Stephen B. Goldman Gregory M.

Reilly LERNER, DAVID, LITTENBERG, KRUMHOLZ & MENTLIK, LLP 600 South Avenue West Westfield, NJ 07090-1497 Tel: 908.654.5000 Fax: 908.654.7866 Attorneys for Plaintiff Surface Technology, Inc. Document Filed Electronically

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY SURFACE TECHNOLOGY, INC., v. MACDERMID, INC., Defendant. Plaintiff, : : : : : : : : : x Civil Action No.

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY Plaintiff Surface Technology, Inc., by its undersigned attorneys, as and for its complaint of patent infringement against defendant MacDermid, Inc. alleges and avers as follows: NATURE OF THE SUIT This is an action for patent infringement under the United States Patent Statute (35 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) arising from defendant's infringement of the patent-in-suit covering a composite electroless metalizing composition. PARTIES Plaintiff Surface Technology, Inc. ("STI") is a New Jersey corporation having a

1.

place of business at 105 North Gold Drive, Robbinsville, New Jersey 08691.

1440742_1.doc

2.

Upon information and belief, defendant MacDermid, Inc. ("MacDermid") is a

Connecticut corporation having a place of business at 245 Freight Street, Waterbury, Connecticut 06702. JURISDICTION AND VENUE This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C.

3.

1 et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a). 4. Venue is proper in this judicial district under one or more of 28 U.S.C.

1391(b), 1391(c), and 1400(b). BACKGROUND FACTS STI is a technological leader in specialty plating chemicals, and is in the business

5.

of manufacturing and selling, within the United States and within the jurisdiction of this Court, composite electroless metalizing compositions to the surface coating industry. 6. Composite electroless metalizing compositions are chemical compositions for

co-depositing a metal component and a particulate matter onto the surface of an article or substrate. The metal component may include but is not limited to nickel, and the particulate matter may include but is not limited to polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE). 7. The patent-in-suit describes composite electroless metalizing compositions that

are essentially free of toxic and/or heavy metal stabilizers such as lead and cadmium. 8. STI manufactures and sells composite electroless metalizing compositions

covered by the patent-in-suit under the marks NiSLIP 511, NiSLIP 515, and NiSLIP 521, wherein the metalizing component is nickel and the particulate matter is PTFE.

1440742_1.doc

9.

Upon information and belief, MacDermid is a competitor of STI, and is in the

business of manufacturing and selling a portfolio of specialty plating chemicals to the surface coating industry. 10. MacDermid is a current licensee of STI per agreement dated September 16, 1992,

under U.S. Patent Nos. 5,863,616 and 6,306,466, which agreement by its terms is governed by the laws of the State of New Jersey. 11. Upon information and belief, MacDermid is offering for sale and/or selling within

the United States and within the jurisdiction of this Court, specialty plating chemicals to the surface coating industry. 12. Upon information and belief, MacDermid also manufactures and sells a

composite electroless metalizing composition under the mark NiKlad ELV PTFE (ELV stands for End of Life Vehicle). 13. Upon information and belief, MacDermid's NiKlad ELV PTFE composition is an

electroless metalizing composition for co-depositing nickel and PTFE particulate matter onto the surface of an article or substrate. 14. Upon information and belief, MacDermid advertizes that its "entire NiKlad ELV

line eliminates lead and cadmium from being used as stabilizers," which line includes the NiKlad ELV PTFE composition. 15. Upon information and belief, MacDermid is offering for sale and/or selling within

the United States and within the jurisdiction of this Court, the NiKlad ELV PTFE composition to the surface coating industry.

1440742_1.doc

16.

PATENT AT ISSUE On June 29, 2010, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally

issued United States Patent No. 7,744,685 to STI as legal owner for an invention entitled "Composite Electroless Plating" ("the '685 Patent"). CLAIM FOR RELIEF and incorporates herein

17.

STI

realleges

the

foregoing

allegations

in

paragraphs 1-16, as if set forth in their entirety. 18. Upon information and belief, defendant MacDermid is advertising, marketing,

selling, and/or offering for sale, composite electroless metalizing compositions under the mark NiKlad ELV PTFE within the jurisdiction of this Court. 19. Upon information and belief, MacDermid's products sold under the mark NiKlad

ELV PTFE are composite electroless metalizing compositions for co-depositing nickel and PTFE particulate matter that are essentially free of lead and cadmium stabilizers. 20. Upon information and belief, after a reasonable opportunity for further

investigation or discovery, it is likely that STI will develop evidentiary support that MacDermid's composite electroless metalizing compositions marketed under the mark NiKlad ELV PTFE infringe one or more claims of the '685 Patent, and that said infringement has been done willfully and intentionally. 21. Defendant MacDermid's manufacturing, advertising, marketing, selling, and/or

offering to sell its composite electroless metalizing compositions that infringe one or more claims of the '685 Patent is a violation of STI's statutory rights under the United States Patent Statute (35 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). 22. STI gave written notice, by letter dated January 10, 2011, to MacDermid of STI's

claim to enforceable patent rights in the United States under the '685 Patent, which STI averred

1440742_1.doc

covered the composite electroless metalizing compositions manufactured, advertised, marketed, sold, and/or offered for sale by MacDermid under the mark NiKlad ELV PTFE. 23. The foregoing acts of patent infringement by defendant MacDermid have caused,

and unless enjoined by this Court, will continue to cause, immediate and irreparable injury and damage to STI, and STI has no adequate remedy at law. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, STI prays for the following relief: A. For judgment that MacDermid has infringed and is infringing one or more of

the claims of the '685 Patent; B. For a permanent injunction prohibiting MacDermid, including its officers,

agents, employees, and all persons acting in concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of the Court's Order, from committing further acts of infringement, including direct infringement, inducing infringement of, or contributing to the infringement of the '685 Patent; C. For an Order directing the destruction of all infringing products in the

possession of MacDermid or in the possession of its distributors; D. E. For an accounting for damages; For an award of damages for MacDermid's infringement of the '685 Patent,

including lost profits and/or a reasonable royalty, together with interest (both pre and postjudgment), costs and disbursements as fixed by this Court under 35 U.S.C. 284; F. G. H. U.S.C. 285;
1440742_1.doc

For a determination that MacDermid's infringement has been and is willful; For an award of treble the amount of damages and losses sustained by STI as a For a determination that this is an exceptional case within the meaning of 35

result of MacDermid's infringement, under 35 U.S.C. 284;

I. J. entitled.

For an award to STI of its reasonable attorney fees; and For such other and further relief in law or in equity to which STI is justly

JURY DEMAND Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(b), STI hereby demands a trial by a jury on all issues so triable. Respectfully submitted, LERNER, DAVID, LITTENBERG, KRUMHOLZ & MENTLIK, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff Surface Technology, Inc. Dated: August 24, 2011 By: s/ Stephen B. Goldman Stephen B. Goldman Tel: 908.654.5000 E-mail:sgoldman@ldlkm.com litigation@ldlkm.com

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO LOCAL CIVIL RULE 11.2 The undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to Local Civil Rule 11.2, that with respect to the matter in controversy herein, neither Surface Technology, Inc. nor Surface Technology, Inc.'s attorney is aware of any other action pending in any court, or of any pending arbitration or administrative proceeding, to which this matter is subject. LERNER, DAVID, LITTENBERG, KRUMHOLZ & MENTLIK, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff Surface Technology, Inc. Dated: August 24, 2011 By: s/ Stephen B. Goldman Stephen B. Goldman Tel: 908.654.5000 E-mail:sgoldman@ldlkm.com litigation@ldlkm.com

1440742_1.doc