Beaumont Prods. v. Willert Home Prods. - Complaint

Case 1:17-cv-00522-SCJ Document 1 Filed 02/10/17 Page 1 of 23
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
BEAUMONT PRODUCTS, INC., )

)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No.
)
WILLERT HOME PRODUCTS, INC., ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
)
Defendant. )
)
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Beaumont Products, Inc. (Beaumont) states its Complaint against
Defendant Willert Home Products, Inc. (Defendant), as follows:
1. This is an action for trade dress infringement and unfair competition
under the trademark laws of the United States, Title 15, United States Code,
Georgias Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, O.C.G.A. 10-1-371 et. seq., and
the common law; and for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the
United States, Title 35, United States Code.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over all causes of action set
forth herein pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1121, 28 U.S.C. 1331, and 28 U.S.C.
1338.
3. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because
Defendant transacts business within the State of Georgia, has at least one employee
with an office and residence in the State of Georgia, has infringed Beaumonts
trade dress and patent rights within this State, and is continuing to infringe
Beaumonts trade dress and patent rights within this State.
4. Venue is proper in this judicial district and division pursuant to 28
U.S.C. 1391 and 1400.
THE PARTIES
5. Plaintiff Beaumont is a Georgia Corporation having a principal place
of business at 1560 Big Shanty Dr., Kennesaw, Georgia 30144.
6. Beaumont manufactures, markets, and sells air fresheners, odor
eliminators, and related products in this judicial district and throughout the United
States.
7. Beaumont is the owner of trade dress rights in and to the
nonfunctional design features of certain air freshener and odor eliminator products.
2
8. Beaumont is the owner, by assignment, of all right, title, and interest
in and to United States Patent No. D491,257 for Container for Solid Air
Freshener, including the right to bring suit for patent infringement.
9. Defendant is a Missouri Corporation having a principal place of
business at 4044 Park Ave., St. Louis, Missouri 63110.
10. Upon information and belief, Defendant has and continues to infringe
Beaumonts patent and trade dress rights in the State of Georgia, within this
judicial district, and elsewhere throughout the United States. Upon information
and belief, Defendant is subject to the personal jurisdiction of this Court.
THE CONTROVERSY
11. For at least 13 years, Beaumont has marketed and sold solid air
freshener and odor eliminator products that comprise disc-shaped plastic containers
that are filled with an air freshener/odor eliminator composition in a cake format,
including without limitation the Citrus Magic air freshener products.
Beaumonts Citrus Magic air fresheners exhibit unique design features that
comprise Beaumonts trade dress. See Exhibit A.
12. Beaumont adopted a distinctive trade dress to market and sell air
freshener/odor eliminator products, including without limitation Beaumonts
Citrus Magic air fresheners, which include at least the following trade dress
3
elements (referred to hereinafter as Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade
Dress):
1) a container for a solid air freshener in the shape of a disc,

with a circular disc-shaped bottom with an upwardly
projecting annular side wall;
2) a circular label on the bottom providing instruction and

information about the product;
3) a lid for the container that includes a downwardly curved

rim that snaps to an upper edge of the side wall of the
container, such that the lid merges with the side wall ;
4) air circulation openings in the lid that are covered by and

hidden by a removable label; and
5) the label is circular to match the shape of the lid and is of

contrasting color with the material of the container.
The elements of Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress are depicted in
the photographs and pictures attached as Exhibit A.
13. In addition, Beaumont adopted a distinctive trade dress shelf
organizer/display to market and sell air freshener/odor eliminator products,
including without limitation Beaumonts Citrus Magic air fresheners, which
includes at least the following trade dress elements (referred to hereinafter as
Beaumonts Air Freshener Display Trade Dress):
1) an open top elongated support tray for receiving six air

freshener containers;
4
2) the tray maintains the containers in a neat edge standing

alignment with one behind another, with the containers
respective labels facing forward;
3) the tray is configured to hold six of the containers; and
4) as each container is removed from the tray, the next

container and its label are exposed for viewing.
The elements of Beaumonts Air Freshener Display Trade Dress are depicted in the
photographs attached as Exhibit B.
14. Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener
Display Trade Dress have been advertised and distributed continuously throughout
the United States for at least approximately 13 years.
15. Beaumont first used its Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air
Freshener Display Trade Dress on air freshener/odor eliminator products long before
the Defendant first used the same trade dress on its products. Beaumont is the
original owner of Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air
Freshener Display Trade Dress.
16. The above-named elements of Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging
Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress are non-functional.
17. The above-named elements and the whole of Beaumonts Air
Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress are
highly distinctive.
5
18. Beaumont, through its significant effort, skill, and expertise, has
acquired and now enjoys substantial goodwill and a valuable reputation under its
distinctive trade dress. The maintenance of standards of quality and excellence by
Beaumont has contributed to this valuable goodwill and reputation throughout the
United States.
19. In addition to being inherently distinctive, as a result of Beaumonts
long, exclusive, continuous, and wide-spread use and advertising of its Air Freshener
Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress, Beaumonts Air
Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress have
become associated with Beaumont. Beaumonts customers and the general public
associate Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener
Display Trade Dress as denoting that the articles comprising such trade dress
originate from a single source, i.e., Beaumont.
20. Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress has acquired
secondary meaning as trade dress in relation to solid air fresheners, and has become
an asset of substantial value as a symbol of Beaumont, its quality name, quality
products, and goodwill.
21. After Beaumont established rights to its Air Freshener Packaging
Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress, Defendant has adopted and is
6
using Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display
Trade Dress on products of its own in Georgia and in interstate commerce for the
sale of Defendants air fresheners, particularly Defendants airBOSS Everyday
Odor Eliminator air freshener. Photographs and renderings of Defendants
airBOSS Everyday Odor Eliminator air freshener are attached hereto as Exhibit
C. A photograph of Defendants airBOSS Everyday Odor Eliminator air
freshener and air freshener shelf organizer/display, as displayed and/or offered for
sale in at least Meijer stores, are attached hereto as Exhibit D.
22. Defendant continues to market and sell air freshener/odor eliminator
products having disc-shaped plastic containers that contain an air freshener
composition in a gel- or cake-like format, including without limitation the
airBOSS Everyday Odor Eliminator air freshener (referred to hereinafter as
Defendants Infringing Products).
23. Defendant adopted at least the following product packaging trade
dress elements for Defendants Infringing Products:
1) a container for a solid air freshener in the shape of a disc, with a

circular disc-shaped bottom with an upwardly projecting
annular side wall;
2) a circular label on the bottom providing instruction and

information about the product;
7
3) a lid for the container that includes a downwardly curved rim

that snaps to an upper edge of the side wall of the container,
such that the lid merges with the side wall;
4) air circulation openings in the lid that are covered by and

hidden by a removable label; and
5) the label is circular to match the shape of the lid and is of

contrasting color with the material of the container.
24. In addition, Defendant adopted at least the following shelf
organizer/display trade dress elements:
1) an open top elongated support tray for receiving six air

freshener containers;
2) the tray maintains the containers in a neat edge standing

alignment with one behind another, with the containers
respective labels facing forward;
3) the tray is configured to hold six of the containers; and
4) as each container is removed from the tray, the next container

and its label are exposed for viewing.
25. In addition to infringing the above elements of Beaumonts product
packaging trade dress, Defendant has exactly copied the following elements of
Beaumonts Citrus Magic product packaging:
1) the label being removable by a tab that protrudes outwardly

from the face of the label;
2) the container holding 8 ounces of air freshening/odor eliminator

product;
8
3) the container having an approximate diameter of 5.5 inches; and
4) the container having a height of approximately 1.75 inches.
26. Defendant has hired a former Beaumont employee, Mr. Garnell Lewis. Mr.
Lewis was the Vice President of Sales-Key Accounts for Beaumont from August
2011 until October 2013. During that time, Mr. Lewiss office was at Beaumonts
headquarters in Kennesaw, Georgia. At Beaumont, Mr. Lewis acquired intimate
knowledge of, and was deeply involved with, the Citrus Magic products. He
presented features and benefits of the Citrus Magic products to key accounts, was a
member of the Beaumont management team, and worked closely with both the
Research & Development and Operations departments. In addition, Mr. Lewis knew
the formula, pricing, costs, and prior litigation related to the Citrus Magic packaging
trade dress. He was intimately involved in all aspects of the Citrus Magic products
trade secrets. As such, he was much more than a mere rank-and-file employee.
27. In October 2013, Mr. Lewis left Beaumont to joint Defendant as the
Director of Sales, based out of Atlanta, Georgia. Upon information and belief, one of
Mr. Lewiss responsibilities is the airBOSS brand that currently offers the infringing
airBoss Everyday Odor Eliminator product. Additionally, it appears that this
product was introduced substantially after Mr. Lewis joined Defendant.
9
28. As a result of hiring a former Beaumont employee over a year prior to
the introduction of Defendants Infringing Products, Defendant had actual and
constructive knowledge of Beaumonts trade dress at the time of introduction of
Defendants Infringing Products and Defendants infringement is therefore knowing
and willful.
29. On June 8, 2004, United States Patent No. D491,257 (the 257 patent)
was duly and legally issued for Container for Solid Air Freshener. Beaumont holds
all rights and interest in the 257 patent. A true and correct copy of the 257 patent is
attached hereto as Exhibit E.
30. Defendant has in the past and continues to make, have made, offer for
sale, sell, use, and/or import into the United States one or more products in containers
that infringe Beaumonts 257 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271, including, but
not necessarily limited to, Defendants air freshener/odor eliminator products
marketed and sold under the designation airBOSS Everyday Odor Eliminator.
10
COUNT I:
FEDERAL TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT (15 U.S.C. 1125(a))
31. Beaumont realleges and incorporates herein the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 30 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
32. The adoption and use by Defendant of Beaumonts distinctive and
non-functional Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display
Trade Dress in the State of Georgia and across the United States for its air
freshener/odor eliminator products creates a likelihood of consumer confusion,
deception, and mistake, in violation of Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.
1125(a).
33. By Defendants conduct, including but not limited to its unauthorized
use of Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener
Display Trade Dress, Defendant will receive the benefit of Beaumonts goodwill
achieved over time and at great labor and expense by Beaumont. Defendants use
of Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display
Trade Dress will unjustly enrich Defendant and will place Beaumonts valuable
reputation and goodwill in the hands of Defendant, over whom Beaumont has no
control.
34. Defendants use of Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress
and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress falsely indicates to the consumer public
11
that Defendant and/or Defendants goods are related, connected, sponsored,
approved by, or affiliated with Beaumont and its goods.
35. Defendants activities are likely to cause consumer confusion,
mistake, and deception between Beaumonts goods and those of Defendant.
36. Upon information and belief, Defendants infringement was, and
continues to be, willful.
37. Upon information and belief, Defendant will, if not enjoined by this
Court, continue its acts of trade dress infringement set forth above, which acts have
caused, and will continue to cause, Beaumont immediate and irreparable harm.
Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1116 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a), Beaumont is entitled to an
Order of this Court enjoining Defendants unlawful activities. Beaumont has no
adequate remedy at law.
38. As a result of Defendants conduct set forth above, Beaumont has been,
and continues to be, irreparably damaged. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117, Beaumont
is entitled to a judgment for: (1) Defendants profits; (2) damages sustained by
Beaumont; (3) treble damages; (4) such sum as the Court deems just; (5) Beaumonts
attorneys fees; (6) Beaumonts costs of this action; and (7) interest.
12
COUNT II:
FEDERAL UNFAIR COMPETITION (15 U.S.C. 1125(a))
40. This is an action for trade dress infringement and unfair competition
under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
41. The adoption and use by Defendant of Beaumonts distinctive and
non-functional Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display
Trade Dress in the State of Georgia and across the United States for its air
freshener/odor eliminator products constitutes unfair competition in violation of
Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
42. By Defendants above-noted conduct, Defendant will receive the
benefit of Beaumonts goodwill achieved over time and at great labor and expense
by Beaumont. Defendants use of Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade
Dress and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress will unjustly enrich Defendant and
will place Beaumonts valuable reputation and goodwill in the hands of Defendant,
over whom Beaumont has no control.
43. Defendants above-noted conduct falsely indicates to the consumer
public that Defendant and/or Defendants goods are related, connected, sponsored,
approved by, or affiliated with Beaumont and its goods.
13
44. Defendants activities are likely to cause consumer confusion,
mistake, and deception between Beaumonts goods and those of Defendant.
45. Defendants conduct constitutes a false description or representation
of Defendants products, and is unlawful under 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
46. Upon information and belief, Defendants unfair competition was, and
Court, continue its acts of unfair competition set forth above, which acts have caused,
and will continue to cause, Beaumont immediate and irreparable harm. Pursuant to
15 U.S.C. 1116 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a), Beaumont is entitled to an Order of this
Court enjoining Defendants unlawful activities. Beaumont has no adequate remedy
at law.
and continues to be, irreparably damaged. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117, Beaumont
is entitled to a judgment for: (1) Defendants profits; (2) damages sustained by
Beaumont; (3) treble damages; (4) such sum as the Court deems just; (5) Beaumonts
attorneys fees; (6) Beaumonts costs of this action; and (7) interest.
14
COUNT III:
FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN AND
FALSE DESCRIPTION OR REPRESENTATION UNDER
GEORGIAS UNIFORM DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACT
50. This count is for trade dress infringement and unfair competition
under Georgias Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, O.C.G.A. 10-1-371 et.
seq.
51. The adoption and use by Defendant of Beaumonts Air Freshener
Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress in the State of
Georgia for its air freshener/odor eliminator products constitutes a deceptive trade
practice in violation of O.C.G.A. 10-1-372.
52. By Defendants conduct, including but not limited to its unauthorized
use of Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener
Display Trade Dress, Defendant will receive the benefit of Beaumonts goodwill
achieved over time and at great labor and expense by Beaumont. Defendants use
of Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display
Trade Dress will unjustly enrich Defendant and will place Beaumonts valuable
reputation and goodwill in the hands of Defendant, over whom Beaumont has no
control.
15
53. Defendants use of Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress
and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress causes a likelihood of confusion or of
misunderstanding as to the source of Defendants goods, or a likelihood of
confusion or of misunderstanding as to the sponsorship, approval, or certification
of Defendants goods by Beaumont.
54. Defendants activities cause a likelihood of confusion or of
misunderstanding as to the affiliation, connection, or association with Beaumont,
and a likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding as to the certification by
Beaumont of Defendants goods.
55. Upon information and belief, Defendants infringement was, and
Court, continue its acts of trade dress infringement set forth above, which acts have
caused, and will continue to cause, Beaumont immediate and irreparable harm.
Pursuant to O.C.G.A. 10-1-373, Beaumont is entitled to an Order of this Court
enjoining Defendants unlawful activities. Beaumont has no adequate remedy at law.
and continues to be, irreparably damaged. Pursuant to O.C.G.A. 10-1-373,
16
Beaumont is entitled to a judgment for: (1) such sum as the Court deems just;
(2) Beaumonts attorneys fees; (3) Beaumonts costs of this action; and (4) interest.
COUNT IV:
COMMON LAW MISAPPROPRIATION AND UNFAIR COMPETITION
59. The Defendants aforesaid acts constitute misappropriation of
Beaumonts trade dress and goodwill and are in violation of Georgias Common
Law of Unfair Competition since the Defendants infringement of Beaumonts Air
Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress is likely
to cause confusion, mistake, and/or deception.
60. Defendants conduct described herein is intentional and willful.
61. Beaumont reserves its right to proffer evidence and seek an award of
punitive damages.
62. Absent entry of an injunction by this Court, Beaumont will continue
to suffer irreparable injury to its goodwill and reputation. Beaumont has already
suffered substantial damages as a result of the Defendants acts of
misappropriation and unfair competition.
17
COUNT V:
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. D491,257
64. On June 8, 2004, United States Patent No. D491,257 (the 257 patent)
was duly and legally issued for Container for Solid Air Freshener. Beaumont holds
all rights and interest in the 257 patent. A true and correct copy of the 257 patent is
attached hereto as Exhibit F.
65. Beaumont has marked products covered by the 257 patent with the text
US Patent Number D491,257 or a variation thereof, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 287.
66. Upon information and belief, Defendant has infringed directly and/or
indirectly and continues to infringe directly and/or indirectly the 257 patent by
manufacturing, using, selling, importing, and/or offering for sale solid air
freshener/odor eliminator products in containers that infringe the 257 patent,
including, but not necessarily limited to, Defendants air freshener/odor eliminator
products marketed and sold under the designation airBOSS Everyday Odor
Eliminator.
67. An ordinary observer with knowledge of the prior art would find that
Defendants Infringing Products are substantial similar to the 257 patent giving such
attention as a purchaser usually gives.
18
68. The acts of infringement of the 257 patent by Defendant has caused
damage to Beaumont, and Beaumont is entitled to recover from the Defendant the
damages sustained by Beaumont as a result of its wrongful acts in an amount subject
to proof at trial.
69. The infringement of Beaumonts exclusive rights under the 257
patent by the Defendant will continue to damage Beaumont, causing irreparable
harm, for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Beaumont prays that the Court enter judgment in its favor
and against Defendant follows:
a. That the elements of Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade
Dress and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress be adjudged to be protectable and
infringed by Defendant;
b. That Defendant be ordered to pay profits from its infringement of
Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display
Trade Dress, with interest;
c. That Defendant be ordered to pay all damages sustained by Beaumont
on account of, inter alia, Defendants trade dress infringement, unfair competition,
19
and injury to Beaumonts business reputation pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1051 et. seq.,
with interest;
d. That such damages assessed against Defendant be enhanced or trebled
as provided by 15 U.S.C. 1117;
e. That Defendant be required to pay to Beaumont monetary damages to
be used for corrective advertising to be conducted by Beaumont;
f. That Defendant be ordered to pay Beaumonts attorneys fees and
costs resulting from Defendants infringement of Beaumonts Air Freshener
Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress, with interest;
g. That Defendant, its officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys,
and those persons in active concert or participation with it, be preliminarily and
permanently enjoined and restrained from further infringement of Beaumonts Air
Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress;
h. That Defendant be directed to file with the Court and serve on
Beaumont, no later than thirty (30) days after the issuance of an injunction, a report
in writing under oath setting forth in detail the manner and form in which Defendant
has complied with the injunction;
20
i. That Defendant be ordered to immediately recall and deliver up for
destruction all of its goods bearing Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade
Dress and Air Freshener Display Trade Dress;
j. That an accounting be conducted and judgment be rendered against
Defendant for:
(a) all profits received by Defendant, directly or indirectly, from its
sales and/or advertising of any under air freshener, odor remover, and other similar
products bearing Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air
Freshener Display Trade Dress, or any other trade dress confusingly similar to
Beaumont Products Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress and Air Freshener
Display Trade Dress;
(b) all damages sustained by Beaumont on account of, inter alia,
Defendants unfair competition, false designation of origin, false description or
representation, trademark infringement, patent infringement, injury to Beaumont
Products business reputation, counterfeiting of Beaumont Products mark, and/or
dilution of Beaumonts mark pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117 et. seq., Defendants
violation of 35 U.S.C. 292, and Defendants deceptive trade practices and false
advertising under Georgia law; and
21
(c) actual compensatory damages in an amount not presently known,
but to be computed during the pendency of this action; and
k. That Defendant be ordered to pay damages adequate to compensate
Beaumont for Defendants infringement of Beaumonts United States Patent No.
D491,257, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284;
l. That Defendant be ordered to pay enhanced or treble damages, and
attorneys fees, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284 and 285;
m. That Defendant be enjoined from further infringement of Beaumonts
United States Patent No. D491,257, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 283;
n. That Defendant be ordered to pay prejudgment and post-judgment
interest; and
o. That Beaumont be granted such other and additional relief as the
Court deems just, equitable, and proper.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(b), Beaumont demands a trial by jury of all
issues triable of right by a jury.
22
This 10th day of February, 2017.
/s/Cynthia J. Lee
Cynthia J. Lee
Georgia State Bar No. 442999
Wesley A. Roberts
Georgia State Bar No. 867277
THOMAS HORSTEMEYER, L.L.P.
400 Interstate North Parkway SE, Suite 1500
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
Telephone: (770) 933-9500
Facsimile: (770) 951-0933
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Beaumont Products, Inc.
4834-7502-7522, v. 1
23
Case 1:17-cv-00522-SCJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/10/17 Page 1 of 2
JS 44 (Rev. 08/16) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

Beaumont Products, Inc. Willert Home Products, Inc.
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
Cynthia J. Lee, Wesley A. Roberts, Thomas Horstemeyer LLP, 400
Interstate North Parkway SE, Atlanta, GA 30339, 770-933-9500
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an X in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
1 U.S. Government 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State 1 1 Incorporated or Principal Place 4 4
of Business In This State
2 U.S. Government 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State 2 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 5 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a 3 3 Foreign Nation 6 6

Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Related Seizure 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 375 False Claims Act
120 Marine 310 Airplane 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 423 Withdrawal 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
130 Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Product Liability 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 367 Health Care/ 400 State Reapportionment
150 Recovery of Overpayment 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury 820 Copyrights 430 Banks and Banking
151 Medicare Act 330 Federal Employers Product Liability 830 Patent 450 Commerce
152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability 368 Asbestos Personal 840 Trademark 460 Deportation
Student Loans 340 Marine Injury Product 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) 345 Marine Product Liability LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY Corrupt Organizations
153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY 710 Fair Labor Standards 861 HIA (1395ff) 480 Consumer Credit
of Veterans Benefits 350 Motor Vehicle 370 Other Fraud Act 862 Black Lung (923) 490 Cable/Sat TV
160 Stockholders Suits 355 Motor Vehicle 371 Truth in Lending 720 Labor/Management 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) 850 Securities/Commodities/
190 Other Contract Product Liability 380 Other Personal Relations 864 SSID Title XVI Exchange
195 Contract Product Liability 360 Other Personal Property Damage 740 Railway Labor Act 865 RSI (405(g)) 890 Other Statutory Actions
196 Franchise Injury 385 Property Damage 751 Family and Medical 891 Agricultural Acts
362 Personal Injury - Product Liability Leave Act 893 Environmental Matters
Medical Malpractice 790 Other Labor Litigation 895 Freedom of Information
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 791 Employee Retirement FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act
210 Land Condemnation 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: Income Security Act 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff 896 Arbitration
220 Foreclosure 441 Voting 463 Alien Detainee or Defendant) 899 Administrative Procedure
230 Rent Lease & Ejectment 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate 871 IRSThird Party Act/Review or Appeal of
240 Torts to Land 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision
245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations 530 General 950 Constitutionality of
290 All Other Real Property 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION State Statutes
Employment Other: 462 Naturalization Application
446 Amer. w/Disabilities - 540 Mandamus & Other 465 Other Immigration
Other 550 Civil Rights Actions
448 Education 555 Prison Condition
560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an X in One Box Only)
1 Original 2 Removed from 3 Remanded from 4 Reinstated or 5 Transferred from 6 Multidistrict 8 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
35 U.S.C. 287; 15 U.S.C. 1125(a)
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Infringement of design patent; infringement of trade dress; unfair competition; state law and common law claims
VII. REQUESTED IN CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: Yes No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
02/10/2017 /s/ Cynthia J. Lee
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE
Print Save As... Reset

JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 08/16) Case 1:17-cv-00522-SCJ Document 1-1 Filed 02/10/17 Page 2 of 2
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44
Authority For Civil Cover Sheet
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:
I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and
then the official, giving both name and title.
(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land
condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)
(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section "(see attachment)".
II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes
precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
cases.)
III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
section for each principal party.
IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code
that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.
When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.
Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing
date.
Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or
multidistrict litigation transfers.
Multidistrict Litigation Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C.
Section 1407.
Multidistrict Litigation Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to
changes in statue.
VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service
VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.
VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket
numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.
Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Exhibit D
Exhibit E

Beaumont Prods. v. Willert Home Prods. - 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

Beaumont Prods. v. Willert Home Prods. - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:17-cv-00522-SCJ Document 1 Filed 02/10/17 Page 1 of 23

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

BEAUMONT PRODUCTS, INC., )

Plaintiff Beaumont Products, Inc. (Beaumont) states its Complaint against

Defendant Willert Home Products, Inc. (Defendant), as follows:

1. This is an action for trade dress infringement and unfair competition

United States, Title 35, United States Code.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

forth herein pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1121, 28 U.S.C. 1331, and 28 U.S.C.

3. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because

Beaumonts trade dress and patent rights within this State.

4. Venue is proper in this judicial district and division pursuant to 28

U.S.C. 1391 and 1400.

5. Plaintiff Beaumont is a Georgia Corporation having a principal place

of business at 1560 Big Shanty Dr., Kennesaw, Georgia 30144.

6. Beaumont manufactures, markets, and sells air fresheners, odor

7. Beaumont is the owner of trade dress rights in and to the

8. Beaumont is the owner, by assignment, of all right, title, and interest

Freshener, including the right to bring suit for patent infringement.

9. Defendant is a Missouri Corporation having a principal place of

business at 4044 Park Ave., St. Louis, Missouri 63110.

and belief, Defendant is subject to the personal jurisdiction of this Court.

including without limitation the Citrus Magic air freshener products.

comprise Beaumonts trade dress. See Exhibit A.

freshener/odor eliminator products, including without limitation Beaumonts

elements (referred to hereinafter as Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade

1) a container for a solid air freshener in the shape of a disc,

2) a circular label on the bottom providing instruction and

3) a lid for the container that includes a downwardly curved

4) air circulation openings in the lid that are covered by and

5) the label is circular to match the shape of the lid and is of

the photographs and pictures attached as Exhibit A.

13. In addition, Beaumont adopted a distinctive trade dress shelf

organizer/display to market and sell air freshener/odor eliminator products,

including without limitation Beaumonts Citrus Magic air fresheners, which

includes at least the following trade dress elements (referred to hereinafter as

Beaumonts Air Freshener Display Trade Dress):

1) an open top elongated support tray for receiving six air

2) the tray maintains the containers in a neat edge standing

3) the tray is configured to hold six of the containers; and

4) as each container is removed from the tray, the next

photographs attached as Exhibit B.

the United States for at least approximately 13 years.

Freshener Display Trade Dress.

16. The above-named elements of Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging

17. The above-named elements and the whole of Beaumonts Air

distinctive trade dress. The maintenance of standards of quality and excellence by

19. In addition to being inherently distinctive, as a result of Beaumonts

originate from a single source, i.e., Beaumont.

20. Beaumonts Air Freshener Packaging Trade Dress has acquired

an asset of substantial value as a symbol of Beaumont, its quality name, quality

products, and goodwill.

21. After Beaumont established rights to its Air Freshener Packaging

sale of Defendants air fresheners, particularly Defendants airBOSS Everyday

Odor Eliminator air freshener. Photographs and renderings of Defendants

C. A photograph of Defendants airBOSS Everyday Odor Eliminator air

sale in at least Meijer stores, are attached hereto as Exhibit D.

22. Defendant continues to market and sell air freshener/odor eliminator

products having disc-shaped plastic containers that contain an air freshener

composition in a gel- or cake-like format, including without limitation the

airBOSS Everyday Odor Eliminator air freshener (referred to hereinafter as

Defendants Infringing Products).

23. Defendant adopted at least the following product packaging trade

dress elements for Defendants Infringing Products: