Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 1 of 15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Degelman Industries, Ltd., Plaintiff, v. Pro-Tech Welding & Fabrication, Inc. and Michael Weagley, Defendant ( s) . 06-CV-6346 VERDICT FORM In accordance with the Court's instructions, please answer the following questions. Your answers for each question must be unanimous. Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 2 of 15 FINDINGS ON DEGELMAN'S CLAIMS DEGELMAN'S UTILITY AND DESIGN PATENT CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANTS 1. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech Welding and Fabrication, Inc. ("Pro-Tech"), and/or Michael P. Weagley ("Weagley"), has infringed Claim 1 of the ' 576 Patent? (Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no" for each Defendant.) . Accused Defe.ndant ProduCt Pr.o-Tech Welding and 'li MichlicJ P. Weagley Fabrication, SPL Loader Ve> Ye-> SPB Backhoe ie.> res SPS Skidsteer Ye-.> _ye> SPC Compact Yes YE> IST Loader Yt:5 ye; 1ST Backhoe
vy;_ II:: SBS Switchblade Skidsteer res ye5 Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 3 of 15 Super Duty Loader - 2- Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 4 of 15 2. For each of the following products, has Degclman proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed Claim 2 of the '576 Patent? (Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no" for each Defendant.) Accused Defendant Product Pro-Tech Welding and Michael P. leagle1; Fabrication, Inc. SPL Loader
VeA I. SPB Backhoe ve:s I SPS Skidsteer '{G> [;J SPC Compact
k/t1 IST Loader ye;s (;;b.; IST Backhoe ye5 1ST Skidsteer '{:> CfM PBS Pullback '{:5
Super Duty Loader rt::' I .., - j - Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 5 of 15 3. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed Claim 3 of the '576 Patent? (Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no" for each Defendant.) Accused Defendant Product SPL Loader SPB Backhoe SPS Skidsteer SPC Compact 1ST Loader IST Backhoe 1ST Skidsteer PBS Pullback , F$L Foldout FTF Forklift SBL Switchblade Loader SSB Switchblade Backhoe SBS Switchblade Skidsteer Super Duty Loader Pro-Tech Welding and Fabrication, Inc. -4 - Michael P. Weagley Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 6 of 15 4. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed Claim 4 of the '576 Patent? (Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no" for each Defendant.) Accused Defendant Product SPL Loader SPB Backhoe SPS Skidsteer SPC Compact 1ST Loader IST Backhoe IST Skidsteer PBS Pullback FTF Forklift SBL Switchblade Loader SSB Switchblade Backhoe SBS Switchblade Skidsteer Super Duty Loader Pro-Tech Welding and Fabrication, Inc. 11 0/V .., - 5- Michael P. Weagley Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 7 of 15 5. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed Claim 5 of the '576 Patent? (Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an ''N" for "no" for each Defendant.) Accused Defendant Product SPL Loader SPB Backhoe SPS Skidsteer SPC Compact 1ST Loader IST Backhoe IST Skidsteer PBS Pullback FTF Forklift SBL Switchblade Loader SSB Switchblade Backhoe SBS Switchblade Skidsteer Super Duty Loader Pro-Tech Welding and Fabrication, Inc. - 6- Michael .P. Weagley Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 8 of 15 6. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed Claim 6 of the '576 Patent? (Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no" for each Defendant.) ' Accused Defendant Product Pro-Tech Welding and Michael P. Weagley Fabrication, Inc. SPL Loader
Jj_t4 SPB Backhoe (J p /()A .., . SPS Skidsteer
1;/u SPC Compact UY y_f)A 1ST Loader .I
L;{k IST Backhoe ,I " C/o.A I I 1ST Skidsteer
{/u PBS Pullback
p F:IJL Foldout 'VP--1 Vu FTF Forklift uj!A SBL Switchblade Loader (jQ/J
SSB Switchblade Backhoe Jl4M I
SBS Switchblade Skidsteer VM L;I/.J Super Duty Loader VIr 'fr I
J - 7- Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 9 of 15 7. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed Claim 7 of the '576 Patent? (Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N'' for "no" for each Defendant.) Accused Defendant Product SPL Loader SPB Backhoe SPS Skidsteer SPC Compact IST Loader IST Backhoe 1ST Skidsteer PBS Pullback FBL Foldout FTF Forklift SBL Switchblade Loader SSB Switchblade Backhoe SBS Switchblade Skidsteer Super Duty Loader Pro-Tech Welding and Fabrication, Inc. - 8 - Michael P. Weagley Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 10 of 15 8. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Wcagley, has infringed Claim 8 ofthe '576 Patent? (Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no" for each Defendant.) Accused Defendant Product SPL Loader SPB Backhoe SPS Skidsteer SPC Compact IST Loader IST Backhoe IST Skidsteer PBS Pullback p FI3L Foldout FTF Forklift SBL Switchblade Loader SSB Switchblade Backhoe SBS Switchblade Skidsteer Super Duty Loader Pro-Tech Welding and Fabrication, Inc. - 9- Michael P. Weagley Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 11 of 15 9. For each of the following products, has Degclman proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed the '097 Patent? (Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no" for each Defendant.) Accused Defendant Product Pro-Tech Welding and Michael P. Weagley Fabrication, Inc. SPL Loader NO 1/tf SPB Backhoe i/0 ;V() r SPS Skidsteer /v'O ;vo SPC Compact ;flO 11/0 1ST Loader )Jo /11(/ 1ST Backhoe )VO jV() IST Skidsteer /Vo N ~ PBS Pullback ;vd jt((J - 10- Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 12 of 15 - 10. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed the '128 Patent? (Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for ' 'no" for each Defendant.) .. - ~ - - - - - - - - -- -- - ~ : . _ Accused Defendant Product Pro-Tech Welding and Michael P. Weagley Fabrication, Inc. SPL Loader jJ() No SPB Backhoe IJO No SPS Skidsteer No NO SPC Compact NO No IST Loader /J() ;Jo IST Backhoe No No IST Skidsteer ;VO f'/d' PBS Pullback tid jVd p /JO !Vo FJL Foldout FTF Forklift t/b NO - 11 - Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 13 of 15 11. For each of the following products, has Degelman proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendants, Pro-Tech and/or Weagley, has infringed the '129 Patent? (Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no" for each Defendant.) Accused Defendant Product Pro-Tech Welding and Michael P. Weagley Fabrication, Inc. . .. SPL Loader No fJI SPB Backhoe tfCJ j{d SPS Skidsteer jJO j l / ~ SPC Compact NCJ )lo IST Loader No N6 IST Backhoe N6 !fo 1ST Skidsteer tJa lf6 PBS Pullback tJo flO - 12- Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 14 of 15 12. If you answered "Yes" to any of Questions 1 through 11, and thus found that any Defendant has infringed any Degelman patent(s), has Degelman proven by clear and convincing evidence that such Defendant's(s') infringement was willful? (Please answer in each cell with a "Y" for "yes" (for Degelman), or with an "N" for "no" for each Defendant.) Accused Defendant Product Pro-Tech Welding and Michael P. Weagley Fabrication, Inc. '576 Patent (Claim 1) ;JO A/0 ' 576 Patent (Claim 2) J/() ffd '576 Patent (Claim 3) /VO ; J ~ '576 Patent (Claim 4) NO po '576 Patent (Claim 5) Na Nd '576 Patent (Claim 6) 1/'0 IJ'() '576 Patent (Claim 7) /VO ;1/J '576 Patent (Claim 8) jJO NO '097 Patent !/() No '128 Patent NtJ )/() '129 Patent J/0 )/0 - 13- Case 6:06-cv-06346-JWF Document 220 Filed 03/08/13 Page 15 of 15 13. Have Defendants proven by clear and convincing evidence that Degelman's asserted utility and/or design patent claims are invalid? ' 576 Patent Yes _i_ (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman) (Claim 1) '576 Patent Yes _X (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman) (Claim 2) '576 Patent Yes X (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman) (Claim 3) '576 Patent Yes _l_ (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman) (Claim 4) ' 576 Patent Yes _!_ (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman) (Claim 5) '576 Patent Yes ....X (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman) (Claim 6) '576 Patent Yes _j_ (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman) (Claim 7) '576 Patent y ~ j _ (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman) (Claim 8) '097 Patent Yes _i (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman) ' 128 Patent Yes _l_ (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman) '129 Patent y., j_ (for Pro-Tech and/or Weagley) No (for Degelman) Dated: March ~ ' 2013 ~ ~ - 14-