C&A Mktg. v. GoPro - Complaint

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID: 1
SILLS CUMMIS & GROSS P.C.

One Riverfront Plaza
Newark, New Jersey 07102-5400
Telephone (973) 643-7000
Facsimile (973) 643-6500
Attorneys for Plaintiff
C&A MARKETING, INC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
C&A MARKETING, INC., a New Jersey

corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
GOPRO, INC., a Delaware corporation,
Case No.
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT
INFRINGEMENT AND
REQUEST FOR INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Defendant.
Plaintiff C&A Marketing, Inc. (C&A Marketing) complains and alleges as follows
against Defendant GoPro, Inc. (GoPro). C&A Marketings principal place of business is 2
Bergen Turnpike, Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, 07660. On information and belief, GoPros
principal place of business is 3000 Clearview Way, San Mateo, California, 94402.
THE NATURE OF THE ACTION
1.
C&A Marketing brings this action to recover damages and obtain injunctive and
other relief arising from GoPros infringement of a C&A Marketing design patent. C&A
Marketing is the manufacturer, distributor, and marketer of Polaroid brand photography
equipment and accessories through a long-term licensing agreement. In January 2014, C&A
Marketing launched the Polaroid Cube, a point of view (POV) camera with a uniquely compact
footprint and distinctive cube shape. C&A Marketing protected its innovative design through a
COMPLAINT
design patent issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office and owns all right, title,
and interest in and to U.S. Patent No. D730,423 (the D423 patent). In July 2015, GoPro
launched the GoPro Hero4 Session, which both the public and industry observers immediately
noticed was strikingly similar to the Polaroid Cube, and which infringes the design protected by
the D423 patent. By this action, C&A Marketing seeks to stop GoPros unlawful conduct and
obtain compensation for the violations that have occurred thus far.
THE PARTIES
2.
Plaintiff C&A Marketing is a New Jersey corporation with its principal place of
business in Ridgefield Park, New Jersey.

3.
Defendant GoPro is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in
San Mateo, California.

JURISDICTION
4.
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331 (federal
question) and 1338(a) (patents).

5.
This Court has personal jurisdiction over GoPro because GoPro has committed
and continues to commit acts of infringement in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271 and, on information
and belief, places infringing products into the stream of commerce with the knowledge or
understanding that such products are sold in the State of New Jersey. On information and belief,
GoPro does extensive business with persons in this District. GoPro has also caused injury to
C&A Marketing within this District.
VENUE
6.
Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and 1400(b) in that
GoPro is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District. In addition, venue is proper because
C&A Marketings principal place of business is in this district and C&A Marketing suffered
harm in this district. Moreover, a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred
in this district.
COMPLAINT
BACKGROUND FACTS
7.
C&A Marketing is a leading national and international manufacturer and retailer
in all segments of the consumer electronics photography and imaging industries including
research and development, manufacturing, distribution, and retail. Each of the companys
principals has been active in the industry for over a quarter of a century. Through an exclusive
long term license agreement, C&A Marketing is the exclusive manufacturer, distributor, and
marketer of Polaroid brand mountable action cameras.
8.
The Polaroid brand is one of the most recognized names in the world, once
described by The Boston Globe as a juggernaut of innovation. Founded by Dr. Edwin Land in
1937, the company and brand were initially associated with products employing the patented
polarization invented by the founderin particular the now ubiquitous polarized sunglasses.
Over the years, the public came to associate Polaroid with instant cameras, which allowed
consumers to enjoy their pictures and share their memories in under a minute rather than wait
hours or days for a photo-processor to develop and print from film. The brand has also become
synonymous with ease of use, sharing memories, and the gratification that results from the
brands instant experience. Because of this, and the extensive efforts and investment of C&A
Marketing, the brand is experiencing a global resurgence and connecting with a new generation
of consumer.
9.
In January 2013, C&A Marketing engaged and partnered with Ammunition, LLC
(Ammunition), a California-based design studio, to design a new kind of point-of-view (POV),

mountable and wearable action camera. Ammunition, founded by Apples former design chief
Robert Brunner, is responsible for industrial designs ranging from Beats headphones to the
Square stand that transforms an iPad into a point-of-sale device. In August 2014, Ammunition
won best in show at the 2014 Industrial Design Society of America (IDSA) awards. Fast
Company magazine named Ammunition #1 in its list of The Worlds Top 10 Most Innovative
Companies of 2015 in Design.
COMPLAINT
10.
Industrial design was a guiding factor in the new POV cameras development
from the projects inception. Ammunition worked iteratively with C&A Marketing and
manufacturing vendors to keep the focus on design. Early prototypes, for example, came back to
Ammunition from manufacturing with a more elongated shape than the designer envisioned in
order to accommodate the battery. Ammunition and C&A Marketing rejected the compromise,
and in response split the battery into two pieces in order to make the product conform with the
designers vision of what was to become an iconic cubic camera.
11.
In early January 2014, C&A Marketing unveiled the results of the design efforts,
called the Polaroid Cube (pictured below), at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES 2014) in Las
Vegas, Nevada. The new Polaroid Cube was designed to become a part of consumers day-today lives, allowing them to capture of the moment memories. It is weatherproof, shockproof,
mountable, and rugged, all in a compact, distinctive and fun footprint. The interface has a multifunction button on top that controls power on & off (via long press), captures still images (with a
single click), and starts/stops video recording (with a double click). Due to its solid construction
and design, a Gizmodo reviewer noted, Its something a kid could go nuts with, without a
parent worrying that the delicate equipment might get busted.
12.
Reviews lauded the new product and its design. On January 6, 2014, during CES
2014, The Verge referred to the product as adorable. Fast Company called the product showCOMPLAINT
stopping. CNET referred to the Cube as eye-catching, with the headline, hands-free video in
an ultrasmall package. PCMag found its video quality comparable to that of current action
cams costing twice its price and more. It gave the Cube an Excellent rating, with the sum-up,
The Polaroid Cube is tiny, cute, simple to use, and produces surprisingly good video.
SlashGear reported, The Polaroid Cube renewed my interest in the Polaroid brand and provided
me a reason to break out my skateboard . . . . Is the Polaroid Cube worth the cash? Absolutely.
Digital Trends described the Cube as an easy-to-use action cam that gives a novel way to
shoot from new perspectives. In a review that focused closely on the design, Gizmodo referred
to the tiny, adorable camera, stating, Polaroid commissioned San Francisco-based studio
Ammunition to oversee the entire design, and it shows . . . . [T]he company is well-familiar with
making distinctive products with mass-market appeal. Theyve proven they know how to make
something that people not only want to use, but want to be seen using.
13.
C&A Marketing protected its innovative design through a design patent issued by
the United States Patent and Trademark Office, filed just prior to the Cubes unveiling at CES
2014. C&A Marketing owns all right, title, and interest in and to the D423 patent. The figure
on the face of the D423 patent is below.
14.
Not long after the Cubes unveiling, in July 2015, GoPro publicly launched the
GoPro Hero4 Session, a cube-shaped action camera, pictured below.
COMPLAINT
15.
On information and belief, the GoPro Hero4 Session is GoPros first cube-shaped
product. The immediate predecessor to this product (the GoPro Hero4) and the version that was
on sale the previous year, (the GoPro Hero3+) are pictured below. These models share a design
theme common to all predecessor GoPro cameras back to the original GoPro HERO 35mm,
originally launched in 2005. They are not cube-shaped.
16.
Observers immediately noticed the similarities between the new GoPro Hero4
Session and the Polaroid Cube. The Motley Fool reported: At first glance, the Hero 4 Session
looks like a copy of the Polaroid Cube, a $100 camera which turned heads with its cute form
factor and retro design aesthetics. . . . [I]ts tiny form factor apparently convinced GoPro to create
the Hero 4 Session. Slashgear wrote that the Hero4 Session was akin to the new Polaroid
COMPLAINT
Cube+, complete with one form factor youd easily mistake for the other, and that it looks
very, very similar in size to the Cube+. Digital Photography Review similarly noted, [T]his
new camera looks just like the Polaroid Cube[.]
17.
Consumers noticed the similarities between GoPros Hero4 Session and the
Polaroid Cube as well, expressing that opinion in comments on Internet reviews and videos. One
consumer uploaded a video entitled, GoPro Hero4 Session: Copying the Polaroid Cube?!
Other comments include, Poo[r] Polaroid . . . Their little Polaroid cube . . . definitely looked
interesting. And here comes go pro [sic] blatantly copying them off; Looks/seems identical to
the Polaroid CUBE; and So its a copy of the Polaroid Cube?
18.
A side-by-side comparison of the GoPro Hero4 Session and the corresponding
figure from the D423 patent is below.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(Infringement of U.S. Patent No. D730,423)
19.
C&A Marketing incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs
1-18 above.
COMPLAINT
20.
C&A Marketing is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the D423
patent, issued on May 26, 2015, and entitled Cubic Action Camera. The D423 patent is
attached as Exhibit A.
21.
On information and belief, GoPro has infringed and continues to infringe the
D423 patent by using, selling and/or offering to sell in the United States, and/or importing into
the United States, the Hero4 Session discussed in this Complaint, which embodies the design
covered by the D423 design patent. GoPros infringing activities violate 35 U.S.C. 271.
22.
GoPros infringement is without the consent or other authority of C&A
Marketing. GoPro is not licensed under the D423 patent.

23.
C&A Marketing has been damaged by GoPros acts in an amount as yet
unknown. C&A Marketing has no adequate legal remedy. Unless enjoined by this Court,
GoPros continued acts of infringement will cause C&A Marketing substantial and irreparable
harm. Under 35 U.S.C. 283, C&A Marketing is entitled to an injunction barring GoPro from
further infringement of the D423 patent.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, C&A Marketing prays for relief, as follows:
1.
A judgment that GoPro has infringed the D423 patent;
2.
An order and judgment preliminarily and permanently enjoining GoPro and its
officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and all others acting in privity or in concert with
them, and their parents, subsidiaries, divisions, successors and assigns, from further acts of
infringement of the D423 patent;
3.
A judgment awarding C&A Marketing all damages adequate to compensate for
GoPros infringement of the D423 patent, and in no event less than a reasonable royalty for
GoPros acts of infringement, including all pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at the
maximum rate permitted by law;
4.
An order awarding C&A Marketing all of GoPros profits from sales of infringing
products, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 289, together with prejudgment and post-judgment interest;
COMPLAINT
5.
Actual damages suffered by C&A Marketing as a result of GoPros unlawful
conduct, in an amount to be proven at trial, together with prejudgment and post-judgment

interest;
6.
Costs of suit and reasonable attorneys fees; and
7.
Any other remedy to which C&A Marketing may be entitled.
Dated: November 3, 2015
By:
s/Mark S. Olinsky
MARK S. OLINSKY
(973) 643-7000
C&A MARKETING, INC.
OF COUNSEL:
MICHAEL A. JACOBS
NATHAN B. SABRI
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105-2482
COMPLAINT
JURY DEMAND
Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, C&A Marketing demands a
trial by jury as to all issues so triable in this action.
By:
COMPLAINT
s/Mark S. Olinsky
MARK S. OLINSKY
(973) 643-7000
C&A MARKETING, INC.
10
LOCAL CIVIL RULE 11.2 CERTIFICATION

I, counsel of record for plaintiff in the above-referenced matter, hereby certify that the
matter in controversy is not the subject of any other action pending in any court, or any pending
arbitration or administrative proceeding.
I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge.
By:
COMPLAINT
s/Mark S. Olinsky
MARK S. OLINSKY
(973) 643-7000
C&A MARKETING, INC.
11
CERTIFICATION OF NONARBITRABILITY
PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 201.1(d)
I, counsel of record for plaintiff in the above-referenced matter, hereby certify that the
relief requested in this matter includes non-monetary relief, and the damages potentially
recoverable in this matter exceed the sum of $150,000, exclusive of interest and costs and of any
claim for punitive damages. Accordingly, Local Rule 201.1(d) does not apply to this matter.
I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge.
By:
COMPLAINT
s/Mark S. Olinsky
MARK S. OLINSKY
(973) 643-7000
C&A MARKETING, INC.
12
Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1-1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID: 13
EXHIBIT A
CIVIL COVER SHEET
@I // %HTe) ,-*,-&
JWT @I // RXeX[ RêTa bWTTc P]S cWT X]Uâ\PcX^] R^]cPX]TS WTaTX] ]TXcWTa aT_[PRT ]â bd__[T\T]c cWT UX[X]V P]S bTaeXRT Û _[TPSX]Vb â ^cWTa _P_Tab Pb aT`dXaTS Qh [Pf' TgRT_c Pb
_aêXSTS Qh [^RP[ ad[Tb Û R^dac) JWXb Uâ\' P__aêTS Qh cWT @dSXRXP[ 8^]UTaT]RT Û cWT K]XcTS IcPcTb X] IT_cT\QTa ,42/' Xb aT`dXaTS Uâ cWT dbT Û cWT 8[TaZ Û 8^dac Uâ cWT
_da_^bT Û X]XcXPcX]V cWT RXeX[ S^RZTc bWTTc) "7++ /37869)8/437 43 3+;8 5'-+ 4, 8./7 ,462%#
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS
DEFENDANTS
C&A Marketing, Inc.
GoPro, Inc.
Bergen County, NJ
(b) 8^d]ch Û HTbXST]RT Û <Xabc BXbcTS F[PX]cXUU
8^d]ch Û HTbXST]RT Û <Xabc BXbcTS 9TUT]SP]c
"+;)+58 /3 9%7% 51'/38/,, )'7+7#

DEJ;5
(c) 6ccâ]Thb ",DJF 3=FA$ '@@JAKK$ +F=DE =G@ 8AEAICHGA 3MF>AJ#
San Mateo County, CA
"/3 9%7% 51'/38/,, )'7+7 431<#

?D B6D9 8ED9;CD6J?ED 86I;I' KI; J>; BE86J?ED E<
J>; JH68J E< B6D9 ?DLEBL;9)
6ccâ]Thb "/B 0GHOG#
Sills Cummis & Gross P.C.; One Riverfront Plaza, Newark, NJ, 07102;
MOlinsky@SillsCummis.com; 973-643-5402
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION "5E=?A =G S;T DG 4GA (HP 4GEQ#

" ,
K)I) =êTa]\T]c
F[PX]cXUU
" .
<TSTaP[ GdTbcX^]
"9%7% -HNAJGFAGL 3HL = 5=JLQ#
" -
K)I) =êTa]\T]c
9TUT]SP]c
" /
9XeTabXch
"/G@D?=LA )DLDRAGKCDI HB 5=JLDAK DG /LAF ///#
III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES "5E=?A =G S;T DG 4GA (HP BHJ 5E=DGLDBB
",HJ *DNAJKDLQ )=KAK 4GEQ#
PTF
8XcXiT] Û JWXb IcPcT
" ,
DEF
" ,
=G@ 4GA (HP BHJ *ABAG@=GL#

PTF
DEF
?]Râ_âPcTS HJ FaX]RX_P[ F[PRT
" /
" /
Û 7dbX]Tbb ?] JWXb IcPcT
8XcXiT] Û 6]^cWTa IcPcT
" -
"
?]Râ_âPcTS =G@ FaX]RX_P[ F[PRT

Û 7dbX]Tbb ?] 6]^cWTa IcPcT
" 0
" 0
8XcXiT] â IdQYTRc Û P
<âTXV] 8^d]cah
" .
"
<âTXV] DPcX^]
" 1
" 1
IV. NATURE OF SUIT "5E=?A =G S;T DG 4GA (HP 4GEQ#

CONTRACT
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
TORTS
,,+ ?]bdaP]RT
,-+ CPaX]T
,.+ CX[[Ta 6Rc
,/+ DTV^cXPQ[T ?]bcad\T]c
,0+ HTRêTah Û EeTa_Ph\T]c
$ ;]UâRT\T]c Û @dSV\T]c
,0, CTSXRPaT 6Rc
,0- HTRêTah Û 9TUPd[cTS
IcdST]c B^P]b
%;gR[dSTb LTcTaP]b&
,0. HTRêTah Û EeTa_Ph\T]c
Û LTcTaP]kb 7T]TUXcb
,1+ Ic^RZW^[STabk IdXcb
,4+ EcWTa 8^]caPRc
,40 8^]caPRc Fa^SdRc BXPQX[Xch
,41 <aP]RWXbT
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
REAL PROPERTY
-,+ BP]S 8^]ST\]PcX^]
--+ <âTR[^bdaT
-.+ HT]c BTPbT $ ;YTRc\T]c
-/+ Jâcb c^ BP]S
-/0 Jâc Fa^SdRc BXPQX[Xch
-4+ 6[[ EcWTa HTP[ Fa^_Tach
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
PERSONAL INJURY
.,+ 6Xa_[P]T
.,0 6Xa_[P]T Fa^SdRc
BXPQX[Xch
.-+ 6bbPd[c' BXQT[ $
I[P]STa
..+ <TSTaP[ ;\_[^hTabk
BXPQX[Xch
./+ CPaX]T
./0 CPaX]T Fa^SdRc
BXPQX[Xch
.0+ C^câ LTWXR[T
.00 C^câ LTWXR[T
Fa^SdRc BXPQX[Xch
.1+ EcWTa FTab^]P[
?]Ydah
.1- FTab^]P[ ?]Ydah (
CTSXRP[ CP[_aPRcXRT
CIVIL RIGHTS
//+ EcWTa 8XeX[ HXVWcb
//, L^cX]V
//- ;\_[^h\T]c
//. >^dbX]V*
6RR^\\^SPcX^]b
//0 6\Ta) f*9XbPQX[XcXTb (
;\_[^h\T]c
//1 6\Ta) f*9XbPQX[XcXTb (
EcWTa
//3 ;SdRPcX^]
FORFEITURE/PENALTY
PERSONAL INJURY
" .10 FTab^]P[ ?]Ydah (
Fa^SdRc BXPQX[Xch
" .12 >TP[cW 8PaT*
FWPa\PRTdcXRP[
FTab^]P[ ?]Ydah
Fa^SdRc BXPQX[Xch
" .13 6bQTbc^b FTab^]P[
?]Ydah Fa^SdRc
BXPQX[Xch
PERSONAL PROPERTY
" .2+ EcWTa <aPdS
" .2, JadcW X] BT]SX]V
" .3+ EcWTa FTab^]P[
Fa^_Tach 9P\PVT
" .30 Fa^_Tach 9P\PVT
Fa^SdRc BXPQX[Xch
PRISONER PETITIONS
Habeas Corpus:
" /1. 6[XT] 9TcPX]TT
" 0,+ C^cX^]b c^ LPRPcT
IT]cT]RT
" 0.+ =T]TaP[
" 0.0 9TPcW FT]P[ch
Other:
" 0/+ CP]SP\db $ EcWTa
" 00+ 8XeX[ HXVWcb
" 000 FaXb^] 8^]SXcX^]
" 01+ 8XeX[ 9TcPX]TT (
8^]SXcX^]b Û
8^]UX]T\T]c
" 1-0 9adV HT[PcTS ITXidaT

Û Fa^_Tach -, KI8 33,
" 14+ EcWTa
BANKRUPTCY
" /-- 6__TP[ -3 KI8 ,03
" /-. MXcWSaPfP[
-3 KI8 ,02
PROPERTY RIGHTS
" 3-+ 8^_haXVWcb
" 3.+ FPcT]c
" 3/+ JaPST\PaZ
"
"
"
"
"
"
LABOR
2,+ <PXa BPQâ IcP]SPaSb
6Rc
2-+ BPQâ*CP]PVT\T]c
HT[PcX^]b
2/+ HPX[fPh BPQâ 6Rc
20, <P\X[h P]S CTSXRP[
BTPeT 6Rc
24+ EcWTa BPQâ BXcXVPcX^]
24, ;\_[^hTT HTcXaT\T]c
?]R^\T ITRdaXch 6Rc
"
"
"
"
"
SOCIAL SECURITY
31, >?6 %,.40UU&
31- 7[PRZ Bd]V %4-.&
31. 9?M8*9?MM %/+0%V&&
31/ II?9 JXc[T NL?
310 HI? %/+0%V&&
FEDERAL TAX SUITS

" 32+ JPgTb %K)I) F[PX]cXUU
â 9TUT]SP]c&
" 32, ?HIjJWXaS FPach
-1 KI8 21+4
OTHER STATUTES
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
.20 <P[bT 8[PX\b 6Rc

/++ IcPcT HTP__âcX^]\T]c
/,+ 6]cXcadbc
/.+ 7P]Zb P]S 7P]ZX]V
/0+ 8^\\TaRT
/1+ 9T_âcPcX^]
/2+ HPRZTcTTa ?]U[dT]RTS P]S
8âad_c EaVP]XiPcX^]b
/3+ 8^]bd\Ta 8aTSXc
/4+ 8PQ[T*IPc JL
30+ ITRdaXcXTb*8^\\^SXcXTb*
;gRWP]VT
34+ EcWTa IcPcdcâh 6RcX^]b
34, 6VaXRd[cdaP[ 6Rcb
34. ;]eXa^]\T]cP[ CPccTab
340 <aTTS^\ Û ?]Uâ\PcX^]
6Rc
341 6aQXcaPcX^]
344 6S\X]XbcaPcXeT Fa^RTSdaT
6Rc*HTeXTf â 6__TP[ Û
6VT]Rh 9TRXbX^]
40+ 8^]bcXcdcX^]P[Xch Û
IcPcT IcPcdcTb
IMMIGRATION
" /1- DPcdaP[XiPcX^] 6__[XRPcX^]
" /10 EcWTa ?\\XVaPcX^]
6RcX^]b
V. ORIGIN "5E=?A =G S;T DG 4GA (HP 4GEQ#

" , EaXVX]P[
Fa^RTTSX]V
" - HT\êTS Ua^\

IcPcT 8^dac
" .
HT\P]STS Ua^\
6__T[[PcT 8^dac
" / HTX]bcPcTS â
HT^_T]TS
" 0 JaP]bUTaaTS Ua^\

6]^cWTa 9XbcaXRc
"KIA?DBQ#
" 1 Cd[cXSXbcaXRc
BXcXVPcX^]
8XcT cWT K)I) 8XeX[ IcPcdcT d]STa fWXRW h^d PaT UX[X]V (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity#5
28 U.S.C. 1338; 35 U.S.C. 271, et seq.
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION 7aXTU STbRaX_cX^] Û RPdbT5
This is an action for patent infringement arising out of the patent laws of the United States of America.
" 8>;8A ?< J>?I ?I 6 CLASS ACTION

VII. REQUESTED IN
KD9;H HKB; -.' <)H)8e)F)
COMPLAINT:
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
"7AA DGKLJM?LDHGK#&
IF ANY
@K9=;
96J;
8>;8A O;I ^][h XU ST\P]STS X] R^\_[PX]c5

" OTb
" D^
JURY DEMAND:
DEMAND $
9E8A;J DKC7;H
I?=D6JKH; E< 6JJEHD;O E< H;8EH9
s/Mark S. Olinsky
11/03/2015
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
H;8;?FJ #
6CEKDJ
6FFBO?D= ?<F
@K9=;
C6=) @K9=;

C&amp;A Mktg. v. GoPro - 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

C&amp;A Mktg. v. GoPro - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID: 1

SILLS CUMMIS & GROSS P.C.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

C&A MARKETING, INC., a New Jersey

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 2 of 12 PageID: 2

business in Ridgefield Park, New Jersey.

Defendant GoPro is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in

San Mateo, California.

question) and 1338(a) (patents).

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 3 of 12 PageID: 3

C&A Marketing is a leading national and international manufacturer and retailer

(Ammunition), a California-based design studio, to design a new kind of point-of-view (POV),

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 4 of 12 PageID: 4

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 5 of 12 PageID: 5

GoPro Hero4 Session, a cube-shaped action camera, pictured below.

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 6 of 12 PageID: 6

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 7 of 12 PageID: 7

A side-by-side comparison of the GoPro Hero4 Session and the corresponding

figure from the D423 patent is below.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

C&A Marketing incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 8 of 12 PageID: 8

GoPros infringement is without the consent or other authority of C&A

Marketing. GoPro is not licensed under the D423 patent.

C&A Marketing has been damaged by GoPros acts in an amount as yet

A judgment that GoPro has infringed the D423 patent;

A judgment awarding C&A Marketing all damages adequate to compensate for

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 9 of 12 PageID: 9

Actual damages suffered by C&A Marketing as a result of GoPros unlawful

conduct, in an amount to be proven at trial, together with prejudgment and post-judgment

Costs of suit and reasonable attorneys fees; and

Any other remedy to which C&A Marketing may be entitled.

Dated: November 3, 2015

SILLS CUMMIS & GROSS P.C.

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 10 of 12 PageID: 10

SILLS CUMMIS & GROSS P.C.

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 11 of 12 PageID: 11

LOCAL CIVIL RULE 11.2 CERTIFICATION

Dated: November 3, 2015

SILLS CUMMIS & GROSS P.C.

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 12 of 12 PageID: 12

Dated: November 3, 2015

SILLS CUMMIS & GROSS P.C.

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1-1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID: 13

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1-1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 2 of 9 PageID: 14

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1-1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 3 of 9 PageID: 15

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1-1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 4 of 9 PageID: 16

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1-1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 5 of 9 PageID: 17

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1-1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 6 of 9 PageID: 18

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1-1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 7 of 9 PageID: 19

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1-1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 8 of 9 PageID: 20

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1-1 Filed 11/03/15 Page 9 of 9 PageID: 21

Case 2:15-cv-07854-KSH-CLW Document 1-2 Filed 11/03/15 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 22

CIVIL COVER SHEET

C&A Marketing, Inc.

(b) 8^d]ch ^U HTbXST]RT ^U <Xabc BXbcTS F[PX]cXUU

8^d]ch ^U HTbXST]RT ^U <Xabc BXbcTS 9TUT]SP]c

"+;)+58 /3 9%7% 51'/38/,, )'7+7#

(c) 6cc^a]Thb ",DJF 3=FA$ '@@JAKK$ +F=DE =G@ 8AEAICHGA 3MF>AJ#

San Mateo County, CA

"/3 9%7% 51'/38/,, )'7+7 431<#

6cc^a]Thb "/B 0GHOG#

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION "5E=?A =G S;T DG 4GA (HP 4GEQ#

=G@ 4GA (HP BHJ *ABAG@=GL#

C&A Mktg. v. GoPro - Complaint

C&A Mktg. v. GoPro - Complaint