Caffeinate Labs v. Vante - Complaint

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 1 of 28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
CAFFEINATE LABS, INC.,
Plaintiff
Civil Action No._______
v.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
VANTE INC., a New York corporation, and
ALEXANDER SHLAFERMAN, an individual,
Defendants
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Caffeinate Labs, Inc. files this Complaint against Vante Inc. and Alexander
Shlaferman (collectively Defendants) for the foregoing reasons:
PARTIES
1.
Plaintiff, Caffeinate Labs, Inc. (Caffeinate) is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, having its usual place of
business at 170 Anderson Street, Portland, Maine 04101.
2.
Vante Inc. is a New York corporation organized and existing under the laws of
New York, having a principal place of business at 1733 Sheepshead Bay Road, Suite 32,
Brooklyn, NY 11235.
3.
Alexander Shlaferman, a/k/a Alex Xander, is an individual whose last known
address is 134 Bay 26 Street, Brooklyn, New York 11214.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4.
Plaintiffs claims arise out of patent infringement under Title 35 of the United
States Code, unfair business practices under the Lanham Act, Title 15 of the United States Code,

and ancillary state law claims for unfair business practices, trade libel, interference with
advantageous business relations, and unjust enrichment.
5.
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to
28 U.S.C. 1331, 28 U.S.C. 1332, and 28 U.S.C. 1338. In addition, the Court has diversity
jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332 because Caffeinate and Defendants are
citizens of different states and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.00. Finally, this court
has ancillary jurisdiction over all state law causes of action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367.
6.
Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and (c) and 1400(b). Defendants
have committed acts giving rise to each of the claims raised in this complaint in this District.
Defendants have regularly engaged in business in this Commonwealth and District and
purposefully availed themselves of the privilege of conducting business in this District.
7.
Since learning about Plaintiffs innovative and patented designs on or about
January 28, 2013, Defendants have been engaged in a scheme to willfully and knowingly
misappropriate the designs and features of Plaintiffs patented works by developing a competing
product, which is of like design, purpose and function. Defendants competing product is sold
under the name of Wallet Ninja.
8.
Defendants are known to advertise, offer for sale, and sell the Wallet Ninja at
brick and mortar stores located throughout the Commonwealth of Massachusetts including, but
not limited to, Staples, Office Depot, Walgreens and Walmart.
9.
Defendants make the Wallet Ninja available to any person to buy, including to
Massachusetts residents, at these stores and on numerous online shopping platforms including
Amazon.com, Walmart.com, Staples.com, Walgreens.com, and Office Depot.

CAFFEINATES PATENT PORTFOLIO

10.
Caffeinate owns two issued patents and one pending patent application covering
its designs in its PocketMonkey tool. The PocketMonkey is a flat, multi-purpose tool, which is
the size of a credit card.
11.
The PocketMonkey was invented by Nathan Barr, President and Founder of
Caffeinate. The PocketMonkey has 12 tools as part of its design. They are: (1) a bottle opener;
(2) a flat screwdriver; (3) a Phillips screwdriver; (4) a micro screwdriver; (5) a phone kickstand;
(6) a set of 6 hex wrenches; (7) a fruit peeler; (8) a door latch slip; (9) an earbud cord wrap;
(10) a letter opener; (11) a ruler; and (12) a straight edge.
12.
When Barr initially sought to design a multipurpose pocket tool that would fit
comfortably in a wallet, he encountered many design challenges. To his knowledge, there were
no multi-purpose tools that were as thin as a credit card. On the one hand, the design had to be
strong enough to function as a tool. For example, the screwdriver portion had to be able to
withstand the torque required to insert or remove a screw. The hex wrenches had to have
sufficient structural integrity such that they could insert or remove a hex bolt.
13.
On the other hand, the design also had to be thin enough to fit in a wallet. Barr
wanted the whole tool to be about the size of a credit card in all dimensions. In addition, the
features had to be precise. For example, the eye glass screwdriver and the Phillips screwdriver
required precision cuts within the body of the multifunctional tool.
14.
When Barr was working on various versions of the multifunctional tool, he relied
upon engineering principles to perfect the tools that are part of the PocketMonkey.
15.
After making approximately one hundred revisions of the multifunctional tool,
Barr settled on the design that ultimately became the PocketMonkey.

16.
Barr initially applied for a patent on the PocketMonkey design on November 28,
2012. That application matured into United States Patent No. 9,302,383 entitled Utility Tool
Device and Related Methods and Systems (the 383 patent) on April 5, 2016. A true and
accurate copy of the 383 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
17.
On February 19, 2016, Caffeinate filed a continuation of the 383 Patent, entitled
Utility Tool Device, which was published as U.S. Patent Publication No. 2016/0176034 on
June 23, 2016. (the 034 patent pub.). This patent application is currently pending before the
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). A true and accurate copy of the 034
patent pub. is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
18.
On March 15, 2013, Caffeinate applied for a design patent covering the novel
design features of the PocketMonkey. On June 17, 2014, the USPTO issued United States Patent
No. D707,091 entitled Utility Tool, (the D091 patent). A true and accurate copy of the
D091 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit C.
19.
The D091 patent, the 383 patent, and the 034 patent pub. are assigned to
Caffeinate, which owns the full rights, title, and interest in these pieces of intellectual property.
20.
The D091 patent and the 383 patent have not expired and are in full force and
21.
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 282, the D091 patent, the 383 patent, and all of their
effect.
respective claims are presumed valid.

22.
Caffeinate marks its utility tools with notice information regarding its patents.
INITIAL MEETING BETWEEN THE PARTIES
23.
On or about January 28, 2013, Nathan Barr, CEO of Caffeinate attended a
wholesale products and innovative designs tradeshow called NY NOW Market. He set up a
4


booth at the NY NOW Market tradeshow so that he could display, and hopefully sell, his newly
designed PocketMonkey.
24.
At some point during the tradeshow, Shlaferman approached Barr, who was
working Caffeinates booth, and asked questions about the PocketMonkey. The discussion
originally began as an inquiry into the features of the PocketMonkey. At some point,
Shlaferman offered to help Barr get the PocketMonkey into the sales channels at all of the major
big box stores.
25.
The two met later that evening at Barrs hotel, The Yotel, to further discuss
Shlafermans offer. During that meeting, Shlaferman stated that he would require a license to
Caffeinates intellectual property in order for him to assist in opening sales channels into major
big box stores. Shlafermans licensing terms essentially required Barr to relinquish all of his
rights and control in the intellectual property underlying the PocketMonkey. Shlaferman tried to
convince Barr that he would not succeed without him.
26.
During those discussions, Barr notified Shlaferman that his utility tool designs
were patent pending.

27.
On or about February 2, 2013, Barr received an email purportedly sent from
Shlaferman, wherein Shlaferman stated: You've heard everything I've had to say and I hope you
realize my credibility. Please try to get an answer for me in the next days if possible. Think long
term. We are not building a product we are building a company and you need a partner who is
fully capable on all ends strategically, creatively, and technically. I am your one stop shop. This
is what you need even if you don't realize it yet. Trust me to do this for you and I will take you
and your product where you've never dreamed of. I want a long term relationship where we can
continue pumping out products and get into a cycle with these stores with your brand where we

can predict their exact ordering schedule. With my guidance and your ingenuity we can make a
shitload of money. I take that back, we WILL make a shitload of money. Just give me the green
light and let's work. A true and accurate copy of an email sent from alex@vantetoys.com to
nate@caffeinatelabs.com dated February 2, 2013 is attached hereto as Exhibit D.
28.
In an email dated February 6, 2013, Barr rejected Shlafermans offer, again
reiterating that his designs were patent pending. Specifically, Barr stated: As we talked about, I
think this product has a very strong patent position and doesn't necessitate taking shortcuts to
ensure beating out the competition. I have made it very clear in the market that this is patent
pending. A true and accurate copy of the February 6, 2013 email from Barr to Shlaferman is
attached hereto as Exhibit E.
29.
Not deterred, Shlaferman continued to try to persuade Barr to enter into a business
relationship with respect to the manufacturing, design, and sales of the technology embodied in
the D091 and 383 patents. Specifically, on or about February 28, 2013, Shlaferman sent an
email to Barr acknowledging Barrs rights and pleading: Consider this. I'll give you a check
[for] 20 grand which is the guarantee for the first $200k in sales. It's yours to do as you please.
All I'm asking for are the full rights to distribute your item, the use of the name PocketMonkey
and the use of the design. I will give you a 10% royalty on lifetime sales. I just want this deal to
happen now. Truly Yours, Alex Shlaferman |www.vantetoys.com|# 718 332 5584|fax718 568
0258 Like us on Facebook! www.facebook.com/VanteToys. A true and accurate copy of the
February 28, 2013 email from Shlaferman to Barr is attached hereto as Exhibit F.
30.
On or about March 1, 2013, Barr sent an email rejecting Shlafermans proposed
terms for at least two reasons: (1) the royalty rate of 10% was too low; and (2) he had potential

business partners offering better terms. A true and accurateaccurate copy of the March 1, 2013
email from Barr to Shlaferman is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
31.
It subsequently appeared that, after Barr rejected Shlafermans proposed terms for
doing business together, Shlaferman substantially copied Barrs design and features, developing
an infringing tool which ultimately became known as and sold under the name of the Wallet
Ninja.
32.
Further evidencing Defendants desire to simply copy Plaintiffs designs and to
palm-off of Plaintiffs ingenuity and inventiveness, during the discussions between Barr and
Shlaferman, Barr told Shlaferman that he was also developing a credit card-sized pocketknife
which Barr told him he called Knife Ninja. When Barr learned that Defendants had released a
knock-off version of his PocketMonkey under the name Wallet Ninja, he recognized the need
to distinguish his products and changed the name of his pocketknife to Wildcard.
THE ACCUSED PRODUCT
33.
The Wallet Ninja is a credit-card sized, multifunctional tool. On its packaging, it
purports to be the Worlds First 100% Flat Multi-Tool, even though Defendants know this
statement is false because the PocketMonkey was patent-pending and offered for sale to the
public before the infringing Wallet Ninja was developed or sold.
34.
The Wallet Ninja claims to have nearly identical features as the PocketMonkey.
Specifically, it has: (1) a bottle opener; (2) a flat screwdriver; (3) a Phillips screwdriver; (4) a
micro screwdriver; (5) a cellphone kickstand; (6) a set of 6 hex wrenches; (7) a fruit peeler; (8) a
letter opener; (9) a ruler; and (10) a straight edge. Of note, these feautures do not have the
design and craftsmanship of the PocketMonkey, which has tended to erode consumer confidence
in the PocketMonkey.
7


35.
The Wallet Ninja also copied the identical thickness and approach to making such
a thin tool, which at the time was novel.

36.
Even though Shlaferman knew that Barr had applied for patent protection for his
PocketMonkey designs and functionality, he nonetheless applied for a design patent application
covering the Wallet Ninja on or about February 26, 2014. Shlafermans filing date for his patent
application was more than a year after he first saw the PocketMonkey for sale at the NY NOW
event and learned of the pending patent(s).
37.
When Shlaferman applied for a patent on the design of the Wallet Ninja, he did
not disclose his knowledge of the PocketMonkey as a relevant piece of prior art to the USPTO as
is required by the rules of disclosure, candor, and good faith that govern the process of applying
for a patent. The rules of candor before the USPTO require all inventors and their attorneys to
disclose all known prior art to the Patent Office. See 37 C.F.R. 1.56.
38.
Defendants currently sell the Wallet Ninja in numerous online and brick and
mortar stores throughout the Commonwealth and other markets. The Wallet Ninja is sold in the
same streams of commerce as the PocketMonkey. In several instances, stores within the
Commonwealth sell both the PocketMonkey and the Wallet Ninja.
39.
The PocketMonkey is made in the United States, whereas The Wallet Ninja is
made in China. Accordingly, the Wallet Ninja is usually available at a lower price than the
PocketMonkey.
40.
Plaintiff purchased a Wallet Ninja in an Office Depot store located in
Marlborough, Massachusetts in August of 2016. Hight Decl., 3. Additionally, Caffeinate

bought a Wallet Ninja from an online retailer and had it shipped to Massachusetts. Barr Decl.,
13.

DEFENDANTS MEDIA CAMPAIGN ADVERTISING WALLET NINJA

41.
On information and belief, one or both Defendants operate and control a
Facebook page entitled The Xander Experience. The Xander Experience Facebook page is
used, among other things, to market, advertise, promote and comment on the Wallet Ninja
product.
42.
In addition, Shlaferman has been interviewed numerous times regarding the
purported innovations embodied within the Wallet Ninja which he claims as his own. These
interviews, some of which are discussed below, have been broadcast worldwide in video and
print format.
43.
Beginning as early as August of 2013, Defendants embarked on a media
campaign replete with knowingly false and misleading statements about the origin of the design
for a flat, multipurpose tool. In August of 2013, Shlaferman was interviewed on the Howard
Stern show (Howard Stern interview). See Barr Decl., 7; See also
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjrAwNwJQYQ
44.
During the Howard Stern interview, Shlaferman demonstrated the Ninja product
for Mr. Stern and a large audience viewing the show live. See Barr Decl., 8.
45.
The Howard Stern interview has been further broadcast via live television and
web-archives such as YouTube.

46.
During the Howard Stern interview, Shlaferman evidenced an understanding of
intellectual property rights of others when he discussed the Swiss Army Knife trademark and
acknowledged that he could not characterize the Wallet Ninja as a type of Swiss Army Knife
because that term is trademarked. See Barr Decl., 8.

47.
Despite his basic understanding of trademark law, Shlaferman took credit during
the Howard Stern interview for designing the multi-purpose, flat tool he called Wallet Ninja,
when he knew that, in fact, Nate Barr was the original designer and inventor of a multi-purpose
flat tool called PocketMonkey that Shlaferman had substantially copied. See Barr Decl., 9.
48.
These blatantly false claims of origin continued into the following year. For
example, in an October 22, 2014 interview, when asked How did you come up with the idea for
the Wallet Ninja? Shlaferman responded: Out of a need to create a multi tool you could have
with you at all times without actually needing to take something extra with you. A true and
accurate copy of this interview can be viewed at http://nextshark.com/20-year-old-entrepreneuris-so-successful-he-has-his-own-factory-in-china/
49.
Shlaferman made the aforesaid statement with knowledge that Barr had already
designed and applied for patent protection for the PocketMonkey nearly two years prior to
making that statement.
50.
Two days later, on October 24, 2014, Bloomberg aired an interview with
Shlaferman during which he again discussed his purported design of the Wallet Ninja. See Barr
Decl., 3. During that interview, Shlaferman stated that he had launched his Wallet Ninja
product sometime around October of 2013, which is nearly a year after the priority date for the
383 patent. See Barr Decl., 4.
51.
Shlaferman also stated Im like vicious, when describing how he had earned
$10 million in less than a year from sales of the Wallet Ninja. Id. at 5. In addition, Shlaferman
stated that he had been selling the Wallet Ninja in Walmart and Pet Boys.
52.
During this same timeframe, Plaintifffs patent applications for the deisgn and
utility of the PocketMonkey. Plaintiff filed for protection of the utility of the PocketMonkey
10


design on November 28, 2012, nearly a year before Defendants launch of Wallet Ninja. The
383 patent application was published on May 29, 2014. Defendants claim to have made more
than $10 million in sales from the Wallet Ninja between October 2013 and October 2014.
53.
Defendants were on notice of Plaintiffs pending patent rights and therefore are
liable to Plaintitff for lost profits or a reasonable royalty for all sales of the Wallet Ninja
occurring after May 29, 2014.
54.
Defendants are additionally liable to Plaintiff for a reasonable royalty or lost
profits for all sales of the Wallet Ninja that occurred after June 17, 2014, which is the issue date
of the D091 patent.
DEFENDANTS DELIBERATELY UNDERCUT PRICING FOR POCKETMONKEY
55.
The PocketMonkey was first sold to the public in November of 2012, which was
nearly a year before Defendants began selling their infringing Wallet Ninja. As such, Caffeinate
developed a market and a demand for a flat, multipurpose tool. Defendants avoided the tie and
financial investment necessary to develop that market and instead entered the game once the
market had been developed. In doing so, they capitalized on Plaintiffs design and investment by
diverting sales that would otherwise have gone to Caffeinate.
56.
PocketMonkey is made in the United States, and is advertised accordingly.
57.
The Wallet Ninja is made in China and imported into the United States.
58.
In the Howard Stern interview Shlaferman stated America sucks for consumer
goods. The stuff you can do there [China] in a week, here [in the US] takes months.
Shlaferman also discussed how much cheaper it is to manufacture in China as compared with the
United States. See Barr Decl., 10.
11


59.
Shlaferman also touted the advantages of manufacturing in China in an interview
with National Public Radios Kai Ryssdal on October 28, 2014. See Barr Decl., 11; .See also
http://www.marketplace.org/2014/10/28/business/21-year-old-who-owns-factory-china
60.
Based on his conduct, it is clear that Shlaferman purposefully set out to disparage
the PocketMonkey and undercut the pricing of the PocketMonkey as a means of diverting sales
of the PocketMonkey toward the Wallet Ninja.
DEFENANTS DISPARAGEMENT CAMPAIGN AGAINST POCKETMONKEY
61.
During the Howard Stern interview, Shlaferman discussed a Facebook page he
operates under the pseudonym Alex Xander called The Xander Experience.
62.
Shlaferman has used the Xander Experience Facebook page, to among other
things, advertise impromptu parties he hosts. See Barr Decl., 12. One such party, for example,
occurred on the Manhattan Bridge. Id. The Manhattan Bridge party drew more than 1000 party
goers and resulted in Shlaferman being arrested. Id.
63.
Shlaferman has also used the Xander Experience Facebook page to disparage,
libel, and make false and distorted claims about the PocketMonkey.
64.
In November of 2014, Shlaferman asked thousands of his Facebook followers to
disparage Caffeinates PocketMonkey tool by posting his request on The Xander Experience
Facebook page. Specifically, Shlaferman posted Wow I feel flattered that I was knocked off so
quickly with some garbage. I really need your guys help. After 6 months of development, sweat,
passion and tears, ThinkGeek needs to know this is not right. Please click on
http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/18c2/ And comment I prefer a Wallet Ninja
http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/ Or anything of that variation. It would mean a huge
amount to me. Thank you. (Xander Experience Disparagement Request). A true and accurate
12


copy of the November 30, 2014 quote from The Xander Experience Facebook page is attached
hereto as Exhibit H.
65.
The link in the Xander Experience Disparagement Request led directly to an
advertisement of the PocketMonkey on a website known as ThinkGeek.

66.
Many of Defendants followers heeded the Xander Experience Disparagement
Request and posted disparaging comments about the PocketMonkey online. The majority of the
disparaging comments were made on November 30, 2014, the same date as the Xander
Experience Disparagement Request was made. A true and accurate copy of this thread is
attached hereto as Exhibit I.
67.
Those disparaging posts appeared on the Think Geek website as well as the
Xander Experience Facebook page.

68.
On information and belief, customers, suppliers and other business contacts of
Caffeinate saw those disparaging and untrue posts.

69.
Defendants knew at the time they made the Xander Experience Disparagement
Request that Nate Barr was the original inventor of the PocketMonkey, a flat, multipurpose tool,
which is the size of a credit card, and that Barrs designs predated any designs they had for the
Wallet Ninja by a substantial amount of time. They therefore knew that their claims to be first
and their assertions that they were knocked off so quickly with some garbage were false,
misleading, and likely to cause economic injury to Caffeinate.
NOTICE OF INFRINGEMENT AND UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES
70.
On or about December 21, 2015, Caffeinate sent a letter to the registered agent for
Vante Inc. In that letter, Caffeinate provided written notice to Vante that the USPTO had
allowed the claims in the 383 patent. (First Notice). The First Notice was sent via certified
13


mail, return receipt requested, to Vantes agent of record as listed on the New York Secretary of
States website. A true and accurate copy of the December 21, 2015 letter is attached hereto as
Exhibit J.
71.
In addition, the First Notice also notified Vante of its unfair business practices
under both state and federal law with respect to the unauthorized copying of the PocketMonkey
designs, the disparagement of PocketMonkey, and the false and misleading claims that
Caffeinate copied Defendants designs, when exactly the opposite was true.
72.
Although Caffeinate had addressed the First Notice to Vantes registered agent, an
entity who under law is required to be available to receive mail delivered via the U.S. Post
Office, the USPS was unable to deliver the First Notice after several failed attempts.
73.
The First Notice was returned to Caffeinates counsel sometime on or about
February 10, 2016. The front of the envelope indicates that the USPS made at least two attempts
to deliver the First Notice. The envelope also indicates that the address for Vantes registered
agent had a door, but no doorbell. The First Notice was returned with a sticker, which states
Return to Sender[.] Unclaimed[.] Unable to Forward[.] Return to Sender[.] A true and accurate
copy of the unopened, undelivered First Notice is attached hereto as Exhibit K.
74.
On or about February 22, 2016, Caffeinates counsel sent an email, attaching the
December 21, 2015 letter, to Vante and to Shlaferman at the following addresses:
alex@vantetoys.com and vantetoys@gmail.com (Second Notice). A true and accurate copy of
the February 22, 2016 email to Defendants is attached hereto as Exhibit L.
75.
On or about March 2, 2016, Caffeinate attempted for a third time to provide
notice of Defendants infringement and unfair business practices (Third Notice). This time
Caffeinate sent a letter to: 1733 Sheepshead Bay Road Suite 32, Brooklyn, NY 11235, which is
14


the address Defendants provided to the USPTO on their trademark application for the Wallet
Ninja mark. A true and accurate copy of the March 2, 2016 letter is attached hereto as
Exhibit M.
76.
On March 4, 2016, Vantes attorney acknowledged receipt of the Second Notice.
In his email, Vantes counsel stated that he was reviewing the Second Notice and he would
respond in due course.
77.
To date, Defendants have not provided any substantive response to the First
Notice, the Second Notice, or the Third Notice.

78.
Vantes failure to provide a valid address for receipt of business mail harmed
Caffeinate because, once an infringer is put on notice, s/he is subject to willful damages if the
infringement continues after the notice date. By effectively dodging notice by failing to provide
a valid mailing address for receipt of notice, Defendants were able to move the notice date for
purposes of calculating willful damages.
INFRINGEMENT OF THE 383 PATENT
79.
Rather than innovate on their own, Defendants copied Caffeinates patented
designs for its flat, multifunctional pocket tool as embodied in the 383 patent.
80.
Defendants do not have permission or any other lawful right to use Caffeinates
inventions as disclosed in the 383 patent or in its child, the 034 patent pub.
81.
The following exemplary claim chart, created based upon one of many online
advertisements for the Wallet Ninja, shows how the Wallet Ninja infringes claim 1 of the 383
patent. A true and accurate copy of an advertisement for the Wallet Ninja, appearing at
https://www.vat19.com/item/wallet-ninja-multi-tool is attached hereto as Exhibit N.
15


82.
This claim chart is based on preliminary analysis and may be amended or
supplemented after further investigation and discovery in this action. This claim chart is for
notice purposes under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 and 12.
Claim Element (Claim 1 of 383 patent)
Infringing Feature of Accused Product
A device, comprising:.
a substantially flat body comprising two or
This perfectly flat multi-tool packs six
more tools;
wrenches, four screwdrivers, two rulers, a

cellphone stand, a bottle opener, a can opener,
a letter opener, a box cutter, and a fruit peeler
into a single piece of steel the size of a credit
card. Ex. O, p.1.
wherein the two or more tools are formed in
See image Ex. O, p. 3 showing two or more
or on the body by one or more of cutouts,
tools formed in or on the body by one of more
apertures, contours and inscriptions;
cutouts, apertures, contours, and inscriptions.

See also image Ex. O, pp. 4, 5, 6, 7.
wherein the body further comprises an
With the help of a credit card, you can
undulating curvilinear elongate aperture
transform the Wallet Ninja into a smartphone
passing therethrough, the undulating
stand. Ex. O, p. 6; see also image Ex. O, p.
curvilinear elongated aperture being
6.
approximately 53.98 mm long and configured

to accept and frictionally engage with an
approximately credit card-sized supporting
member:
16


and wherein the flat body is formed of a heat
Material: 4X heat treated steel Ex. O, p. 2
treated metal.
INFRINGEMENT OF THE D091 PATENT

83.
Rather than innovate on its own, Defendants copied Caffeinates patented designs
for its flat, multifunctional pocket tool as embodied in the D091 patent.
84.
Defendants do not have permission to use Caffeinates inventions as disclosed in
the D091 patent.

85.
The exemplary claim chart below shows how the Wallet Ninja infringes claim 1
of the D091 patent.

86.
As can be seen from the claim chart below, an ordinary observer would think that
the accused design is substantially the same as the patented design when the two designs are
compared to one another. This is particularly so because the PocketMonkey was the first tool of
its kind, i.e., a truly credit card sized, in all dimensions, multifunctional tool, to hit the consumer
market.
87.
Barr spent a considerable amount of time designing the look of the PocketMoney.
In his final design, he was able to incorporate twelve tools into the PocketMonkey. Of those
twelve tools, Defendants infringing product copies eight of them.
88.
This claim chart is based on preliminary analysis and may be amended or
supplemented after further investigation and discovery in this action. This claim chart is for
notice purposes under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 and 12.
17


Claim Element of D091 patent
Infringing Device
COUNT ONE
(Infringement of the 383 Patent)
(Against Both Defendants)
89.
Caffeinate re-alleges and incorporates by reference all of the allegations in
paragraphs 1 through 88 as if fully set forth herein.

90.
Defendants, jointly or severally, have been and are still infringing one or more
claims of the 383 patent by manufacturing, using, selling, importing, or offering for sale the
Wallet Ninja within the United States in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271,
91.
Defendants had actual notice of the pending patents that ultimately issued as the
383 patent at least as early as February 6, 2013.

92.
Defendants had constructive notice of the 383 patent at least as early as April 5,
2016 because Caffeinate marks its Pocket Monkey products with patent notices.
93.
Defendants had actual notice of the 383 patent at least as early as February 22,
2016.
18


94.
Defendants have profited and continue to profit from their manufacture, use, sale,
offers to sell, and importation of the Wallet Ninja.

95.
Defendants infringement of the 383 patent is wanton,willful, and deliberate.
96.
Caffeinate has suffered and continues to suffer damages and irreparable harm
because of Defendants infringement of the 383 patent.

COUNT TWO
(Infringement of the D091 Patent)
97.
Caffeinate re-alleges and incorporates by reference all of the allegations
contained in paragraphs 1 through 96 as if fully set forth herein.

98.
Defendants, jointly and severally, have been and are still infringing one or more
claims of the D091 patent by manufacturing, using, selling, importing, or offering for sale the
Wallet Ninja within the United States in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271,
99.
Defendants had actual notice of the pending patents that ultimately issued as the
D091 patent at least as early as February 6, 2013.

100.
Defendants had constructive notice of the D091 patent at least as early as June
17, 2014 because Caffeinate marks its Pocket Monkey products with patent notices.
101.
Defendants had actual notice of the D091 patent at least as early as February 22,
2016.
102.
Defendants have profited and continue to profit from their manufacture, use, sale,
offers to sell, and importation of the Wallet Ninja.

103.
Defendants infringement of the D091 patent is wanton, willful, and deliberate.
104.
Caffeinate has suffered and continues to suffer damages and irreparable harm
because of Defendants infringement of the D091 patent.

19


COUNT THREE
(Unfair Business Practices Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act 15 U.S.C 1125)
105.
paragraphs 1 through 104 as though fully set forth herein.

106.
Defendants, jointly and severally, have been and are still committing unfair
business practices in violation of in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1125, the Lanham Act.

107.
Defendants actions include, without limitation, using in commerce, in connection
with goods or services false designations of origin, false or misleading descriptions of fact,
and/or false or misleading representation of fact, which have caused and continue to cause
confusion and mistake to the general public, and have deceived and continue to deceive as to the
affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin,
sponsorship, or approval of his or their goods, services, or commercial activities by another
person.
108.
In addition, Defendants have in the past and continue to presently: misrepresent
the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another persons goods,
services, or commercial activities, in commercial advertising or promotions.
109.
The above-described acts and practices by Defendants have and are likely to
continue to purposefully mislead or deceive the general public and therefore constitute unfair
competition under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).
110.
Defendants acted willfully and intentionally in claiming to be the worlds first flat
multipurpose tool, in disparaging the PocketMonkey, in enlisting their customers to disparage the
PocketMonkey, in falsely claiming that Caffeinate copied their design for a multipurpose tool,
when they knew the opposite was true, among other things.
20


111.
The unlawful and fraudulent business practices of Defendants, as detailed
throughout this complaint, present a continuing threat to, and are intended to deceive members of
the public, in that Defendants continue to promote the Wallet Ninja by trading on the goodwill of
PocketMonkey, which was in fact developed, patented, and sold long before the Pocket Ninja
was purportedly developed, marketed, or sold.
112.
Defendants knew of Caffeinates designs and patent pending status when they
purported to invent the Wallet Ninja. In fact, Defendants had discussed creating a partnership
with Caffeinate and/or licensing Caffeinates intellectual property for a multipurpose tool. When
Caffeinate rejected Defendants offers to license or partner, Defendants wrongfully
misappropriated Caffeinates proprietary intellectual property for themselves.
113.
In doing so, Defendants obviated the need to invest their own time and money to
develop a multipurpose tool of their own. Instead, Defendants reaped the monetary benefits of
selling the infringing Wallet Ninja without having invested the time, effort, ingenuity and money
required to design a functioning, low profile, multipurpose pocket tool.
114.
Defendants created and/or seized opportunities to publicly disparage the
PocketMonkey and to claim that they were in fact the first to invent a multipurpose pocket tool.
115.
Caffeinate has been and continues to be irreparably harmed by Defendants
conduct; and Caffeinate lacks an adequate remedy at law to prevent such ongoing harm and
damage to its goodwill and reputation as well as that of the PocketMonkey.
116.
Defendants by their own admission have profited from their false and misleading
advertising and unfair business practices.

117.
Caffeinate has sustained monetary damages as a result of Defendants false and
misleading advertising and unfair business practices in an amount to be proven at trial.
21


118.
Because Defendants actions have been willful, Caffeinate is entitled to recover
treble its actual damages or Defendants profits, whichever is greater, and to an award of costs,
and this being an exceptional case, reasonable attorneys fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117(a).
119.
As a direct and proximate result of Defendants wrongful conduct, Caffeinate has
been injured in fact and has lost money and profits. Such harm will continue unless Defendants
acts are enjoined by this Court. Caffeinate has no adequate remedy at law for Defendants
continuing violation of its rights.
COUNT FOUR
(Unfair Business Practices in Violation of Mass. G.L. Ch. 93A)
120.

121.
Defendants, jointly and severally, have been and are still committing unfair and
deceptive business practices in violation of the laws of the Commonwealth and specifically in
violation of Mass. G.L. Ch. 93A.
122.
Defendantswere on notice of Caffeinates claims arising out of their conduct in
violation of Mass. G.L. Ch. 93A at least as early as February 22, 2016.
123.
Defendants failed to respond to Caffeinates demands made pursuant to Mass.
G.L. Ch. 93A.

124.
Defendants actions include, without limitation, using in commerce, in connection
with goods or services, false designations of origin, false or misleading descriptions of fact,
and/or false or misleading representations of fact, which have caused and continue to cause
confusion, mistake, and have deceived and continue to deceive consumers and the public as to
22


the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin,
sponsorship, or approval of their goods, services, or commercial activities by another person.
125.
In addition, Defendants have in the past and continue to presently: misrepresent
the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of their goods, services, or commercial
activities, in commercial advertising or promotion.
126.
The above-described acts and practices by Defendants are likely to mislead or
deceive the general public and therefore constitute unfair competition under Mass. G.L. Ch. 93A.
127.
Defendants acted willfully, knowingly and intentionally in claiming to be the
worlds first multipurpose tool, in disparaging the PocketMonkey, in actively enlisting their
customers to disparage the PocketMonkey, in falsely claiming that Caffeinate copied their design
for a multipurpose tool, when they knew the opposite was true, among other things.
128.
The unlawful and fraudulent business practices of Defendants, as detailed
throughout this complaint, present a continuing threat to, and are meant to deceive members of
the public, in that Defendants continue to promote the Wallet Ninja by trading on the goodwill of
PocketMonkey, which was in fact the developed, patented, and sold by Plaintiffs long before the
Pocket Ninja was purportedly invented, marketed, or sold.
129.
Defendants knew of Caffeinates designs and patent pending status when they
purported to invent the Wallet Ninja. In fact, Defendants had proposedcreating a partnership
with Caffeinate and/or licensing Caffeinates intellectual property for a multipurpose tool. When
Caffeinate rejected Defendants offers to license or partner, Defendants wrongfully
misappropriated Caffeinates proprietary intellectual property for their own gain.
130.
In doing so, Defendants obviated the need to invest their own time and money to
develop a multipurpose tool of their own. Instead, Defendants reaped the monetary benefits of
23


selling the infringing Wallet Ninja without having invested the time, effort, ingenuity and money
required to design a functioning, low profile, multipurpose pocket tool.
131.
Defendants created and/or seized opportunities to publicly disparage the
PocketMonkey and to claim that they were in fact the first to invent a multipurpose pocket tool.
132.
Caffeinate has been and continues to be irreparably harmed by Defendants
conduct; and Caffeinate lacks an adequate remedy at law to prevent such ongoing harm and
damage to its goodwill and reputation as well as that of the PocketMonkey.
133.
Defendants have wrongfully gained profits by virtue of their false, deceptive and
misleading advertising and unfair business practices.

134.
Caffeinate has sustained monetary damages as a result of Defendants false,
deceptive and misleading advertising and unfair business practices in an amount to be

determined at trial.
135.
As a result of Defendants willful conduct as aforesaid, Caffeinate is entitled to
recover punitived damages in an amount double or treble the actual damages assessed or
Defendants profits, whichever is greater, and to an award of costs and reasonable attorneys fees
pursuant to Mass. G.L. Ch. 93A.
136.
As a direct and proximate result of Defendants wrongful conduct and unfair or
deceptive acts or practices, Caffeinate has suffered actual damages and has lost money and
profits. Such harm will continue unless Defendants conduct is enjoined by this Court.
Caffeinate has no adequate remedy at law for Defendants continuing violations of its rights.
24


COUNT FIVE
(Interference with Advantageous Business Relations)
137.
Caffeinate re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in paragraphs 1
through 136 as if fully set forth herein.

138.
By their conduct alleged herein, Defendants have wrongfully interfered with
Caffeinates advantageous business relations with its customers, its suppliers, its resellers, and
others with whom Caffeinate does business. By posting disparaging remarks about Caffeinates
products, proactively encouraging their followers to disparage Caffeinates products, claiming to
manufacture and distribute the worlds first 100% flat multi-tool, among other things,
Defendants have wrongfully interfered with Caffeinates business relationships.
139.
Defendants knew that Caffeinate was marketing and selling the PocketMonkey
and that Caffeinate enjoyed an economic benefit from those sales.

140.
Defendants knew that Caffeinate had customers and other business relationships
with third parties.

141.
Defendants motives were improper, wrongful and unlawful.
142.
Caffeinate lost sales and goodwill in an amount to be determined at trial as a
proximate result of Defendants lies regarding, among other things: (1) who was first to market
with a 100% flat multi-tool; (2) who copied whose intellectual property.
COUNT SIX
(Commercial Disparagement)
143.
25


144.
Defendants are known to have published false statements in the following places:
(1) the packaging for their Wallet Ninja tool; (2) on the Xander Experience Facebook page;
(3) on the ThinkGeek website; and (4) in interviews in print and video mediums available on the
Web.
145.
Defendants false statements were harmful to Caffeinate and its owner Nathan
Barr.
146.
Caffeinate suffered pecuniary loss and loss of its goodwill in an amount to be
determined at trial.
147.
Defendants intended to harm Caffeinate by virtue of their false statements.
148.
Defendants knew their statements were false at the time they were made.
149.
Defendants acted with reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the statements
made and described herein.

COUNT SEVEN
(Unjust Enrichment)
150.

151.
As a result of the aforesaid conduct, Defendants have been unjustly enriched to
Caffeinates detriment. Caffeinate seeks a fullaccounting and disgorgement of all ill-gotten

gains and profits resulting from Defendants inequitable activities.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Caffeinate Labs, Inc., respectfully requests relief as follows:
A. A declaratory judgment that Vante and/or Shlaferman has infringed one or more of the
claims of the asserted patents;
26


B. An order for injunctive relief and final judgment preliminarily and permanently enjoining
Shlaferman and Vante and its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, affiliates,
attorneys, and all others acting in privity or concert with them, and their parents, subsidiaries,
divisions, successors and assigns, from further acts of infringement of Caffeinates asserted
patents;
C. A judgment awarding Caffeinate monetary damages adequate to compensate for
Defendants infringement of Caffeinates asserted patents, and a reasonable royalty based on
Defendants saes of infringing products, as well as all pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at
the maximum rate permitted by law;
D. A judgment awarding Caffeinate punitive damages including treble damages based on
any infringement found to be willful, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284, together with prejudgment
interest;
E. Judgment for actual damages suffered by Caffeinate as a result of Defendants unlawful
conduct, in an amount to be determined at trial, as well as prejudgment interest as authorized by
law;
F. Reasonable funds for corrective advertising;
G. An accounting of Defendants profits pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
H. A judgment trebling any damages award pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
I. Punitive damages and injunctive relief pursuant to Mass. G.L. Ch. 93A;
J. Restitution relief against Defendants and in favor of Caffeinate, including disgorgement
of wrongfully obtained profits and other appropriate relief;
K. Costs of suit and reasonable attorneys fees; and
L. Any other relief to which Caffeinate is entitled under any state or federal law.
27


DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Caffeinate Labs, Inc. demands a jury trial for all issues so triable.
CAFFEINATE LABS, INC.
By its attorneys,
/s/ Anne-Marie Dinius
Anne-Marie Dinius BBO# 647556
amdinius@amdiniuslaw.com
AMDinius Law
101 Great Road, #119
Bedford, MA 01730
(650) 814-0810
Jonathan Braverman
JonathanB@BBB-lawfirm.com
Baker, Braverman & Barbadoro
300 Crown Colony Dr #500
Quincy, MA 02169
(781) 848-9610
Dated: December 7, 2016
28

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1-1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 1 of 2
CIVIL COVER SHEET
JS 44 (Rev. 0 /16)
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
Vante Inc. and Alex Shlaferman
Caffeinate Labs, Inc.
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff
Suffolk, MA.
County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)

NOTE:
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number)
AMDinius Law
101 Great Rd #119
Bedford, MA 01730
Attorneys (If Known)
Baker, Braverman & Barbadoro

300 Crown Colony Dr. Ste. 500
Quincy, MA 02169
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in One Box Only)

1
Kings, NY
(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
U.S. Government
Plaintiff
U.S. Government
Defendant
III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an X in One Box for Plaintiff

(For Diversity Cases Only)
PTF
Citizen of This State
1
Federal Question
(U.S. Government Not a Party)
Diversity
(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)
DEF
1
and One Box for Defendant)

PTF
DEF
Incorporated or Principal Place
4
4
of Business In This State
Citizen of Another State
Incorporated and Principal Place

of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a
Foreign Country
Foreign Nation
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in One Box Only)

CONTRACT
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
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
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
IMMIGRATION
462 Naturalization Application
465 Other Immigration
Actions
OTHER STATUTES
375 False Claims Act
376 Qui Tam (31 USC
3729(a))
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
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
6 Multidistrict
Litigation Transfer
(specify)
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
8 Multidistrict
Litigation Direct File
35 USC 101, 15 USC 1125
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:

VII. REQUESTED IN
COMPLAINT:
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
IF ANY
DATE
CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION

UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P.
(See instructions):
CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:

Yes
No
JURY DEMAND:
DEMAND $
JUDGE
DOCKET NUMBER
SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
/s Anne-Marie Dinius
12/07/2016
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT #
AMOUNT
APPLYING IFP
JUDGE
MAG. JUDGE
JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 0 /16)
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading 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. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:
I.(a)
(b)
(c)
Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and
then the official, giving both name and title.
County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land
condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)
Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section "(see attachment)".
II.
Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes
precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
cases.)
III.
Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
section for each principal party.
IV.
V.
Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.
When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.
Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing
date.
Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or
multidistrict litigation transfers.
Multidistrict Litigation Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C.
Section 1407.
Multidistrict Litigation Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to
changes in statue.
VI.
Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service
VII.
Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.
VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket
numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.
Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT C
US00D707091S
(12) United States Design Patent do Patent No.:

Barr
(45) Date of Patent:
(54) UTILITY TOOL

-
D544,768 S +
(71) Applicant: ut. Labs, Inc., Somerville, MA

(US)
(72) Inventor: Nathan G. Barr, Somerville, MA (US)
US D707,091 S
: Jun. 17, 2014
6/2007 Book ............................... D8/40
D586,645 S +
2/2009 Lee .........
D613,138 S +
4/2010 Salvino ............................ D8/18
. D8/103
D680,700 S + 4/2013 Ung .......................
D32/46
D685,620 S + 7/2013 Wysoczynski et al.
... D8/40
D687,287 S +
... D8/98
8/2013 Yu Chen ................
D692,288 S + 10/2013 Locklear .......................... D8/98
(73) Assignee: Caffeinate Labs, Inc., Somerville, MA

(US)
(**) Term:
14 Years
* cited by examiner
Primary Examiner Elizabeth Albert
(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm Stanley F. Chalvire; Morse,
(21) Appl. No. 29/450,200

(22) Filed
Mar.
15, 2013
1IeCl.
ar. 15,
Barnes-Brown & Pendleton, P.C.

(57)
CLAIM
The ornamental design for a utility tool, as shown and
described.
? Cl. 0805
(58)
foi - - - - - ificat- - - - - -s - - - - - - - h- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - D8/16
Ield 01 UIa?SITIcal IOIn Searc

s
See application file for complete search history.

e
References Cited
FIG. 4 is a left side view of a first embodiment of the utility

. . .. .
-- -
FIG. 5 is a right side view of a first embodiment of the utility
5/1914 Marion ............................ D8/17
2/1990 Hoilien ............................ D8/18
5,437,074 A * 8/1995 W. al. .
FIG. 3 is a bottom plan view of a first embodiment of the

tool. . .
D126,253
S : !5/1984
1941 Smiley
............................. : 18
D273,757 S
Evans .............................. D8/18
D306.124 S +
FIG. 2 is a top plan view of a first embodiment of the utility

tool.
utility tool.
|U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS

D45,815 S +
FIG. 1 is &l perspective view of a first embodiment of the utility
tool.
USPC ........ D8/16, s 3. *

(56)
DESCRIPTION
... 15/105
D362,168 S + 9/1995 Mancini ........................... D8/98

D435,422 S + 12/2000 Schimmel ....
... D8/104
D496,240 S + 9/2004 Sandelius ........................ D8/38
tool.
FIG. 6 is a front plan view of a first embodiment of the utility
tool;- and
*-
-- -
FIG. 7 is a back plan view of a first embodiment of the utility

tool.
1 Claim, 5 Drawing Sheets
EXHIBIT C
U.S. Patent
Jun. 17, 2014
Sheet 1 of 5
FIG. I.
US D707,091 S
EXHIBIT C
U.S. Patent
Jun. 17, 2014
FIG. 2
FIG. 3
Sheet 2 of 5
US D707,091 S
EXHIBIT C
U.S. Patent
Jun. 17, 2014
FHG. 4
Sheet 3 of 5
US D707,091 S
FIG. 5
EXHIBIT C
U.S. Patent
Jun. 17, 2014
Sheet 4 of 5
FIG. 6
US D707,091 S
EXHIBIT C
U.S. Patent
Jun. 17, 2014
Sheet 5 of 5
FIG. 7
US D707,091 S
5/27/2015
EXHIBIT D
CaffeinateLabsMailplus
Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document
1-5 Filed 12/07/16 Page 1 of 2
NathanBarr<nate@caffeinatelabs.com>
plus
4messages
VanteToys<vantetoys@gmail.com>
To:nate<nate@caffeinatelabs.com>
Tue,Jan29,2013at1:40PM
We'reprintingcatalogsforToyFair.I'llbemeetingwithagoodamountofmybuyersduringTFandcanshowit
tothemthenandthere.IcangetthisinmycatalogwithafewotheritemsI'mshowingthem.Ourwholecatalog
isonlyabout5itemssoeachonegetsspecialattention.
TrulyYours,
AlexShlaferman|www.vantetoys.com|#7183325584|fax7185680258
LikeusonFacebook!www.facebook.com/VanteToys
NateBarr<nate@caffeinatelabs.com>
To:VanteToys<vantetoys@gmail.com>
Sat,Feb2,2013at5:31PM
HeyAlex,
Itwasgreatmeetingwithyouaswell.Ihavenothadadequatetimetorespond,butwantedtogetbacktoyou
onthecatalogoffer,asIdon'twanttoholdupyourprinting.Idon'tthinkthisisagoodfitforyourcatalog.Don't
getmewrongyouhavesomeawesomeproducts,butIthinkthisproductonlyfeelslegit/premiumwhenit
appearstobeanauthentictool.Iworrythatputtingitnexttotoys(againgreatproducts)setsthewrongtone.
Cheers,
Nate
[Quotedtexthidden]
NateBarr
Creator
www.zootilitytools.com
M:4138831788
P:8189255384
"Theinformationcontainedinthismessagemaybeprivilegedandconfidential.Itisintendedtobereadonlyby
theindividualorentitytowhomitisaddressedorbytheirdesignee.Ifthereaderofthismessageisnotthe
intendedrecipient,youareonnoticethatanydistributionofthismessage,inanyform,isstrictlyprohibited.If
youhavereceivedthismessageinerror,pleaseimmediatelynotifythesenderanddeleteordestroyanyandall
copiesofthismessage"
VanteToys<vantetoys@gmail.com>
To:NateBarr<nate@caffeinatelabs.com>
Sat,Feb2,2013at6:21PM
Iunderstandyourbrandandyourintegrityandwouldn'tdoanythingtocompromisethatvalue.Don'tworryabout
thecatalog.Itisnotessentialtopresentingthisitem.
You'veheardeverythingI'vehadtosayandIhopeyourealizemycredibility.Pleasetrytogetananswerforme
inthenextdaysifpossible.
https://mail.google.com/mail/b/357/u/0/?ui=2&ik=5c1a975353&view=pt&q=Alex%20vantetoys%40gmail.com&qs=true&search=query&th=13c879c468760ce6&
1/2
5/27/2015
EXHIBIT D
CaffeinateLabsMailplus
Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document
1-5 Filed 12/07/16 Page 2 of 2
Thinklongterm.Wearenotbuildingaproductwearebuildingacompanyandyouneedapartnerwhoisfully
capableonallendsstrategically,creatively,andtechnically.Iamyouronestopshop.Thisiswhatyouneed
evenifyoudon'trealizeityet.TrustmetodothisforyouandIwilltakeyouandyourproductwhereyou've
neverdreamedof.
Iwantalongtermrelationshipwherewecancontinuepumpingoutproductsandgetintoacyclewiththese
storeswithyourbrandwherewecanpredicttheirexactorderingschedule.
Withmyguidanceandyouringenuitywecanmakeashitloadofmoney.Itakethatback,weWILLmakea
shitloadofmoney.
Justgivemethegreenlightandlet'swork.
PleaseexcuseanymistakesthisemailwassentfrommyiPhone.
[Quotedtexthidden]
NateBarr<nate@caffeinatelabs.com>
To:ChrisBent<chris@caffeinatelabs.com>
Thu,Dec19,2013at12:55PM
Emailstring1
[Quotedtexthidden]
NateBarr
Creator
www.zootilitytools.com
Mobile:4138831788
Office:8189255384
"Theinformationcontainedinthismessageisprivilegedandconfidential."
https://mail.google.com/mail/b/357/u/0/?ui=2&ik=5c1a975353&view=pt&q=Alex%20vantetoys%40gmail.com&qs=true&search=query&th=13c879c468760ce6&
2/2
EXHIBIT I
9/10/2015
Case
ThinkGeek::PocketMonkey12in1PocketTool
1:16-cv-12480-GAO
Document 1-10 Filed 12/07/16
Page 1 of 6
Lastday! 25%offandFREEShipping InternationalOrders$200+!NoCodeNecessary!Offerends12/1711:59p.m.PT(seedetails)
25%offandFREESHIPPING
GO
findstuff
Account | WishLists | GeekPoints

LiveChat
Help
InternationalOrders$200+
Haveanaccount? LogIn
NoCodeNecessary(Seedetails)
Loot:Yourcartislonely
SHOPBYCATEGORY
SHOPBYINTEREST
HOLIDAY
NEW
BESTSELLERS
EXCLUSIVES
TSHIRTS
GADGETS
SALE
Home>Tools,Outdoor&Survival>GeekTools>
HolidayGiftCenter
TShirts&Apparel
PocketMonkey12in1PocketTool
GeekToys
You'vegotamonkeyinyourpocket!
CustomerActionShots:
Thesizeofacreditcardmakingiteasytocarry
Electronics&Gadgets
TSAcompliant
Home&Office
Plus,itlookslikeamonkey!
Tools,Outdoor&Survival
Readmore...
YourFellowSmart
MassesAlsoBought:
Knives,Swords&Axes
Survival&CampingGear
$11.99
GeekTools
Instock
WalletNinja16in1
PocketMultiTool
Quantity: 1
Outdoor&BackyardFun
CarGadgets&Accessories
OnSale
or
ViewAll
FisherSpacePenwith
Stylus
GeekKids
Clicktozoom
New
Exclusives
Bestsellers
Like
Share
184
Tweet
13
TilesofInfinityInfinite
GeometricPatterns
SHOPFORGIFTS:
Giftsunder$10
Giftsunder$20
Main
Description
Additional
Images
GiftsforHim
GiftsforHer
GiftCertificates
SHOPBYINTEREST:
StarWars
DoctorWho
StarTrek
Minecraft
Portal
Tolkien
GameofThrones
You'vegotamonkeyinyourpocket!
Kelvin.23AllInOneTool
NoteveryoneinreallifeislikeRossGellerwithalittleMarcelasabestfriendtohelpwithtasks,keepthemcompany,
andgenerallyjustbeawesome.Butifyoudidhaveamonkey,whattypesofthingswouldyouhaveitdo?Grabyoua
beer?Openmail?Peelyourbananas?Actually,thatmightbetrickysincemonkeyslovebananas.
Well,althoughitsnotareal,furrymonkey,thisstainlesssteelPocketMonkey12in1toolmightjustbeabletohelp
yououtwithafewofthosetasks.Thislight,creditcardsizedtoolfeaturesacoupleofuniquefeaturesnotfoundin
othermultitools.Justinsertyourcreditcardandmakeitaphonestand.Ithasabottleopener,flatscrewdriver,micro
screwdriverforuseonglassesorkids'toys,adoorlatchslip,letteropener,hexwrench(workson5differentsizes),
Phillipsheadscrewdriver,orangepeeler,banananicker(forsquishybananatops),ruler(Englishandmetric),and
straightedge!
Hazard4PatrolPack
ProductSpecifications
HungerGames
BigBangTheory
12in1PocketToolwithamonkeyhead
Firefly
Has12functions:Phonestand,bottleopener,flatandPhillipsheadscrewdrivers,microscrewdriver,hex
LEGO
wrench,banananicker,orangepeeler,doorlatchslip,letteropener,ruler(Englishandmetric),andstraight
iPhoneStuff
iPadStuff
Zombies&Bacon
MadScientist
Office&DormPranks
JapanFan
edge
Uniqueandfunctionalgiftforeveryonetohave
Materials:Heattreatedstainlesssteel
Dimensions:3"longx2"widex.1"thick
Weight:.6oz.
ViewAllInterests
Clearance
WannachataboutPocketMonkey12in1PocketTool?
Signupforgeekmail
file:///C:/Users/Zootility/Downloads/ThinkGeek%20Wallet%20Ninja%20Incident%20(1)/ThinkGeek%20%20%20%20Pocket%20Monkey%20%2012in1%20P 1/6
9/10/2015
EXHIBIT I
Case
YourEmail
1:16-cv-12480-GAO
Page 2 of 6
HavequestionsaboutPocketMonkey12in1PocketTooloryourorder?Wemonitorthese
commentsdaily,butitmaybefastertoemailusdirectlyorcallusat1888GEEKSTUFF.
RSSfeeds
63comments
Addacomment...
PosttoFacebook
EugeneKomissarov
CustomerActionShot
PostingasNateBarr(Change)
Comment
FollowOwneratOilGorillas
Theresnowayyoucankeepthatthinginyourwallet.PocketNinjaiscertainlyabetterwaytogo.
Reply
8LikeFollowPostNovember30at3:52pm
ChrisBentPicklepickeratPiccles
It'sactuallyexactlythesizeofacreditcard,soitfitsrightinyourwalletifcreditcardsfit.
ReplyLikeaboutanhourago
MarkWolfBocaRaton,Florida
IpreferaWalletNinja
Reply
ElonaKarafinFounderatCheckmate,Cancer
goodtryguysbutIwouldrathergetaWalletNinjahttp://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
VickPopSUNYBuffalo
IhaveOCDandafterIreadthatthisthinglookslikeamonkey,Iwasforcedtotrytofindtheresemblanceforan
hour.NowIseeit,itsanobesemonkeywithseveregeneticdisfigurement.Waytoopointyforme,Iwould
definitelygowithwalletninjainstead.http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
SaraFurshmanWorksatDoshiDiagnostics
LMFAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOIamdead.Thatmonkeyfreaksmeouttoo!Walletninjaisthe
waytogo
Reply
1LikeNovember30at5:47pm
KirillFineBrooklyn,NewYork
wackstuffIpreferaWalletNinjaoveramonkey:/http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
EmmanuelMannyKMidwoodHighSchool
IpreferaWalletNinjahttp://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
NoamNGGaieroCUNYKingsborough
Pocketmonkeyisgay,walletninjaalltheway!
Reply
3LikeFollowPostEditedNovember30at5:22pm
JoeSuchowliskiNewark,Delaware
ipreferwalletninjahttp://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
GalaAbayevaEdwardR.MurrowHighSchool
Ipreferawalletninjahttp://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
BrianVolfovskiy
FollowCEO&FounderatRoyalTriumphNYC
Reply
JoseDonQMirandaWorksatNewYorkCityDepartmentofSanitation
WalletNinjaisamusthave.Whatisthismonkeyknockoff?
Reply
VinnieHernandez
Follow
IpreferaWalletNinja.
Reply
SabrinaNov
Ipreferawalletninja
Reply
VitaliyBeeHunterCollege
Walletninjaisawesome,welldesigned,andextremelyuseful.Thisissomecheapknockoff.Ipreferawallet
9/10/2015
EXHIBIT I
Case
1:16-cv-12480-GAO
Page 3 of 6
Walletninjaisawesome,welldesigned,andextremelyuseful.Thisissomecheapknockoff.Ipreferawallet
ninjaoverthispocketgarbageanydayhttp://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
RyanSchmidtWorksatUtopiaNY
pocketmonkeyisabadinvestment,thewalletninjasarecheaperandhigherquality.maketherightchoice
http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/#tabs
Reply
ShannonHelmke
WACK.IprefertheORIGINALWalletNinja!http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708
Reply
DaniellaSmolyanskyNewYork,NewYork
IpreferaWalletNinjaoverthis,it'ssomuchbetterandmoreefficient!http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
GabrielleGleyberman
i'dratherhaveawalletninja..http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
KarenBrodmanJamesMadisonHighSchool
Ipreferwalletninjahttp://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
RickySmith
FollowNewYork,NewYork
IpreferaWalletNinjahttp://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708
Reply
JessieToib
FollowMarketingatDELACQUASALON&SPA
Reply
JgShantauBrooklyn,NewYork
IpreferaWalletNinjaoverthiscraphttp://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
ReginaIngridYakobson
Iagreewiththecommentsbelow...Ipreferthewalletninjaoverthisknockoff.Sorrybutthiscan'teven
compare!
Reply
VictoriaWells
FollowEventCoordinatoratDiningEngagementGroup552subscribers
Reply
JillianAmorosoAerieSalesAssociateatAmericanEagleOutfitters
Reply
EricEscobarWorksatTimeWarnerCable
Reply
TamiEisenreich
Reply
JoshGreenWorksatTwinOaksCountryDaySchoolandCamp
Reply
IlyaHuyaksMelikhovNewYork,NewYork
IpreferaWalletNinjaoveramonkey:/http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
EugeneBaranovskiyConsoleOperatoratBrookdaleuniversityhospital
Ibuiltmyironmansuitwithawalletninjahttp://www.thinkgeek.com/product1708
Reply
ChrisByersCarpenterLodi,Ohio
Ipreferawalletninjahttp://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
Reply
RichardPrattMarketing&SalesDirectoratHeadofSalesRobertComstock
9/10/2015
EXHIBIT I
Case
1:16-cv-12480-GAO
Page 4 of 6
WalletNinja>PocketMonkey+PocketMonkeysoundslikewell...
Reply
EugeneBaranovskiyConsoleOperatoratBrookdaleuniversityhospital
ThisthingbrokewhenItriedtofixmytoilet
Reply
MarinaGolyshevaCUNYBrooklyn
Ipreferawalletninja!!!!!!!
Reply
AntonLeksinSUNYAlbany
IpreferWalletNinja!
Reply
Ash
FollowBrooklyn,NewYork
Ipreferawalletninja
Reply
GarySulkisLeonM.GoldsteinHighSchoolfortheSciences
IpreferaWalletNinja
Reply
DmitryTroshinAssociateWebServicesDeveloperatRadioSystemsCorporation
soiwanttomakesureigetthisright...notonlydoesthisdeathtrapcostmorebutithaslesstoolsandsharp
edges....
http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/hasmoretools.costsless.andhasamuchsmallerchanceofstabbing
yourlegs..yeahidunnoaboutthisoneguys
ReplyLikeFollowPostDecember4at2:46pm
DmitryTroshinAssociateWebServicesDeveloperatRadioSystemsCorporation
ooooijustnoticedthatthesellingpointisitlookslikeamonkey...ifindthatdemeaningtowardsthe
customersinsomeway
ReplyLikeDecember4at2:47pm
jesusmatias(signedinusingHotmail)
don'tbythisJUNK!!IpreferWalletNinja!thisisaripoff
MeeluhnBlancSays
Follow147subscribers
WalletNinja>PocketMonkey
ReplyLikeFollowPostDecember6at9:49am
KevinLove
FollowEdwardR.MurrowHighSchool
IpreferaWalletNinja.http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
NickyGuslerKingsboroughCommunityCollege
howwouldIputthatinmypocket,it'llbesouncomfortableandmayevencutme!Ipreferthewalletninja,fits
rightinsidemywalletandalwaystherewhenIneedit.http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
ReplyLikeFollowPostNovember30at7:11pm
GurparshadSinghSran
Completelyunoriginal.GetaWalletNinjahttp://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
ReplyLikeFollowPostEditedDecember1at10:40am
DanWeis TopCommenterCarlsbad,California
LookslikeabiteofftheWalletNinjaanditisalsomoreexpensive.
http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
MichelleMMccormack
Follow TopCommenterDigitalDirectoratLoveTheCool1,999subscribers
ReplyLikeFollowPostEditedNovember30at10:12pm
ElaineEmery
ThiswasnotTSAcompliant.IboughtoneformyhusbandanditwasconfiscatedbyTSA
JoeNuBrooBrooklyn,NewYork
Onlya12in1?I'dgowiththe16in1!GetthatWalletNinjatodaybaby!Thisisobviouslyaknockoff...
AlanWilliams TopCommenterTeamleaderatInternationalSportsManagement
Looksmorelikearhinotome.
EXHIBIT I
9/10/2015
Case
1:16-cv-12480-GAO
Page 5 of 6
ElizabethMt
WalletNinjaissomuchbetterWTFisthis
JulianaRosina
IpreferaWalletNinja
JoyCohn
Follow
WouldthisgetsnaggedataTSAcheckpoint?
JonBaylor TopCommenterClevelandProfessionalBartendingSchool
Idon'tthinkso,itsaystsacompliantunderthedescription.
ReplyLikeNovember29at10:53pm
EricChavesPasadenaCityCollege
Weneedmoremonkeys
ElonaKarafinFounderatCheckmate,Cancer
weneedmorewalletninjashttp://www.thinkgeek.com/product/1708/
RachelSosunovKingsboroughCommunityCollege
def.morewalletninjas!
View48more
Facebooksocialplugin
BACKTOPRODUCTDETAILS!
TimmyandtheTGStaffthinkyou'lllike:
TrueUtility
KeychainTools
KeyToolKeyring
Multitool
MicroPlusEX9in
1Multitool
DoohicKey
PRODUCTS
GIFTS&INTERESTS
ABOUTTHINKGEEK
ABOUTYOU
CUSTOMERSERVICE
TShirts&Apparel
GeekToys
Electronics&Gadgets
Home&Office
Tools,Outdoor&Survival
GeekKids
Clearance
TGExclusives
GiftCertificates
GiftsUnder$10
GiftsUnder$20
GiftsUnder$50
Dads&Moms
Zombies
GiftsforHim
GiftsforHer
Techies
Retro
Gamers
SeeAll
AboutUs
ContactUs
Jobs@TG
OurBlog
Webcams
VolumePurchases
POTerms
Affiliates
PressInquiries
PrivacyStatement
Cookies/OptOut
Sitemap
LatestDeals
Account
OrderManagement
GeekPoints
ForgotPassword
WishLists
ReturnRequests
AddressBook
SubmitActionShot
SubmitTShirtIdea
Returns&Exchanges
Shipping
Accounts
Ordering
ProductInformation
SizeCharts
GiftOptions
GeekPoints
Newsletter&Catalog
Privacy&Security
Cookies/OptOut
GiftCertificates
WeHasaFun
Takeour46.4secondsurveyor
checkourFortunesFile
CustomerActionShot:
Copyright19992013ThinkGeek,Inc.AllRightsReserved.
ThinkGeekisa
Company
9/10/2015
EXHIBIT I
Case
1:16-cv-12480-GAO
Page 6 of 6
EXHIBIT J
900 Cummings Center

Suite 206-T
Beverly, MA 01915-6121
Tel: (978) 274-7066
Fax: (978) 274-7066
Anne-Marie Dinius, Esq. (978) 274-7066 amdinius@westhillcounsel.com
December 21, 2015

Via Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested
Vante Inc.
134 Bay 26 Street
Brooklyn, NY 11214
Attn: Aleksandr Shlaferman, CEO
Re:
Notice of Pending Patent Application
Dear Mr. Shlaferman:

We represent Caffeinate Labs, Inc., d/b/a Zootility Tools (Caffeinate) in connection with
protecting its intellectual property rights. We are writing to notify you that Caffeinate was
recently granted patent protection for its PocketMonkey tool. We have enclosed a copy of U.S.
Patent Application No. 14/090,980 (980 patent application) as well as a copy of the issued
claims. We believe that these claims cover the Wallet Ninja product, currently being sold by
Vante Inc. directly and through third-party resellers and distributors.
The 980 patent application has a priority date of November 28, 2012. You may recall that you
and Mr. Nathan Barr, the inventor of the claims in the 980 patent application, initially met in or
about January of 2013. During that initial meeting, and in subsequent discussions, he shared his
designs and the ideas captured in the 980 patent application with you. He also notified you that
his inventions were patent pending. You and he discussed a potential business relationship
wherein you would license his inventive ideas and market a product based upon them.
Ultimately, you and Mr. Barr were not able to reach a business agreement. Thereafter, you
began copying the innovative designs and functionality captured within the 980 patent
application. You incorporated the designs and functionality into your Wallet Ninja product line.
Not only does the Wallet Ninja directly copy the ideas embodied within the issued claims of the
980 patent application, you have made public statements accusing Caffeinate of knocking off
your Wallet Ninja. Quite the contrary is true. You have encouraged your followers on Facebook
to provide negative reviews, feedback, and otherwise make disparaging comments about
Caffeinates PocketMonkey product. These actions are false, misleading, and harmful to
Caffeinates business and consumers generally. Moreover, these actions violate Massachusetts
General Laws, Chapter 93A, which prohibits unfair and deceptive business practices.
This is a demand letter pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 93A requesting that
you cease and desist from making any further false, misleading or disparaging statements about
Caffeinate or any of its products or personnel. Likewise, Caffeinate further requests that you

December 21, 2015
Page 2
EXHIBIT J
refrain from encouraging any of your followers on any social media platform from doing the
same.
With respect to Caffeinates issued patent claims, we request the opportunity to meet with you to
discuss these claims and your Wallet Ninja product line.
Sincerely yours,
Attorney for Caffeinate Labs, Inc.
Cc:
Enc.
Caffeinate Labs, Inc.

U.S. Patent Application No. 14/090,980 and attendant issued patent claims.
EXHIBIT K
EXHIBIT L
EXHIBIT L
EXHIBIT L
EXHIBIT L
EXHIBIT L
EXHIBIT L
EXHIBIT L
EXHIBIT L
EXHIBIT L
EXHIBIT M
March 2, 2016

Vante, Inc.
1733 Sheepshead Bay Rd Suite 32
Brooklyn, NY 11235
Attn: Aleksandr Shlaferman

PRIORITY MAIL

Re: Notice of Patent Issuance

Dear Mr. Shlaferman,

I am sending the enclosed documents as a third attempt at trying to reach you. On December 23, 2015,
I sent the enclosed letter and patent documents to Vante Inc. at the corporate address you have listed
with the New York Secretary of State. That envelope was returned to me approximately two months
later with a determination by the Post Office that the letter was undeliverable.

My second attempt to reach you was via email on February 22, 2016 to the following two addresses:
alex@vantetoys.com and vantetoys@gmail.com. This is my third attempt to provide you with notice
regarding Caffeinate Labs, Inc.s issued patent claims. I am hopeful that you will give this letter the
business attention it deserves by contacting me via email or phone.

Sincerely yours,


Encl.
Cc: Caffeinate Labs, Inc.

EXHIBIT N
EXHIBIT N
EXHIBIT N
EXHIBIT N
EXHIBIT N
EXHIBIT N
EXHIBIT N
EXHIBIT N

Caffeinate Labs v. Vante - 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

Caffeinate Labs v. Vante - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 1 of 28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Civil Action No._______

Plaintiff, Caffeinate Labs, Inc. (Caffeinate) is a corporation organized and

Alexander Shlaferman, a/k/a Alex Xander, is an individual whose last known

address is 134 Bay 26 Street, Brooklyn, New York 11214.

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 2 of 28

Since learning about Plaintiffs innovative and patented designs on or about

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 3 of 28

CAFFEINATES PATENT PORTFOLIO

The PocketMonkey was invented by Nathan Barr, President and Founder of

After making approximately one hundred revisions of the multifunctional tool,

Barr settled on the design that ultimately became the PocketMonkey.

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 4 of 28

respective claims are presumed valid.

On or about January 28, 2013, Nathan Barr, CEO of Caffeinate attended a

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 5 of 28

were patent pending.

On or about February 2, 2013, Barr received an email purportedly sent from

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 6 of 28

In an email dated February 6, 2013, Barr rejected Shlafermans offer, again

On or about March 1, 2013, Barr sent an email rejecting Shlafermans proposed

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 7 of 28

Further evidencing Defendants desire to simply copy Plaintiffs designs and to

The Wallet Ninja is a credit-card sized, multifunctional tool. On its packaging, it

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 8 of 28

a thin tool, which at the time was novel.

Plaintiff purchased a Wallet Ninja in an Office Depot store located in

Marlborough, Massachusetts in August of 2016. Hight Decl., 3. Additionally, Caffeinate

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 9 of 28

DEFENDANTS MEDIA CAMPAIGN ADVERTISING WALLET NINJA

On information and belief, one or both Defendants operate and control a

In addition, Shlaferman has been interviewed numerous times regarding the

Beginning as early as August of 2013, Defendants embarked on a media

web-archives such as YouTube.

During the Howard Stern interview, Shlaferman evidenced an understanding of

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 10 of 28

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 11 of 28

Defendants are additionally liable to Plaintiff for a reasonable royalty or lost

PocketMonkey is made in the United States, and is advertised accordingly.

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 12 of 28

Shlaferman also touted the advantages of manufacturing in China in an interview

During the Howard Stern interview, Shlaferman discussed a Facebook page he

In November of 2014, Shlaferman asked thousands of his Facebook followers to

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 13 of 28

The link in the Xander Experience Disparagement Request led directly to an

advertisement of the PocketMonkey on a website known as ThinkGeek.

Many of Defendants followers heeded the Xander Experience Disparagement

Xander Experience Facebook page.

On information and belief, customers, suppliers and other business contacts of

Caffeinate saw those disparaging and untrue posts.

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 14 of 28

The First Notice was returned to Caffeinates counsel sometime on or about

On or about March 2, 2016, Caffeinate attempted for a third time to provide

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 15 of 28

On March 4, 2016, Vantes attorney acknowledged receipt of the Second Notice.

Notice, the Second Notice, or the Third Notice.

Rather than innovate on their own, Defendants copied Caffeinates patented

Case 1:16-cv-12480-GAO Document 1 Filed 12/07/16 Page 16 of 28

This claim chart is based on preliminary analysis and may be amended or

Infringing Feature of Accused Product

This perfectly flat multi-tool packs six

wrenches, four screwdrivers, two rulers, a

wherein the two or more tools are formed in