UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * * *

SNOWIZARD, INC. and RONALD R. SCIORTINO vs. PRECISION METALSMITHS, INC.

CIVIL ACTION CASE NO. SECT.

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AND UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES

NOW INTO COURT, through undersigned counsel, comes plaintiff SnoWizard, Inc., who respectfully represents: Parties 1. Plaintiffs are: (a) SnoWizard, Inc. (SnoWizard), a Louisiana corporation with its principal place of

business in Jefferson, Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; and (b) Ronald R. Sciortino (Sciortino), an individual domiciled in New Orleans, Orleans

Parish, Louisiana. 2. Made defendant is Precision Metalsmiths, Inc. (PMI), an Ohio corporation with its principal place of business in Cleveland, Cuyahoga County, Ohio.

Page -1-

Jurisdiction and Venue 3. This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. 1 et seq., and this Court has federal question subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a). 4. Additionally, this is an action for unfair trade practices arising under the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, La. R.S. 51:1409(A), and supplemental subject matter jurisdiction herein is based upon 28 U.S.C. 1367(a). 5. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2) and 1400(b) because PMI was and is doing business in this district, and did commit and are committing acts of infringement of the patent sued upon herein in this district, and because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to SnoWizard and Sciortinos claims occurred in this district. Facts 6. On May 26, 2009, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued Sciortino U.S. Patent No. 7,536,871 B1 (the 871 Patent) to Sciortino for inventions in an icemaker with an improved cam assembly (the Inventions). A copy of the 871 Patent is attached hereto and made a part hereof.

Page -2-

7. At all times since the issuance of the 871 Patent, SnoWizard has been the exclusive licensee of the 871 Patent. 8. At all times since the issuance of the 871 Patent, SnoWizard has fulfilled the marking requirements under 35 U.S.C. 287(a), thereby giving notice to the public that the Inventions are patented under the 871 Patent. 9. On August 29, 2011, SnoWizard filed a counterclaim against PMI in the matter entitled Southern Snow Mfg. Co., Inc., et al. vs. SnoWizard Holdings, Inc., et al., No. 06-9170 c/w 093394, 10-971, 11-880, 11-1499, Sect. A(1) on the docket of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (Civil Action 06-9170). 10. In SnoWizards counterclaim in Civil Action 06-9170, SnoWizard alleged that since the issuance of the 871 Patent, PMI had infringed the 871 Patent by making the Inventions on behalf of its co-defendants-in-counterclaim in Civil Action 06-9170, Milton G. Wendling, Jr. (Wendling), Southern Snow Manufacturing Company, Inc. (Southern Snow), and Banister & Co. Inc. (Banister & Co.), and by selling the Inventions to them and causing the Inventions to be used, offered for sale, and/or sold by Wendling, Southern Snow, and Banister & Co. (Civil Action 069170, Rec. Doc. 414, p. 6).

Page -3-

11. In Civil Action 06-9170, SnoWizard filed an Ex Parte Motion for Order of Conditional Partial Dismissal on December 23, 2011 advising the Court that SnoWizard and PMI had agreed upon terms of settlement of all claims by and against each other which have been or could have been brought ... (Civil Action 06-9170, Rec. Doc. 513), and the Court granted the motion and issued a 60-day Order of Conditional Partial Dismissal on December 27, 2011 (Civil Action 06-9170, Rec. Doc. 518). 12. In Civil Action 06-9170, the Court extended the effective date of the Order of Conditional Partial Dismissal twice on joint motion of SnoWizard and PMI (Civil Action 06-9170, Rec. Docs. 525, 529), until the dismissal became final on March 9, 2012 (Civil Action 06-9170, Rec. Doc. 529). 13. Subsequent to the dismissal of SnoWizards counterclaim against PMI in Civil Action 069170 on March 9, 2012, PMI continued to manufacture a material component part of the Inventions and to sell them to Wendling, Banister & Co., and Southern Snow for use in their infringing products. 14. Following a jury trial held on February 19-22 and 25-28, 2013 in Civil Action 06-9170, the jury rendered a verdict finding Wendling, Banister & Co., and Southern Snow infringed the 871 Patent (Civil Action 06-9170, Rec. Doc. 661-3), and the Court rendered judgment in conformity therewith on March 5, 2013 (Civil Action 06-9170, Rec. Doc. 665). Page -4-

15. On February 22, 2013, during the trial of Civil Action 06-9170, Wendling testified that he, Banister & Co., and Southern Snow had continued to buy a material component part of the Inventions from PMI for use in their infringing products. 16. At all times since the dismissal of SnoWizards counterclaim against PMI in Civil Action 06-9170 on March 9, 2012, PMI has known that the component part of the Inventions which it continued to manufacture and sell to Wendling, Banister & Co., and Southern Snow was especially made for use in an infringement of the 871 Patent. 17. PMIs manufacture and sale of a material component part of the Inventions especially made for use in an infringement of the 871 Patent subsequent to the dismissal of SnoWizards counterclaim against PMI in Civil Action 06-9170 on March 9, 2012 offend established public policy, are unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous, and substantially injurious to the public and to SnoWizard and Sciortino. 18. SnoWizard and Sciortino have been deprived of substantial gains and profits and have suffered substantial uncompensated damages as a result of PMIs manufacture and sale of a material component part of the Inventions especially made for use in an infringement of the 871 Patent subsequent to the dismissal of SnoWizards counterclaim against PMI in Civil Action 06-9170 on March 9, 2012. Page -5-

19. SnoWizard and Sciortino will be irreparably harmed by PMIs continued manufacture and sale of a material component part of the Inventions especially made for use in an infringement of the 871 Patent. 20. SnoWizard and Sciortino presently have no means of ascertaining the full extent of PMIs contributory infringement and active inducement of infringement of the 871 Patent or of the amounts of their damages resulting from said infringement except through the production of evidence thereof now in PMIs possession and control, and all such evidence is material to SnoWizard and Sciortinos claims against PMI. Count I: Patent Infringement 21. SnoWizard and Sciortino reallege and adopt and incorporate by reference in Count I the allegations and averments contained in paragraphs 1 through 20 herein. 22. By knowingly manufacturing and selling to Wendling, Banister & Co., and Southern Snow a material component part of the Inventions that was especially made for use in an infringement of the 871 Patent subsequent to the dismissal of SnoWizards counterclaim against PMI in Civil Action 06-9170 on March 9, 2012, PMI contributorily infringed and actively induced Wendling,

Page -6-

Banister & Co., and Southern Snow to infringe the 871 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271(b) and (c). 23. PMIs contributory infringement and active inducement of infringement of the 871 Patent subsequent to the dismissal of SnoWizards counterclaim against PMI in Civil Action 06-9170 was willful and wanton and in total disregard of SnoWizard and Sciortinos rights, warranting the trebling of damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284. 24. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 283, SnoWizard and Sciortino are entitled to preliminary and permanent injunctions in their favor and against PMI enjoining PMI from continuing to contributorily infringe the 871 Patent and from continuing to actively induce others to infringe the 871 Patent. 25. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284, SnoWizard and Sciortino are entitled to judgment in their favor and against PMI awarding all damages SnoWizard has sustained as a consequence of PMIs contributory infringement and active inducement of infringement of the 871 Patent subsequent to the dismissal of SnoWizards counterclaim against PMI in Civil Action 06-9170 on March 9, 2012, including increased damages in the amount of three times the damages sustained by SnoWizard and Sciortino, together with pre- and post-judgment interest, costs, and expenses.

Page -7-

26. This is an exceptional case warranting the award of reasonable attorney fees and expenses in favor of SnoWizard and Sciortino and against PMI pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285. Count II: Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices 27. SnoWizard and Sciortino reallege and adopt and incorporate by reference in Count II the allegations and averments contained in paragraphs 1 through 20 herein. 28. PMIs knowing and willful manufacture and sale of a material component part of the Inventions that was especially made for use in an infringement of the 871 Patent subsequent to the dismissal of SnoWizards counterclaim against PMI in Civil Action 06-9170 on March 9, 2012 are unlawful and unfair trade practices and false, misleading, and deceptive acts and practices in violation of La. Rev. Stat. 51:1405. 29. Pursuant to La. Rev. Stat. 51:1409(A), SnoWizard and Sciortino are entitled to judgment in their favor and against PMI awarding all damages sustained by SnoWizard and Sciortino as a result of PMIs knowing and willful unlawful and unfair trade practices and false, misleading, and deceptive acts and practices, plus three times the damages sustained, and reasonable attorney fees and costs, together with pre- and post-judgment interest.

Page -8-

WHEREFORE, SnoWizard and Sciortino respectfully pray for judgment in their favor and against PMI as follows: (a) Preliminarily and permanently enjoining PMI and each of its officers, agents,

servants, employees, and all persons in concert or participation with them, from contributorily infringing the 871 Patent and from actively inducing others to infringe the 871 Patent; (b) Ordering PMI to file with the Court and serve on SnoWizard and Sciortino within

thirty (30) days after service of the preliminary and permanent injunctions, reports in writing under oath setting forth in detail the manner and form in which defendants have complied with the injunctions, including the destruction of all infringing cam assemblies and the tooling for manufacturing them; (c) Awarding all damages SnoWizard and Sciortino have sustained as a consequence of

PMIs contributory infringement and active inducement of infringement of the 871 Patent subsequent to the dismissal of SnoWizards counterclaim against PMI in Civil Action 06-9170 on March 9, 2012, including increased damages in the amount of three times the damages sustained, together with pre- and post-judgment interest, costs, and expenses; (d) Awarding reasonable attorney fees incurred by SnoWizard and Sciortino in

connection with this matter; and (e) Awarding all damages sustained by SnoWizard and Sciortino as a result of PMIs

knowing and willful unlawful and unfair trade practices and false, misleading, and deceptive acts and practices, plus three times the damages sustained, and reasonable attorney fees and costs, together with pre- and post-judgment interest; Page -9-

(f)

Awarding such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable in the

premises and all such relief to which SnoWizard and Sciortino are entitled.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, /s/ Jack E. Morris JACK E. MORRIS (Bar No. 22539) (T.A.) ATTORNEY AT LAW 4051 VETERANS BOULEVARD SUITE 208 METAIRIE, LOUISIANA 70002 TELEPHONE: (504) 454-2769 FACSIMILE: (504) 454-3855 EMAIL: jem@jemorrislaw.com ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS SNOWIZARD, INC. AND RONALD R. SCIORTINO

Page -10-