Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 1 of 9

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 2 of 9

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 3 of 9

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 4 of 9

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 5 of 9

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 6 of 9

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 7 of 9

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 8 of 9

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 9 of 9

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 1 of 21

EXHIBIT A

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 2 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 3 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 4 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 5 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 6 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 7 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 8 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 9 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 10 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 11 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 12 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 13 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 14 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 15 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 16 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 17 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 18 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 19 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 20 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 21 of 21

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 1 of 4

EXHIBIT B

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 2 of 4

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 3 of 4

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 4 of 4

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 1 of 2

DANIEL LAW OFFICES, P.A.

Patent, Trademark and Copyright Attorneys
605 E. Robinson St., Ste. 100
Orlando, Florida 32801
www.danielpatents.com

Ph: 407-841-8375
Fax: 407-841-8372
Info@danielpatents.com

February 9, 2016
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL and e-mail
Return receipt requested

Best of Golf America, LLC (dan@bestofgolfamerica.com)

3821 Schoolhouse Rd E 2
Fort Myers, FL 33916
Attn: Daniel Ribeiro, Manager and Registered Agent
Re: Patent Infringement- PITCHFIX Divot Repair Tools
Our Ref.: 110108-12L
Dear Mr. Ribeiro:
This law firm represents Sandgroup International, Ltd., owners of the famous
PITCHFIX.com brand of divot repair tools (PITCHFIX) in connection with its intellectual
property enforcement matters.
Specifically, PITCHFIX is the owner of U.S. Patent Nos. D669,952; D700,262;
D699,804; and D700,263, copies of which are enclosed as Exhibit A for your reference
relating to its innovative Golf Divot Repair Tools.
It has come to our attention that your company has recently begun to offer golf divot
repair tools that are either identical or nearly identical to our clients patented products. In this
regard, we reference the PITCHFORK (Divot Tool) that is being offered on your websites
located at http://wholesale.bestofgolfamerica.com/, and http://www.bestofgolfamerica.com/. We
further note the offering of these infringing products in your product catalogue; see Exhibit B,
that was disseminated at the 2016 PGA Golf Show in Orlando. In addition to infringement of
our clients patented products, the tradename PITCHFORK is confusingly similar to our clients
registered trademarks under the PITCHFIX brand.
Accordingly, because you are offering these infringing products for sale within the
United States under a confusingly similar tradename, the demand is hereby made that you, your
business, and your business affiliates:
i.
Immediately cease and permanently desist from all further production, import,
advertising, sale, and promotion of the infringing Pitchfork products;

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 2 of 2

D. Ribeiro
Page 2

ii.
Provide our office with an immediate and complete accounting of all infringing
products in inventory, on order, under construction and which have been sold to date, so that a
proper evaluation of the damages can be made;
iii.

Deliver any and all inventory of products to our client for destruction; and

iv.
Provide detailed information regarding how and where the infringing products are
manufactured including any third party suppliers of parts for the infringing products.
Please rest assured that anything short of full compliance with the above will leave our
client with no choice but to explore all legal options available, including immediate injunctive
relief, a recovery of all profits associated with your sales of infringing products, and treble
damages and attorneys fees for willful conduct. To this end, we note the previous
correspondence between our client and Mr. Fred Haremza who was the representative of Best of
Golf during the 2015 PGA golf show in Orlando Florida.
We therefore expect your written reply confirming your compliance with the above
demands by no later than the close of business on February 29, 2016.
Lastly, please note that this letter is not intended to be a complete statement of facts and
demands, but is written in an effort to explore the possibility of moving towards an amicable
resolution in lieu of formal legal action, without prejudice to any of our clients rights or
remedies, all of which are expressly reserved.
GOVERN YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY.
Very truly yours,

Jason T. Daniel, Esq.

Registered Patent Attorney

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 1 of 3

Zhong-Yi AndMore CO. LTD
Bao Shi road #13, Bao Shi Industrial Parl, Tangxia Town, Dongguan City, Guangdong China
TEL: +86 769 88934778

DANIEL LAW OFFICES, P.A.

605 E. Robinson St., Ste. 100
Orlando, Florida 32801
Attn: Jason T. Daniel, Patent Attorney
02/10/16
Re:

Alleged Patent Infringement- PITCHFIX Divot Repair Tools

Your Ref.: 110108-12L

Dear Mr. Daniels,

Mr Dan Ribeiro has reached out to me for help and clarification in the above
referenced matter. I am generally in agreement with you, such matters should be
handled amicably whenever possible. In my function as a manufacturing agent, I
have helped to procure and supply the mechanic pitch forks in question to Mr.
Ribeiro and his partners; and I have conveyed to Mr. Ribeiro and his partners the
information given to me by associates of mine in the manufacturing business here
in China as explained in detail below.
Let me state for the record, that my Chinese and Taiwanese associates and I, as
well as Mr. Ribeiro and his partners are entirely unaware of any alleged
wrongdoing or infringement upon your clients product. We also were entirely
unaware and in fact are very surprised to find out about the filing of design
patents based on your clients products particular shape.
To give you a brief background, I am a multinational business man (originally
German) that since the late 80ies has been offering manufacturing services out of
Japan, Taiwan and China to the knife, outdoors and golf industries of the various
markets in Europe, USA, Australia, etc.
Let me be more specific in regards to the product in question. When side
opening and front opening (stiletto style) switchblades were made illegal in
Europe and became more and more restricted by US concealed weapons laws, we
had a mechanism that was in the public domain but had not much usage for. With
the golf industry growing to a viable market in the 90ies, it was not a big jump to
use the very same spring powered locking mechanism for mechanic divot tools.
We have supplied many Brand name manufacturers with a variety of mechanic
Divot tool designs over the years.
With the much more substantial success in the golf markets of the Divix brand
mechanic divot tools, which we also were a supplier for, came a movement in
China by manufacturers to offer to potential clients the same mechanism with
different base plate and fork designs as well as all other parts as factory designs,

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 2 of 3

Zhong-Yi AndMore CO. LTD
Bao Shi road #13, Bao Shi Industrial Parl, Tangxia Town, Dongguan City, Guangdong China
TEL: +86 769 88934778

aka open tooling. As the Divix item was rapidly diversified and copied we very
quickly saw a multitude of very similarly looking, open tooling, mechanic divot
tools by a multitude of metal goods manufacturers and trading company being
offered to the various markets. At the time the shape your client now uses was
offered as is or with insignificant variations by several suppliers from their open
tooling factory designs to potential clients from the west.
Because I am familiar with the process of filing patents, in your clients case
design patents, I also know that European and US patent attorneys as well as the
European and US Patent Authorities only are able to view the present market of
the time through a very narrow window when it comes to the validity of a design
patent. That is why design patents, even without the existence of prior art are
from my personal experience nearly impossible to enforce.
Once a client comes with a sample to a patent attorney for entering into the
process of a filing, the attorney will ask whether this is an original design and then
is going to have to believe what his client tells him. When then filed, the
responsible Patent Authority will need to take that very same statement as for
granted and really has not much choice but to issue a design patent if a market
search comes up negative. It is entirely possible that searches for the very same
shape in the present market of the time will not render any results, meaning that
the perceived due diligence has been satisfied and a patent is then issued. The
result is that everybody believes that they have done a thorough job, when in fact
by granting a patent, someone else's intellectual property rights now have been
infringed upon.
What no firm in Europe or in the US take into account is that these factory owned
open tooling designs are based on ODM molds that the factory has indeed paid for.
This is an asset we account for in our books. How is it then permissible for a
foreign entity in their market to claim it as their own? Fact is that they cannot.
Here our claim to our non-infringement with your clients design patents. We have
come across the factory/engineer that showed to us that they were the original
source for the open tooling which your client asked them to reserve exclusively for
him. Their statement is that the design used by your client was presented by the
factory to your client and to many other clients prior to your client Your client has
merely changed the cover plates with his own design and used all other existing
factory owned parts and tooling for the metal portions and mechanism.
We have taken exactly the same action your client originally did, we have
completely changed the design of the cover plates and made them even out of a
different material so that the items are entirely distinguishable by look, feel and
touch. We feel that because the base design is in the public domain no
infringement has occurred.

Case 0:16-cv-62042-WJZ Document 7-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2016 Page 3 of 3

Zhong-Yi AndMore CO. LTD
Bao Shi road #13, Bao Shi Industrial Parl, Tangxia Town, Dongguan City, Guangdong China
TEL: +86 769 88934778

You can see from my explanation that I am very passionate about this matter. My
frustration lies with the European and US patent authorities, who with better
screening of the markets could likely avoid situations like this one. Because we
are rather certain that we are in possession of prior art, we feel it unjust to be
accused of any wrongdoing and are presuming to be acting in perfect legality by
selling this particular product to our clients worldwide.
We feel that in view of these facts a design patent should never have been issued
to your client and only became reality because at the time the complete facts were
not known to the issuing authority.
Of course we very much welcome you and your clients response and are
continuing to be cooperative. Even to the point of offering manufacturing services
to your client.
Sincerely,

Stefan Schauffele
President