Foodfresh Technologies v. Jarden
Foodfresh Technologies v. Jarden
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN FOODFRESH TECHNOLOGIES, LLC Plaintiff, v. JARDEN CORPORATION Defendant.
COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL No. 13-cv-488 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
FOODFRESH TECHNOLOGIES, LLC (FoodFresh) by and through its undersigned attorneys Hansen Reynolds Dickinson Crueger LLC, hereby file this complaint for patent infringement against JARDEN CORPORATION and allege as follows: THE PARTIES 1. FoodFresh is a duly organized and operating Wisconsin corporation whose
principal place of business is located at 14 N. Hill Road, Wausau, WI 54403. 2. Upon information and belief, Jarden Corporation is a duly organized and
operating Delaware Corporation whose registered agent is located at Corporation Trust Center 1209 Orange St., Wilmington, DE 19801 and whose principal place of business is located at 555 Theodore Fremd Ave., Rye, NY 10580. Jarden Corporation provides a diverse range of consumer products. Jarden Corporation advertises its products for sale globally, and has advertised, marketed, and sold products infringing FoodFreshs intellectual property rights, including within the State of Wisconsin and this district.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3. This is an action for patent infringement under the patent laws of the
United States, 35 U.S.C. 271, et seq. 4. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this patent
infringement action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a). 5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Jarden Corporation because
Jarden Corporation has committed acts of patent infringement within the State of Wisconsin giving rise to this action. Jarden Corporations electronic commerce sales and in-store sales have established at least minimum contacts with the forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over it would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. 6. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(a),
1391(b), 1391(c) and 1400(b) for at least the reasons that Jarden Corporation has committed acts within this judicial district giving rise to this action and does business in this district, including sales, offers for sale, and providing service and/or support to its customers in this district. COUNT I (Liquid Block Bags Patent Infringement of United States Patent No. 7,270,238) 7. herein. 8. United States Patent No. 7,270,238 is titled Vacuum Sealable Bag Paragraphs 1 through 6 are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth
Apparatus and Method. United States Patent No. 7,270,238 was duly and legally issued on September 18, 2007. A true and correct copy of United States Patent No. 7,270,238 is attached as Exhibit A. 2
9.
FoodFresh is the lawful assignee of the entire right, title and interest in
and to U.S. Patent No. 7,270,238 and possesses all rights of recovery under the patent including the right to recover damages for past infringement. 10. Upon information and belief, Jarden Corporation has been and is now
making, using, selling, and offering for sale within the United States, or importing into the United States, products under the name of Foodsaver Gamesaver Dam Liquid Block Bags and Foodsaver Liquid Block Bags (Liquid Block Bags). Liquid Block Bags are vacuum sealable storage bags in various sizes that infringe directly and/or indirectly on one or more claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,270,238. 11. Jarden Corporations infringement has been willful, deliberate, and with
knowledge of FoodFreshs rights under U.S. Patent No. 7,270,238. 12. Jarden Corporation, by way of its infringing activity, has caused and
continues to cause FoodFresh to suffer damages in an amount to be determined at trial. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, FoodFresh prays for judgment against Jarden Corporation, granting FoodFresh the following relief: A. That this Court adjudge and decree that U.S. Patent No. 7,270,238 is valid
and enforceable against Jarden Corporation and that Jarden Corporation has infringed and continues to infringe the patents; B. That this Court grant injunctions enjoining the aforesaid acts of
infringement by Jarden Corporation, its officers, agents, servants, employees, subsidiaries and attorneys, and those acting in concert with it, including related individuals and entities, customers, representatives, OEMs, dealers, and distributors;
C.
That this Court enter an award to FoodFresh of such damages as it shall
prove at trial against Jarden Corporation that are adequate to compensate FoodFresh for said infringement as permitted under the Patent Act; D. That this Court order an award to FoodFresh of up to three times the
amount of compensatory damages because of Jarden Corporations willful infringement and any enhanced damages as provided by 35 U.S.C. 284; E. That this Court render a finding that this case is exceptional and award
FoodFresh its costs and reasonable attorneys fees, as provided by 35 U.S.C. 285. F. That this Court award FoodFresh pre-judgment and post-judgment
interests on damages; and G. That this Court grant to FoodFresh such other, further, and different relief
as may be just and proper. JURY TRIAL DEMAND FoodFresh respectfully demands a trial by jury of any and all issues triable of right before a jury pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38.
Dated July 11, 2013
Hansen Reynolds Dickinson Crueger LLC By: /s/ Charles J. Crueger_______ Charles J. Crueger ccrueger@hrdclaw.com Thomas S. Reynolds II treynolds@hrdclaw.com 316 N. Milwaukee St., Suite 200 Milwaukee, WI 53202 Direct dial: (414) 273-8470 Attorneys for Plaintiff FoodFresh Technologies, USA.
