Restoration Hardware v. Chicago Wicker - Complaint

Case3:15-cv-00894 Document1 Filed02/26/15 Page1 of 12
1 MICHAEL J. MCCUE (SBN: 296425)

Email: MMcCue@LRRLaw.com
2 AARON D. JOHNSON (SBN: 261747)
Email: ADJohnson@LRRLAW.com
3 Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP
4300 Bohannon Drive
4 Menlo Park, CA 94025
(650) 391-1380 (Tel.)
5 (702) 391-1395 (Fax)
6 Attorneys for Plaintiffs
RESTORATION HARDWARE, INC.
7 RH US, LLC
3993HowardHughesParkway
Suite600
LasVegas,NV891695996
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12 RESTORATION HARDWARE, INC.,
a Delaware corporation, and RH US,
13 LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company,
14
Plaintiffs,
15
vs.
16
CHICAGO WICKER & TRADING
17 COMPANY, an Illinois corporation,
18
Civil Case No.: 3:15-cv-00894
COMPLAINT
Defendant.
19
20
Plaintiffs Restoration Hardware, Inc. and RH US, LLC (together, RH)
21 allege the following:

NATURE OF THIS ACTION
22
23
1.
This is an action for design patent infringement under the Patent Act,
24 35 U.S.C. 1, et seq., and for trademark infringement and unfair competition under
25 the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq., arising out of Defendant Chicago Wicker
26 & Trading Companys (Defendants) infringement of RHs patented furniture
27 designs and trademarks.
28 ///
1
5512076_1
1
2
PARTIES
2.
Plaintiff Restoration Hardware, Inc. is a Delaware corporation whose
3 principal place of business is located at 15 Koch Road, Corte Madera, California,

4 94925. Prior to January 30, 2015, Restoration Hardware, Inc. was the owner of
5 United States Design Patents D663,967 (the D967 Patent) and D663,966 (the
6 D966 Patent) (together, the RH Patents). True and accurate copies of the RH
7 Patents are attached hereto as Exhibit A.
On January 30, 2015, Restoration
8 Hardware, Inc. assigned all right, title, and interest in and to the RH Patents to
Suite600
9 Plaintiff RH US, LLC, which granted a license back to Restoration Hardware, Inc..
10
3.
Plaintiff RH US, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company whose
11 principal place of business is located at 15 Koch Road, Corte Madera, California,

12 94925.
13
4.
Defendant Chicago Wicker & Trading Company is an Illinois
14 corporation whose principal place of business is located at 5625 W. 115th Street,

15 Suite B, Alsip, Illinois, 60603. Upon information and belief, Defendant conducts
16 business under a variety of names, including, without limitation, Forever Patio,
17 Chicago Wicker NCI, Northcape International, Northcape Outdoor, and
18 Northcape.
19
20
JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5.
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to
21 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338 because this action involves claims for patent
22 infringement in violation of 35 U.S.C. 1, et seq.
23
6.
This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because Defendant
24 purposefully, willfully, and/or intentionally infringed upon RHs design patents and
25 trademarks by using RHs patented designs and trademarks with the knowledge that
26 RH is located in California and that RH would likely suffer injury or harm resulting
27 from the infringement in California. Indeed, Defendant continued its infringing
28 conduct despite notice from RH. Upon information and belief, Defendant conducts
2
5512076_1
1 bu
usiness from
m, among other locaations, a w
warehouse llocated in Fullerton, Californiaa,
2 and has purp
posefully directed
d
itss tortious conduct aand activitiies at Caliifornia, and
d
3 RH
Hs claims arise out of such co
onduct andd activitiess. Upon information and belieff,
4 Deefendant has
h sold orr distributeed the infr
fringing prroducts in this judiccial districtt.
5 Acccordingly, the exercise of personal jurisddiction oveer Defendannt is reasonnable.
6
7.
Venue is proper in this judiciial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2

2)
7 because juriisdiction is
i not fou
unded sollely on ddiversity oof citizensship and a
8 sub
bstantial part
p
of thee property that is thhe subject of this acctionnam
mely, RHs
Suite600
Las Vegas, NV 891695996
LasVegas,NV89169
5996
9 pattented dessigns and trademark

ksis situuated in thhis judiciaal district. Venue is
10 pro
oper in thee Northern District off this courtt, San Franncisco divission.
11
12
INTRAD
DISTRICT
T ASSIGN
NMENT
8.
t Civil Rule
R
3-2(c)), this is aan Intellecctual Propeerty Action
n
Pursuant to
13 asssignable on
n a district-wide basiis.
14
15
GENE
ERAL AL
LLEGATIO
ONS
9.
i
e and popuular luxuryy brand in the home furnishings
RH is an innovative
16 maarketplace. RH dessigns, man

nufactures, and sellls a widde varietyy of home
17 furrnishings, including
i
furniture,
f
lighting,
l
beed, bath, haardware, aand other prroducts.
18
10.
RH also possesses su
ubstantial patent righhts, includiing the following two
o
19 design paten
nts, each reegistered with
w the Unnited Statess Patent annd Tradem
mark Officee:
20 US
S D663,966
6 (the D9
966 Patent) and US D
D663,967 (the D9667 Patent)).
21
11.
The RH Patents are valid

v
and ssubsisting.
22
12.
The D967
7 Patent claims, withhout limitattion, as folllows:
23
The orrnamental design for a sofa, as shown andd describedd.
24
25
26
27
28
3
55120076_1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Suite600
Las Vegas, NV 891695996
LasVegas,NV89169
5996
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16 Reelevant Desscriptions: FIG. 1 is a perspectiive view of a first em
mbodiment of a sofa
17 sho
owing my new desig
gn; FIG. 2 is a front elevationaal view theereof; FIG.. 3 is a reaar
18 eleevational view
v
thereo
of; and FIG
G. 6 is a riight side ellevational view thereeof (the lefft
19 sid
de elevation
nal view being
b
the saame thereoof).
20
13.
21
The orrnamental design for a lounge, as shown and described.
The D966
6 Patent claims, withhout limitattion, as folllows:
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
G. 1
FIG
4
55120076_1
1 Relevant Description: FIG. 1 is a perspective view of a lounge showing my new

2 design.
3
14.
Together, the D967 Patent and the D966 Patent are referred to herein
4 as the RH Patents.
5
15.
RH sells furniture products embodying the designs set forth in the RH
6 Patents as part of its Provence collection.

7
16.
In addition to the foregoing, RH is the owner of United States
8 Tramemark Registration No. 4,231,598 for the PROVENCE mark for use in
Suite600
9 connection with, Furniture, namely, chaise lounges, sofas, loveseats, lounge chairs,
10 arm chairs, side chairs, ottomans, coffee tables, side tables, dining tables, console
11 tables, cushions. RHs federal registration for the PROVENCE mark is valid and
12 subsisting.
13
17.
Upon information and belief, Defendant owns and operates a web-
14 based furniture manufacturing business based in Illinois with facilities in California,

15 Florida, New Jersey, and Ontario, Canada, , that sells goods to retailers and
16 customers across the United States.
17
18.
In or about February, 2015, RH learned that Defendant is advertising
18 and selling, through the http://www.www.foreverpatio.com website and, upon

19 information and belief, other websites and distribution channels, a sofa, lounge
20 chair, loveseat, and sectional sofa components as part of its Bayside collection that
21 each include designs that are nearly identical to the design of RHs sofa and lounge
22 chair set forth in the RH Patents.
23
19.
For instance, a side-by-side comparison of RHs sofa and lounge chair
24 and Defendants sofa and lounge chair shows that Defendants designs are
25 substantially the same as RHs:
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
5
5512076_1
RHs Patented Design
Defendants Infringing Products
Provence Sofa
Bayside Sofa
Provence Lounge Chair
Bayside Lounge Chair
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Suite600
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
20.
RH has also learned that Defendant is advertising and selling, through
24 the http://www.northcapeinternational.com website, and upon information and

25 belief, other websites and distribution channels, a sofa, lounge chair, loveseat, and
26 sectional sofa components as part of its Geneva collection that each include
27 designs that are nearly identical to the design of RHs sofa and lounge chair set forth
28 in the RH Patents.
6
5512076_1
21.
For instance, a side-by-side comparison of RHs sofa and lounge chair
2 and Defendants sofa and lounge chair shows that Defendants designs are
3 substantially the same as RHs:
4
5
RHs Patented Design
Defendants Infringing Products
Provence Sofa
Geneva Sofa
Provence Lounge Chair
Geneva Lounge Chair
6
7
8
Suite600
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
22.
The design of Defendants sofa, lounge chair, loveseat, and sectional
26 sofa components and the design of RHs Provence sofa and lounge are so similar
27 that it is highly unlikely that Defendant adopted its designs without prior knowledge
28 of the Provence designs set forth in the RH Patents.
7
5512076_1
23.
Upon information and belief and despite RHs demands, Defendant has
2 continued to manufacture, use, offer to sell, sell, and/or import into the United
3 States, furniture products that infringe upon the designs set forth in the RH Patents,
4 including sales to consumers and to numerous retailers.
5
24.
In addition to the foregoing, RH has learned that Defendant has adopted
6 the Provance designation for a line of outdoor furniture, known as The Provance
7 Collection,
that
Defendant
advertises
on
its
website,
8 http://www.northcapeinternational.com/collections/the-provance-collection
and,
Suite600
9 upon information and belief, other websites as well. A screenshot of the webpage is
10 set forth below:
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 ///
8
5512076_1
COUNT I
(Patent Infringement
under 35 U.S.C. 1, et seq.)
1
2
3
25.
RH incorporates the allegations in foregoing paragraphs as though fully
4 set forth herein.

5
26.
RH owns the D967 Patent.
27.
Defendant infringed the D967 Patent by making, using, offering to
7 sell, selling, and/or importing into the United States products that embody or use the
Suite600
8 designs claimed in the D967 Patent.

9
28.
RH did not authorize Defendants conduct.
10
29.
Defendants conduct was knowing, intentional, and willful, making this
11 an exceptional case.
12
30.
RH incorporates the allegations in foregoing paragraphs as though fully
13 set forth herein.

COUNT II
(Patent Infringement
under 35 U.S.C. 1, et seq.)
14
15
16
31.
RH incorporates the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs as though
17 fully set forth herein.

18
32.
RH owns the D966 Patent.
19
33.
Defendant infringed the D966 Patent by making, using, offering to sell,
20 selling, and/or importing into the United States products that embody or use the
21 designs claimed in the D966 Patent.
22
34.
RH did not authorize Defendants conduct.
23
35.
Defendants conduct was knowing, intentional, and willful, making this
24 an exceptional case.
COUNT III
(Trademark Infringement
under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1114)
25
26
27
36.

9
5512076_1
37.
RH has been using the PROVENCE trademark in commerce in
2 connection with the advertising and sale of furniture products since at least as early
3 as April, 2010.
RHs use of the PROVENCE mark in commerce predates
4 Defendants use of the confusingly similar Provance mark.

5
38.
Given RHs longstanding use of its PROVENCE mark in commerce in
6 connection with furniture products including sofas and lounge chairs, Defendants
7 use of the confusingly similar Provance mark in connection with furniture
8 products, including sofas, lounge chairs, and loveseats, constitutes a reproduction,
Suite600
9 copying, counterfeit, and/or colorable imitation of RHs PROVENCE mark in a

10 manner that is likely to cause confusion or mistake or is likely to deceive consumers.
11
39.
Defendants unlawful use of RHs PROVENCE mark in commerce has,
12 at all times, been willful, deliberate, and intentional. Defendants use of RHs
13 PROVENCE mark in commerce was designed to usurp and wrongfully trade off of
14 the substantial investment and goodwill RH has developed in its PROVENCE mark.
15
40.
Defendants unlawful use of RHs PROVENCE mark in commerce
16 constitutes trademark infringement in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.

17 1114.
18
41.
As a direct and proximate result of Defendants conduct, RH has
19 suffered, and will continue to suffer, monetary loss and irreparable injury to its
20 business, reputation, and goodwill.
COUNT IV
(Unfair Competition
under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125)
21
22
23
42.

25
43.
Defendant is selling, and/or offering to sell, furniture in commerce,
26 including, without limitation, sofas, chairs, and loveseats using the designation
27 Provance, a designation that is confusingly similar to RHs federally registered
28 PROVENCE mark.
10
5512076_1
44.
Defendants use of the confusingly similar Provance designation is a
2 false designation of origin which is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to

3 deceive consumers as to the existence of an affiliation, connection or association
4 between Defendant and RH, and/or is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or
5 to deceive consumers as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of Defendants
6 furniture products by RH.
7
45.
Defendants use of the confusingly similar Provance designation in
8 commerce has, at all times, been willful, deliberate, and intentional.
The
Suite600
9 Defendants use of the confusingly similar Provance designation in commerce was

10 designed to usurp and wrongfully trade off of the substantial investment and
11 goodwill RH has developed in its PROVENCE mark.
12
46.
Defendants use of the confusingly similar Provance mark in
13 commerce constitutes unfair competition in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.

14 1125(a), in that Defendant has used in connection with goods a false designation
15 of origin, a false or misleading description and representation of fact which is likely
16 to cause confusion, and to cause mistake, and to deceive as to the affiliation,
17 connection, or association of Defendant with RH and as to the origin, sponsorship,
18 and approval of Defendants furniture products and commercial activities by RH.
19
47.
As a direct and proximate result of Defendants conduct, RH has
20 suffered, and will continue to suffer, monetary loss and irreparable injury to its
21 business, reputation, and goodwill.
22
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
23
WHEREFORE, RH requests that the Court enter:
24
A.
A preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting Defendant and its
25 officers, agents, servants, and those persons in active concert or participation with
26 them from directly or indirectly infringing RHs rights in the RH Patents, including,
27 without limitation, Defendants manufacturers, suppliers, and retailers;
28
B.
A preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting Defendant and its

11
5512076_1
1 officers, agents, servants, and those persons in active concert or participation with
2 them from using the PROVENCE mark or any confusingly similar variations
3 thereof, in commerce;
4
C.
Judgment in favor of RH and against Defendant for damages adequate
5 to compensate RH for Defendants infringment of the RH Patents, wich shall be

6 trebled as a result of Defendants willful patent infringement, pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
7 284, or an award of Defendants profits from its infringements pursuant to 35
8 U.S.C. 289, whichever is greater, together with prejudement interest and costs;
Suite600
D.
Judgment in favor of RH and against Defendant for damages adequate
10 to compensate RH for Defendants infringment of the PROVENCE mark, including,

11 but not limited to RHs actual damages, Defendants profits, and the costs of the
12 action, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
13
E.
Judgment in favor of RH and against Defendant for RHs costs and
14 attorneys fees incurred in this action, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285 and 15 U.S.C.
15 1117; and
16
F.
Judgment in favor of RH and against Defendant for such other relief as
17 the Court deems just, equitable, and proper.

18
Respectfully submitted,
19
20 Dated: February 26, 2015
21
22
23
24
25
26
By:
/s/ Michael J. McCue

MICHAEL J. MCCUE
AARON D. JOHNSON
Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP
3993 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 600
Las Vegas, Nevada 89169-5996
(702) 949-8200 (Tel.)
(702) 949-8398 (Fax)
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
RESTORATION HARDWARE, INC.
RH US, LLC.
27
28
12
5512076_1
Case3:15-cv-00894 Document1-1 Filed02/26/15 Page1 of 21
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
JS 44 (Rev. 12/12) cand rev (1/15/13)
CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS
DEFENDANTS
RESTORATION HARDWARE, INC., RH US, LLC

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff
CHICAGO WICKER & TRADING COMPANY

County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
Marin
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)

NOTE:
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number)

Michael J. McCue, Aaron D. Johnson, LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER LLP
4300 Bohannon Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Tele: (650) 391-1380
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in One Box Only)
1
U.S. Government
Plaintiff
Federal Question
(U.S. Government Not a Party)
U.S. Government
Defendant
Diversity
(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)
Attorneys (If Known)
III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an X in One Box for Plaintiff
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in One Box Only)

CONTRACT
(For Diversity Cases Only)

PTF
Citizen of This State
1
DEF
1
Citizen of Another State
Incorporated and Principal Place

of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a
Foreign Country
Foreign Nation
TORTS
110 Insurance
120 Marine
130 Miller Act
140 Negotiable Instrument
150 Recovery of Overpayment
& Enforcement of Judgment
151 Medicare Act
152 Recovery of Defaulted
Student Loans
(Excludes Veterans)
153 Recovery of Overpayment
of Veterans Benefits
160 Stockholders Suits
190 Other Contract
195 Contract Product Liability
196 Franchise
REAL PROPERTY
210 Land Condemnation
220 Foreclosure
230 Rent Lease & Ejectment
240 Torts to Land
245 Tort Product Liability
290 All Other Real Property
PERSONAL INJURY
310 Airplane
315 Airplane Product
Liability
320 Assault, Libel &
Slander
330 Federal Employers
Liability
340 Marine
345 Marine Product
Liability
350 Motor Vehicle
355 Motor Vehicle
Product Liability
360 Other Personal
Injury
362 Personal Injury Medical Malpractice
CIVIL RIGHTS
440 Other Civil Rights
441 Voting
442 Employment
443 Housing/
Accommodations
445 Amer. w/Disabilities Employment
446 Amer. w/Disabilities Other
448 Education
(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
FORFEITURE/PENALTY
PERSONAL INJURY
365 Personal Injury Product Liability
367 Health Care/
Pharmaceutical
Personal Injury
Product Liability
368 Asbestos Personal
Injury Product
Liability
PERSONAL PROPERTY
370 Other Fraud
371 Truth in Lending
380 Other Personal
Property Damage
385 Property Damage
Product Liability
PRISONER PETITIONS
Habeas Corpus:
463 Alien Detainee
510 Motions to Vacate
Sentence
530 General
535 Death Penalty
Other:
540 Mandamus & Other
550 Civil Rights
555 Prison Condition
560 Civil Detainee Conditions of
Confinement
625 Drug Related Seizure

of Property 21 USC 881
690 Other
and One Box for Defendant)

PTF
DEF
Incorporated or Principal Place
4
4
of Business In This State
BANKRUPTCY
422 Appeal 28 USC 158
423 Withdrawal
28 USC 157
PROPERTY RIGHTS
820 Copyrights
830 Patent
840 Trademark
LABOR
710 Fair Labor Standards
Act
720 Labor/Management
Relations
740 Railway Labor Act
751 Family and Medical
Leave Act
790 Other Labor Litigation
791 Employee Retirement
Income Security Act
SOCIAL SECURITY
861 HIA (1395ff)
862 Black Lung (923)
863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
864 SSID Title XVI
865 RSI (405(g))
FEDERAL TAX SUITS

870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff
or Defendant)
871 IRSThird Party
26 USC 7609
OTHER STATUTES
375 False Claims Act

400 State Reapportionment
410 Antitrust
430 Banks and Banking
450 Commerce
460 Deportation
470 Racketeer Influenced and
Corrupt Organizations
480 Consumer Credit
490 Cable/Sat TV
850 Securities/Commodities/
Exchange
890 Other Statutory Actions
891 Agricultural Acts
893 Environmental Matters
895 Freedom of Information
Act
896 Arbitration
899 Administrative Procedure
Act/Review or Appeal of
Agency Decision
950 Constitutionality of
State Statutes
IMMIGRATION
462 Naturalization Application
465 Other Immigration
Actions
V. ORIGIN (Place an X in One Box Only)

1 Original
Proceeding
2 Removed from
State Court
Remanded from
Appellate Court
4 Reinstated or
Reopened
5 Transferred from
Another District
(specify)
6 Multidistrict
Litigation
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
35 U.S.C. 271
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:

patent infringement
CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION

VII. REQUESTED IN
UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P.
COMPLAINT:
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY
JUDGE
DATE
CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:

Yes
No
JURY DEMAND:
DEMAND $
DOCKET NUMBER
SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
/s/ Michael J. McCue
02/26/2015
,;',9,6,21$/$66,*10(17&LYLO/5
(Place an X in One Box Only)
Print
( ) SAN FRANCISCO/OAKLAND
Save As...
( ) SAN JOSE
( ) EUREKA
Reset

Restoration Hardware v. Chicago Wicker - Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Restoration Hardware v. Chicago Wicker - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case3:15-cv-00894 Document1 Filed02/26/15 Page1 of 12

1 MICHAEL J. MCCUE (SBN: 296425)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Civil Case No.: 3:15-cv-00894

Plaintiffs Restoration Hardware, Inc. and RH US, LLC (together, RH)

21 allege the following:

Case3:15-cv-00894 Document1 Filed02/26/15 Page2 of 12

Plaintiff Restoration Hardware, Inc. is a Delaware corporation whose

3 principal place of business is located at 15 Koch Road, Corte Madera, California,

On January 30, 2015, Restoration

Plaintiff RH US, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company whose

11 principal place of business is located at 15 Koch Road, Corte Madera, California,

Defendant Chicago Wicker & Trading Company is an Illinois

14 corporation whose principal place of business is located at 5625 W. 115th Street,

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because Defendant

Case3:15-cv-00894 Document1 Filed02/26/15 Page3 of 12

Venue is proper in this judiciial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2

9 pattented dessigns and trademark

16 maarketplace. RH dessigns, man

The RH Patents are valid

The orrnamental design for a sofa, as shown andd describedd.

Case3:15-cv-00894 Document1 Filed02/26/15 Page4 of 12

The orrnamental design for a lounge, as shown and described.

Case3:15-cv-00894 Document1 Filed02/26/15 Page5 of 12

1 Relevant Description: FIG. 1 is a perspective view of a lounge showing my new

RH sells furniture products embodying the designs set forth in the RH

6 Patents as part of its Provence collection.

In addition to the foregoing, RH is the owner of United States

Upon information and belief, Defendant owns and operates a web-

14 based furniture manufacturing business based in Illinois with facilities in California,

In or about February, 2015, RH learned that Defendant is advertising

18 and selling, through the http://www.www.foreverpatio.com website and, upon

For instance, a side-by-side comparison of RHs sofa and lounge chair

Case3:15-cv-00894 Document1 Filed02/26/15 Page6 of 12

RHs Patented Design

Defendants Infringing Products

Provence Lounge Chair

Bayside Lounge Chair

RH has also learned that Defendant is advertising and selling, through

24 the http://www.northcapeinternational.com website, and upon information and

Case3:15-cv-00894 Document1 Filed02/26/15 Page7 of 12

For instance, a side-by-side comparison of RHs sofa and lounge chair

RHs Patented Design

Defendants Infringing Products

Provence Lounge Chair

Geneva Lounge Chair

The design of Defendants sofa, lounge chair, loveseat, and sectional

Case3:15-cv-00894 Document1 Filed02/26/15 Page8 of 12

In addition to the foregoing, RH has learned that Defendant has adopted

Case3:15-cv-00894 Document1 Filed02/26/15 Page9 of 12

RH incorporates the allegations in foregoing paragraphs as though fully

4 set forth herein.

RH owns the D967 Patent.

Defendant infringed the D967 Patent by making, using, offering to

8 designs claimed in the D967 Patent.

RH did not authorize Defendants conduct.

Defendants conduct was knowing, intentional, and willful, making this

RH incorporates the allegations in foregoing paragraphs as though fully

13 set forth herein.

RH incorporates the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs as though

17 fully set forth herein.

RH owns the D966 Patent.