain
patents on Rosados bottle design.
107.
Elias, acting on behalf of himself and New Dutch, knew that Rosado had no
knowledge that New Dutch intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosados
bottle design, and knew that Rosado was acting without such knowledge.
108.
Elias had a duty to disclose to Rosado that he intended to file patent applications
and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs.

109.
and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs pursuant to the Patent Act which requires the
truthful disclosure of inventorship in connection with every application for a patent.
110.
and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs pursuant to their close personal relationship.
111.
The fact that Elias intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on
Rosados bottle designs was material to Rosado.

112.
Rosado, in reliance upon Elias, created his bottle design, reduced it to practice,
and provided it to Elias for a de minimus payment.

113.
bottle design.
114.
Elias caused New Dutch to file the 662 Application, the 244 Application, the
227 Application and the 816 Application with the USPTO without disclosing the fact that New
16
Dutch was filing these applications to Rosado, and without disclosing Rosados inventorship to
the USPTO.
115.
The Bottle Patents were issued to Esther and assigned to New Dutch as a result of
the filing of the applications for Rosados bottle design with the USPTO.
116.
Elias and New Dutch obtained immediate, direct, and substantial commercial
advantages from Rosados bottle design and the patents on Rosados bottle design, including, but
are not limited to, (i) not having to invest extensive significant money, time, labor, or skill to
develop Rosados bottle design, and (ii) preventing New Dutchs and NY2O, LLCs direct
competitors from copying and exploiting Rosados bottle design.
117.
Rosado was damaged, and continues to suffer damages including, but not limited
to, loss of income from royalties that he could have earned from the licensing of his bottle
design, as well as the reputational interests that would have accrued from being named the sole
inventor of the Bottle Patents.
118.
Rosado was also damaged to his property because patents are a property right, and
by and through the acts set forth herein, Rosado was denied his right to his patents.
COUNT VII NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION OR OMISSION
119.

120.
This is a count for negligent misrepresentation or omission under New York
common law against New Dutch and Elias Slubski.

121.
Elias and Rosado had a close personal relationship that lasted over twenty years
during which time the two friends frequently reposed trust and confidence in each other.
17
122.
Elias asked Rosado to utilize his skills and experience to create a bottle design for
123.
Elias, acting on behalf of himself and New Dutch, negligently concealed from
Elias.
Rosado that Elias intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosados bottle
design.
124.
Elias, acting on behalf of himself and New Dutch, possessed superior knowledge,
not readily available to Rosado, that New Dutch intended to file patent applications and obtain
patents on Rosados bottle design.
125.
Elias, acting on behalf of himself and New Dutch, knew or had reason to know
that Rosado had no knowledge that New Dutch intended to file patent applications and obtain
patents on Rosados bottle design, and knew or had reason to know that Rosado was acting
without such knowledge.
126.
and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs.

127.
and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs pursuant to the Patent Act which requires the
truthful disclosure of inventorship in connection with every application for a patent.
128.
and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs pursuant to their close personal relationship.
129.
The fact that Elias intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on
Rosados bottle designs was material to Rosado.

130.
Rosado, in reliance upon Elias, created his bottle design, reduced it to practice,
and provided it to Elias for a de minimus payment.
18
131.
bottle design.
132.
Elias caused New Dutch to file the 662 Application, the 244 Application, the
227 Application and the 816 Application with the USPTO without disclosing the fact that New
Dutch was filing these applications to Rosado, and without disclosing Rosados inventorship to
the USPTO.
133.
The Bottle Patents were issued to Esther and assigned to New Dutch as a result of
the filing of the applications for Rosados bottle design with the USPTO.
134.
Elias and New Dutch obtained immediate, direct, and substantial commercial
advantages from Rosados bottle design and the patents on Rosados bottle design, including, but
are not limited to, (i) not having to invest extensive significant money, time, labor, or skill to
develop Rosados bottle design, and (ii) preventing New Dutchs and NY2O, LLCs direct
competitors from copying and exploiting Rosados bottle design.
135.
Rosado was damaged, and continues to suffer damages including, but not limited
to, loss of income from royalties that he could have earned from the licensing of his bottle
design, as well as the reputational interests that would have accrued from being named the sole
inventor of the Bottle Patents.
136.
Rosado was also damaged to his property because patents are a property right, and
by and through the acts set forth herein, Rosado was denied his right to his patents.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Rosado demands judgment and relief against NY2O, LLC, New Dutch
Water Corp., Elias Slubski and Esther Slubski as follows:
19
A. An Order to the Director of the USPTO and Defendants requiring that Rosado
be listed as the sole inventor of the Bottle Patents;
B. Constructive trusts placed upon the Bottle Patents awarding Rosado all of the
benefits realized by New Dutch Water Corp., NY2O, LLC and Elias Slubski
from the Bottle Patents, and requiring that any and all references to the creator
of the Bottle Design made by defendants be corrected to reflect that Rosado is
the creator of the bottle design.
C. An order requiring New Dutch Water Corp. to assign all right, title, and
interest in and to the Bottle Patents to Rosado.
D. An accounting of all benefits realized by New Dutch Water Corp., NY2O,
LLC and Elias Slubski from the Bottle Patents;
E. Restitution be made to Rosado by New Dutch Water Corp., NY2O, LLC and
Elias Slubski for all benefits received by them from the Rosado bottle design;
F. Damages be awarded to Rosado for, inter alia, loss of income from royalties,
loss of reputational interests, and other damages to be proven at trial, along
with pre and post-judgment interest; and
G. Such other and further relief as is just and proper.
20
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all claims so triable.
Dated: November 12, 2014
Respectfully submitted,
By:
Joel B. Rothman (JR 0352)
joel.rothman@sriplaw.com
Schneider Rothman Intellectual Property Law
Group PLLC
4651 North Federal Highway
Boca Raton, FL 33431
Tel: 561-404-4350
Fax: 561-404-4353
Attorneys for Plaintiff
21
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 22

CIVIL COVER SHEET
JS44 (Rev. 1/2013)
The JS 44 civil coversheet and the information containedherein neitherreplacenor supplementthe filing and serviceof pleadingsor other ptêre as required by law, except as
provided twlocal rules ofcourt. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference oflheUnited Slates inSeptember 1974, is required for theuseofthe(Jlerk ofCourt forlhe
purpose ofinitiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ONNliXT PAGE OFTHISform.)
DEFENDANTS
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS
NY20. LLC, NEW DUTCH WATER CORP., ELIAS SLUBSKI and
SHANE ROSADO
ESTHER SLUBSKI,
Countv ofResidence of First Listed Defendant
fb> Countv ofResidence of First Listed Plaintiff

Monmonth CountV. NJ
(EXCEPT IN US PUINTIFF CASES)
Nassau
(INU.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

NOTE:
IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES. USE THE LOCATION OF

THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, andTelephone Number)

Schneider Rothman Intellectual Property Law Group, 4651 North Federal
Highway, Boca Raton, FL 33431; 561-404-4350
Attorneys (If Known)
Hoffman & Baron, LLP, 6900 Jericho Turnpike, Syosset, NY 11791;

516-822-3550
III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (P/o aw "X"InOneBoxfar Plaintiff
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an "X"mOneBox Only)
(For DiversityCases Only)

0
U.S. Goveramenl
Plaintiff
Federal Question
Citizen ofThis Slate
(US Covemmeni Not a Party)
and One Boxfor Defendant)
PTF
DEF
O 1
PTE
Incotporaiedor PrincipalPlace
DEF
O 4
O 4
OS
OS
O 6
of Business In This State
U.S. Govermnent
Defendant
Citizen of Another State
Divcraity
(Indicate Citizenship ofParties in Item III)
O 2
Incorporated an<fPrincipal Place

of Business In Another State
Citizenor Subjectof a
0 3
Foreign Nation
Foreicn Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an "A"' inOneRax Only)

K RORI?FJTnRF./PENAL1EPi%
l:ss^;xJCONTRAerriS!ia3.
PERSONAL INJURY
PERSONAL INJURY
110 Insurance
120 Marine
310 Airplane
130 Miller Act
315 Airplane Product
150 Recovery ofOvcrpaymeni

iSI Medicare Act
1S2 Recovery of Defaulted
(Excludes Veterans)
o
153 Recovery of OverpajTOcnt
of Veieran's Benefits
160 Stockholders' Suits
19S Contract lôduct Liability
i96 Franchise
830 Patent
380 Oilier Personal
(njuiy
O 720 Labor/Management
Relations
Property Damage
O 740 Railwa>-Labor Act
385 Property Damage
O 751 Family and Medical
REALPROPERTV
O 210 Land Condemnation

o 220 Foreclosure
Habeas Corpus:
d
463 Alien Dettunee
510 Motions to Vacate
230 Rent Lease & Ejectment
442 Employment
240 Torts to Land
443 Housing/
245 Tort Product Liability
Acconvnodalions
O 530 General
445 Amer. w/Disabilities- 535 Death Penalty
290 All Other Real Property
470 Racketeo' loilueaced and
Corrupt Organizations
861 HIA(l395ff)
862 Black Lung (923)
803 DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
864 SSID Title XVI
d 865 RSr (405(g))
480 Consumer Credit

490 Cable/Sat TV
350 Securities/Commodilies/
890 Other Statuioiy Actions

891 Agricultural Acts
Exdiange
893 Enviroiunental Matters
895 Freedom of InfoimatioD
896 Arbitration
: rTEDERAIl TAX SIRTRJ
899 Administrative Procedure
Act/Review or Appeal of
870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff

or Defendant)
Agency Decision
d
950 Constitutionalityof
State Statutes
::s33(!;i?lMMlGRA'nONi:^2:.
446 Amer. w/Disabilitics - O 540 Mandamus & Odier
448 Education
O 550 Civil Riîts
460 Deportation
26 use 7609
Othen
Other
450 Commerce
d
o
840 Trademark
d 871 IRSThird Party
Sentence
Empla>'ment
430 Banks and Banking
Act
Income Security Act
440 Other Civil Rights

441 Voting
o
o
410 Antitrust
Leave Act
790 Other Labor Litigation

d 791 Employee Retirement
Medical MaloriKtice
1
710 Fair Labor Standard-s

Act
Product Liability
O 362 Pasonal Injury-
o
-isSfHTrATrSECHSlW^
O 370 Other Fraud
400 Stale Rcapportionment
iPROPFim^RlRHTJ^M d
Liability
360 Otlier Personal
375 False Claims Act
423 Willidrawal
O 820 Copyrights
PERSONAL PROPERTY
37J Truth in Lending
28 use 157
368 Asbestos Personal
d 422 Appeal 28 use 158
690 Other
Injury Product
Liability
0fProperty2l USC88i
Personal Injury
Product Liability
340 Marine
345 Marine Product
Produci Liability
190 Other Contract
lJ 625 Drug Related Seizure
Pliamiaccutical
350 Motor Velikle

O 355 Motor Vehicle
367 Health Care/
Slander
330 Federal Employers'

Liability
Student Loans
O 320 .Assault, Libel &
& Enforcement ofJudgment
365 Personal Injury Product LiabiU^
Litîlity
140 Negotiable Instrument
d 462 Naturalization Application

O 465 Other Immigration
Actions
555 Prison Condition

560 Civil DetaineeConditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place cm "X"inOne Box Only)

1 Original
Proceeding
2 Removed from
State Court
Remanded from
Appellate Court
4 Reinstated or
Reopened
O 5 Transferred from
Another District
Multidistrict
Litigation
(specify)
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Donotcitejurisdiclionalsiatuies unlessdiversity):
35 use 256
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION
VII. REQUESTED IN
Brief description ofcause;

Claim of (nventorship
CHECK TF THIS is A CLASS ACTION
COMPLAINT:
CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
DEMANDS
JURY DEMAND:
UNDERRULE 23. F.R Cv.P.
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)

(See inslruciion':):
IF ANY
DATE
DOCKET NUMBER
JUDGE
* \
SIGNATUR
ORNEY OF RECORD
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT#
AMOUNT
APPLMN
JUDGE
MAG. JUDGE
Yes
No
CERTIFICATION OF ARBITRATION ELIGIBILITY
Local Arbitration Rule 83.10 provides that with certain exceptions, actions seeking money damages only inanamount not in excess of$150,000,
exclusive of interest and costs, are eligible forcompulsory arbitration. Tlie amount of damages ispresumed tobebelow thethreshold amount unless a
certification to the contrary is filed.
Joel B. Rothman
, counscl for
, do hereby certify that the above captioned civil action is
ineligible for compulsory arbitration for the following reason(s):
monetary damages sought are in excess of$150,000, exclusive of interest and costs,
[x]
the complaint seeks injunctive relief,
the matter is otherwise ineligible for the following reason

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT - FEDERAL RULES CIVIL PROCEDURE 7.1
Identify any parent corporation and any publicly held corporation thatowns 10%or moreor its stocks:
Not applicable.
RELATED CASE STATEMENT (Section VIII on the Front of this Forml
Please listall cases thatarearguably related pursuant to Division of Business Rule 50.3.1 in Section VTIl on thefront of this form. Rule 50.3.1 (a)
provides that "Acivil case is "telaied" toanother civil case for purposes of tills guideline when, because of the similarity offacts and legal issues or
because the cases arise from the same transactions or events,a substantial saving of judicial resources is likelyto result from assigning both casesto the
same judge and magistrate judge." Rule 50.3.1 (b) provides that"Acivil case shall not be deemed "related" toanother civil case merely because the civil
case: 0"^) involves identical legal issues, or (B) involves the same parties." Rule 50.3.1 (c) ftuther provides tliat "Presumptively, and subject to thepower
ofajudge to determine otherwise pursuant toparagraph (d), civil cases shall not bedeemed to be "related" unless both cases are still pending before the
court."
NY-E DIVISION OF BUSINESS RULE 50.Udlf2>
1.)
Is the civil action being filed in theEastern District removed from a NewYork State Court located inNassau or Suffolk
County: nq
2.)
If you answered "no" above:
a) Did theevents or omissions giving rise to the claim or claims, or a substantial part thereof, occur inNassau or Suffolk
County
b) Did the eventsor omissions givingrise to the claim or claims, or a substantial part thereof, occur in the Eastern
Disu-ici? Yes
If your answer to question 2 (b)is"No," docs thedefendant (or a majority of thedefendants, ifthere is more than one) reside inNassau or
Suffolk County, or, in an interpleader action, does theclaimant (ora majority of theclaimants, if there ismore than one) reside in Nassau
or Suffolk County?
(Note: A corporation shall be considered a resident of the County in which it hasthe most significant contacts).
BAR ADMISSION
I am currently admitted in the Eastern Districtof New York and currently a member in goodstanding of the bar of this court.
Yes
No
Are you currently the subjectof any disciplinary action (s) in this or any otherstate or federal court?
|~|
Yes
(Ifyes, please explain)
I certify the ap<iura^^jnl information provided above.

Signature:,
No

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

for the
Eastern District
of of
New
York
__________
District
__________
SHANE ROSADO,
Plaintiff(s)
v.
NY20, LLC, NEW DUTCH WATER CORP., ELIAS

SLUBSKI and ESTHER SLUBSKI,
Defendant(s)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No.
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendants name and address)
NY20 LLC
6 WESTCHESTER PLAZA
ELMSFORD, NEW YORK 10523
A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) or 60 days if you
are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiffs attorney,
whose name and address are: Joel B. Rothman
Schneider Rothman Intellectual Property Law Group
Boca Raton, Florida 33431
If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.
You also must file your answer or motion with the court.
DOUGLAS C. PALMER
CLERK OF COURT
Date:
Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)
Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE
(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))
This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)
was received by me on (date)
I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date)
; or
I left the summons at the individuals residence or usual place of abode with (name)
, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,
on (date)
, and mailed a copy to the individuals last known address; or
I served the summons on (name of individual)
, who is
designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date)
; or
I returned the summons unexecuted because
; or
Other (specify):
.
My fees are $
for travel and $
for services, for a total of $
0.00
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date:
Servers signature
Printed name and title
Servers address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:
Print
Save As...
Reset


for the
Eastern District
of of
New
York
__________
District
__________
SHANE ROSADO,
Plaintiff(s)
v.

Defendant(s)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No.

NEW DUTCH WATER CORP.
14 MAHAN ROAD
OLD BETHPAGE, NEW YORK 11804

DOUGLAS C. PALMER
CLERK OF COURT
Date:

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

on (date)
; or
on (date)
, who is

on (date)
; or
; or
Other (specify):
.
My fees are $
for travel and $
0.00
Date:
Servers signature
Servers address
Print
Save As...
Reset


for the
Eastern District
of of
New
York
__________
District
__________
SHANE ROSADO,
Plaintiff(s)
v.

Defendant(s)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No.

ELIAS SLUBSKI
14 MANHAN ROAD

DOUGLAS C. PALMER
CLERK OF COURT
Date:

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

on (date)
; or
on (date)
, who is

on (date)
; or
; or
Other (specify):
.
My fees are $
for travel and $
0.00
Date:
Servers signature
Servers address
Print
Save As...
Reset


for the
Eastern District
of of
New
York
__________
District
__________
SHANE ROSADO,
Plaintiff(s)
v.

Defendant(s)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No.

ESTHER SLUBSKI
14 MANHAN ROAD

DOUGLAS C. PALMER
CLERK OF COURT
Date:

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

on (date)
; or
on (date)
, who is

on (date)
; or
; or
Other (specify):
.
My fees are $
for travel and $
0.00
Date:
Servers signature
Servers address
Print
Save As...
Reset
I lllll llllllllIll lllllllllll llll llllllllll 111111111111111111111111111111111

USOOD576495S
c12)
United States Design Patent

Slubski
D394,607 s
D402,192 S
D402,193 S
D483,982 S
D488,386 S
D518,722 S
(54) BOTTLE
(75) Inventor: Esther Slubskl, Old Bethpage, NY (US)
(73) Assignee: New Dutch Water Corp., Old Bethpage,
NY(US)
(**) Term:
*
*
*
*
*
*
5/1998
12/1998
12/1998
12/2003
412004
412006
Monaghanet al.
Bell et al.
Bell et al.
Irvine
Hall et al.
Corbett et al.
D9/520
D9/686
D9/693
D7/300.l
D9/550
D9/500
* cited by examiner
14 Years
Primary Examiner=Ynii Simmons

Assistant Examiner=Deiu: L Sipos
(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm~Hoffmann & Baron, LLP
(21) Appl. No.: 29/279,662

(22) Filed:
US D576,495 S
** Sep. 9, 2008
Patent No.:
(45) Date of Patent:
(10)
May 4, 2007
(57)
(51) LOC (8) Cl.
09-01
(52) U.S. Cl.
D9/537; D9/549
(58) Field of Classification Search
D9/500,
D9/516, 529, 549,557~558, 575, 682, 686~694,
D9/522, 545, 530, 537, 540, 767; 215/379,
215/381~384; 220/660, 662, 669~673, 675;
D7/608, 300.1
See application file for complete search history.
(56)
References Cited
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS

1,740,223 A
D201,791 S
D239,697 S
D261,361 S
D288,530 S
D322,027 s
D353,771 s
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
12/1929
8/1965
4/1976
10/1981
3/1987
12/1991
12/1994
Burvenick
Hershbergeret al
Hunt
Epperson
Hartung
Knudsenet al.
Klitsner
220/568
D32/30
D9/522
D9/522
D9/522
D9/516
D9/500
CLAIM
The ornamental design for a bottle, as shown and described.

DESCRIPTION
FIG. 1 is a top, front, right side perspective view of a bottle

showing my new design;
FIG. 2 is a top plan view thereof;
FIG. 3 is a front elevation view thereof;
FIG. 4 is a left side elevation view thereof;
FIG. 5 is a rear elevation view thereof; and,
FIG. 6 is a bottom plan view thereof.
The dot-dash broken lines shown in the drawings represent
unclaimed environment and are for illustrative purposes only,
forming no part of the claimed design.
1 Claim, 6 Drawing Sheets
F=====i
I
{]Tu
I
I
I
U.S. Patent
Sep.9,2008
Sheet 1of6
US D576,495 S
--------
FIG. 1
~------~
-..;::--------------- I
~~-----~
~~~--=-.-:.:-
I
"'--=--~
I
---- ---. . .___
I
-------------
1--0f
-----
. .I,
.
~-----
...
U.S. Patent
Sep.9,2008
Sheet 2 of 6
FIG. 2
...
.........__________ _ /
...................__
US D576,495 S
U.S. Patent
Sep.9,2008
US D576,495 S
Sheet 3 of 6
----------1
F--------~
FIG. 3
~--------)
LT__:_--:-__:_--:-__:_--:-__:__:::J
..----------------------
___
I
~-
'//
,/
__
U.S. Patent
FIG. 4
Sep.9,2008
US D576,495 S
Sheet 4 of 6
-------~
F----------1
I
~-
:J
=-
-= <=;J
-1
j
i
-------------------
&------
_j
-;::)
U.S. Patent
Sep.9,2008
US D576,495 S
Sheet 5 of 6
-------~
F----------1
I
~--------J
,.....:....7"".....:....7"".....:....7"".....:...._::.:.J
FIG. 5
----------------------
~------~
U.S. Patent
FIG. 6
Sep.9,2008
Sheet 6 of 6
US D576,495 S
I lllll llllllllIll lllllllllll llll llllllllll111111111111111111111111111111111

USOOD596037S
c12)

Slubski
Patent No.:
(10)
(54) BOTTLE
D488,386 S
D492,203 S
D518,722 S
D529,390 S
D563,788 S
D576,495 S
D580,766 S
(75) Inventor: Esther Slubskl, Old Bethpage, NY (US)

(73) Assignee: New Dutch Water Corp., Bethpage, NY
(US)
(**) Term:
14 Years
(57)
Related U.S. Application Data
(63) Continuation-in-part of application No. 29/279,662,

filed on May 4, 2007, now Pat. No. Des. 576,495.
( 51) LOC (9) Cl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 09-01
(52) U.S. Cl.
D9/537; D9/549
D9/500,
D9/516, 529, 549,557~558, 575, 682, 686~694,
D9/522, 545, 530, 537, 540, 767; 215/379,
215/381~384; 220/660, 662, 669~673, 675;
D7/608, 300.1
References Cited

1,740,223 A
D201,791 S
D483,982 S
*
*
*
12/1929 Burvenick
8/1965 Hershbergeret al
12/2003 Irvine
D9/550
D9/556
D9/500
D9/544
D9/516
D9/537
D9/516

Sep.9,2008
(56)
412004 Hall et al.

6/2004 Curtis et al.
412006 Corbett et al.
10/2006 Lalanne et al
3/2008 Reimannet al. .
9/2008 Slubski
1112008 Younget al.
* cited by examiner
(21) Appl. No.: 29/324,244

(22) Filed:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
US D596,037 S
** Jul. 14, 2009
220/568
D32/30
D7/300.l
CLAIM

DESCRIPTION
FIG. 1 is a top, front, right side perspective view of a bottle

showing my new design;
The dot-dash broken lines shown in the drawings represent
unclaimed environment and are for illustrative purposes only,
forming no part of the claimed design.
U.S. Patent
Jul. 14, 2009
Sheet 1 of 6
US D596,037 S
FIG. I
( ~
\_
_,/A
I .......... ,,
, /1
~-----,
I
I
----
------
I
I
I
~----------------------
U.S. Patent
FIG. 2
Jul. 14, 2009
Sheet 2 of 6
US D596,037 S
U.S. Patent
Jul. 14, 2009
Sheet 3of6
FIG. 3
11
! !
l \l
-----\
US D596,037 S
U.S. Patent
Jul. 14, 2009
US D596,037 S
Sheet 4 of 6
FIG. 4
----------1
F--------=
IL_
_J
----r
.L
.
-------
C '------~
\'
\;:
\
~
'
I
/
\
1
/I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
'"
11
I'
~
I
1
U.S. Patent
Jul. 14, 2009
US D596,037 S
Sheet 5 of 6
FIG. 5
----------1
F--------=::-..
Ii_
C
I
I
.:
_J
.__,
I
_,
---------r.
L
\'\
\'\
\
\
11
U.S. Patent
FIG. 6
Jul. 14, 2009
Sheet 6 of 6
US D596,037 S
I lllll llllllllIll lllllllllll llll llllllllll111111111111111111111111111111111

USOOD611819S
c12)

Slubski
Patent No.:
(10)
(54) REMOVABLE ELASTIC BAND ON A BOTTLE
D483,982 S
D542,167 S
D542,687 S
D546,225 S
D546,226 S
D546,227 S
D576,495 S
(76) Inventor: Esther Slubskl, 14 Mahan Rd., Old

Bethpage, NY (US) 11804
(**) Term:
14 Years
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
12/2003
5/2007
5/2007
7/2007
7/2007
7/2007
9/2008
US D611,819 S
** Mar. 16, 2010
Irvine
Brown
Brown
Brown
Brown
Brown
Slubski
D7/300.l
Dll/4
Dll/4
Dll/4
Dll/4
Dll/4
D9/537
(21) Appl. No.: 29/324,227
* cited by examiner
(22) Filed:

Sep. 9, 2008
Related U.S. Application Data
(63) Continuation of application No. 29/279,662, filed on

May 4, 2007, now Pat. No. Des. 576,495.
( 51) LOC (9) Cl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 09-01
(52) U.S. Cl.
D9/516; D9/434
D9/500,
D9/516, 529, 549,557~558, 575, 682, 686~694,
D9/522, 545,530,537, 540, 767, 501, 517,
D9/719; 215/379, 381~384; 220/660, 662,
220/669~673, 675; D7/608, 300.1; D20/22;
Dll/3, 4, 6
(56)
References Cited

1,740,223 A
2,538,684 A
3,583,602 A
D222,032 S
D222,033 S
D421,384 S
D480,969 S
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
12/1929
1/1951
611971
9/1971
9/1971
3/2000
10/2003
Burvenick
Gushard et al.
Gruber et al.
Donoghue
Donoghue
Herrmann
Owens
220/568
215/382
222192
D9/501
D9/501
D9/69l
D9/455
(57)
CLAIM
The ornamental design for a removable elastic band on a

bottle, as shown and described.
DESCRIPTION
FIG. 1 is a top, front, right side perspective view of a removable elastic band on a bottle showing my new design;
The dot-dash broken lines in the drawings showing the majority of a bottle illustrate the portions of the design that form no
part of the claim. The evenly dashed broken lines in the
drawings define the bounds of the claim and form no part
thereof.
U.S. Patent
Mar. 16, 2010
Sheet 1of6
--- . -
,.,....
FIG. 1
...
VS D611,819 S
----.........."'
~~-----::::4.
------ - I
I.
.
~...
.
I
--
.. --.,_.
.
J
~~-----"T"?
==== rzzs:__,.
~- <, "'
/ .'(.......:-::::::
.>,
/'
/'
/'
I I
.I I/
I
<,;
>
I .
j !
(\
\.
\
.
I
4l~1lA
I
i !
i !
i !
j !
i !
i !
i !
i !
i !
i !
i !
i !
i !
i !
i I
i !
i \
I1.
<,
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
~--.l_
,,//
U.S. Patent
Mar. 16, 2010
Sheet 2 of 6
FIG. 2
/'.'.: :.::::::--~:
.///
~'
-~\\
li
}'
\\
.. . . ....._ .// // .
''r=: ..
i .---....
\
' .
t>
/'
''"\
'
US D611,819 S
U.S. Patent
Mar. 16, 2010
US D611,819 S
Sheet 3 of 6
-------~
-----------!
F
.
I
I
:....:..:....:..:....:..:~
-r=r=>:" \ <,
~
/'
,
//
'
I
'
I
I
I
.\
'
.,.
'\
'
'i
'
II
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
i
i
\
i
\
i
\
\
\
i
\
i
i
i
I\
II
\~
II
I
....._
i
\
'
i
i
'
~ __
.....l....___._
I)
I
U.S. Patent
Mar. 16, 2010
US D611,819 S
Sheet 4 of 6
----~
---------!
F
.
I
F'IG. 4
I
'
/
,
,/'
-=..-=:- ....:....-:- -~~
-----------
<,
.'\.
.\
I
'
i
i
i
\
i
i
\
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
\
\
\'<,
i
I
_.,,
U.S. Patent
Mar. 16, 2010
US D611,819 S
Sheet 5 of 6
-------~
----------!
F
.
I
FIG. 5
~
/'
/'
,
. ...:....-:-...:....-:-...:....-:-)
J_=------::r
------- .,_
<,'\.
.\
.\
i
i
\
\
\
i
i
i
i
i
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
\' ______________ __, ,j
U.S. Patent
FIG. 6
Mar.16,2010
Sheet 6 of 6
US D611,819 S
I lllll llllllllIll lllllllllll llll llllllllll 111111111111111111111111111111111

USOOD663623S
c12)

Slubski
(54) BOTTLE
(76)
Inventor: Esther Slubskl, Old Bethpage, NY (US)
(**)
Term:
(21)
Appl. No.: 29/381,816
(22)
Filed:
14 Years
Dec. 23, 2010
( 51) LOC (9) Cl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 09-01

(52) U.S. Cl.
D9/537; D9/549
D9/682,
D9/686~694,516,522, 529~530, 533, 536,
D9/537~544,549,556, 571, 574~575, 767;
215/379, 381~384; 220/660, 662, 669, 675;
D7/509, 510, 511, 608, 300.1
D576,495
D592,967
D596,037
D610,911
D611,355
D611,819
D617,200
D654,752
D655,172
2009/0134111
S *
S *
S *
S *
S *
S *
S *
S *
S *
Al*
9/2008
512009
712009
3/2010
3/2010
3/2010
6/2010
2/2012
3/2012
512009
US D663,623 S
** Jul. 17, 2012
Slubski
Melrose et al
Slubski .
Kimetal.
Kimetal
Slubski
Goldburt
Krasner
Brooks et al
Schroeder
D9/537
D9/574
D9/549 X
D9/575X
D9/540
D9/516
D9/540
D7/300.l
D9/522
215/383 X
* cited by examiner
Primary Examiner~ Carol P Rademaker

(74) Attorney,Agent, or Firm~ Hoffmann & Baron, LLP
(57)
CLAIM
References Cited
DESCRIPTION
FIG. 1 is a top, front, right side perspective view in accordance with the bottle of the invention;
FIG. 3 is a front elevational view thereof;
FIG. 4 is a right side elevational view thereof, the left side
elevational view being a mirror image;
FIG. 5 is a rear elevational view thereof; and,
The dot-dash-dot-dash broken lines shown in the drawings
are included for the purpose of illustrating environmental
structure and form no part of the claimed design .
(56)
1,740,223
D201,791
D322,027
5,178,816
5,385,250
D433,337
D460,696
D473,469
D488,386
D492,203
D522,865
D523,346
D529,390
D563,788
Patent No.:
(10)
A *
s *
s *
A *
A *
S *
S *
S *
S *
s *
s *
S *
S *
S *
12/1929
8/1965
12/1991
1/1993
1/1995
1112000
712002
4/2003
412004
6/2004
612006
612006
10/2006
3/2008
Burvenick
D7/300.l x
Hershberger et al. .......... D32/30
Knudsen et al. ............... D9/516
Suzuki et al. ................. 264/530
Pasquale ................... 2201669 x
Cautereels ..................... D9/539
Goettner .
D9/539 X
Claessen ........................ D9/537
Hall et al.
D9/574 X
Curtis et al. ................... D9/556
Andoh ........................... D9/503
Andoh ........................... D9/543
Lalanne et al.
D9/571 X
Reimann et al. ............... D9/516
U.S. Patent
Jul. 17, 2012
Sheet 1of6
US D663,623 S
U.S. Patent
Jul. 17, 2012
Sheet 2 of 6
US D663,623 S
U.S. Patent
Jul. 17, 2012
Sheet 3 of 6
US D663,623 S
U.S. Patent
Jul. 17, 2012
Sheet 4 of 6
US D663,623 S
U.S. Patent
Jul. 17, 2012
Sheet 5 of 6
US D663,623 S
U.S. Patent
Jul. 17, 2012
Sheet 6 of 6
US D663,623 S
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D576,495

Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07
495 Drawings filed 5/7/07














Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D576,495

NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14











Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 21 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Civil Action No.:

NY2O, LLC, NEW DUTCH WATER CORP.,

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 21 PageID #: 2

pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 256.

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a).

Venue is proper in this district, pursuant 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2), because the

In the alternative, venue is proper in this district, pursuant 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(3),

because Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this judicial district.

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 21 PageID #: 3

Shane Rosado is an individual who resides in the State of New Jersey.

business in Elmsford, New York.

business in Old Bethpage, New York.

Elias Slubski is an individual who resides in Old Bethpage, New York.

Esther Slubski is an individual who resides in Old Bethpage, New York.

Shane Rosado is an accomplished industrial and product designer. Rosado studied

Elias Slubski (Elias) is an entrepreneur. Elias incorporated New Dutch on April

Esther Slubski (Esther) is an architect and also is Eliass mother.

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 4 of 21 PageID #: 4

on a PC computer in SolidWorks, a three-dimensional computer aided design (CAD) software

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 5 of 21 PageID #: 5

In or about February of 2007 Rosados bottle design was complete. Rosado is in

to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosados bottle design.

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 6 of 21 PageID #: 6

assign his rights in his bottle design to Elias or New Dutch.

On September 8, 2008, Esther filed U.S. design application number 29/324,244

On September 9, 2008, Esther filed U.S. design application number 29/324,227

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 7 of 21 PageID #: 7

Rosado is the sole inventor of the Bottle Patents.

the 244 Application, and the 816 Application.

the filing of the 227 Application.

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 8 of 21 PageID #: 8

Exhibits 5, 6, 7, and 8 attached hereto show side-by-side comparisons of Rosados

As demonstrated in Exhibits 5, 6, 7, and 8 attached hereto, Rosado is the true

Esther is not an inventor of the Bottle Patents.

deceptive intent on the part of Rosado.

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 9 of 21 PageID #: 9

The 2014 Silver Pentaward for Beverages, recognizing excellence in creative

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 10 of 21 PageID #: 10

Rosado repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 57 as

though fully set forth herein.

inventorship pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 256.

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 11 of 21 PageID #: 11

Rosado is the sole inventor of the claims in the 495 Patent.

deceptive intent on the part of Rosado.

Rosado repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 57 as

though fully set forth herein.

inventorship pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 256.

Rosado is the sole inventor of the claims in the 037 Patent.

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 12 of 21 PageID #: 12

deceptive intent on the part of Rosado.

Rosado repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 57 as

though fully set forth herein.

inventorship pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 256.

Rosado is the sole inventor of the claims in the 819 Patent.

deceptive intent on the part of Rosado.

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 13 of 21 PageID #: 13

Rosado repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 57 as

though fully set forth herein.

inventorship pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 256.

Rosado is the sole inventor of the claims in the 623 Patent.

deceptive intent on the part of Rosado.

Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 14 of 21 PageID #: 14