You are on page 1of 42

Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 1 of 16 Page ID #:1

1 G. WARREN BLEEKER, CA Bar No. 210834


wbleeker@lrrc.com
2 MICHAEL A. KOPLOW, CA Bar No. 285858
mkoplow@lrrc.com
3 LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE LLP
655 N Central Ave., Suite 2300
4 Glendale, CA 91203-1445
Tel: 626.795.9900
5 Fax: 626.577.8800
6 Attorneys for Plaintiffs
JOBAR INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
7 DREAM PRODUCTS INCORPORATED,
SUPPORT PLUS HOLDINGS, INC.,
8 and PENN L.L.C.
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13
JOBAR INTERNATIONAL, INC.; Case No. 2:17-cv-07441
655 N Central Ave

14 DREAM PRODUCTS
INCORPORATED; SUPPORT PLUS COMPLAINT FOR:
Suite 2300

15 HOLDINGS, INC.; AND PENN L.L.C.,


1. DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
16 Plaintiffs, OF NON-INFRINGEMENT,
INVALIDITY, AND
17 v. UNENFORCEABILITY OF A
DESIGN PATENT;
18 JUKA INNOVATIONS 2. DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
CORPORATION, OF NON-INFRINGEMENT OF
19 COPYRIGHTS;
Defendant. 3. DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
20 OF NON-INFRINGEMENT AND
INVALIDITY OF TRADE
21 DRESS;
4. DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
22 OF NO UNFAIR COMPETITION;
5. UNFAIR COMPETITION
23 UNDER CAL. BUS. & PROF.
CODE 17200 ET SEQ.; AND
24 6. INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE
WITH PROSPECTIVE
25 ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE
26
27 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
28
102565612_1
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 2 of 16 Page ID #:2

1 Plaintiffs Jobar International, Inc. (Jobar), Dream Products Incorporated


2 (Dream Products), Support Plus Holdings, Inc. (Support Plus), and Penn L.L.C.
3 d/b/a/ PulseTV.com (Penn) (collectively, Plaintiffs) by their attorneys, assert
4 this Complaint against Defendant Juka Innovations Corporation (Juka or
5 Defendant) as set forth below.
6 NATURE OF THE ACTION
7 1. Plaintiffs in this action seek declaratory judgment of non-infringement,
8 invalidity, and unenforceability of a design patent, and non-infringement of
9 copyrights and trademarks asserted by Defendant against Plaintiffs, a declaration
10 that Plaintiffs have not engaged in unfair competition, and judgment against
11 Defendant for unfair competition and interference with Plaintiffs prospective
12 economic advantage.
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 PARTIES
655 N Central Ave

14 2. Plaintiff Jobar is a corporation organized and existing under the laws


Suite 2300

15 of the State of California, having a principal place of business at 21022 Figueroa


16 St., Carson, CA 90745.
17 3. Plaintiff Dream Products is a corporation organized and existing under
18 the laws of the State of California, having a principal place of business at 9754
19 Deering Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311.
20 4. Plaintiff Support Plus is a corporation organized and existing under the
21 laws of the State of Ohio, having a principal place of business at 5581 Hudson
22 Industrial Pkwy, P.O. Box 2599, Hudson, OH 44236.
23 5. Plaintiff Penn, L.L.C. (d/b/a PulseTV.com) is a limited liability
24 company organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, having a
25 principal place of business in Illinois.
26 6. On information and belief, Defendant Juka is a corporation organized
27 and existing under the laws of the State of New York, having a principal place of
28 business at 707 Broadhollow Rd., Suite 22, Farmingdale, NY 11735.

102565612_1 -2-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 3 of 16 Page ID #:3

1 JURISDICTION AND VENUE


2 7. This is an action for declaratory judgment arising under (i) the Patent
3 Laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. 100 et seq. (the Patent Act), (ii) the United
4 States Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq. (the Copyright Act), (iii) the
5 Trademark Laws of the United States, 15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq. (the Lanham Act),
6 and (iv) 28 U.S.C. 2201 and 2202 (the Declaratory Judgment Act).
7 8. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action under
8 at least 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1338(a), and 2201 and 2202. This Court has
9 supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
10 1367(a). Plaintiffs state law claims arise from the same common nucleus of
11 operative facts and transactions such that they form part of the same case or
12 controversy and a plaintiff would ordinarily be expected to try them all in a single
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 judicial proceeding.
655 N Central Ave

14 9. On information and belief, this Court has personal jurisdiction over


Suite 2300

15 Defendant because of Defendants continuous and systematic contacts with the


16 state of California, including by conducting substantial and regular business with
17 consumers through the marketing and sales of drainage products in this district and
18 elsewhere in California. Defendant maintains an interactive website, available at
19 https://www.tubshroom.com/, which offers for sale Defendants products to
20 residents of California and this judicial district. In addition, Defendants false
21 assertions of infringement of design patents, copyrights, and trademarks allegedly
22 owned by Defendant were directed to Plaintiff Jobar in the State of California,
23 caused harm in California, and in this District where Jobar resides, and Defendant
24 separately directed false accusations of infringement to eBay which is also located
25 in California, and which caused damage to at least Plaintiff Jobar in this District.
26 10. Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2)
27 because the Central District of California is a judicial district in which a substantial
28 part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, and under 28

102565612_1 -3-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 4 of 16 Page ID #:4

1 U.S.C. 1391(b)(1) and (c)(2) because Defendant is subject to personal


2 jurisdiction in this district.
3 FACTUAL BACKGROUND
4 Background to the Parties
5 11. Founded in 1972, Plaintiff Jobar is an internationally respected market
6 leader in the consumer products industry, with its headquarters and U.S.
7 distribution center located in Carson, California. Jobar is a business-to-business
8 supplier that develops innovative and unique products to satisfy consumers
9 everyday needs. With its partner factories, Jobar introduces approximately 100 new
10 products annually under its brands and through private labeling. Jobar backs its
11 products with exceptional customer service, consistent value pricing, and extensive
12 worldwide distribution. Plaintiff Jobar is a supplier of products to Plaintiffs Dream
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 Products, Support Plus, and NextEra Media and Pulse Direct, which are each
655 N Central Ave

14 customers of Jobar and sell Jobars products to consumers.


Suite 2300

15 12. With more than 35 years of experience in the mail-order industry,


16 Plaintiff Dream Products is a leading direct-to-consumer catalog and e-commerce
17 provider specializing in providing unique items to consumers at affordable prices.
18 Dream Products ships thousands of orders every business day, and its business is
19 drive by a sophisticated real-time inventory-management system.
20 13. Since its founding in 1972, Plaintiff Support Plus has offered a wide
21 variety of products to aid the daily living of its customers. Support Plus works
22 tirelessly to find the best quality, fairly priced merchandise possible for its
23 customers.
24 14. Plaintiff Penn, LLC, since its founding in 1996, has distributed and
25 supplied a range of consumer goods to customers.
26 15. On information and belief, Defendant Juka holds itself out as a
27 manufacturer and seller of bathroom drain products.
28

102565612_1 -4-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 5 of 16 Page ID #:5

1 16. Defendant purports to own U.S. Design Patent No. D785,767, titled
2 Tub Drain Hair Collector (the Asserted Design Patent).
3 17. Defendant also purports to own visual material Copyright
4 Registration Nos. (i) VAu001283876, titled Tub Shroom Collateral 2016;
5 (ii) VAu001263568, titled TubShroom; and (iii) VAu001283873, titled
6 SinkShroom Collateral 2016 (collectively, the Asserted Copyrights).
7 18. Defendant further purports to own (i) Trademark Registration No.
8 4,972,762 for the standard character mark TubShroom for strainers for plumbing
9 drains in International Class 11; (ii) Reg. No. 5,179,859 for the standard character
10 mark SinkShroom for strainers for plumbing drains; plumbing fittings, namely,
11 sink strainers; [and] plumbing supplies, namely sink strainers in International
12 Class 11; and (iii) Reg. No. 5,179,860 for the standard character mark
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 ShowerShroom for strainers for plumbing drains; plumbing fittings, namely,


655 N Central Ave

14 sink strainers; [and] plumbing supplies, namely sink strainers in International


Suite 2300

15 Class 11.
16 19. Defendant additionally purports to own common law trademark rights
17 to the following depicted logos for TubShroom, SinkShroom, and
18 ShowerShroom, each containing design and word elements. Collectively, the
19 trademark registrations identified above and the alleged common law trademark
20 rights for the logos in this Paragraph will be referred to as the Asserted
21 Trademarks.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

102565612_1 -5-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 6 of 16 Page ID #:6

1 Defendant Threatened Suit Against Plaintiffs


2 20. An actual controversy exists between Plaintiffs and Defendant as to
3 whether Plaintiffs manufacture and distribution of its drainage products infringes
4 alleged rights held by Defendant, or causes unfair competition with Defendant.
5 21. On October 5, 2017, counsel for Defendant threatened legal action
6 against Plaintiffs, asserting that Jobars Softee Sink Strainers and Softee Tub
7 Strainers infringe the Asserted Design Patent, the Asserted Copyrights, and the
8 Asserted Trademarks. In particular, counsel for Defendant sent counsel for
9 Plaintiffs a cease and desist demand letter, and attached a 23-page drafted
10 Complaint for Patent Infringement, Copyright Infringement, Trademark
11 Infringement & Unfair Competition, captioned for the United States District Court
12 for the Southern District of New York. A copy of Defendants October 5, 2017
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 letter and attached complaint are attached as Exhibit A.


655 N Central Ave

14 22. Defendant accuses each of the Plaintiffs of patent infringement,


Suite 2300

15 copyright infringement, and trademark infringement with respect to the Asserted


16 Design Patent, the Asserted Copyrights, and the Asserted Trademarks (Counts I-III
17 and V). Defendant additionally accused Plaintiff Jobar of unfair competition under
18 the Lanham Act and New York state law (Counts IV and VI).
19 23. Defendant threatens litigation in New York, an improper forum for this
20 action.
21 24. Defendants threat letter and draft complaint articulate an intent to
22 initiate a federal lawsuit to enforce its alleged intellectual property rights against
23 each of the Plaintiffs. As a result, Plaintiffs believe that their continued
24 manufacture and/or sale and distribution of drainage products will result in
25 litigation brought by Defendant in an improper forum. Consequently, Plaintiffs
26 bring this action in a proper forum, seeking a declaratory judgment, that Plaintiffs
27 manufacture and/or distribution of their drainage products do not infringe the
28 Asserted Design Patent, the Asserted Copyrights, or the Asserted Trademarks.

102565612_1 -6-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 7 of 16 Page ID #:7

1 25. Defendant threatened that it would initiate litigation against Plaintiffs


2 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
3 However, Defendant cannot prove that any of the Plaintiffs are incorporated in New
4 York or have a regular and established place of business in New York.
5 Accordingly, venue for Defendants claim of patent infringement in New York
6 would be improper against each of the Plaintiffs. Accordingly, Plaintiffs have filed
7 suit in the Central District of California, where each of the claims may be properly
8 litigated.
9 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
10 (By All Plaintiffs - Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement, Invalidity,
11 and Unenforceability of the Asserted Design Patent)
12 26. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the foregoing
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.


655 N Central Ave

14 27. Neither Plaintiffs nor their products, including the Softee Sink
Suite 2300

15 Strainers and Softee Tub Strainers, directly infringe, contributorily infringe, or


16 actively induce others to infringe any valid claims of the Asserted Design Patent,
17 either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. Plaintiffs are not liable in any
18 respect for any infringement of the Asserted Design Patent by anyone.
19 28. The Asserted Design Patent is additionally invalid, unenforceable, and
20 void for failing to comply with one or more of the requirements for patentability
21 specified in Title 35, U.S. Code, 102, 103 and 112.
22 29. The Asserted Design Patent is also invalid for being primarily
23 functional and therefore ineligible for design patent protection. In particular, on
24 January 7, 2016, Defendant filed a utility patent for the same design shown in the
25 Asserted Design Patent, in Patent Application No. 14/990,476, titled Hair
26 Straining Device, which published as U.S. Patent Application Pub. No.
27 2017/0073949 (the Utility Patent Application). The Utility Patent Application is
28 currently pending and is in the process of examination before the United States

102565612_1 -7-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 8 of 16 Page ID #:8

1 Patent and Trademark Office (the USPTO). The Utility Patent Application
2 depicts nearly identical images as in the Asserted Design Patent. In addition, the
3 Utility Patent Application describes and claims the overall look of the design in
4 functional terms. For example, claim 16 of the currently pending claims in the
5 Utility Patent Application is directed to a hair straining device for a drain
6 comprising a cylindrical central element comprising a cylindrical sidewall, a
7 hollow core, and a top wall, the sidewall forming the hollow core, the sidewall
8 comprising at least one water inlet sidewall opening extending through the sidewall
9 configured to allow water to enter the hollow core, the top wall mounted to a top
10 end of the sidewall and providing an at least partial boundary to the top end of the
11 hollow, the top wall is transverse to the sidewall, and a bottom shelf element
12 connected to a bottom end of the cylindrical sidewall and extending radially
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 outward from the cylindrical side wall, the bottom shelf element configured to
655 N Central Ave

14 engage a drain wall of the drain and to space the sidewall from the drain wall, the
Suite 2300

15 bottom shelf element comprising at least one bottom drain opening extending
16 through the bottom shelf element, wherein the cylindrical sidewall provides a
17 circular water flow path about the central element between the sidewall and the
18 drain wall terminating at the bottom shelf element such that hair tends to wrap
19 around the central element as it accumulates and the at least one sidewall opening
20 and the at least one bottom opening sized and positioned to substantially prevent
21 hair from flowing therethrough.
22 30. In addition, Defendant and its predecessors-in-interest have touted the
23 allegedly numerous functional aspects of the design of the Asserted Design Patent.
24 For example, Defendant describes its design as a revolution in drain protection
25 and that it simply works better than the alternatives that are out there. In
26 addition, the Kickstarter campaign for the design of the Asserted Design Patent
27 describes that [u]nlike traditional strainers that go over the drain, TubShroom is
28 designed to go directly inside the drain opening and that the hair is being

102565612_1 -8-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 9 of 16 Page ID #:9

1 wrapped around the mid-cylinder, while the water still flows freely through
2 multiple holes strategically located throughout the unit. Defendants website
3 similarly describes that the design is functional, stating that TubShroom fits any
4 standard shower bathtub drain with a snug fit. The unique mushroom-like shape
5 allows for maximum water flow so you can keep on showering. Hair collects
6 neatly inside the drain around the bottom lip--completely out of sight--until you're
7 ready to clean it off. Defendant states that the design fits 1.5" bath tub drains
8 (and soon 1.75" drains as well!) like a glove and catches every hair out of sight
9 without disrupting the flow of water. Clean up is a breeze with a simple swipe of
10 the hair with a paper towel every few weeks. Defendant describes that its patent-
11 pending designs are the product of extensive testing and refinement.
12 31. During prosecution of the Asserted Design Patent and the Utility
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 Patent Application, prior art patents and publications were cited or identified that
655 N Central Ave

14 bear a strong resemblance to the design claimed in the Asserted Design Patent.
Suite 2300

15 This and other pieces of prior art are much closer in overall appearance to the
16 design claimed in the Asserted Design Patent than the allegedly infringing strainers
17 cited in Defendants drafted complaint. Based on Defendants position that the
18 Softee Sink Strainers and Softee Tub Strainers infringe the Asserted Design Patent,
19 the Asserted Design Patent would be invalid for anticipation and/or obviousness
20 over the prior art, including the art cited or identified during the prosecution history
21 of the Asserted Design Patent and the Utility Patent Application.
22 32. An actual controversy exists between Plaintiffs and Defendant as to
23 whether any of Plaintiffs products infringe any alleged rights Defendant may have
24 in the Asserted Design Patent. Defendant contends that Plaintiffs infringe the
25 Asserted Design Patent and have threatened to file suit on such claims. Plaintiffs
26 deny that contention, and contend that they are entitled to manufacture and sell their
27 products and services without any interference by Defendant.
28

102565612_1 -9-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 10 of 16 Page ID #:10

1 33. Plaintiffs are entitled to, and seek at this time, a judicial declaration
2 that Plaintiffs and their products do not infringe any valid claims of the Asserted
3 Design Patent.
4
5 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
6 (By All Plaintiffs - Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement
7 of the Asserted Copyrights)
8 34. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the foregoing
9 paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.
10 35. Neither Plaintiffs nor their products, including the Softee Sink
11 Strainers and Softee Tub Strainers, directly infringe, contributorily infringement, or
12 actively induce others to infringe any purported rights in the Asserted Copyrights.
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 Plaintiffs are not liable in any respect for any infringement of the Asserted
655 N Central Ave

14 Copyrights by anyone.
Suite 2300

15 36. An actual controversy exists between Plaintiffs and Defendant as to


16 whether any of Plaintiffs products infringe any alleged rights Defendant may have
17 in the Asserted Copyrights. Defendant contends that Plaintiffs infringe the
18 Asserted Copyrights and have threatened to file suit on such claims. Plaintiffs deny
19 that contention, and contend that they are entitled to manufacture and sell their
20 products and services without any interference by Defendant.
21 37. Plaintiffs are entitled to, and seek at this time, a judicial declaration
22 that Plaintiffs and their products do not infringe any purported rights in the
23 Asserted Copyrights.
24 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
25 (By All Plaintiffs - Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement
26 of the Asserted Trademarks)
27 38. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the foregoing
28 paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.

102565612_1 -10-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 11 of 16 Page ID #:11

1 39. Plaintiffs do not use the trademarks claimed by Defendant. Neither


2 Plaintiffs nor their products, including the Softee Sink Strainers and Softee Tub
3 Strainers, directly infringe, contributorily infringement, or actively induce others to
4 infringe any purported rights in the Asserted Trademarks. Plaintiffs are not liable
5 in any respect for any infringement of the Asserted Trademarks by anyone.
6 40. An actual controversy exists between Plaintiffs and Defendant as to
7 whether any of Plaintiffs products infringe any alleged rights Defendant may have
8 in the Asserted Trademarks. Defendant contends that Plaintiffs infringe the
9 Asserted Trademarks and have threatened to file suit on such claims. Plaintiffs
10 deny that contention, and contend that they are entitled to manufacture and sell their
11 products and services without any interference by Defendant.
12 41. Plaintiffs are entitled to, and seek at this time, a judicial declaration
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 that Plaintiffs and their products do not infringe any purported rights in the
655 N Central Ave

14 Asserted Trademarks.
Suite 2300

15 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF


16 (By All Plaintiffs - Declaratory Judgment of No Unfair Competition)
17 42. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the foregoing
18 paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.
19 43. Plaintiffs have engaged in no acts that constitute unfair competition
20 under any federal or state laws.
21 44. An actual controversy exists between Plaintiffs and Defendant as to
22 whether any of Plaintiffs engaged in unfair competition with respect to the
23 manufacturing, importation, and distribution of Plaintiffs products. Defendant
24 contends that Plaintiffs engaged in unfair competition and Plaintiffs deny these
25 baseless allegations.
26 45. Defendants allegations have caused injury to Plaintiffs, at least based
27 on third parties including eBay and Amazon who, on information and belief, refuse
28 to sell Plaintiffs products based on Defendants false allegations of infringement.

102565612_1 -11-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 12 of 16 Page ID #:12

1 46. Plaintiffs are entitled to, and seek at this time, a judicial declaration
2 that Plaintiffs have not engaged in any unfair competition.
3 FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
4 (By All Plaintiffs - Unfair Competition
5 under California Bus. & Profs. Code 17200)
6 47. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the foregoing
7 paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.
8 48. Defendants false allegations of infringement as alleged above
9 constitutes an unfair trade practice in violation of Business & Professions Code
10 Section 17200. Defendants actions are unlawful, unfair, and Defendants have
11 made false statements and false allegations. Defendants actions are done with an
12 intent to unfairly compete with Plaintiffs.
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 49. For example, on information and belief, Defendant has made false
655 N Central Ave

14 allegations of infringement by Plaintiffs to third parties, including eBay and


Suite 2300

15 Amazon, which refuse to sell Plaintiffs products based on Defendants false


16 allegations. Defendant has additionally made false allegations of infringement
17 directly to Plaintiffs and have threatened to file frivolous and baseless lawsuits.
18 Defendant knew, or should have known, that its allegations were false. For
19 example, Defendant knew that its products were primarily functional, and has been
20 and currently seeks utility patent protection for the overall design shown in the
21 Asserted Design Patent. Defendant also knew that the prior art cited and identified
22 during prosecution of the Asserted Design Patent and the Utility Patent Application
23 is far closer in overall appearance than Jobars products sold by Plaintiffs.
24 Defendant thus knows that no reasonable litigant would expect to succeed on its
25 claim of design patent infringement, and that its patent infringement claims are
26 baseless. Further, Defendant knows that none of the Plaintiffs use any trademarks
27 even arguably similar to the Tubshroom, Sinkshroom, and Showershroom
28 standard character marks claimed in Defendants Asserted Trademarks. Defendant

102565612_1 -12-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 13 of 16 Page ID #:13

1 thus knows that no reasonable litigant would expect to succeed on its claim that
2 Plaintiffs infringe these standard character marks. Accordingly, Defendant has
3 intentionally and in bad faith committed acts of unfair competition against
4 Plaintiffs.
5 50. Unless Defendant is restrained, Defendant will continue to disrupt
6 Plaintiffs businesses and business relationships, causing irreparable injury and
7 damages to business reputation and goodwill.
8 51. Because of Defendants acts complained of herein, Plaintiffs have
9 been actually damaged and suffered irreparable harm, and will continue to suffer
10 irreparable harm, and Defendant have been unjustly enriched and will continue to
11 be unjustly enriched, which damage, irreparable harm and unjust enrichment will
12 continue until enjoined by order of this Court.
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF


655 N Central Ave

14 (By Plaintiffs Intentional Interference With


Suite 2300

15 Prospective Economic Advantage)


16 52. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the foregoing
17 paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.
18 53. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this Claim pursuant to
19 27 U.S.C. 1367.
20 54. Plaintiffs have developed business relationships with entities
21 including, but not limited to eBay and Amazon.
22 55. Defendant knew of Plaintiffs relationships with existing businesses
23 and prospective customers.
24 56. On information and belief, Defendant knowingly and intentionally
25 interfered with Plaintiffs prospective economic advantage by sending cease and
26 desist letters falsely accusing Plaintiffs of infringement.
27 57. On information and belief, Defendant intended to disrupt Plaintiffs
28 relationships with its vendors, business partners, and customers in California, and

102565612_1 -13-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 14 of 16 Page ID #:14

1 elsewhere, through wrongfully alleging that use and sale of Jobars products
2 constitutes infringement of Defendants purported intellectual property. Defendant
3 intended to disrupt the relationships between Plaintiffs and their vendors, business
4 partners, and customers, and knew the disruption was substantially certain to occur.
5 Defendants conduct has disrupted the business relationships of the Plaintiffs and
6 Plaintiffs as a result have suffered harm to their business, including loss of sales
7 and loss of goodwill.
8 The interference by Defendant was done intentionally, willfully and in
9 conscious disregard of Plaintiffs rights, and therefore Plaintiffs are entitled to
10 exemplary or punitive damages in an amount appropriate to punish Defendant.
11 Defendant knew that its products were primarily functional, and has been and
12 currently seeks utility patent protection for the overall design shown in the Asserted
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 Design Patent. Defendant also knew that the prior art cited and identified during
655 N Central Ave

14 prosecution of the Asserted Design Patent and the Utility Patent Application is far
Suite 2300

15 closer in overall appearance than Jobars products sold by Plaintiffs. Defendant


16 thus knows that no reasonable litigant would expect to succeed on its claim of
17 design patent infringement, and that its patent infringement claims are baseless.
18 Further, Defendant knows that none of the Plaintiffs use any trademarks even
19 arguably similar to the Tubshroom, Sinkshroom, and Showershroom
20 standard character marks claimed in Defendants Asserted Trademarks. Defendant
21 thus knows that no reasonable litigant would expect to succeed on its claim that
22 Plaintiffs infringe these standard character marks. Accordingly, Defendant has
23 intentionally and in bad faith interfered with Plaintiffs prospective economic
24 relations by wrongfully shutting down sales on eBay and Amazon any by
25 threatening frivolous and baseless allegations of infringement against Plaintiffs in a
26 clearly improper forum.
27
28

102565612_1 -14-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 15 of 16 Page ID #:15

1 PRAYER FOR RELIEF


2 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendant as follows:
3 1. For a declaration that Plaintiffs have not infringed the Asserted Design
4 Patent, and that the Asserted Design Patent is invalid and unenforceable;
5 2. For a declaration that Plaintiffs have not infringed the Asserted
6 Copyrights;
7 3. For a declaration that Plaintiffs have not infringed the Asserted
8 Trademarks;
9 4. For a declaration that Plaintiffs have not engaged in any unfair
10 competition;
11 5. For an order enjoining Defendant from making false representations
12 that Plaintiffs are infringing the Asserted Design Patent, the Asserted Copyrights,
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13 and the Asserted Trademarks or are engaged in unfair competition;


655 N Central Ave

14 6. All compensatory damages;


Suite 2300

15 7. Punitive damages;
16 8. An award of treble damages to Plaintiffs under 15 U.S.C. 15;
17 9. An award to Plaintiffs for its attorneys fees and costs of suit; and
18 10. Any additional relief that the Court deems proper.
19
20 Dated: October 11, 2017 Respectfully submitted,
21 LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER
CHRISTIE LLP
22
23 By: /s/G. Warren Bleeker
G. Warren Bleeker
24
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
25 JOBAR INTERNATIONAL, INC.
DREAM PRODUCTS, INCORPORATED
26 SUPPORT PLUS HOLDINGS, INC. and
PENN L.L.C.
27
28

102565612_1 -15-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 16 of 16 Page ID #:16

1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL


2 Plaintiffs hereby demand a jury trial on all issues triable by a jury.
3
4 Dated: October 11, 2017 Respectfully submitted,
5 LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER
6 CHRISTIE LLP

7 By: /s/G. Warren Bleeker


8 G. Warren Bleeker

9 Attorneys for Plaintiffs


JOBAR INTERNATIONAL, INC.
10 DREAM PRODUCTS, INCORPORATED
SUPPORT PLUS HOLDINGS, INC. and
11 PENN L.L.C.

12
Glendale, CA 91203-1445

13
655 N Central Ave

14
Suite 2300

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

102565612_1 -16-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 1 of 26 Page ID #:17

Exhibit A
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 2 of 26 Page ID #:18

www.gandb.com
3501 Bonita Bay Blvd. Tel.: (239) 330-9000
Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Fax: (239) 301-2215

October 5, 2017
Via E-Mail

Jobar International, Inc.


c/o Constantine Marantidis, Esq.
LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE LLP
P. O. Box 29001
Glendale, CA 91209

Re: Infringement of Juka Innovations Corporations Intellectual Property Rights


By Jobar International, Inc.

Dear Attorney Marantidis:

For the reasons previously discussed in our correspondence, Juka Innovations has the right to
demand that Jobar International:

(i) cease and desist any and all sales of its infringing strainers;

(ii) remove all offers to sell its infringing strainers from websites and/or retailers
through which its infringing strainers are currently being sold and/or offered
for sale;

(iii) provide a list of any and all customers to whom its infringing strainers have
been sold; and

(iv) provide an accounting of:

(a) all sales of its infringing strainers (including the date of such sales);
and

(b) the number of infringing strainers remaining in inventory.

Juka is disappointed by Jobars lack of good faith response.

Notwithstanding, we have been instructed by Juka to reach out to Jobar one last time to explore
the possibility of an amicable business solution to resolve this dispute.

3501 Bonita Bay Blvd.


Bonita Springs, Florida 34134
Tel.: (239) 330-9000
Exhibit A
-17-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 3 of 26 Page ID #:19
Constantine Marantidis, Esq.
October 5, 2017
Page 2 of 2

If Jobar has any interest in trying to pursue the possibility of an amicable business solution to
resolve this dispute, we must hear from you by close of business on Thursday, October 12, 2017, failing
at which we will proceed with filing the attached complaint.

For the record, inasmuch as retailers who carry the Jobar infringing strainers are also liable, we
are copying them on this letter to separately inquire as to whether they are interested in trying to pursue
the possibility of an amicable business solution to resolve this dispute as to them. If so, we call upon
them to contact us by close of business on Thursday, October 12, 2017, failing at which we will proceed
with filing the attached complaint in which they are included as defendants in the lawsuit, as reflected by
the attached complaint.

This letter is for settlement purposes only and is without prejudice to the rights of Juka
Innovations, all of which are expressly reserved.

Very truly yours,


Charles W. Grimes
Charles W. Grimes
CWG/adm
Enc.: Complaint

Cc: Dream Products Inc.


Support Plus Holdings, Inc.
Nextera Media LLC (aka Penn LLC) DBA PulseTV
Pulse Direct, Inc.

Exhibit A
-18-
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 4 of 26 Page ID #:20

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

__________________________________________

JUKA INNOVATIONS CORPORATION,

Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR PATENT


INFRINGEMENT, COPYRIGHT
v. INFRINGEMENT, TRADEMARK
INFRINGEMENT & UNFAIR
JOBAR INTERNATIONAL, INC., DREAM COMPETITION
PRODUCTS INC., SUPPORT PLUS HOLDINGS,
INC., NEXTERA MEDIA LLC, AND PULSE JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
DIRECT, INC.

Defendants.
__________________________________________

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT, COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT,


TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT & UNFAIR COMPETITION

Plaintiff Juka Innovations Corporation (hereinafter JUKA), for its Complaint against: (i)

Defendant Jobar International, Inc. (JOBAR); and (ii) Defendants Dream Products Inc., Support

Plus Holdings, Inc., Nextera Media LLC (aka Penn LLC) DBA PulseTV, and Pulse Direct, Inc.

(on information and belief acting as the manager of Nextera Media LLC (aka Penn LLC) DBA

PulseTV) (collectively, RETAILERS); alleges as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. This is an action for:

(i) patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the United States, 35

U.S.C. 101 et seq.;

(ii) copyright infringement arising under the Copyright Laws of the United States,

17 U.S.C. 101 et seq.;

(iii) trademark infringement arising under the Trademark Laws of the United States,

Exhibit A
-19-
Page 1 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 5 of 26 Page ID #:21

15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq.;

(iv) unfair competition arising under the Trademark Laws of the United States, 15

U.S.C. 1125(a);

(v) common law trademark infringement under the laws of the State of New York

including, inter alia, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 360 et seq.; and

(vi) common law unfair competition under the laws of the State of New York

including, inter alia, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 349 and 360-l.

2. JUKA owns exclusive rights in the ornamental design (the Design) claimed in

United States Design Patent No. D785,767 entitled Tub Drain Hair Collector (hereinafter the

JUKA Patent). A copy of U.S. Pat. No. D785,767 is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

3. JUKA owns exclusive rights in the visual material (collectively the Visual

Material) claimed in the following United States Copyright Registrations: Reg. No.

VAu001283876 entitled TubShroom Collateral 2016; Reg. No. VAu001263568 entitled

TubShroom; and Reg. No. VAu001283873 entitled SinkShroom Collateral 2016 (collectively,

the JUKA Copyrights) Copies of these three (3) U.S. Copyright Registrations are attached hereto

as Exhibit B.

4. JUKA owns the exclusive rights embodied in the following United States

Trademark Registrations: Reg. No. 4972762 for TUBSHROOM in Class 11 covering Strainers

for plumbing drains; Reg. No. 5179859 for SINKSHROOM in Class 11 covering Strainers

for plumbing drains; Plumbing fittings, namely, sink strainers; Plumbing supplies, namely, sink

strainers; and Reg. No. 5179860 for SHOWERSHROOM in Class 11 covering Strainers for

plumbing drains; Plumbing fittings, namely, sink strainers; Plumbing supplies, namely, sink

Exhibit A
-20-
Page 2 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 6 of 26 Page ID #:22

strainers1 (collectively, the Federal Trademarks). Copies of these (3) U.S. Trademark

Registrations are attached hereto as Exhibit C.

5. JUKA has also developed extensive common law trademark rights in the distinctive

MUSHROOM shape and branding of its products through, inter alia, the use of the following

logos:

(collectively, the Common Law Trademarks) (collectively, JUKAs Federal Trademarks and

Common Law Trademarks are referred to herein as the JUKA Trademarks.)

6. JOBAR has used and continues to use the Design without JUKAs permission, in

violation of 35 U.S.C. 101 et seq., on sink and tub strainers that JOBAR makes, uses, offers for

sale, sells, and/or imports into the United States.

7. JOBAR has used and continues to use the Visual Material without JUKAs

permission, in violation of 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq., on sink and tub strainers that JOBAR makes,

uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or imports into the United States.

8. JOBAR has used and continues to use the JUKA Trademarks without JUKAs

permission, in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq., on sink and tub strainers that JOBAR makes,

uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or imports into the United States.

9. JOBAR has engaged in and continues to engage in unfair competition in violation

of 15 U.S.C. 1125(a) with respect to sink and tub strainers that JOBAR makes, uses, offers for

sale, sells, and/or imports into the United States.

1
Juka also owns, inter alia, a pending U.S. Trademark application for STOPSHROOM in Class 21 covering Drain
plugs for plumbing drains; water stoppers for plumbing drains.
Exhibit A
-21-
Page 3 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 7 of 26 Page ID #:23

10. JOBAR has used and continues to use the JUKA Trademarks without JUKAs

permission, in violation of the laws of the State of New York including, inter alia, N.Y. Gen. Bus.

Law 360 et seq., on sink and tub strainers that JOBAR makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or

transports in commerce in the State of New York.

11. JOBAR has engaged in and continues to engage in unfair competition in violation

of N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 349 and 360-l with respect to sink and tub strainers that JOBAR makes,

uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or transports in commerce in the State of New York.

12. RETAILERS have sold and continue to sell sink and tub strainers in the United

States, without JUKAs permission, which infringe the JUKA Patent.

13. RETAILERS have sold and continue to sell sink and tub strainers in the United

States, without JUKAs permission, which infringe the JUKA Copyrights.

14. RETAILERS have sold and continue to sell sink and tub strainers in the United

States, without JUKAs permission, which infringe the JUKA Trademarks.

15. JUKA seeks, among other relief, an injunction preventing JOBAR and

RETAILERS from further infringing the JUKA Patent, JUKA Copyrights and JUKA Trademarks,

for recovery of its damages and/or a disgorgement of JOBARs and RETAILERS profits from

their infringement. JUKA further seeks, among other relief, an injunction preventing JOBAR from

further unfairly competing against JUKA, and for recover of its damages and/or a disgorgement

of JOBARs profits from its unfair competition.

THE PARTIES

16. Plaintiff JUKA is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State

of New York with a principal place of business at 707 Broadhollow Rd., Ste 22, Farmingdale, NY

Exhibit A
-22-
Page 4 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 8 of 26 Page ID #:24

11735.

17. On information and belief, Defendant JOBAR is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of the State of California with a principal place of business at 21022

Figueroa St., Carson, CA 90745.

18. On information and belief, Defendant Dream Products Inc., is a California

corporation having a principal place of business at 412 Dream Lane, Van Nuys, CA 91496.

19. On information and belief, Defendant Support Plus Holdings, Inc., is an Ohio

Corporation having a principal place of business at 5581 Hudson Industrial Pkwy, PO Box 2599,

Hudson OH, 44236.

20. On information and belief, Defendant Nextera Media LLC (AKA Penn LLC) DBA

PulseTV is a Delaware Corporation having a principal place of business at 7851 185TH ST,

#106, Tinley Park, IL 60477 and is managed by Defendant Pulse Direct, Inc., an Illinois

Corporation having a principal place of business at 7851 185th St., #106, Tinley Park, IL 60477.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

21. This is a civil action for Federal patent infringement (35 U.S.C. 101 et seq.),

copyright infringement (17 U.S.C. 101); trademark infringement (15 U.S.C. 1051), and unfair

competition (15 U.S.C. 1125(a)) and New York State common law trademark infringement

(N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 360 et seq.) and common law unfair competition (N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law

349 and 360-l).

22. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 15 U.S.C.

1121 and 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1338 and 1367.

23. This Court has personal jurisdiction over JOBAR at least because JOBAR transacts

and solicits business in the State of New York, including with respect to sink and tub strainers that

Exhibit A
-23-
Page 5 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 9 of 26 Page ID #:25

infringe the JUKA Patent, JUKA Copyrights and JUKA Trademarks, and because JOBAR is

committing and has committed acts of patent infringement, copyright infringement, trademark

infringement and unfair competition in the State of New York, at least by selling and offering to

sell sink and tub strainers that infringe the JUKA Patent, JUKA Copyrights and JUKA Trademarks

in the State of New York.

24. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Dream Products Inc., at least

because Defendant Dream Products Inc., transacts and solicits business in the State of New York,

including with respect to sink and tub strainers that infringe the JUKA Patent, the JUKA

Copyrights, and the JUKA Trademarks and because Defendant Dream Products Inc. is committing

and has committed acts of patent infringement, copyright infringement and trademark

infringement in the State of New York, at least by selling and offering to sell sink and tub strainers

that infringe the JUKA Patent, JUKA Copyrights and the JUKA Trademarks.

25. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Support Plus Holdings, Inc., at

least because Defendant Dream Products Inc., transacts and solicits business in the State of New

York, including with respect to sink and tub strainers that infringe the JUKA Patent, the JUKA

Copyrights and the JUKA Trademarks, and because Defendant Support Plus Holdings, Inc. is

committing and has committed acts of patent infringement, copyright infringement and trademark

infringement in the State of New York, at least by selling and offering to sell sink and tub strainers

that infringe the JUKA Patent, the JUKA Copyrights and the JUKA Trademarks.

26. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Nextera Media LLC (AKA

Penn LLC) DBA PulseTV as well as, on information and belief, Nextera Media LLCs manager,

Pulse Direct, Inc. (collectively PULSETV) at least because Defendants PULSETV transact and

solicit business in the State of New York, including with respect to sink and tub strainers that

Exhibit A
-24-
Page 6 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 10 of 26 Page ID #:26

infringe the JUKA Patent, the JUKA Copyrights and the JUKA Trademarks, and because

Defendants PULSETV are committing and have committed acts of patent infringement, copyright

infringement and trademark infringement in the State of New York, at least by selling and offering

to sell sink and tub strainers that infringe the JUKA Patent, the JUKA Copyrights and the JUKA

Trademarks.

27. Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400 at least

because: (i) JOBAR and RETAILERS reside in this district by transacting and soliciting business

in this district, including with respect to sink and tub strainers that infringe the JUKA Patent, JUKA

Copyrights and JUKA Trademarks; and (ii) JOBAR and RETAILERS reside in this district by

committing acts of Federal patent infringement, copyright infringement, trademark infringement

and unfair competition and New York State trademark infringement and unfair competition in this

district by selling and offering to sell sink and tub strainers that infringe the JUKA Patent, JUKA

Copyrights, JUKA Trademarks and which otherwise unfairly compete against JUKAs products.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

A. JUKAs Intellectual Property Rights

28. JUKA has designed, developed, made, and sold a variety of sink, tub and shower

strainers.

29. On or about September 28, 2015, JUKAs predecessors-in-interest launched a

KICKSTARTER campaign to market their unique products.

30. Initially seeking only a modest fundraising target of $12,000, this

KICKSTARTER campaign was wildly successful raising $59,267, i.e., nearly five (5) times

the original goal. A printout from the KICKSTARTER website discussing this campaign is

attached hereto as Exhibit D.

Exhibit A
-25-
Page 7 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 11 of 26 Page ID #:27

31. Through various other crowdfunding platforms, JUKAs predecessors-in-interest

raised a total of over $200,000 in pre-orders. Clearly, the market had spoken, and there was high

demand for JUKAs novel products.

32. JUKAs products have received widespread praise through such media outlets as

Tech Insider, BuzzFeed, Slate, Glamour Magazine, USA Today and many others. Some collected

examples of positive publicity surrounding JUKAs products are attached hereto as Exhibit E.

33. Recognizing the counterfeiting challenges that the little guy often faces after

developing a commercially successful product, JUKA has taken steps to protect its innovative

products. In particular, JUKA owns:

(i) various United States design patents relating to its Design. Relevant to this dispute,

JUKA owns all right, title, and interest in, and has the right to sue and recover for

past, present, and future infringement of, the JUKA Patent identified above from

May 2, 2017 the date such patent duly and legally issued to JUKA;

(ii) various United States copyright registrations relating to the Visual Material.

Relevant to this dispute, JUKA owns all right, title, and interest in, and has the right

to sue and recover for past, present, and future infringement of, the JUKA

Copyrights identified above from at least as early as the date such copyright

registrations duly and legally issued to JUKA, namely:

(a) January 3, 2017 with respect to Copyright Reg. No. VAu001283873;

(b) August 23, 2016 with respect to Copyright Reg. No. VAu001263568; and

(c) January 3, 2017 with respect to Copyright Reg. No. VAu001283876;

and

(iii) various trademark rights relating to JUKAs MUSHROOM Brand including:

Exhibit A
-26-
Page 8 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 12 of 26 Page ID #:28

(a) the JUKA Federal Trademarks identified above from at least as early as the

date such trademark registrations duly and legally issued to JUKA, namely:

(1) June 7, 2016 with respect to Trademark Reg. No. 4972762 for

TUBSHROOM;

(2) April 11, 2017 with respect to Trademark Reg. No. 5179859 for

SINKSHROOM; and

(3) April 11, 2017 with respect to Trademark Reg. No. 5179860 for

SHOWERSHROOM;

and

(b) The JUKA Common Law Trademarks identified above, namely:

34. The JUKA Patent, JUKA Copyrights and JUKA Federal Trademarks are presumed

to be valid.

35. As JUKA anticipated, third party infringers have, unfortunately, came out of the

proverbial woodwork in an effort to unlawfully knock-off JUKAs innovative products.

36. Incredibly, in the short time since JUKA has been selling its innovative products,

JUKA has successfully pursued over one thousand (1000) takedown notices / cease and desist

letters against numerous third parties (including various Amazon and eBay resellers). Most

notably, JUKA has been successful in stopping third party infringement by Ontel Products

Corporation, Creative Concepts Manufacturing Limited and Groupon, Inc. Example photographs

of various infringing products in connection with which JUKA has successfully enforced its rights

Exhibit A
-27-
Page 9 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 13 of 26 Page ID #:29

are attached hereto as Exhibit F. In other words, numerous third parties tried to capitalize on

JUKAs unique products, but quickly stopped and recognized JUKAs intellectual property rights

once such third parties were confronted.

B. JOBARs Patent Infringement

37. On information and belief, JOBAR is a large multinational company with offices

in the U.S., Europe and Hong Kong. According to JOBARs website, JOBARs current product

catalog includes over 700 items, with 100 new product additions annually.2

38. Without JUKAs authorization, JOBAR made, used, offered for sale, sold, and/or

imported into the United States sink and tub strainers (hereafter, the Infringing Strainers) that

violate the JUKA Patent. The Infringing Strainers include at least products identified by the model

names Softee Sink Strainers and Softee Tub Strainers as shown below:

39. The overall appearance of the Design of the JUKA products covered by the JUKA

Patent and the corresponding designs of JOBARs Infringing Strainers are substantially the same.

2
See: http://www.jobar.com/about-us/. A printout of this webpage is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
Exhibit A
-28-
Page 10 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 14 of 26 Page ID #:30

40. An ordinary observer will perceive the overall appearance of the Design covered

by the JUKA Patent and the corresponding designs of JOBARs Infringing Strainers to be

substantially the same.

41. Table 1 below illustrates JOBARs infringement by comparing figures from the

JUKA Patent with exemplary images of both the Softee Sink Strainers and Softee Tub

Strainers.

Table 1 Comparison of the JUKA Patent with the Infringing Strainers


Exemplary Infringing
Exemplary Infringing Products
US D785,767 Patent Figures Products (Softee Sink
(Softee Tub Strainer)
Strainer)

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Exhibit A
-29-
Page 11 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 15 of 26 Page ID #:31

Table 1 Comparison of the JUKA Patent with the Infringing Strainers


Exemplary Infringing
Exemplary Infringing Products
US D785,767 Patent Figures Products (Softee Sink
(Softee Tub Strainer)
Strainer)

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Exhibit A
-30-
Page 12 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 16 of 26 Page ID #:32

Table 1 Comparison of the JUKA Patent with the Infringing Strainers


Exemplary Infringing
Exemplary Infringing Products
US D785,767 Patent Figures Products (Softee Sink
(Softee Tub Strainer)
Strainer)

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Exhibit A
-31-
Page 13 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 17 of 26 Page ID #:33

Table 1 Comparison of the JUKA Patent with the Infringing Strainers


Exemplary Infringing
Exemplary Infringing Products
US D785,767 Patent Figures Products (Softee Sink
(Softee Tub Strainer)
Strainer)

Fig. 7

Fig. 8

42. On information and belief, JOBAR intended to copy the Design covered by the

JUKA Patent.

43. On information and belief, JOBAR sells and offers to sell its Infringing Strainers,

to end-user customers through third-party resellers who distribute Infringing Strainers throughout

the United States, including in New York (as discussed more fully below).

44. On information and belief, JOBAR has infringed and continues to infringe the

Exhibit A
-32-
Page 14 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 18 of 26 Page ID #:34

JUKA Patent within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 271 at least by making, using, selling, offering to

sell, and/or importing the Infringing Strainers into the United States without JUKAs authorization.

C. JOBARs Copyright Infringement

45. Without JUKAs authorization, JOBAR made, used, offered for sale, sold, and/or

imported into the United States the Infringing Strainers which violate the JUKA Copyrights.

46. On information and belief, JOBAR copied the Visual Material in creating the

Infringing Strainers.

47. JOBARs Infringing Strainers are substantially similar to the Visual Materials

covered by the JUKA Copyrights.

48. JOBAR has infringed and continues to infringe the JUKA Copyrights within the

meaning of 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq. at least by making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or

importing the Infringing Strainers into the United States without JUKAs authorization.

D. JOBARs Trademark Infringement

49. JUKA has conscientiously taken steps to develop a MUSHROOM Brand in

connection with its products. JUKA has done this, inter alia, by:

(i) consistently using the word-formative SHROOM in connection with its product

names;

(ii) obtaining Federal Trademark Registrations over relevant goods for the words

TUBSHROOM (Reg. No. 4972762), SINKSHROOM (Reg. No. 5179859) and

SHOWERSHROOM (Reg. No. 5179860);

(iii) filing a Federal Trademark Application over relevant goods for the word

STOPSHROOM (Application Serial No. 87287555);

(iv) registering the www.tubshroom.com, www.sinkshroom.com and

Exhibit A
-33-
Page 15 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 19 of 26 Page ID #:35

www.showershroom.com domain names; and

(v) using the Common Law Trademarks shown below (which self-evidently include a

stylized Mushroom Cap trademark and separate end emphasize the word

formative SHROOM):

50. JOBARs Infringing Strainers are likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake or

to deceive with the JUKA Trademarks in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1114 and N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law

360-k.

51. JOBAR has infringed and continues to infringe the JUKA Trademarks: (i) within

the meaning of 15 U.S.C. 1114 at least by making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or

importing the Infringing Strainers into the United States; and (ii) within the meaning of N.Y. Gen.

Bus. Law 360-k by making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or transporting in commerce in

the State of New York; without JUKAs authorization.

E. JOBARs Unfair Competition

52. JOBARs conduct is likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception as to: (i) the

affiliation, connection or association of JOBARs Infringing Strainers and JUKA; and (ii) the

origin, sponsorship or approval of JOBAR and the Infringing Strainers by JUKA; in violation of:

(i) Section 43 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a); and

(ii) the laws of the State of New York including, inter alia, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 349

and 360-l.

F. Test Buys and Third Party Retailers


Exhibit A
-34-
Page 16 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 20 of 26 Page ID #:36

53. Through an online search, JUKAs agents discovered that Infringing Strainers were

being offered for sale through the www.dreamproducts.com website operated by Defendant Dream

Products Inc. A printout of the www.dreamproducts.com website showing this offer for sale is

attached hereto as Exhibit H.

54. On August 29, 2017, JUKAs agents conducted test buys of Infringing Strainers

from Defendant Dream Products Inc. A copy of the e-mail receipt confirming such order is

attached hereto as Exhibit I. This test buy order was shipped to JUKAs agents in New York. Upon

receipt, JUKAs agents confirmed that this order contained Infringing Strainers manufactured by

JOBAR.

55. Through an online search, JUKAs agents discovered that Infringing Strainers were

being offered for sale through the www.supportplus.com website operated by Defendant Support

Plus Holdings, Inc. A printout of the www.supportplus.com website showing this offer for sale is

attached hereto as Exhibit J.

56. On June 12, 2017, JUKAs agents conducted test buys of Infringing Strainers

from Defendant Support Plus Holdings, Inc. A copy of the e-mail receipt confirming such order is

attached hereto as Exhibit K. This test buy order was shipped to JUKAs agents in New York.

Upon receipt, JUKAs agents confirmed that this order contained Infringing Strainers

manufactured by JOBAR.

57. Through an online search, JUKAs agents discovered that Infringing Strainers were

being offered for sale through the www.pulsetv.com website operated by Defendants PULSETV.

A printout of the www.pulsetv.com website showing this offer for sale is attached hereto as Exhibit

L.

58. On August 29, 2017, JUKAs agents conducted test buys of Infringing Strainers

Exhibit A
-35-
Page 17 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 21 of 26 Page ID #:37

from Defendants PULSETV. A copy of the e-mail receipt confirming such order is attached hereto

as Exhibit M. This test buy order was shipped to JUKAs agents in New York. Upon receipt,

JUKAs agents confirmed that this order contained Infringing Strainers manufactured by JOBAR.

59. On information and belief, RETAILERS have infringed and continue to infringe:

(i) the JUKA Patent within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 271;

(ii) the JUKA Copyrights within the meaning of 17 U.S.C. 501; and

(iii) the JUKA Trademarks within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. 1114 and N.Y. Gen. Bus.

Law 360-k;

at least by making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing the Infringing Strainers into

the United States without JUKAs authorization.

Count I

(As to All Defendants Infringement Under 35 U.S.C. 271 of the JUKA Patents)

60. JUKA re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in

paragraphs 1 through 59 of this Complaint.

61. JOBAR and RETAILERS, without authorization from JUKA, have made, used,

offered for sale, sold, and/or imported in or into the United States, and continue to make, use, offer

for sale, sell, and/or import in or into the United States, sink and tub strainers that infringe the

JUKA Patent.

62. JUKA has been and will continue to be irreparably harmed by the infringement of

the JUKA Patent by JOBAR and RETAILERS.

Count II

(As to All Defendants Infringement Under 17 U.S.C. 501 of the JUKA Copyrights)

63. JUKA re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in

Exhibit A
-36-
Page 18 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 22 of 26 Page ID #:38

paragraphs 1 through 59 of this Complaint.

64. JOBAR and RETAILERS, without authorization from JUKA, have made, used,

offered for sale, sold, and/or imported in or into the United States, and continue to make, use, offer

for sale, sell, and/or import in or into the United States, sink and tub strainers that infringe the

JUKA Copyrights.

65. JUKA has been and will continue to be irreparably harmed by the infringement of

the JUKA Copyrights by JOBAR and RETAILERS.

Count III

(As to All Defendants Infringement Under 15 U.S.C. 1114 of the JUKA Trademarks)

66. JUKA re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in

paragraphs 1 through 59 of this Complaint.

67. JOBAR and RETAILERS, without authorization from JUKA, have made, used,

offered for sale, sold, and/or imported in or into the United States, and continue to make, use, offer

for sale, sell, and/or import in or into the United States, sink and tub strainers that infringe the

JUKA Trademarks.

68. JUKA has been and will continue to be irreparably harmed by the infringement of

the JUKA Trademarks by JOBAR and RETAILERS.

Count IV

(As to JOBAR Only Unfair Competition Under 15 U.S.C. 1125(a))

69. JUKA re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in

paragraphs 1 through 59 of this Complaint.

70. JOBAR has deliberately and willfully attempted to trade on JUKAs hard-earned

goodwill in the JUKA Trademarks as well as JUKAs reputation for quality products in order to

Exhibit A
-37-
Page 19 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 23 of 26 Page ID #:39

confuse consumers as to the origin and sponsorship of the Infringing Strainers and, thus, to pass

off the Infringing Strainers as bona fide JUKA products.

71. The conduct of JOBAR is likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception as to: (i)

the affiliation, connection or association of the Infringing Strainers and JOBAR with JUKA; and

(ii) the origin, sponsorship or approval of JOBAR and the Infringing Strainers by JUKA; in

violation of Section 43 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).

Count V

(As to All Defendants Infringement Under N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 360-k of the JUKA

Trademarks)

72. JUKA re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in

paragraphs 1 through 59 of this Complaint.

73. JOBAR and RETAILERS, without authorization from JUKA, have made, used,

offered for sale, sold, and/or transported in commerce in the State of New York, and continue to

make, use, offer for sale, sell, and/or transports in commerce in the State of New York, sink and

tub strainers that infringe the JUKA Trademarks.

74. JOBAR acted with the intent to cause confusion or mistake or to deceive with

respect to the JUKA Trademarks.

75. JUKA has been and will continue to be irreparably harmed by the infringement of

the JUKA Trademarks by JOBAR and RETAILERS.

Count VI

(As to JOBAR Only Unfair Competition Under N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 349 and 360-l)

76. JUKA re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in

paragraphs 1 through 59 of this Complaint.

Exhibit A
-38-
Page 20 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 24 of 26 Page ID #:40

77. JOBAR has deliberately and willfully attempted to trade on JUKAs hard-earned

goodwill in the JUKA Trademarks as well as JUKAs reputation for quality products in order to

confuse consumers as to the origin and sponsorship of the Infringing Strainers and, thus, to pass

off the Infringing Strainers as bona fide JUKA products.

78. The conduct of JOBAR is likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception as to: (i)

the affiliation, connection or association of the Infringing Strainers and JOBAR with JUKA; and

(ii) the origin, sponsorship or approval of JOBAR and the Infringing Strainers by JUKA; in

violation of the laws of the State of New York including, inter alia, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 349

and 360-l.

WHEREFORE, JUKA respectfully requests that the Court grant the following relief:

1. A judgment that JOBAR and RETAILERS infringed the JUKA Patent;

2. A judgment that JOBAR and RETAILERS infringed the JUKA Copyrights;

3. A judgment that JOBAR and RETAILERS infringed the JUKA Trademarks;

4. A judgment that JOBAR engaged in unfair competition;

5. A permanent injunction enjoining JOBAR, RETAILERS and all persons acting in

concert with JOBAR and/or RETAILERS, from infringing the JUKA Patent;

6. A permanent injunction enjoining JOBAR, RETAILERS and all persons acting in

concert with JOBAR and/or RETAILERS, from infringing the JUKA Copyrights;

7. A permanent injunction enjoining JOBAR, RETAILERS and all persons acting in

concert with JOBAR and/or RETAILERS, from infringing the JUKA Trademarks;

8. A permanent injunction enjoining JOBAR and all persons acting in concert with

JOBAR from engaging in unfair competition;

9. A judgment and order requiring JOBAR and RETAILERS to pay JUKA all

Exhibit A
-39-
Page 21 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 25 of 26 Page ID #:41

damages caused by JOBARs and RETAILERS infringement of the JUKA Patent (but in no event

less than a reasonable royalty) pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284, or the total profit made by JOBAR

from its infringement of each of the JUKA Patents pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 289;

10. A judgment and order requiring JOBAR and RETAILERS to pay JUKA

supplemental damages or profits for any continuing post-verdict infringement up until entry of the

final judgment, with an accounting, as needed;

11. A judgment and order requiring JOBAR and RETAILERS to pay JUKA increased

patent damages up to three times the amount found or assessed pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284;

12. A judgment and order requiring JOBAR and RETAILERS to pay JUKA statutory

copyright damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 504;

13. A judgment and order requiring JOBAR and RETAILERS to pay JUKA pre-

judgment and post- judgment interest on any damages or profits awarded;

14. A judgment and order requiring JOBAR and RETAILERS to pay JUKA: (i)

JOBARs and RETAILERS profits; (ii) any damages sustained by JUKA; and (iii) the costs of

this action; under 15 U.S.C. 1117;

15. A judgment and order requiring JOBAR and RETAILERS to pay JUKA all profits

derived from the manufacture, use, display or sale of Infringing Strainers in New York and/or all

damages suffered by JUKA by reason of the manufacture, use, display or sale of the Infringing

Strainers in New York under N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 360-m;

16. A determination that this action is an exceptional case pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285;

17. A determination that this action is an exceptional case pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;

18. A determination that JOBAR acted with the intent to cause confusion or mistake or

to deceive pursuant to N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 360-k;

Exhibit A
-40-
Page 22 of 23
Case 2:17-cv-07441 Document 1-1 Filed 10/11/17 Page 26 of 26 Page ID #:42

19. A determination that JOBAR and/or RETAILERS infringed the JUKA Trademarks

with knowledge or in bad faith within the meaning of N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 360-m;

20. An award of JUKAs attorneys fees for bringing and prosecuting this action

pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285, 17 U.S.C. 505 and 15 U.S.C. 1117;

21. An award of treble profits and damages and/or reasonable attorneys fees to JUKA

from JOBAR and/or RETAILERS pursuant to N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 360-m;

22. An award of JUKAs costs and expenses incurred in bringing and prosecuting this

action; and

23. Such further and additional relief as this Court deems just and proper.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

JUKA hereby demands a jury for all issues so triable.

DATED: ____________

GRIMES LLC

/s/ Russell D. Dize _


Russell D. Dize (RD4000)
dize@gandb.com
grimes@gandb.com
hickman@gandb.com
200 W. 57th Street, Suite 1403
New York, New York 10019
Telephone: 239-330-9000
Fax: 239-301-2215

Exhibit A
-41-
Page 23 of 23