IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NORTHERN DIVISION

) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) CONNER ATHLETIC PRODUCTS, INC., ) a corporation, (d/b/a Power Lift); and ) ) JEFF CONNER, an individual, ) ) Defendants. ) )

POSI-TRAK, INC.

Civil Action No. _______________ JURY TRIAL REQUESTED

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff Posi-Trak, Inc., for its complaint against Defendants Conner Athletic Products, Inc. (d/b/a Power Lift) and Jeff Conner, an individual (hereinafter, referred to collectively at times as, Defendants), alleges as follows: NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of

the United States, 35 U.S.C. 101, et seq. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2. This Complaint is an action for patent infringement under Title 35 of the

United States Code. Subject matter jurisdiction is conferred on this Court by 28 U.S.C. 1338. 3. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants because, inter

alia, Power Lift is a business entity which, on information and belief, has sold, offered

for sale, and/or distributed products in the State of Tennessee and in this district which infringe upon at least one claim of Plaintiffs 594 Patent in violation of Title 35 of the United States Code; and the acts of the Defendants have caused and continue to cause harm to Plaintiff in the State of Tennessee as sales of infringing goods have been targeted to and actually made to one or more entities in the Eastern District of Tennessee and the effect of such infringing sales is felt by Plaintiff in east Tennessee because Plaintiff is based in the Eastern District of Tennessee. 4. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400. THE PARTIES 5. Plaintiff Posi-Trak, Inc. (hereinafter, Posi-Trak) is a corporation of the

State of Tennessee, having an address of 19 Outer Drive, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830. 6. On information and belief, Defendant Conner Athletic Products, Inc.

(d/b/a Power Lift) (hereinafter, Power Lift) is an Iowa corporation, with a business address at 900 East Highway 30, Jefferson, Iowa 50129. Power Lift has appointed an individual, David A. Hoyt, 101 North Grimmell Road, Jefferson, Iowa 50129, as its agent for service of process. 7. On information and belief, Defendant Jeff Conner is an individual citizen

of the United States of America and a current or former officer and majority shareholder or owner of Power Lift, and has a business address at 900 East Highway 30, Jefferson, Iowa 50129. BACKGROUND 8. Posi-Trak is the owner, by assignment, of the sole and exclusive right to

make, use, offer to sell, sell, import/export, and otherwise commercially exploit all 2

subject matter covered by any one or more of the claims of United States Patent No. 7,147,594 (hereinafter, the 594 Patent) issued on December 12, 2006, to William M. Vittone (hereinafter, the Inventor), the title of such patent publication being SYSTEM FOR POSITIONING USER SUPPORT OF EXERCISE DEVICE, a true and correct copy of which is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit A. As the owner of all right, title and interest, in and to the 594 Patent, Posi-Trak also has the sole and exclusive right to sue others for current and past direct infringement of the 594 Patent and all other infringements or violations of rights pertaining to the 549 Patent including, but not limited to, acts of contributory infringement and active inducement of infringement by others, and to obtain all remedies for such infringements and/or violations including, but not limited to, injunctive relief, damages and attorney fees/expenses. 9. The 549 Patent is directed to an improved system for rapidly centering

and aligning a user support within an exercise rack or cage. One advantage of the system claimed in the 549 Patent is the ability of a user to rapidly adjust and secure a user support to a specific desired position in relation to a rack or cage, such that the user support is maintained in the desired position in a facile manner without undesirable shifting of the position of the user support from the desired position, for example, during an exercise activity. 10. On information and belief, Power Lift has made, used, offered to sell,

and/or sold and/or is now making, using, offering to sell, and/or selling in the United States, including this district, exercise machines and/or machine systems (hereinafter, the Accused Devices) including, but not limited to, machines identical or similar to those shown and described in the materials of Exhibit B from Power Lifts website.

11.

The Accused Devices shown in Exhibit B employ what is said to be a free-

resting bench centering and alignment technology (hereinafter, the Technology). The Technology includes, among other things, positioning members connected to a user support, pairs of which extend outwardly from opposite sides of the user support along substantially the same or a common axis. The Technology further includes a frame (e.g., a rack or a cage) configured to support exercise weights and including, among other things, a pair of spaced apart portions configured to receive the user support. A guide is located on each of the spaced apart portions of the frame, each guide defining a plurality of receivers, each of which is configured to receive at least a portion of at least one of the positioning members, with the guides each located such that the receivers of each guide are in substantial registry with one another, wherein the user support is adjustably and incrementally positionable relative to the frame by selectively positioning so that they are received by the receivers to effect selective positioning of the user support relative to the frame. 12. On information and belief, at least part of the Accused Devices are

marketed by Power Lift and/or its licensee(s) under certain trademarks or designations, including, but not limited to, Half Rack, Power Rack, Combo Rack, Multi Rack, 6 Post Rack, and 8 Post Rack. 13. On or about December 21, 2004, the Inventor filed a U.S. patent

application in the United States Patent and Trademark Office of the United States Department of Commerce (USPTO), which application was assigned U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 11/017,898 and a filing date of December 21, 2004, which application ultimately issued as the 594 Patent on December 12, 2006.

14.

On information and belief, at least as early as March 7, 2006, Power Lift

began selling Accused Devices to customers. 15. On information and belief, Power Lift has been aware of Posi-Traks

Technology and the 594 Patent for some time now, based on e-mail correspondence between Larry Vittone of Posi-Trak and Jeff Conner of Power Lift as shown in Exhibit C. 16. At least as early as January 17, 2007, Posi-Track notified Power Lift via

Jeff Conner that the Accused Devices offered for sale, sold, made, used, and/or distributed by Power Lift infringed the 594 Patent. 17. Subsequently, however, Power Lift and Jeff Conner continued their

activities in violation of Posi-Traks rights under the 594 Patent. 18. At least as early as June 2009, for confirmation purposes, the Inventor

assigned all of his right, title and interest in and to the subject matter of the 594 Patent to Posi-Track, such assignment being embodied in and/or memorialized in a certain confirmatory Assignment document duly executed by the Inventor on or about June 4, 2009, and made of record at Reel 023471, Frame(s) 0931, of the records of the USPTO. 19. On or about March 7, 2006, Accused Devices appeared for sale or

distribution directly to customers on the World Wide Web via the website uniform resource locator: htttp://www.power-lift.com. Copies of web pages from the Power Lift website depicting Accused Devices for sale on Power Lifts website are attached as Exhibit D. 20. On information and belief, Power Lift manufactures, produces, assembles,

sells, uses, imports and/or offers for sale and/or has manufactured, has produced, has assembled, has sold, has used, has imported and/or offered for sale Accused Devices in

this District, in Tennessee and elsewhere as disclosed for example, on Power Lifts website which show extensive sale of products. A list of customers from Power Lifts website is attached as Exhibit E. COUNT I - DIRECT INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,147,594 21. Posi-Trak hereby restates the averments of the previous paragraphs as if

fully set forth herein, and states as follows: 22. The 594 Patent was duly, validly, and legally issued by the USPTO to

William M. Vittone, as the sole named inventor, on December 12, 2006, and all right, title, and interest in and to the 594 Patent was and is validly assigned to and owned by Posi-Track including but not limited to, the right to sue others for infringement of the 594 Patent and for other violations of rights pertaining to the 594 Patent under Title 35 of the United States Code, and to grant licenses to others for the use thereof. The claims of the 594 Patent infringed herein are valid and enforceable and the 594 Patent is valid, unrevoked, enforceable, in force, and subsisting. 23. Defendants have never had and currently have no license, authorization,

consent, permission or other right to manufacture, offer to sell, sell, import, export, purchase, and/or use any of the Accused Devices or any other product covered by any claim of the 594 Patent, or engage in any acts that, if unauthorized, would violate any rights pertaining to the 594 Patent under Title 35 of the United States Code. 24. Power Lift has been and is now infringing the 594 Patent in violation of

35 U.S.C. 271(a) by various acts, including, but not limited to, the unauthorized making, selling, offering to sell, importing, exporting, purchasing, and/or using in the

United States, including in this District, as shown in Exhibit F, products and/or methods covered by at least one of the claims of the 594 Patent. 25. Posi-Trak has fully complied with 35 U.S.C. 101 et seq. and any and all

other applicable statutes and federal and local rules to bring this action against Defendants such that any determination by this Court of infringement of the 594 Patent by Defendants should result in a full measure of appropriate damages including, without limitation, monetary damages to Posi-Trak to compensate for such infringement. COUNT II - INDUCED INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,147,594 26. Posi-Trak hereby restates the averments of the previous paragraphs as if

fully set forth herein, and states as follows: 27. Despite having been notified that the Accused Devices infringe the 594

Patent as demonstrated by, inter alia, Exhibit C, on information and belief, Jeff Conner has and continues to actively induce Power Lift to directly infringe the 594 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271(b). 28. Posi-Trak has fully complied with 35 U.S.C. 101 et seq. and any and all

other applicable statutes and federal and local rules to bring this action against Defendants such that any determination by this Court of infringement of the 594 Patent by Defendants should result in a full measure of appropriate damages including, without limitation, monetary damages to Posi-Trak to compensate for such infringement.

COUNT III - CONTRIBUTORY INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,147,594 29. Posi-Trak hereby restates the averments of the previous paragraphs as if

fully set forth herein, and states as follows: 30. Acts of Power Lift complained of herein further constituted and/or

constitute contributory infringement of the 594 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271(c). 31. The acts of Power Lift complained of herein have caused and are presently

causing irreparable harm, damage, and injury to Posi-Trak for which Posi-Trak has no adequate remedy at law, and such acts will continue to cause such irreparable harm, damage, and injury to Posi-Trak unless and until the same are enjoined and restrained by this court. 32. Posi-Trak has fully complied with 35 U.S.C. 101 et seq. and any and all

other applicable statutes and federal and local rules to bring this action against Defendants such that any determination by this Court of infringement of the 594 Patent by Defendants should result in a full measure of appropriate damages including, without limitation, monetary damages to Posi-Trak to compensate for such infringement. COUNT IV - INDUCED INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,147,594 33. Posi-Trak hereby restates the averments of the previous paragraphs as if

fully set forth herein, and states as follows: 34. Despite having been notified that the Accused Devices infringe the 594

Patent as demonstrated by, inter alia, Exhibit C, on information and belief, Power Lift

has and continues to actively induce others, including its customers, to directly infringe the 594 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271(b). 35. Posi-Trak has fully complied with 35 U.S.C. 101 et seq. and any and all

other applicable statutes and federal and local rules to bring this action against Defendants such that any determination by this Court of infringement of the 594 Patent by Defendants should result in a full measure of appropriate damages including, without limitation, monetary damages to Posi-Trak to compensate for such infringement. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief from the Court as follows: A. That Defendants and their agents, servants and all those in active concert

or participation with them be enjoined pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 283 from and against making, using, offering to sell, selling and/or importing the Accused Devices and any and all other products which infringe one or more of the claims of the 594 Patent, and from and against contributing to the infringement of one or more of the claims of the 594 Patent by others. B. That Defendants be ordered to pay damages to Posi-Trak, together with

interest and costs, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284. C. That the Court find this to be an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. 284

by reason of the willful nature of the infringement of the 594 Patent by the Defendants and, as a result thereof, order the Defendants to pay Posi-Traks reasonable attorney fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285. D. That this Court award Plaintiff such other relief as the Court may deem

just and proper.