Upload
slburstein
View
53
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
ABC v. Diageo - Complaint
Citation preview
1
INTHEUNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURTFORTHEWESTERNDISTRICTOFPENNSYLVANIA
AMERICANBEVERAGECORPORATION,andPOUCHPACINNOVATIONS,LLC
Plaintiffs, CaseNo.
v. JURYTRIALDEMANDED
DIAGEONORTHAMERICA, INC.,andDIAGEOAMERICASSUPPLY,INC.t/d/b/aCAPTAINMORGANCO.,
Defendants.
VERIFIEDCOMPLAINT
Plaintiffs,AmericanBeverageCorporation(“ABC”)andPouchPacInnovations,LLC
(“PPI”) (together,“Plaintiffs”),bytheircounsel,filethisVerifiedComplaintagainst
DefendantsDiageoNorthAmerica,Inc.andDiageoAmericasSupply,Inc.t/d/b/aCaptain
MorganCo.,andinsupportthereofaverasfollows.
PreliminaryStatement
ThiscaseinvolvesABC’sDaily’sCocktailsandtheinfringementofABC’sintellectual
propertyrightsthereinbytheDefendantsandtheiraptly-namedParrotBayCocktails.This
casearosebecausetheDefendants,seekingtocapitalizeonthecommercialsuccessof
ABC’sDaily’sCocktails,anddespiteamyriadofavailablealternatives,recentlylaunched
theirParrotBayCocktailspackagedinpouchesthat– truetotheirname– parrot boththe
patenteddesignandtradedressofABC’sDaily’sCocktails.TheDefendants’ParrotBay
CocktailsnotonlyinfringeABC’spatentpouchdesign,butare also sosimilarinappearance
toABC’sDaily’sCocktailsthatconsumerconfusionislikelytooccurandinfacthasalready
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 1 of 23
2
occurred,toABC’sdetriment.WhileABCwelcomesfaircompetition,theDefendants
conductinthiscasegoesfarbeyondthestandardsoffaircompetitionasrecognizedbythe
law.ABCbelievesthattheDefendantsareplanninganextensivenationwiderolloutoftheir
ParrotBayCocktailsfortheupcomingspringandsummermonths,whicharethemost
profitableseasonforfrozencocktailpouchsales.Unlessenjoined,theDefendantswillbe
abletoexploittheactualandinevitableconsumerconfusioncausedbytheirinfringing
productsduringthisprimebuyingseasonandtherebypoachpotentialcustomers,sales,
andmarketsharefromABC.OncetheDefendantshaveestablishedasubstantialshareof
thefrozencocktailpouchmarketthroughtheirinfringingactivities,thedamagetoABCwill
alreadyhavebeendone,asanymonetarydamagesorremedialactions(e.g.,redesignthe
pouchpackaging)imposedbythisCourtwouldbeinsufficienttoredresstheirreparable
harmsufferedbyABC.Giventheforegoing,Plaintiffs seeksthisCourt’sinterventionto
restrainandenjointheDefendants’infringingconduct.
TheParties
1. PlaintiffAmericanBeverageCorporation(“ABC”)isacorporationorganized
andexistingunderthelawsofDelaware,withaprincipalplaceofbusinessinVerona,
Pennsylvania.
2. PlaintiffPouchPacInnovations,LLC(“PPI”)isalimitedliabilitycompany
organizedandexistingunderthelawsofFlorida,withaprincipalplaceofbusinessin
Sarasota,Florida.
3. Uponinformationandbelief,DiageoNorthAmerica,Inc.isaConnecticut
corporationwithaprincipalplaceofbusinessinNorwalk,Connecticut.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 2 of 23
3
4. Uponinformationandbelief,DiageoAmericasSupply,Inc.isaNewYork
corporationwithaprincipalplaceof businessinNorwalk,Connecticutandthattradesand
doesbusinessas“CaptainMorganCo.”
JurisdictionandVenue
5. ThisCourthasjurisdictionoverthesubjectmatterofthisactionpursuantto
15U.S.C.§1121(actionarisingundertheLanhamAct),28U.S.C.§1331(federalquestion),
28U.S.C.§1338(a)(anyActofCongressrelatingtopatentsortrademarks),28U.S.C.§
1338(b)(actionassertingclaimofunfaircompetitionjoinedwithasubstantialandrelated
claimunderthetrademarklaws),and28U.S.C.§1367(supplementaljurisdiction).
6. ThisCourthaspersonaljurisdictionovertheDefendantsbecausetheyhave
committedandcontinuetocommitactsofinfringementinviolationof35U.S.C.§271and
15U.S.C.§1125,andplaceinfringingproductsintothestreamofcommerce,withthe
knowledgeorunderstandingthatsuchproductsaresoldintheCommonwealthof
Pennsylvania,includinginthisdistrict.Uponinformationandbelief,theDefendantsderive
substantialrevenuefromthesaleofinfringing productswithinthisdistrict,expecttheir
actionstohaveconsequenceswithinthisdistrict,andderivesubstantialrevenuefrom
interstatecommerce.Thematterincontroversyexceedsthesumorvalueof$75,000
exclusiveofinterestandcosts.
7. Venueinthisdistrictisproperpursuantto28U.S.C.§§1391and1400
becausetheDefendantsaresubjecttojurisdictioninthisDistrict,transactbusinesswithin
thisdistrict,andofferforsaleinthisdistrictproductsthatinfringethePlaintiffs’
intellectualpropertyrights.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 3 of 23
4
ABC’sDaily’sCocktails
8. ABCmakesandsellsalineofsingle-serveready-to-drinkfrozencocktails
packagedinpouchesunderitsDaily’sbrandname(the“Daily’sCocktails”).
9. Foralltimesrelevanthereto,ABChaspackageditsDaily’sCocktailsin
pouchesthatarethesubjectofthisaction.
10. ThedesignofthepouchinwhichABCpackagesitsDaily’sCocktailsisthe
subjectofU.S.DesignPatentNo.D571,672(the“672Patent”).Atrueandcorrectcopyof
thepatentisattachedheretoasExhibitA.
11. The672Patentcoverstheunique,novel,andnon-obviousornamentaldesign
andappearanceofABC’spouchpackaging.
12. PPIownsthe672PatentandlicenseditexclusivelytoABC,whichowns
substantiallyallrights,title,andintereststoandinthe672Patent,includingbutnot
limitedtotherighttobringsuit,aloneandinitsownname,forinfringementofthe672
Patent.Accordingly,ABChasstandingtoassertclaimsforinfringementofthe672Patent,
andPPIjoinsasco-plaintiffastheregisteredownerofthe672Patent.
13. ThepouchpackagingoftheDaily’sCocktailsembodies asingularand
inherentlydistinctivetradedresscharacterizedbyageneraloverallappearanceand
commercialimpressioncreatedthroughsize,shape,colorscheme,pictoralelements,
labeling,andlayout.TheseelementsincludethepatentedhourglassshapeofABC’spouch
packagingandthreehorizontallabelingpartitions,withthetop-mostportionconsistingof
aperforatedtear-awayflapwiththelanguage“FREEZEANDENJOY,”themiddleportion
containingtheDaily’sbrandname,acolorfuldepictionoftheparticularfrozencocktail
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 4 of 23
5
flavorandcorrespondingfruit imagery,andthebottomportionidentifyingthespecific
productandkeyinformation thereof.
Illustration 1:ADaily’scocktail.
14. TheelementsofABC’stradedressarenon-functional.
15. Continuouslysincethefallof2005,ABChasmadeandsoldininterstate
commerceitsDaily’sCocktailsinitstradedresstoidentifythesourceoftheDaily’s
Cocktailsandtodistinguishthemfromthosemadeandsoldbyothers.ABChas
prominentlydisplayeditstradedresstodistributors,retailers,andconsumersthrough
advertising,theinternet,industrypublications,andpoints-of-sale.
16. ABChasinvestedsubstantialtime,resources,andmoneyinmakingand
sellingitsDaily’sCocktailsintheirpouchpackagingtradedress.
17. AsaresultofABC’scommercialactivitiesassetforthherein,ABC’strade
dresshasdevelopedandnowhasasecondaryanddistinctivemeaningtoconsumersand
thealcoholicbeverageindustry.Specifically,ABC’stradedresshascometoindicatethat
the Daily’sCocktailscomefromororiginateonlywithABC.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 5 of 23
6
18. ABC’susesandhasuseditstradedressonallflavorvarietiesoftheDaily’s
Cocktails,andthus,itstradedresshasarecognizableandconsistentoveralllook.
Illustration 2:TheconsistentoveralllookofABC’stradedress onitsDaily’sCocktails.
TheDefendants’ParrotBayCocktails
19. TheDefendantsmakeandsellalcoholicbeveragesundertheir“ParrotBay”
brandname.
20. Plaintiffs recentlydiscoveredthattheDefendantshavebeguntomakeand
sellininterstatecommercesingle-serveready-to-drinkfrozencocktailspackagedin
pouchesundertheirParrotBaybrandname (the“ParrotBayCocktails”).
21. TheDefendants’ParrotBayCocktailsarepackagedinpouchesindicatingthat
theyare“BREWEDANDBOTTLEDBYCAPTAINMORGANCO.,PLAINFIELDIL.”
22. Moreimportantly,theDefendants’ParrotBayCocktailsarepackagedin
pouchesthatinfringePlaintiffs’ patentedpouchdesignandembodyABC’stradedressand
socloselyimitateABC’stradedressthatconsumersarelikelytobeconfusedastothe
sourceororiginoftheDefendants’ParrotBayCocktails.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 6 of 23
7
Illustration 3:ADaily’sCocktail(left)andaParrotBayCocktail(right).
23. TheDefendants’ParrotBayCocktailsarepackagedinpouchesthatare
identicalinoverallcommercialimpressiontothepouchesinwhichtheDaily’sCocktailsare
packaged,includingbutnotlimitedtosize,shape,colorscheme,pictoralelements,labeling,
andlayout.Specifically, theDefendantshaveparrotedthepatentedhourglassshapeof
ABC’spouchpackaging,aswellasthethreehorizontallabelingpartitions,withthetop-
mostportionconsistingofaperforatedtear-awayflapwiththelanguage“FREEZE&
SQUEEZE,”themiddleportioncontainingtheParrotBaybrandname,acolorfuldepiction
oftheparticularfrozencocktailflavorandcorrespondingfruitimagery,andthebottom
portionidentifyingthespecificproductandkeyinformationthereof.
24. TheDefendantshavecopiedtheconsistentoverallcommercialimpressionof
ABC’stradedressacrosstheDefendants’entireproductline.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 7 of 23
8
Illustration 4:TheconsistentoveralllookoftheDefendants’ParrotBayCocktails.
25. Moreover,theDefendantshavecopiedthepatenteddesignandappearance
ofthe672PatentintheirParrotBayCocktailpouches.
Illustration 5:The672Patent(left)andaParrotBayCocktail(right).
26. TheDefendantsarenotauthorizedtopracticethe672Patent.
27. TheDefendants’conductassetforthhereinisnotonlylikelytocause
consumerconfusion,buthasalreadycausedactualconsumerconfusion.ABChasreceived
correspondencesfromcustomersevidencingactualconfusionwiththeDefendants’Parrot
BayCocktails.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 8 of 23
9
28. Forseveralreasons,furtherconsumerconfusionisnotjustlikely,but
inevitable.
29. TheDaily’sCocktailsdirectlycompetewiththeParrotBayCocktails.
30. TheParrotBayCocktailsareofferedinmanyofthesameflavorsasthe
Daily’sCocktails,includingforexample strawberry daiquiriandpiñacolada.
31. TheParrotBayCocktailsandtheDaily’sCocktails arerelativelylow-priced
items,bothcostingapproximately$2.00per unit.
32. TheParrotBayCocktailsandtheDaily’sCocktailsarebothsingle-serve
frozencocktailproductsthat,giventheirlowcost,areimpulsepurchasesforconsumers.
Assuch,consumersexhibitverylittlebrandloyaltyinconnectionwithfrozencocktail
pouchproducts,andarenotlikelytoexerciseagreatdealofcarebeforeselectingtheir
frozencocktailpouchproductsforpurchase,norinevaluatingthequalityofthefrozen
cocktailproductfollowingconsumption.
33. TheParrotBayCocktailsaresoldthroughmanyofthesametradechannels
astheDaily’sCocktails,suchasliquorstoresandretailchainsandsupermarketssuchas
WalmartandShaw’s.
Illustration 6:Daily’sCocktails(left)andParrotBayCocktails(right)ataWalmartstore.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 9 of 23
10
34. Oftentimes,theproductsappearnexttoeachotheronracksattheends of
aisles,furtherexacerbatingtheriskofconfusion.
Illustration 7:Daily’sCocktails(left)andParrotBayCocktails(right).
35. Insomeinstances,thetwoproductsaremixedtogetheronnearbyshelves
andsometimesevenappearonthesameshelfrow.
Illustration 8:Arefrigerateddisplayunitcontainingthetwoproductsonthesameshelfrows.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 10 of 23
11
36. Whentheproductsappearonthesameshelvesorrows,consumerconfusion
isunavoidablebecauseitisdifficulttodistinguishthetwoproducts.
Illustration 9:Arefrigerateddisplayunitcontainingthetwoproducts.Daily’sCocktails
exclusivelypopulatethetoptwoshelves,whileParrotBayCocktailsexclusivelypopulatethe
bottomshelf.Bothproductspopulatethethirdshelffromthetop.
Illustration 10:Aclose-upofFigure9 showinghowclosevisualinspectionisrequiredto
discoverthatthesameshelfcontainstwoproductsfromdifferentsources,withtheDaily’s
Cocktails(left)adjacenttotheParrotBayCocktails(right).
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 11 of 23
12
37. Storesalso stockthe two products inrefrigeratedshelvesbehindfoggyglass
doors,makingitevenmoredifficultforconsumerstonoticeandappreciatewhatever
minutedifferencestheremaybebetweenthepouchpackagingofthetwoproducts.
Illustration 11:ArefrigerateddisplayunitcontainingbothDaily’sCocktailsandParrotBay
Cocktails.Thefoggyglassdoorasseenbycustomersmakesitimpossibletodistinguishthe
twoproducts.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 12 of 23
13
38. Thesearrangementscreatethevisualeffectoftheproducts“flowing”
together,implying toconsumersthattheyalloriginatefromthesamesource.
Illustration 12:Racks containingbothDaily’sCocktailsandParrotBayCocktailsshowinghow
twoproductsfromdifferentsourcesappearto“flow”together.
39. TheDefendants’conductassetforthhereinisallthemoreegregiouswhen
measuredagainstcompetingfrozencocktail pouch productsmadeandsoldbyother
beveragemanufacturers.Asurveyofthetradedressusedbyotherbeverage
manufacturersshowsthemultiplepouchpackagingoptionsavailabletocompaniessuchas
theDefendants.
Illustration 13:Otherfrozencocktailpackaging.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 13 of 23
14
40. ThesimilarityoftheDefendants’ParrotBayCocktails totheDaily’sCocktails
isallthemorestrikingwhenviewedin lightofthisrangeofavailableoptions.
41. Uponinformationandbelief,theDefendantshaveenteredintoacontract
packingarrangementwithAdmiralBeverageCorporation,whichconvenientlysharesthe
sameinitialsasABC,tomakeanddistributetheDefendants’ParrotBayCocktails.Asa
resultofthisarrangement,theDefendantsareabletorepresenttodistributorsand
retailersanaffiliationwith“abc,”which,inconnectionwiththeDefendants’otherconduct
assetforthherein,makesitlikelythatcompanieswithinthealcoholicbeverageindustry–
includingbutnotlimitedtodistributorsandretailers– maybeconfusedastothesourceor
originoftheDefendants’ParrotBayCocktails,ormaycometobelievethattheyaredealing
withABCandtheDaily’sCocktails.
Notice
42. PPIwrotetoDiageoNorthAmerica,Inc.(“Diageo”) onDecember8,2011,
advisingDiageothatPPIbelievedthatDiageowasinfringingPlaintiffs’ rightsand
demandingthatDiageoceaseanddesistsuchinfringingconduct.AcopyofPPI’sletteris
attachedheretoasExhibitB.
43. Fromthatpoint,PPIandDiageoexchangedmultiplewritten
correspondencesduringDecemberof2011andupthroughandincludingMarchof2012.
AtnotimedidDiageo indicatethatitwouldcomplywithPPI’sdemand.
44. OnApril25,2012,ABCwrotetotheDefendants,advisingtheDefendantsthat
ABCbelievedthattheywasinfringingABC’sintellectualpropertyrightsassetforthherein
anddemandingthattheyceaseanddesisttheirconduct.AcopyofABC’sletterisattached
heretoasExhibitC.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 14 of 23
15
45. TheDefendantshavenotcomplied withABC’sdemands.
46. Accordingly,Plaintiffs havenochoicebuttoproceedwiththeinstantaction.
The ConsequencesoftheDefendants’InfringingConduct
47. TheDefendants’conductassetforthhereiniswrongful,malicious,
fraudulent,deliberate,willful,and/orintentionalandhascausedandwillcontinuetoharm
thePlaintiffs.
48. Unlessrestrained,theDefendants’conducthascausedandwillcontinueto
causeirreparableharmtoPlaintiffsforwhichtheyhavenoadequateremedyatlaw.
49. Uponinformationandbelief,theDefendantsareplanningforanationalroll-
outoftheirParrotBayCocktailsinpreparationforthesummermonths.
50. Thesummermonthsrepresenttheprimeseasonforsalesoffrozencocktails.
51. IftheDefendantsarepermittedtorollouttheirParrotBayCocktailsand
floodthemarketwiththeirinfringingproductsduringtheprimesellingseason,the
Defendantswillbeabletoexploittheactualandinevitableconsumerconfusiontopoach
potentialcustomers,sales,andsharesofthefrozencocktailmarketfromABC.Consumers
mayalsocometomistakenlyattributeinferiorqualitiesoftheDefendants’ParrotBay
CocktailstoABC,causingABCtosufferalossofitsreputation,trade,andgoodwill.
52. TheDefendants’conductalsothreatenstherightofthepublictobefreefrom
confusionanddeception.
53. Uponinformationandbelief,theDefendantsarepreparingtolaunchasingle-
servefrozencocktailpouchproductundertheDefendants’“Smirnoff”brandnamein
packagingthat,insofarasitutilizesthesamepouchpackaginganddesignasthe
Defendants’ParrotBayCocktails,infringesthePlaintiffs’rightsassetforthherein.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 15 of 23
16
54. Giventheforegoing,thePlaintiffsareentitledtoapreliminaryinjunctionto
bemadepermanentuponentryofafinaljudgment,preventingtheDefendantsfrom
continuingtheactscomplainedofherein.
COUNTI:PatentInfringement
55. ThePlaintiffsincorporatebyreferencetheallegationsinthepreceding
paragraphsasifsetforthherein.
56. Byengagingintheconductsetforthherein,theDefendantshaveinfringed
andcontinuetoinfringethe672Patent,literallyand/orunderthedoctrineofequivalents,
byusing,selling,and/orofferingtosell,intheUnitedstatesand/orimportingintothe
UnitedStates,theirParrotBayCocktailsinpouchpackagingthatinfringesthe672Patentin
violationof35U.S.C.§271.
57. Atall timesrelevanthereto,theDefendants’conducthasinvolvedandtaken
placewithininterstatecommerce.
58. TheDefendants’conductassetforthhereiniswrongful,malicious,
fraudulent,deliberate,willful,and/orintentionalandhascausedandwillcontinuetoharm
thePlaintiffs.
59. Unlessrestrained,theDefendants’conducthascausedandwillcontinueto
causeirreparableharmtoPlaintiffsforwhichtheyhavenoadequateremedyatlaw.
60. ThePlaintiffsareentitledtoapreliminaryinjunctiontobemadepermanent
uponentryofafinaljudgment,preventingtheDefendantsfromcontinuingtheacts
complainedofherein.
COUNTII:TradeDressInfringementandUnfairCompetition
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 16 of 23
17
61. ThePlaintiffsincorporatebyreferencetheallegationsinthepreceding
paragraphsasifsetforthherein.
62. TheDefendantshavemadeandsoldininterstatecommercetheirParrotBay
CocktailspackagedinpouchesthatembodyABC’stradedress.
63. AsaresultoftheDefendants’conductassetforthherein,consumerscouldbe
confusedandinducedtopurchasetheDefendants’ParrotBayCocktails,mistakenly
believingthemtobeDaily’sCocktails,thusdeprivingABCoftheprofitsofsale.
64. TheParrotBayCocktailsareofinferiorqualitytotheDaily’sCocktails,and
uponinformationandbelief,theDefendants’pouchesaresusceptibletoleaks.Asaresult
oftheDefendants’conductassetforthherein,consumersmaycometoattributethe
inferiorqualitiesoftheDefendants’ParrotBayCocktailstotheDaily’sCocktails,toABC’s
detriment.
65. Byengagingintheconductsetforthherein,theDefendantsarepassingoff
theirParrotBayCocktailsasABC’sDaily’sCocktails,tradingoffandexploitingABC’s
reputationandgoodwill,toABC’sdetriment.
66. Byengagingintheconductsetforthherein,theDefendantshaveinfringed
andcontinuetoinfringeABC’srightsinitstradedress,inviolationof§43(a)oftheLanham
Act,15U.S.C.§ 1125(a).TheDefendants’conductislikelytocauseconfusion– initially,
post-sale,andotherwise– mistake,anddeceptionamongconsumersastotheaffiliation,
connection,orassociationoftheDefendantswithABCandastotheorigin,sponsorship,
andapprovaloftheDefendants’ParrotBayCocktailsandcommercialactivitiesbyABC.
SuchconductalsointerfereswithABC’srighttouseitstradedresstoidentifyABCasthe
singlesourceoftheDaily’sCocktails.TheDefendants’conductassetforthhereinalso
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 17 of 23
18
constitutesfalsedesignationoforigin,unfaircompetition,andfalseadvertisinginviolation
of§43(a)oftheLanhamAct,15U.S.C.§1125(a).
67. TheDefendants’conductassetforthhereiniswrongful,malicious,
fraudulent,deliberate,willful,and/orintentional.
68. TheDefendants’conductassetforthhereiniswrongful,malicious,
fraudulent,deliberate,willful,and/orintentionalandhascausedandwillcontinuetoharm
thePlaintiffs.
69. Unlessrestrained,theDefendants’conducthascausedandwillcontinueto
causeirreparableharmtoPlaintiffsforwhichtheyhavenoadequateremedyatlaw.
70. ThePlaintiffsareentitledtoapreliminaryinjunctiontobemadepermanent
uponentryofafinaljudgment,preventingtheDefendantsfromcontinuingtheacts
complainedofherein.
COUNTIII:CommonLawUnfairCompetition
71. ThePlaintiffsincorporatebyreference theallegationsinthepreceding
paragraphsasifsetforthherein.
72. TheDefendants’conductassetforthhereinislikelytocauseconsumer
confusion,tocausemistake,andtodeceiveastotheaffiliation,connection,orassociation
oftheDefendantswithABCandastotheorigin,sponsorship,andapprovalofthe
Defendants’ParrotBayCocktailsandcommercialactivitiesbyABC.Suchconductalso
interfereswithABC’srighttouseitstradedresstoidentifyABCasthesinglesourceofthe
Daily’sCocktails.
73. TheDefendants’conductassetforthhereinconstitutesunfaircompetition
andpalmingoff.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 18 of 23
19
74. TheDefendants’conductassetforthhereiniswrongful,malicious,
fraudulent,deliberate,willful,and/orintentional.
75. TheDefendants’conductassetforthhereiniswrongful,malicious,
fraudulent,deliberate,willful,and/orintentionalandhascausedandwillcontinuetoharm
thePlaintiffs.
76. Unlessrestrained,theDefendants’conducthascausedandwillcontinueto
causeirreparableharmtoPlaintiffs forwhichtheyhavenoadequateremedyatlaw.
77. ThePlaintiffsareentitledtoapreliminaryinjunctiontobemadepermanent
uponentryofafinaljudgment,preventingtheDefendantsfromcontinuingtheacts
complainedofherein.
PRAYERFORRELIEF
WHEREFORE,thePlaintiffsdemandjudgmentagainsttheDefendantsasfollows:
1. AjudgmentdeclaringthattheDefendantshaveinfringedthe672Patentand
haveinfringedABC’stradedress,havecompetedunfairlywithABC,haveinjuredABC’s
businessreputationbytheunauthorizeduseofABC’stradedress,andhavewillfully
violatedtheapplicablelawsoftheUnitedStatesandofthestateswheretheDefendants’
goodshavebeensold,alltothedetrimentofPlaintiffs;
2. ThattheDefendants,theirofficers,agents,servants,employees,attorneys,
successorsandassigns,andallotherpersonsinactiveconcertwithorparticipationwith
thembepreliminarilyandpermanentlyenjoinedandrestrainedfrom:
(a) Infringingorinducinginfringementofthe672Patent;
(b) Infringingor inducinginfringementofABC’stradedress;
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 19 of 23
20
(c) UsingABC’stradedress,aloneorincombinationwithanyotherelements,to
advertiseoridentifytheDefendants’goodsorservices;
(d) UnfairlycompetingwithABCinanymannerwhatsoever;
(e) Causinglikelihoodofconfusion;
(f) Engaginginanyactsoractivitiesdirectlyorindirectlycalculatedtotrade
uponABC’stradedressorthereputationorgoodwillofABC,orinanywayto
competeunfairlywithABC;
3. ForpreliminaryandpermanentinjunctivereliefdirectingDefendantsto
recallfromdistributionanddestroyallproductsthatinfringethe672Patentorinfringeor
embodyABC’stradedressoranycolorableimitationthereof,butwhichdonotemanate
fromABC;
4. ForajudgmentagainstDefendantsawardingthePlaintiffsdamagesandlost
profits,including:
(a) AlldamagessustainedbythePlaintiffsasaresultoftheDefendants’unlawful
infringementofthe672Patent,togetherwithinterestonsuchdamagesand
thatsuchdamagesbetrebled,pursuantto35U.S.C.§284and35U.S.C.§289;
(b) AlldamagessustainedbyABCasaresultoftheDefendants’unlawful
infringementofABC’stradedress,togetherwithinterestonsuchdamages
andthatsuchdamagesbetrebled;
(c) AllprofitsderivedbytheDefendantsfromthesaleofgoodsbythedirector
indirectuseofABC’stradedressorcolorableimitationsthereof,andthat
suchprofitsbetrebled;
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 20 of 23
21
(d) AlldamagessustainedbyPlaintiffs onaccountofpatentinfringement,trade
dressinfringement,unfaircompetition,andanyotherdamagessufferedby
Plaintiffs asaresultoftheDefendants’conductassetforthherein,andthat
suchdamagesbetrebled;
5. ForanaccountingofallDefendants’profitsfromtheconductcomplainedof
herein;
6. ForanorderdirectingtheDefendantstopaypunitivedamages;
7. ForanorderdirectingtheDefendantstopayrestitution;
8. Foranawardofattorneys’feespursuantto35U.S.C.§285and15U.S.C.§
1117orasotherwisepermittedbylaw;
9. Foranawardofpre-judgmentandpost-judgmentinterestatthemaximum
rateallowedbylaw;
10. Forthecostsandexpensesofthesuitherein;and
11. ForsuchadditionalandfurtherreliefasthisCourtmaydeemjustand
proper.
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 21 of 23
22
Respectfullysubmitted,
By: /s/StevenW.ZofferDickie,McCamey&Chilcote,P.C.StevenW.Zoffer,EsquirePAI.D.#[email protected],EsquirePAI.D.#[email protected],Suite400Pittsburgh,PA15222-5402Telephone:(412)281-7272Facsimile:(412)392-5367
Ference&AssociatesLLCStanelyD.Ference,III,EsquirePAI.D.#[email protected],PA15143Telephone:(412)741-8400Facsimile:(412)741-9292
CounselforPlaintiffs
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 22 of 23
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 23 of 23
VERIFICATION
I, Tim Barr, Vice President of Marketing and Strategy of American Beverage
Corporation, hereby verify that the facts set forth in the foregoing VERIFIED COMPLAINT are
true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.
I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of
18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
23
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1-1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 1 of 5
(12) United States Design PatentMurray
(10) Patent No.:(45) Date of Patent:
US D571,672 S** Jun. 24, 2008
(54) FLEXIBLE POUCH
(21) App!. No.: 29n98,054
(73) Assignee: Pouch Pac Innovations, LLC, Sarasota,FL (US)
(75) Inventor: R. Charles Murray, Lakewood Ranch,FL (US)
3/2001 Laudenberg et al.512001 Fuqucn 0917078/2001 Croft et al. 09/6%7/2002 Thomas912002 Garcia 09/696212005 Bennan 091708912005 Snyder 09/5438/2006 lJeda D917028/2006 lJeda 091702912006 lJeda 091702912007 Berman 091708
1012007 Bennan 09170812/2007 Murray 091708
112008 Bennan 091708
6.199.601 nlD442,078 S •0446,445 S *6,422,753 BI0463,275 S •
D502.092 S •D509.144 S *0526,573 S ..0527,278 S ..0528.0II S *0551,568 S *D553,008 S ..D557,614 S ..D558.596 S *Nov. 28, 2007
14 Years(**) Term:
(22) Filed:
The ornamental design for a flexible pouch, as shown anddescribed.
* cited by examiner
Primary Examiner-Caron D. VeynarAssistant Examiner..-Abraham Bahia(74) AI/orney, Agent, or Pirm--Gifford,Anderson & Citkowski, P.C
(51 )(52)(58)
(56)
LOC (8) Cl. 09-05U.S. CI. . D9nlOField of Classification Search D91702-714.
D9/601, 607, 611, 719,522,434-435.696;206/822; 383/61.1,81,104,80,901,63.
383/103,203; 2221107See application file for complete search history.
References Cited
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
(57) CLAIM
Krass, Sprinkle,
733,449 A2,189,174 A2,703,671 A3,286,005 A3,304,977 A3.924,008 A4,078.717 A4,326,568 A4,361,235 A4,498,591 A4.717,046 A4.848,421 A4,999,978 A5,222,535 A5,267,591 A5,433.526 A5,485,714 AD435,440 S *
711903 Willsie211940 Hohl3/1955 Kinds.:th
1111966 Cook211967 Hanunons
1211975 Fordetal.3/1978 Stearley4/1982 Burton et al.
11/1982 Gautier et al.211985 Smith, 11111988 nrogli et a!.711989 Froese et a!.311991 Kohlbach et al.6/1 993 Roders
121 I993 Wakabayashi et a!.7/1995 Wild et al.II I996 Montalvo
1212000 Croft et al. 09/696
DESCRIPTION
FIG. 1 is a front side elevational vit.'W of a flexible pouchshowing my new design;
FIG. 2 is a side elevational view thereof;
FIG. 3 is a rear side elevational view thereof;
FIG. 4 is a bottom plan view thereof;
riG. 5 is a front side elevational view ofa second embodimentof the flexible pouch;
FIG. 6, a side elevational view thereof;
FIG. 7 is a rear side elevational view thereof; and,
FIG. 8 is a bottom plan view thereof.
1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets
o
o o EXHIBrr
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1-1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 2 of 5
u.s. Patent Jun. 24,2008 Sheet 1 of 4
F16-1
l1B-2
US D571,672 S
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1-1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 3 of 5
U.S. Patent Jun. 24, 2008 Sheet 2 of 4 US D571,672 S
"11-4
FIIl-3
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1-1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 4 of 5
u.s. Patent Jun. 24, 2008 Sheet 3 of 4 US D571,672 S
116-6
116-5
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1-1 Filed 05/07/12 Page 5 of 5
u.s. Patent Jun. 24, 2008 Sheet 4 of 4 us I>S71,672 S
FIB· 1
F16·8
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1-2 Filed 05/07/12 Page 1 of 2
ERNEST l. GIFFORD /IIALLEN M. KRASSDOUOLAS W. Sl'IUNltl.1!THOMAS E. ANDERSON IIIRONALD W. CITKOWSKIJULIE A. GREENBERGDOUGLAS J. McEVOYJOHN O. POSADOUGLASL.WATHENMARK D. SCHNEIDERKEVIN S. MAcKENZIEJULIE K. STAPLE. 1'11.0.MARTI>~ S. BANCROFT, pu.D. f2J
MARK A. HARPER, PH.D.
JOHN CHAUCESARE A. SCLAFANIERIN B. KLUGWESTON ll. OOULD. PlI.D. U)
(1) ALSO ADU'TTI!O IN fLOIUDA
()) ALAe ADMITTliD IH ~n; .... YOIlK.
(1) Ot4LY AculTTUJ Itt CONN'ICTJI:UT
Mr. Evan GourvitzDirector & Senior CounselDiageo North America, Inc.801 Main AvenueNorwalk, Connecticut 06851
.-.( "
"'GIFFORD,KRASS.SPRINKLE.ANDERSON &
C====~y-__ CITKOWSKI. PC.PATENT, TRAOEMAJ\l< & COl'YRIGHT PRACTICE
December 8,2011
MAtN OFFICE2701 TROY CENTER DRIVE
SUITE 330P.O. BOX 7021
TROY, MICHIGAN 48007· 7021TELEPHONE (248) 647·6000
FAX (248) 647·$110
ANN ".BOl OFFICE303 DETROIT STREET
SUITE 300ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48104-1144
TELEPHONE (134) 91J·9300FAX (134) 913·6007
fLORIDA OFFICESEABOARD OFFICE PARK
312 EAST VENICE AVENUESUITE 201
VENICE. FLORIDA 34285TELEPHONE (941) 488-4245
INFO@PA TLA W. COMWWW.PATLAW.COM
Re: Parrot Bay PackagingOur Reference: PPJ-27981/08
Dear Mr. Gourvitz:
We represent PPi Technologies Inc. in its intellectual property matters. Thiscorrespondence relates to packaging for the Parrot Bay beverage produced by Diageo.
PPi Technologies is the owner of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0247682and U.S. Design Patent No, D571 ,672, copies of which are enclosed. These patents are directedto a stand-up flexible pouch. PPi Technologies has licensed the technology covered by thepatent and application to American Beverage Corp. for its use in packaging Daily's frozenalcoholic beverages. It has corne to our attention that Diageo is marketing a frozen alcoholicbeverage in a flexible pouch under the Parrot Bay brand. We have compared the Parrot Baypouch with Design Patent No. D571,672. It is our opinion that the Parrot Bay pouch is aninfringement of the PPi Technologies' design patent. In fact, the Parrot Bay pouch is virtuallyidentical to the Daily's pouch. A copy of photographs taken of the pouches side by side isenclosed as Exhibit A. It is interesting to note that not only has Diageo copied the shape of thepouch but also has copied aspects of the Daily's branding.
As you are well aware, representatives of Diageo visited PPi Technologies and wereinfonned of PPi's patent rights in the pouch. Nevertheless, this will stand as formal notificationof PPi's patent rights. We remind Diageo that the penalties for willful infringement includetriple damages and attorneys fees. Diageo and its customers are infringing PPi's rights. PPidemands· that Diageo cease and desist from producing packaging currently used for the ParrotBay product.
EXHI8rT
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1-2 Filed 05/07/12 Page 2 of 2
GIFFORD, KRASS, SPRINKLE,ANDERSON 8: CITKOWSKI, P.G.
Mr. Evan GourvitzDecember 8, 20]]Page 2
If you have any questions or wish to discuss the matter, please contact the undersigned.
Thomas E. Anderson
TEAJgsEnclosures
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1-3 Filed 05/07/12 Page 1 of 3
I 211l-\41 tille'
--------------
Dickie
Steven W. ZotterAttorney-at-LawAdmitted in PA. DC
April 25, 2012
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESSEvan GourvitzDirector and Senior CounselDiageo North America, Inc.801 Main AvenueNorwalk, CT 06851
RE: American Beverage Corporation GeneralParrot Bay PackagingOur File No.: 0004085.0267432
Dear Mr. Gourvitz:
Direct Dial: 412-392-5492Direct Fax: 412-392-5367
szoffer@dmclaw,com
This finn has been retained by American Beverage Corporation ("ABC") in connectionwith frozen cocktails sold by Diageo North America, Inc., and Diageo Americas Supply, Inc.CDiageo") under its Parrot Bay brand.
For several years, ABC has been making and selling frozen cocktails under its Daily'sbrand name. The Daily's cocktails are packaged in pouches that embody a unique trade dress,consisting of a distinctive shape, size, and overalI general appearance. ABC has expendedsubstantial time, resources, and money in connection with its trade dress, and as a result, theDaily's cocktails have become easily recognizable and popular due to ABC's trade dress. Asyou may also know, ABC's pouch is the subject of U.S. Design Patent No. 0571,672, which hasbeen licensed exclusively to ABC.
It has come to our attention that Diageo is making and selling frozen cocktails under itsParrot Bay brand in pouches that so closely embody and imitate ABC's pouches that consumerconfusion is likely to occur. In fact, ABC has already received reports of actual consumerconfusion caused by Diageo's conduct. A picture of the two products is enclosed as Exhibit A.The resemblance is undeniable.
ABC believes that Diageo is infringing ABC's trade dress and the aforementioned patent.Accordingly, ABC demands that Diageo cease and desist from making and selling its infringingParrot Bay cocktails. As you know, damages for willful infringement include treble damagesand attorney's fees. Please confirm in writing by May 1,2012 that Diageo will comply withABC's request to cease and desist. If we do not hear from you by that time, ABC will take
DICKIE. MlCAMEY &CHILCOTE, PC I ATTORNEYS AT lAWMAIN: 412·281·7272 FAX: 412·392-5367lWO PPG PlACE, sum: 400 I PlTTS8URGH, PA 15222·5402 I WWW.DMCLAW.COM
EXHIBITChorlotle, NC ICoIumbus,OH I Haddonfield, NJ I HOlrisburg, PA
Philadelphia, PA I Pitlsburgh, PA I Raleigh, NC I Steuben'<iUe,OHWashington, DC I VvreeIing, Wi IlMlminglon, DE
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1-3 Filed 05/07/12 Page 2 of 3
Evan C;ourvitzDIrector and Senior CounselDiageo North America, Inc.April ,2012Page 2
whatever action it deems appropriate including, but not limited to, proceeding to enforce itsrights, should that become necessary, in the United States District Court for the Western Districtof Pennsylvania. Nothing herein constitutes a waiver of any of ABC's rights or remedies, al! ofwhich are expressly reserved.
Thank you for your attention to this matter, and please do not hesitate to contact us at theabove address or phone if you have any questions or would like to discuss.
Very truly
~\.j'UI1""" for American Beverage Corporation
SWZlpfhAttachmentcc: American Beverage Corporation (w/attachment)
Nathan A. Kostelnik, Esquire (w/o attachment)
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1-3 Filed 05/07/12 Page 3 of 3
Case 2:12-cv-00601-JFC Document 1-4 Filed 05/07/12 Page 1 of 1-".;S 44 (Rev, 12/07) CIVIL COVER SHEETThe JS 44 civil cover sheet and the intormatinn contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or olher papers as required by law, except as providedby local rules of court. This fonl1, approved by Ihe Judicial Conference ot the United Slates in September 1974. is required for the usc of the Clerk ofCourt for the purpose of1l1itiatingthe civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIO~S ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS
AMERICAN BEVERAGE CORPORATION and
POUCH PAC INNOVATIONS, LLC
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Alle~heny
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)
DEFENDANTS DIAGEO NORTH AMERICA, INC. and
IAGEO AMERICAS SUPPLY, INC. t/d/b/a CAPTAIN
ORGAN CO.
County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(IN U,S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES. USE THE LOCATION OFTHE
LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorncy's (Finn Name. Address. and Telephone Number~teven w.Esquire, Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C.,
PPG Place, Suite 400, Pgh., PA 15222 (412)
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an ..x.. in One Box Only)
a I U.S. Government ~ 3 Federal QuestionPlaintiff (U,S. Government Not a Party)
Zoffer Attorneys (If Known)
Two281-72 2
III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES(Plaee an "X" in One Box f"r Plaintiff(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
PTF DEl' PTF DEl'Citi'en of This Stale a I a I Incorporated 01' Principal Place a 4 a 4
of Business In This State
a 2 U,S. GovernmentDefendant
a 4 Diversity
(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item Ill)
Citizen of Another State
Citizen or Subject of aForei n Count
a 2
a 3
a 2 Incorporated and Princtpal Placeof Business In Another State
o 3 F,,,eign Nation
a 5 a 5
a ~ 0 6
IV. NATURE OF SUIT tPlacean ..x .. in One Box flnl )(() Tit CT rmn. H RHlTl'IUJP.. R "RlWf( 11IFR. lU..
400 State Reapportionment4 I0 Antitrust430 Banks and Banking450 Commerce460 Deportation470 Raeketecr InJIuenced and
Corrupt Organizations480 Consumer Credit490 CablclSat TV810 Selective Service850 Securities/Commoditiesl
Exchange875 Customer Challenge
12 USC 3410890 Other Statutory Actions891 Agricultural Acts892 Economic Stabilization Act893 Environmental Matters894 Energy Allocation Act895 Freedom of Infonnation
Act900Appeal of Fcc Determination
Under Equal Accessto Justice
a 950 Constitutionality ofState Statutes
0aaaaa
00a0
0II
aaa0aa
a
a 422 Appeal 28 USC 158a 423 Withdrawal
28 USC 157
I I lie;: 10.
a 610 Agriculturca 620 Other Food & Druga 625 Drug Related Sciwre
of Property 21 USC 881a 630 Liquor Lawso 640 R.R. & Trucka 650 Airline Regs.a 660 Occupational
SafetylHcaltha 690 Other
'L 462 Naturaliz.ation Applicationa 463 Habeas Corpus -
Alk'11 Detaineea 465 Other Immigration
Actions
PRI, fit r .... mn
PF-RSONAL INJURYa 362 Personal Injury
Med. Malpracticea 365 Personal Injury
Product Liabilitya 368 Asbestos Personal
Injury ProductLiability
PERSONAL PROPERTYa 370 Other Frauda 371 Truth in Lendinga 380 Other Personal
Property Damagea 385 Property Damage
Product Liability
a 510 M"tions to VacateSentence
Habeas Corpus:530 Gencral535 Dcath Penalty540 Mandamus & Other550 Civil Rights555 Prison Condition
'1\ II RIC.II
PERSONAL INJURYo 3 I0 Airplanea 3 I5 Airplane Product
Liability320 Assault. Libel &
Slander330 Federal Employers
Liabilitya 340 Marineo 345 Marine Product
Liabilitya 350 Motor Vehieleo 355 Motor Vehicle
Product Liabilitya 360 Other Personal
Iniu
o 44 J Votinga 442 Employmenta 443 Housing!
Accommodations 0a 444 Welfare aa 445 Amer. wlDisabilities - a
Employment aa 44~ Amer. w/Disabilities - a
Othera 440 Other Civil Rights
Itl' l.I'ItOP.'KTYa 2 J0 Land Condemnationa 220 Foreclosurea 230 Rent Lease & Ejectmenta 240 Torts to Landa 245 Tort Product Liabilitya 290 All Other Real Property
a I 10 Insurancea 120 Marinea 130 Miller Acta 140 Negotiable Instrumenta 150 Recovery of Overpayment a
& Enforcement ofJudgmenta 15! Medicare Act aa 152 Recovery of Defaulted
Student Loans(Exel. Veterans)
a 153 Recovery of Overpaymentof Veteran's Benctits
a 160 Stockholders' Suitsa 190 Other Contracta 195 Contract Product Liabilitya 196 Franchise
V. ORIGIN
KJ I OriginalProceeding
(Place an ..x.. in One Box Only)
o 2 Removed from 0 3State Court
Remanded from 0 4 Reinstated or 0 5 Transferred from 0 6 MultidistrictAppellate Court Reopened another dlSlnCt Litigation
s eCl
o 7Appeal to DistrictJudge fromMagistrateJud ent
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do Dot cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):35 USC 271 and 15
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION ~B~n':'"'e-:'f-:-de;";sc;;"n';'ip-:ti';;;on""o"';f:-c"';au:;;s:':'e:-=--=-"'---'''''''''''-''''''''''''''''''---------------------------
Patent infringement, trade dress infrin ement, and unfair com etition
VII. REQUESTED IN
COMPLAINT:
o CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
UNDER F.R.C.P. 23 JURY DEMAND: 1{J Yes 0 No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
IF ANY(See instructions):
JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE 5/7 /12 SIGNATURE OF ATTORNE Y OF RECORD
lsi Steven W. Zoffer
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # AMOUNT---- ------- APPLYfNG IFP------ JUDGE----- MAG. JUDGE--------