Skits v. LTD Trade Dress Complaint

Case 8:15-cv-01591-JLS-DFM Document 35 Filed 01/28/16 Page 1 of 19 Page ID #:241
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
600 ANTON BLVD, SUITE 1400

COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92626-7689
SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
10
Ketan S. Vakil (#191043)

kvakil@swlaw.com
Jeffrey M. Singletary (#233528)
jsingletary@swlaw.com
SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.
600 Anton Blvd, Suite 1400
Costa Mesa, California 92626-7689
Telephone: 714.427.7000
Facsimile: 714.427.7799
Glenn W. Trost (#116203)
gtrost@swlaw.com
350 S. Grand Ave., Suite 2600
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: 213.929.2500
Facsimile: 213.929.2525
Attorneys for Plaintiff SKITS, LLC
11
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
15
16
SKITS, LLC, a California limited

liability company,
Plaintiff,
17
18
19
20
21
22
v.
LTD COMMODITIES LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company;
ACI, INC., a New Jersey corporation;
DOES 1-10,
Defendants.
Case No. SACV1501591 JLS (DFMx)

The Honorable Josephine L. Staton
Ctrm.10A
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
FOR DAMAGES AND
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (PATENT
AND TRADEMARK
INFRINGEMENT; UNFAIR
COMPETITION); DEMAND FOR
JURY TRIAL
Trial Date:No Date Set
Initial Complaint Filed: October 2, 2015
23
24
25
26
27
28
Second Amended Complaint
SACV1501591 JLS (DFMX)
1
2
For its Second Amended Complaint herein, plaintiff SKITS, LLC (SKITS)
hereby alleges as follows:
PARTIES
4
5
1.
SKITS is a limited liability company organized and existing under the
laws of the state of California, having its principal place of business at 1801 East
Carnegie Avenue, Santa Ana, California 92705.

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
2.
SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that defendant
10
LTD Commodities LLC (LTD) is a limited liability company organized and
11
existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, having its principal place of
12
business at 2800 Lakeside Drive, Bannockburn, Illinois 60015.
13
14
3.
SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that LTD
15
regularly conducts business in, and has committed the acts alleged herein, within
16
this judicial district.
17
18
4.
SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon allege, that defendant
19
ACI, Inc. (ACI) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
20
state of New Jersey, having its principal place of business at 950 3rd Ave., 20th
21
Floor, New York City, NY 10022.
22
23
5.
SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that ACI
24
regularly conducts business in, and has committed at least some of the acts alleged
25
herein, within the United States.
26
27
28
6.
SKITS does not know the true names and capacities of defendants
Does 1-10, inclusive, and therefore sues such defendants by fictitious names.
-1-

SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon allege, that each fictitiously named
defendant is in some manner responsible for the claims and causes of action alleged
herein and that the acts or omissions of said fictitious defendants proximately
caused damage and other harm alleged in this complaint. When SKITS ascertains
the actual names and capacities of Does 1-10, it will amend this complaint name
such defendants by their true names.
7
8

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
7.
SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that defendants,
and each of them, including defendants sued by fictitious names, are, and at all
10
times mentioned herein were, the alter-egos, parents, subsidiaries, agents, partners,
11
associates, joint-venturers, servants, employees, and/or other authorized
12
representatives of each of the remaining defendants, and in doing the things herein
13
alleged were acting within the course and scope of their authority, agency, and
14
employment, and with the knowledge, consent, and approval of their fellow
15
defendants, and each of them.
16
17
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
18
19
8.
This is an action for (A) patent infringement arising under the patent
20
laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. 271 and 281; (B) trademark infringement
21
arising under 15 U.S.C. 1125(a); (C) false designation of origin arising under 15
22
U.S.C. 1125(a); (D) trademark infringement arising under the common law of the
23
state of California; and (E) unfair competition arising under the laws of the state of
24
California.
25
26
9.
This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 15
27
U.S.C. 1116(a) and 1121(a) and 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338 over the claims
28
arising under the laws of the United States. This Court has supplemental
-2-

jurisdiction over the remaining claims in this Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
1367(a) because the state law claims are so related to the federal claims that they
form part of the same case or controversy and derive from a common nucleus of
operative facts.

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
10.
This Court has personal jurisdiction over LTD because LTD has a
continuous, systematic, and substantial presence within this judicial district
including by regularly doing and soliciting business and deriving revenue from
goods provided to individuals in this judicial district, including but not limited to,
10
on information and belief, selling infringing cases directly to consumers and/or
11
retailers in this district and selling into the stream of commerce knowing such cases
12
would be sold in California and this district, which acts form a substantial part of
13
the events or omissions giving rise to SKITS claim.
14
15
11.
This Court has personal jurisdiction over ACI because ACI has a
16
continuous, systematic, and substantial presence within this judicial district
17
including by regularly doing and soliciting business and deriving revenue from
18
goods provided to individuals in this judicial district, including but not limited to,
19
on information and belief, selling into the stream of commerce knowing such cases
20
would be sold in California and this district, which acts form a substantial part of
21
the events or omissions giving rise to SKITS claim. Moreover, on information and
22
belief, SKITS thereon alleges, that ACI has entered into an agreement with LTD to
23
indemnify LTD for actions related to the products ACI has sold LTD, including
24
products it it knew or should have known would be sold in California and this
25
district.
26
27
28
12.
Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)-(d),
and 28 U.S.C. 1400(b).

-3-

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
2
3
13.
SKITS, formerly known as Relief Pod International LLC, sells and
markets compartmentalized Tech Cases used to keep items such as cords,
chargers, and other accessories for electronic devices portable and organized. Since
the launch of these cases, including the SKITS Smart Tech Case shown below, in
March 2014, they have enjoyed substantial success and acclaim.
8
9

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
14.
The Smart Tech Case debuted in the widely read SkyMall catalogue
21
and has since been featured in national publications such as USA Today and Travel
22
Weekly, regional news outlets like The Seattle Times and The Dallas Morning
23
News, and almost a dozen other blogs, websites, and other online news outlets in
24
fewer than two years on the market. The Smart Tech Case is also offered by
25
national retail chains like Nordstrom, Best Buy, and Fred Meyer, and through the
26
SKITS website since at least as early as December 2013.
27
///
28
///
-4-

15.
SKITS has common law rights in the SMART TECH CASE trademark
in connection with organizing cases by virtue of SKITS widespread and
continuous use of the mark.
4
5

In light of the innovative design of the Smart Tech Case product, the
United States Patent and Trademark Office duly issued United States Design Patent
No. D739,655 (the 655 patent) on September 29, 2015, entitled CASE. A
copy of the 655 patent is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit A and incorporated
herein by this reference. SKITS is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and
10
SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
16.
interest in the 655 patent.
11
12
13
17.
SKITS has provided the public with constructive notice of its pending
and now issued patent rights pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 287.
14
15
18.
Defendants ACI and LTD are infringing by manufacturing, using,
16
selling, offering for sale, and/or importing into the United States cases that infringe
17
SKITS intellectual property rights, including SKITS rights in the 655 patent and
18
in the SMART TECH CASE trademark.
19
20
19.
LTD sells and offers for sale a Smart Tech Organizer Case that is
21
virtually identical to SKITS Smart Tech Case. SKITS is informed and believes,
22
and based thereon alleges, that LTD purchases the product marketed as Smart
23
Tech Organizer Case from ACI; that ACI imports that product into the United
24
States for sale to LTD and perhaps other US-based customers; and that ACI has
25
agreed to indemnify LTD for any infringement claims brought against ACI with
26
respect to that product.
27
///
28
///
-5-

1
2
20.
ACI and LTD neither sought nor received permission from SKITS to
use its 655 patent design.
3
4
5
21.
ACI neither sought nor received permission from SKITS to use its
SMART TECH CASE trademark.

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
22.
SKITS is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that LTDs
unauthorized use of the SMART TECH ORGANIZER CASE mark and 655 patent
design is intended to trade upon the goodwill and substantial recognition associated
10
with the Smart Tech Case and SKITS, and to cause mistake or deception as to the
11
source of LTDs cases.
12
13
23.
By virtue of the acts complained of herein, LTD has created a
14
likelihood of injury to SKITS business reputation, caused a strong likelihood of
15
consumer confusion, mistake, and deception as to the source of or origin or
16
relationship of SKITS and LTDs goods, and has otherwise competed unfairly with
17
SKITS by unlawfully trading on and using the SMART TECH CASE mark and
18
655 patent design without SKITS permission.
19
20
21
24.
SKITS is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that ACIs
and LTDs acts complained of herein are willful and deliberate.
22
23
24
25.
ACI and LTD have profited through infringement of SKITS SMART
TECH ORGANIZER CASE mark and 655 patent design.
25
26
26.
ACI and LTDs acts complained of herein have caused SKITS to
27
suffer irreparable injury to its business. SKITS will suffer substantial loss of
28
goodwill and reputation unless and until ACI and LTD are preliminarily and
-6-

permanently enjoined from their wrongful actions complained of herein.
2
3
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(PATENT INFRINGEMENT)
5
6
7
27.
SKITS repeats and re-alleges the allegations of the foregoing
paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
8
9

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
10
28.
This is a claim for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. 271 and
281 against all defendants.
11
12
29.
Defendants, through their agents, employees, and servants, have and
13
continue to knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringe the 655 patent by
14
making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing the Smart Tech
15
Organizer Case product that is covered by the claims of the 655 patent.
16
Defendants acts of infringement of the 655 patent were undertaken without
17
permission or license from SKITS. SKITS is informed and believes, and on that
18
basis alleges, that defendants knew, or should have known, of the 655 patent and
19
that its actions constitute willful and intentional infringement of the 655 patent.
20
21
30.
As a direct and proximate result of defendants acts of infringement,
22
Defendants have derived and received gains, profits, and advantages in an amount
23
to be determined at trial. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 289, SKITS is entitled to
24
Defendants total profits from its infringement.
25
26
31.
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284 and 285, SKITS is entitled to damages
27
for Defendants infringing acts and treble damages together with interest and costs
28
as fixed by this Court, along with reasonable attorney fees.

-7-

32.
Due to the aforesaid infringing acts, SKITS has suffered great and
irreparable injury, for which SKITS has no adequate remedy at law. Defendants
will continue to infringe the 655 patent to the great and irreparable injury of
SKITS, unless enjoined by this Court.
5
6
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(INFRINGEMENT OF UNREGISTERED MARK)
8
9

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
33.
paragraphs as if set forth fully herein.

34.
This is a claim for trademark infringement arising under 15 U.S.C.
1125(a).
35.
LTDs use in commerce of the SMART TECH ORGANIZER CASE
mark for organizing cases for earbuds, cords, chargers and more is likely to cause
confusion with SKITS use of the SMART TECH CASE mark for a nearly
identical case for cords and accessories for your electronic devices.
36.
SKITS is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that LTD
20
knew or had reason to know of SKITS ownership and use of the SMART TECH
21
CASE mark and that its use of the mark in connection with organizing cases would
22
infringe SKITS trademark in violation of Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15
23
U.S.C. 1125(a).
24
25
37.
26
has derived and received, and will continue to derive and receive, gains, profits, and
27
advantages from the use of the SMART TECH CASE mark. By reason of LTDs
28
actions, constituting unauthorized use of the SMART TECH CASE mark, SKITS
-8-

has been damaged and is entitled to monetary relief in an amount to be determined
at trial.
3
4
38.
Due to LTDs actions, constituting unauthorized use of the SMART
TECH CASE mark, SKITS has suffered and continues to suffer great and
irreparable injury, for which SKITS has no adequate remedy at law.
7
8

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
39.
As a result of the trademark infringement as described above, SKITS
is entitled to relief, including injunctive relief, recovery of LTDs profits, actual
10
damages, reasonable royalty, enhanced profits, and damages, costs, and reasonable
11
attorney fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1125(a), 1116, and 1117.
12
13
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
14
(FEDERAL UNFAIR COMPETITION &
15
FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN)
16
17
18
40.
19
20
21
41.
This is a claim for unfair competition and false designation of origin
arising under 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
22
23
42.
Without SKITS consent, LTD has created and will create a false
24
designation of origin by using in commerce the SMART TECH ORGANIZER
25
CASE mark and/or other marks confusingly similar to the SMART TECH CASE
26
mark in connection with the distribution, sale, offering for sale, advertising, and/or
27
promotion of LTDs organizing cases, thereby causing a likelihood of confusion,
28
mistake, or deception as to an affiliation, connection, or association with SKITS or

-9-

to suggest SKITS as the origin of the goods, or that SKITS has sponsored or
approved LTDs commercial activities.
3
4
43.
acted with the intent to unfairly compete against SKITS, to trade upon SKITS
reputation and goodwill by causing confusion and mistake among customers and
the public, and to deceive the public into believing that LTDs organizing case
products are associated with, sponsored by, or approved by SKITS.

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
10
44.
11
had knowledge of SKITS ownership and prior use of the SMART TECH CASE
12
mark, and without the consent of SKITS, has willfully committed acts of unfair
13
competition and false designation of origin in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
14
15
45.
16
has derived and received, and will continue to derive and receive, gains, profits, and
17
advantages from LTDs false designation of origin, false or misleading statements,
18
false or misleading descriptions of fact, or false or misleading representations of
19
fact. By reason of LTDs actions, constituting false designation of origin, false or
20
misleading statements, false or misleading descriptions of fact, or false or
21
misleading representations of fact, SKITS has been damaged and is entitled to
22
monetary relief in an amount to be determined at trial.
23
24
46.
Due to LTDs actions, constituting false designation of origin, false or
25
misleading statements, false or misleading descriptions of fact, or false or
26
misleading representations of fact, SKITS has suffered and continues to suffer great
27
and irreparable injury, for which SKITS has no adequate remedy at law.
28
///
- 10 -

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(CALIFORNIA COMMON LAW TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT)
3
4
5
47.
6
7
48.
common law.
This is a claim for trademark infringement arising under California

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
10
49.
LTDs acts complained of herein constitute trademark infringement
11
under California common law. LTDs acts complained of herein are willful and
12
deliberate and committed with knowledge that LTDs unauthorized use of the
13
SMART TECH CASE mark causes a likelihood of confusion.
14
15
50.
SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that LTD has
16
derived and received and will continue to derive and receive, gains, profits, and
17
advantages from LTDs trademark infringement. By reason of LTDs wrongful
18
acts as alleged in this Complaint, SKITS has been damaged and is entitled to
19
monetary relief in an amount to be determined at trial.
20
21
51.
Due to LTDs trademark infringement, SKITS has suffered and
22
continues to suffer great and irreparable injury, for which SKITS has no adequate
23
remedy at law.
24
25
52.
LTDs willful acts of trademark infringement under California
26
common law constitute fraud, oppression, and malice. Accordingly, SKITS is
27
entitled to exemplary damages.
28
///
- 11 -

FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(CALIFORNIA UNFAIR COMPETITION)
3
4
5
53.
6
7
54.
This is a claim for unfair competition arising under California
Business & Professions Code 17200, et seq. and California common law against
defendants LTD and Does 1-10.

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
10
11
55.
LTDs acts of trademark infringement and false designation of origin
12
complained of herein are fraudulent, unfair, and unlawful, and constitute unfair
13
competition with SKITS under the common law and statutory laws of the state of
14
California, particularly California Business & Professions Code 17200, et seq.
15
16
56.
SKITS is informed and believes and thereon alleges, that it has
17
standing to assert this claim under California Business & Professions Code
18
17200, et seq. because SKITS monetary and property interests have been
19
damaged by the aforesaid actions of LTD.
20
21
57.
SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that LTD has
22
derived and received, and will continue to derive and receive gains, profits, and
23
advantages from LTDs unfair competition. By reason of LTDs wrongful acts as
24
alleged in this Complaint, SKITS has been damaged and is entitled to monetary
25
relief in an amount to be determined at trial.
26
///
27
///
28
///
- 12 -

58.
By its actions, LTD has injured and violated the rights of SKITS and
has irreparably injured SKITS, and such irreparable injury will continue unless
LTD is enjoined by this Court.
4
5
WHEREFORE, SKITS prays for judgment in its favor against Defendants
for the following relief:
7
8
1. That the 655 patent be deemed willfully infringed by defendants;

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
10
2. That a preliminary and permanent injunction issue enjoining
11
Defendants, its respective officers, directors, agents, servants,
12
employees, and attorneys, and those persons in active concert or
13
participation with Defendants, from infringing the 655 paten;
14
15
3. That Defendants account for all gains, profits, and advantages derived
16
by their infringement of the 655 patent, and that defendants pay to
17
SKITS all damages suffered by SKITS pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284;
18
19
20
4. That SKITS have and recover defendants total profits under 35 U.S.C.
289 for LTDs infringement of the 655 patent;
21
22
5. That an Order trebling of damages and/or awarding exemplary
23
damages issue because of defendants willful conduct pursuant to
24
35 U.S.C. 284;
25
26
6. That an Order deeming this to be an exceptional case within the
27
meaning of 35 U.S.C. 285 issue, entitling SKITS to an award of its
28
reasonable attorney fees, expenses, and costs in this action;

- 13 -

7. That the SMART TECH CASE mark be deemed valid and willfully
infringed by LTD in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1125(a), et seq.;
3
4
8. That a preliminary and permanent injunction issue against LTD, its
officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, representatives,
successors, and assigns, and all persons, firms, or corporations in
active concert or participation with LTD, enjoining them from
engaging in the following activities and from assisting or inducing,
directly or indirectly, others to engage in the following activities:

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
10
11
a. using to market, advertise, promote, sell, offer for sale, and/or
12
identify as LTDs goods the SMART TECH CASE mark or any
13
mark that is confusingly similar to the SMART TECH CASE
14
mark or is likely to create the erroneous impression that LTDs
15
goods or services originate from SKITS, are endorsed by
16
SKITS, or are connected in any way with SKITS;
17
18
b. manufacturing, distributing, shipping, importing, reproducing,
19
displaying, advertising, marketing, promoting, transferring,
20
selling, and/or offering to sell any case products bearing the
21
SMART TECH CASE mark and/or any confusingly similar
22
marks;
23
24
c. otherwise infringing the SMART TECH CASE mark and/or any
25
of SKITS other trademarks;
26
27
28
d. falsely designating the origin of LTDs goods;

///
- 14 -

e. unfairly competing with SKITS in any manner; or
2
3
f. causing a likelihood of confusion or injuries to SKITS business
reputation;
5
6
9. That, because of the exceptional nature of this case resulting from
LTDs deliberate infringing actions, this Court award to SKITS all
reasonable attorney fees, costs, and disbursements incurred as a result
of this action, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
10
11
10. That LTD be required to account for any and all profits derived by its
12
acts of trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and unfair
13
competition complained of in this Complaint;
14
15
11. That SKITS be awarded damages for LTDs trademark infringement
16
pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117 in the form of LTDs profits, damages
17
sustained by SKITS and the costs of the action, together with
18
prejudgment and post-judgment interest;
19
20
12. That LTDs acts of trademark infringement, false designation of origin,
21
and unfair competition complained of in this Complaint be deemed
22
willful, and that SKITS be entitled to enhanced damages;
23
24
13. That LTD be adjudged to have willfully and maliciously infringed the
25
SMART TECH CASE mark in violation of SKITS common law rights
26
under California common law;
27
28
///
- 15 -

1
2
14. That LTD be adjudged to have competed unfairly with SKITS under
the common law of the state of California;
3
4
15. That LTD be adjudged to have competed unfairly with SKITS under
California Business & Professions Code 17200, et seq. and that
LTDs actions in so doing be adjudged willful and done knowingly;
7
8

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
16. That an accounting be ordered to determine LTDs profits resulting

from its infringement, unfair competition, dilution, and false
10
designation of origin, and that SKITS be awarded monetary relief in an
11
amount to be fixed by the Court in its discretion as it finds just as an
12
equitable remedy, including:
13
14
a. all profits received by LTD from sales and revenues of any kind
15
made as a result of its infringing actions, and said amount to be
16
trebled;
17
18
b. all damages sustained by SKITS as a result of LTDs acts of
19
infringement, unfair competition, and false designation of origin,
20
and that such damages be trebled; and
21
22
23
c. punitive damages stemming from LTDs willful, intentional, and

malicious acts;
24
25
26
17. That SKITS recover exemplary damages pursuant to California Civil

Code 3294;
27
28
- 16 -

18. That SKITS have and recover the costs of this civil action, including
reasonable attorney fees;
19. An award of prejudgment and post-judgment interest and costs of this
action against LTD; and
5
6
20. Such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
7
8
Dated:
January 28, 2016
By: _/s/ Jeffrey M. Singletary_______

Jeffrey M. Singletary

SNELL &L.L.P.WILMER
10
11
12
13
14
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff SKITS, LLC hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable.
15
16
Dated:
January 28, 2016
17
18
By: _/s/ Jeffrey M. Singletary_______

19
20
21
22
23
23287824
24
25
26
27
28
- 17 -

1
2
SKITS, LLC, etc. vs. LTD Commodities, LLC, et al.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Case No. SACV15-01591 JLS (DFMx)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on January 28, 2016, I electronically filed the document
described as Second Amended Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief
(Patent and Trademark Infringement; Unfair Competition); Demand for Jury
Trial with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF System which will send
notification of such filing to the following:
10
11
LAW OFFICES
600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1400
Costa Mesa, California 92626-7689
(714) 427-7000
Snell &L.L.P.
Wilmer
12
13
14
15
David M. Given, Esq.

Phillips, Erlewine, Given & Carlin LLP
39 Mesa Street, Suite 201
The Presidio
San Francisco, CA 94129
Attorneys for Defendant

LTD Commodities LLC
Phone:
(415) 398-0900
Facsimile: (415) 398-0911
Email: dmg@phillaw.com
16
17
18
Dated: January 28, 2016
19
20
By: s/Jeffrey M. Singletary
Ketan S. Vakil
Glenn W. Trost
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
SACV15-01591 JLS (DFMx)
23325434.1

Skits v. LTD Trade Dress Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Skits v. LTD Trade Dress Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 8:15-cv-01591-JLS-DFM Document 35 Filed 01/28/16 Page 1 of 19 Page ID #:241

600 ANTON BLVD, SUITE 1400

Ketan S. Vakil (#191043)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SKITS, LLC, a California limited

Case No. SACV1501591 JLS (DFMx)

Case 8:15-cv-01591-JLS-DFM Document 35 Filed 01/28/16 Page 2 of 19 Page ID #:242

SKITS is a limited liability company organized and existing under the

Carnegie Avenue, Santa Ana, California 92705.

600 ANTON BLVD, SUITE 1400

SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that defendant

LTD Commodities LLC (LTD) is a limited liability company organized and

business at 2800 Lakeside Drive, Bannockburn, Illinois 60015.

SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that LTD

this judicial district.

SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon allege, that defendant

Floor, New York City, NY 10022.

SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that ACI

herein, within the United States.

Second Amended Complaint

Case 8:15-cv-01591-JLS-DFM Document 35 Filed 01/28/16 Page 3 of 19 Page ID #:243

such defendants by their true names.

600 ANTON BLVD, SUITE 1400

SKITS is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that defendants,

associates, joint-venturers, servants, employees, and/or other authorized

defendants, and each of them.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 15

Second Amended Complaint

Case 8:15-cv-01591-JLS-DFM Document 35 Filed 01/28/16 Page 4 of 19 Page ID #:244

jurisdiction over the remaining claims in this Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

600 ANTON BLVD, SUITE 1400

continuous, systematic, and substantial presence within this judicial district

on information and belief, selling infringing cases directly to consumers and/or

the events or omissions giving rise to SKITS claim.

continuous, systematic, and substantial presence within this judicial district

Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)-(d),

and 28 U.S.C. 1400(b).

Second Amended Complaint

Case 8:15-cv-01591-JLS-DFM Document 35 Filed 01/28/16 Page 5 of 19 Page ID #:245

SKITS, formerly known as Relief Pod International LLC, sells and

markets compartmentalized Tech Cases used to keep items such as cords,

March 2014, they have enjoyed substantial success and acclaim.

600 ANTON BLVD, SUITE 1400

SKITS website since at least as early as December 2013.

Second Amended Complaint

Case 8:15-cv-01591-JLS-DFM Document 35 Filed 01/28/16 Page 6 of 19 Page ID #:246

in connection with organizing cases by virtue of SKITS widespread and

continuous use of the mark.

600 ANTON BLVD, SUITE 1400

interest in the 655 patent.

and now issued patent rights pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 287.

Defendants ACI and LTD are infringing by manufacturing, using,

in the SMART TECH CASE trademark.

respect to that product.

Second Amended Complaint

Case 8:15-cv-01591-JLS-DFM Document 35 Filed 01/28/16 Page 7 of 19 Page ID #:247

use its 655 patent design.

SMART TECH CASE trademark.

600 ANTON BLVD, SUITE 1400

source of LTDs cases.

By virtue of the acts complained of herein, LTD has created a