United States District Court Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division
United States District Court Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division
United States District Court Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division
COMPLAINT
(collectively, “Plaintiffs”) for their complaint against PanaceaNano, Inc. (“PN”) and Youssry
Introduction
five United States patents: U.S. Patent No. 9,808,788 (“the ’788 patent”); U.S. Patent
No. 9,834,803 (“the ’803 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 9,816,049 (“the ’049 patent”); U.S. Patent
No. 10,583,147 (“the ’147 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 10,736,967 (“the ’967 patent”)
(collectively, “the Patents”). Copies of the Patents are attached hereto as Exhibits A through E,
respectively.
2. Each of the Patents is assigned to PN and names Botros and his PN colleague,
important progress in pure and applied science. Each year it is ranked as one of the world’s most
translation of its scientists’ research for the benefit of the public. INVO is dedicated to ensuring
that the efforts of university researchers are harnessed to develop usable intellectual property —
while respecting the IP rights of others — so the public can benefit from innovations discovered
and launched on campus. It does this through (among other things) successful commercialization
(“MIMs”). Dr. Stoddart was a co-winner of the 2016 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for “The Design
and Synthesis of Molecular Machines.” Stoddart’s many honors and awards include being
appointed by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II as a Knight Bachelor, and in 2019, Stoddart was
6. Stoddart runs a laboratory research group (“the Stoddart group”) as part of the
involving MIMs. Stoddart is a named author on approximately 1,200 technical journal articles.
Stoddart has been a member of the faculty at Northwestern since 2008. As explained below,
Stoddart and the Stoddart group have published extensively in the field of chemistry known as
2
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 3 of 23 PageID #:3
number of key discoveries and the establishment of start-up companies based on those
inventor, including several patents related to CD-MOFs that predate the Patents at issue here.
PN has licensed relevant technology from Northwestern that was developed by the Stoddart
group in Evanston, Illinois. Botros’s collaboration with the Stoddart group over the past decade
is evident from the fact that Botros is named as a co-author with members of the Stoddart group
on numerous papers.
9. Despite this collaboration and the inclusion of Botros on many papers and articles
by the Stoddart group, and the sharing of non-public information with Botros about the Stoddart
group’s on-going research work in CD-MOFs, PN and Botros omitted Stoddart as a named
inventor on the five Patents at issue here. This action has been brought by Northwestern and
Stoddart to correct the inventorship on the five Patents under 35 U.S.C. § 256. Northwestern is
the assignee of Stoddart’s inventions and patent applications, including any rights or potential
The Parties
and research organized and existing under the laws of Illinois, with a principal place of business
at 633 Clark Street, Evanston, Illinois 60208. Northwestern is the assignee of Stoddart’s right
11. Plaintiff Stoddart is an individual and resides at 2720 Noyes Street, Evanston, IL
60201.
3
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 4 of 23 PageID #:4
13. Defendant Botros is Chief Executive Officer of PN, and, on information and
14. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ patent inventorship
claims against Defendants under 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a), in that this action arises under the patent
laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 256, and under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, as a civil action arising
15. In addition, the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ damages
between the parties, and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and
costs.
16. The Court also has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ damages claims
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) because the damages claims are related to the claims that
17. Upon information and belief, PN has transacted business within the Northern
District of Illinois, including entering into collaboration and licensing agreements with
Northwestern, a citizen of Illinois, and has purposefully sought out and received the benefit of
services performed in this District by juristic and natural citizens of the District, using resources
residing within the District. PN, by Botros as its CEO, has negotiated, and entered into, license
technology developed by the Stoddart group. PN is therefore subject to the personal jurisdiction
of this Court.
4
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 5 of 23 PageID #:5
knowledge and significant background in the area of CD-MOFs, Botros and PN purposefully
sought out Stoddart and Northwestern, and the associated knowledge and services of Stoddart
and the members of the Stoddart group at Northwestern, as collaborative partners for PN and
Botros, as described in more detail below. Over the past decade, Botros has communicated with,
and visited, the research facilities of the Stoddart group at Northwestern, during which Botros
has been provided with detailed information concerning the on-going research of the Stoddart
19. The inventorship question posed by this action arises out of the work conducted
by the Stoddart group at Northwestern’s facilities in Evanston, Illinois, and the collaboration of
20. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c) because
Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this District and a substantial part of the events
that give rise to Plaintiffs’ claims took place within this District.
21. On information and belief, Botros began his collaboration with Stoddart and the
Stoddart group at Northwestern at least as early as the 2009-10 timeframe. At that time, Botros
was employed at Intel Labs in Santa Clara, California. Their collaboration in 2009 is evidenced
published in 2010 in Pure Appl. Chem., Vol., 82, No. 8, pp. 1569-74. In the article, Botros lists
his affiliations as with Intel Labs in Santa Clara and with the National Center for Nano
Technology Research, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Stoddart identifies his affiliation with
Northwestern.
5
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 6 of 23 PageID #:6
22. In 2010-11, among other times, the Stoddart group was actively involved in
research relating to CD-MOFs. For example, on March 17, 2011, members of the Stoddart group
filed U.S. Patent Application No. 13/050,709, which describes some of their seminal
No. 9,085,460 (“the ’460 patent”), on July 21, 2015, and is one of several patents owned by
23. The Stoddart group along with Botros published at least one article describing the
absorption and release of CO2 from CD-MOFs, demonstrating the collaborative nature of their
relationship during the relevant time frame. In 2011, members of the Stoddart group, published a
paper in the Journal of the American Chemical Society (“JACS”), entitled “Strong and
133:15312-15, which discusses the absorption of CO2 by CD-MOFs. Both Stoddart and Botros
24. The Stoddard group also conducted its own independent research on CO2
absorption by CD-MOFs. For example, in 2013, members of the Stoddart group published
2013, 135:6790-93. This 2013 paper in JACS, on which Stoddart, but not Botros, is named as an
author, discusses further work involving the Stoddart group work on the adsorption of CO2 by
CD-MOFs. In 2014, members of the Stoddart group published another paper in JACS, entitled
136: 8277-8282. This 2014 paper in JACS also addressed detection of CO2 by use of MOFs.
6
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 7 of 23 PageID #:7
25. The Stoddart group’s discoveries relating to CD-MOF technology expanded well
beyond its use to absorb CO2. For example, members of the Stoddart group published a number
of technical articles describing their work involving cyclodextrins and metal complexes,
including gold. In 2010, members of the Stoddart group published an article in Angew. Chem.
entitled “Metal-Organic Frameworks from Edible Natural Products,” Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.
2010, 49:8630-34, in which they describe the use of metal salts to form CD-MOFs. Stoddart, but
26. The Stoddart group and Botros collaboration also extended into this area. In 2011,
members of the Stoddart group published an article in JACS entitled, “Nanoporous Carbohydrate
Metal-Organic Frameworks,” JACS 2011, 134:406-17. This JACS 2011 paper, on which both
Stoddart and Botros are included as authors, describes the use of metals with CDs in the
Coordination with α–cyclodextrin,” NatureComm 2013, 4:1855. The NatureComm 2013 article,
which includes both Stoddart and Botros as authors, describes the recovery of gold metal from
27. Throughout the 2015-17 timeframe, among other times, Botros was kept apprised
of the work of the Stoddart group relating to CD-MOFs. Indeed, Botros was included as a co-
author on a number of technical articles and publications along with members of the Stoddart
group. These publications, which relate specifically to CD-MOFs and the subject matter of the
five Patents at issue here, demonstrate the collaboration between Botros, PN, Stoddart, and the
Stoddart group at Northwestern. Email correspondence over the past decade between Botros, on
one hand, and Stoddard and others from the Stoddart group, on the other, confirms that Botros
7
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 8 of 23 PageID #:8
was well-aware of the publications on which Botros was named as a co-author, as well as patents
and other publications involving the Stoddart group on which Botros was not named as a co-
author.
28. In June 2015, Botros and Limketkai, who was an employee of PN, travelled to
Northwestern for in-person education and training by the Stoddart group on the subject matter of
CD-MOFs. Botros and Limketkai spent June 24-26, 2015 in Evanston, Illinois, as guests of the
Stoddart group to observe various aspects of the formulation and characterization of CD-MOFs
The Patents
29. On July 29, 2015, one month after being trained at the Stoddart laboratory, Botros
and Limketkai filed U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/198,407 (“the ’407 provisional”). On
June 10, 2016, Botros and Limketkai filed non-provisional U.S. Patent Application
No. 15/179,555 (“the ’555 application”), which claimed priority to the ’407 provisional and
would eventually issue on November 7, 2017 as U.S. Patent No. 9,808,788 (“the ’788 patent”),
Limketkai are the only two inventors named on the ’788 patent, which is assigned to PN.
30. As the Abstract and specification of the ’788 patent explain, the ’788 patent is
directed to a method that includes contacting a solvent with a porous CD-MOF that is adsorbed
with carbon dioxide (CO2) to release the CO2, and then collecting the released CO2. The claims
of the ’788 patent are directed to this same subject matter. The claims recite, among other things,
contacting a solvent with a porous CD-MOF adsorbed with CO2 to cause the release of CO2.
31. The ’788 patent acknowledges (at Col. 3, ll. 25-28) that “[i]n general, the CD-
MOFs that can be used in the methods described herein can be those described in U.S. Pat.
No. 9,085,460 (“’460 patent”), the contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference in
8
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 9 of 23 PageID #:9
their entirely.” The ’460 patent names Stoddart as the first-named inventor of a group of four co-
inventors and is assigned to Northwestern. Neither Botros nor Limketkai are named as an
inventor of Northwestern’s ’460 patent. The ’460 patent describes, among other things, CD-
MOF-2 technology.
32. Over the past decade, including prior to the filing of the ’407 provisional,
Stoddart and the Stoddart group, at least partially in collaboration with Botros, performed
substantial work relating to CO2 absorption and release using CD-MOFs. Their collaboration
with Botros is corroborated by, inter alia, the publication of at least one paper that included
Botros as a co-author. Stoddart and the Stoddart group’s groundwork and discoveries contributed
to the conception of inventions claimed in the ’788 patent. Despite Stoddart’s contribution and
the collaboration between Botros and the Stoddart group on this subject, PN and Botros
33. On August 31, 2015, Botros and Limketkai filed U.S. Provisional Application
No. 62/212,026 (“the ’026 provisional”). On July 27, 2016, Botros and Limketkai filed U.S.
Non-Provisional Application No. 15/220,618 (“the ’618 application”), which claimed priority to
the ’026 provisional and would eventually issue on December 5, 2017, as U.S. Patent
No. 9,834,803 (“the ’803 patent”), entitled “Methods to Isolate Cyclodextrins.” Botros and
Limketkai are the only two inventors named on the ’803 patent, which is assigned to PN.
34. As the specification of the ’803 patent explains, the ’803 patent relates to methods
“square planar metal complex.” The specification of the ’803 patent discloses a number of
embodiments of the square planar metal complex, including, for example, gold. The claims of
the ’803 patent relate generally to isolating CDs by, among other things, adding a “square planar
9
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 10 of 23 PageID #:10
metal complex” to a CD production mixture. Claim 23 of the ‘803 patent expressly recites that
35. Over the past decade, including prior to the filing of the ’026 provisional,
Stoddart and the Stoddart group performed substantial work relating to use of metals, including
gold, in CD production formulations. Their collaboration with Botros is corroborated by, inter
alia, at least two papers that include Botros as a co-author. Stoddart and the Stoddart group’s
groundwork and discoveries contributed to the conception of the claims of the ’803 patent,
including at least claim 23. Despite Stoddart’s contribution and the collaboration between Botros
and the Stoddart group on this subject, PN and Botros improperly omitted Stoddart as a co-
36. On November 17, 2015, Botros and Limketkai filed U.S. Provisional Application
No. 62/256,423 (“the ’423 provisional”). On November 16, 2016, Botros and Limketkai filed
U.S. Non-Provisional Application No. 15/352,809 (“the ’809 application”), which claims priority
to the ’423 provisional and would eventually issue on November 14, 2017 as U.S. Patent
Organic Frameworks.” Botros and Limketkai are the only two inventors named on the
37. As the Abstract and specification of the ’049 patent explain, the ’049 patent
relates to use of a porous CD-MOF for retention of a fragrance. The specification of the
’049 patent describes the preparation of CD-MOF crystals in accordance with the procedure
described in U.S. Patent No. 9,085,460 (described above), of which Stoddart is the first-named
inventor. The specification of the ’049 patent also describes a series of experiments involving the
10
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 11 of 23 PageID #:11
addition of lemon oil into varying amounts of CD-MOF crystal powder. The claims of the
38. Both prior to, and after, the November 17, 2015 filing date of the
’423 provisional, Stoddart and members of the Stoddart group conducted research involving
porous CD-MOFs and aromatic compounds, such as fragrances. On June 6, 2014, members of
the Stoddart group filed U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/008,671 (“the ’671 provisional”)
describing some of that work. The provisional application was eventually filed as a non-
provisional application that issued as Northwestern’s U.S. Patent No. 10,239,044 (“the
2019. The specification of the ’044 patent includes data relating to refinement and separation of
aromatic hydrocarbons, such as pinene and limonene, which are fragrant essential oils, often
described as the precursors of common commercial fragrances. Stoddart, but not Botros, is listed
as an inventor on the ’044 patent owned by Northwestern. The ’671 provisional, from which the
’044 patent claims priority, is among the patent rights licensed to PN under a License Agreement
between Northwestern and PN effective January 28, 2015. Furthermore, a presentation delivered
Presentation”), included discussion of research shown in the ’044 patent and described the
relevance of the work on pinenes as a precursor for fragrances and perfumes. In 2016, members
of the Stoddart group published an article in JACS, entitled “CD-MOF: A Versatile Separation
Medium,” JACS 2016, 138:2292-2301, which describes the ability of pores within MOFs to
retain compounds, such as pinenes. Both Stoddart and Botros are included as authors on the
11
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 12 of 23 PageID #:12
39. The filing of the ’423 provisional on November 17, 2015 was just months after
Botros and Limketkai’s in-person visit to Northwestern for training on CD-MOF technology by
the Stoddart group in June 2015. During the in-person training and/or in the course of preparing
the JACS 2016 article and Pacifichem Presentation, Stoddart and his group communicated to
Botros and/or Limketkai, inter alia, about CD-MOFs with the ability to retain aromatic
hydrocarbon compounds, such as pinenes, within their pores. Such discoveries and contributions
40. Despite Botros’s collaborations with Stoddart and the Stoddart group on
development of the inventions claimed and described in the ’049 patent and Botros’s awareness
of the Stoddart group’s work, including his awareness of the information contained in the related
’049 patent.
41. On March 24, 2016, Botros and Limketkai filed U.S. Provisional Application
No. 62/312,964 (“the ’964 provisional”). On March 23, 2017, Botros and Limketkai filed non-
provisional U.S. Patent Application No. 15/467,016 (“the ’016 application”), which claimed
priority to the ’964 provisional and would eventually issue on March 10, 2020, as U.S. Patent
Metal-Organic Frameworks.” Botros and Limketkai are the only two inventors named on the
42. As the Abstract and specification of the ’147 patent explain, the disclosure of the
’147 patent relates to a composition that includes an active agent and a porous CD-MOF. The
specification of the ’147 patent describes a number of types of active agents, including, among
others, salicylic acid and ibuprofen. The claims of the ’147 patent relate generally to a
12
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 13 of 23 PageID #:13
composition of an active agent and a porous CD-MOF. Claim 7 of the ’147 patent expressly
43. Prior to, and after, the March 24, 2016 filing date of the ’964 provisional, Stoddart
and members of the Stoddart group published technical articles and submitted patent applications
that describe their work involving porous CD-MOFs and active agents, specifically ibuprofen;
i.e., the subject matter described and claimed in the ’147 patent. On November 15, 2015 and
November 2, 2016, Stoddart and members of the Stoddart group filed U.S. Provisional
Applications Nos. 62/255,490 (“the ’490 provisional”) and 62/416,334 (“the ’334 provisional”),
which were eventually combined and filed as a non-provisional application and issued as
Northwestern’s U.S. Patent No. 10,500,218 (“the ’218 patent”), entitled “Uptake of
’218 patent includes data relating to the encapsulation of salicylic acid and ibuprofen in porous
CD-MOFs. Stoddart, but not Botros, is listed as an inventor on the ’218 patent owned by
Northwestern. In 2017, members of the Stoddart group published the research on ibuprofen
2017, 14:1831-39. Both Stoddart and Botros are listed as authors on the 2017 paper.
44. Stoddart and the Stoddart group performed substantial work relating to
compositions of active agents with porous CD-MOFs, including extensive research on the
the Stoddart group’s collaboration with Botros, Stoddart’s discoveries in this area were
into the subject matter claimed in the ’147 patent. The Stoddart group’s collaboration with
13
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 14 of 23 PageID #:14
Botros is corroborated by the publication of the paper in 2017 that includes Botros as a co-
author. Despite the collaboration between Botros and the Stoddart group on this subject and
Stoddart’s contributions to the claims of the ’147 patent, PN and Botros improperly omitted
45. On January 5, 2016, Botros and Limketkai filed U.S. Provisional Application
No. 62/274,962 (“the ’962 provisional”). On December 30, 2016, Botros and Limketkai filed
U.S. Non-Provisional Application No. 15/395,138 (“the ’138 application”), which claimed
priority to the ’962 provisional and would eventually issue as U.S. Patent No. 10,736,967
(“the ’967 patent”), entitled “Method of Preparing Cyclodextrin Complexes.” Botros and
Limketkai are the only two inventors named on the ’967 patent, which is assigned to PN.
46. As the Abstract and specification of the ’967 patent explain, the disclosure of the
the ’967 patent describes a number of drug embodiments of the agent, including, among others,
salicylic acid and ibuprofen. The specification of the ’967 patent describes a number of fragrance
embodiments of the agent, including, among others, limonene. The claims of the ’967 patent
relate generally to a method for preparing an agent-cyclodextrin complex. Claim 1 of the ‘967
patent expressly recites ibuprofen as the drug agent and limonene as the fragrance agent.
47. As explained above, prior to, and after, the January 5, 2016 filing date the
’962 provisional, members of the Stoddart group published a number of technical articles, made
presentations and submitted patent applications that describe their work involving porous CD-
MOFs and active agents, specifically ibuprofen and limonene; i.e., the subject matter described
and claimed in the ’967 patent. On November 15, 2015 and November 2, 2016, Stoddart and
members of the Stoddart group filed the ’490 provisional and the ’334 provisional, respectively,
14
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 15 of 23 PageID #:15
which were eventually combined and filed as a non-provisional application and issued as
Northwestern’s ’218 patent on December 10, 2019. The ’218 patent includes data relating to the
encapsulation of ibuprofen in porous CD-MOFs. Stoddart, but not Botros, is listed as an inventor
on the ’218 patent owned by Northwestern. In 2017, members of the Stoddart group published
Bioavailabilty Studies,” MolecularPharma 2017, 14:1831-39. Both Stoddart and Botros are
listed among the authors on the 2017 paper. On June 6, 2014, Stoddart and members of the
Stoddart group filed U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/008,671, which was eventually filed as
a non-provisional application and issued as Northwestern’s ’044 patent on March 26, 2019.
Northwestern’s ’044 patent includes data relating to refinement and separation of aromatic
hydrocarbons. The specification of the patent includes data for testing of limonene, which is an
48. The Stoddart group performed substantial work relating to compositions of active
agents with porous CD-MOFs, including extensive research on the encapsulation of ibuprofen in
porous CD-MOFs, as evidenced by the ’218 patent, and extensive research on limonene in CD-
MOFs, as evidenced by Northwestern’s ’044 patent. The Stoddart group’s collaboration with
Botros and contributions are found in the subject matter claimed in the ’967 patent. The
in 2017 that include Botros as a co-author. Despite the collaboration between Botros and the
Stoddart group on this subject and Stoddart’s contributions to the claims of the ’967 patent, PN
15
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 16 of 23 PageID #:16
49. As demonstrated above, the claims of the Patents include inventive contributions
by Stoddart made while the Stoddart group was working in collaboration with Botros, which
contributions were not well-known or considered within the state of the art at the time the
50. In his meetings and other communications with Botros and Limketkai, Stoddart
did more than merely provide Botros and Limketkai with well-known principles or explain the
state of the art. As part of their collaboration, Stoddart contributed ideas to the total inventive
concepts that are embodied in one or more claims of each of the Patents. Consequently, Stoddart
51. As part of its mission to disseminate innovative CD-MOF discoveries across the
United States and throughout the world, Northwestern seeks an order correcting inventorship on
the Patents. One of Northwestern’s objectives in pursuing this action is to confirm its ability to
52. PN’s and Botros’s failure to name Stoddart on the Patents as a joint inventor
53. At all relevant times, Stoddard was under an obligation to assign, and in fact did
assign, any and all of his ownership interest in the Patents to Northwestern.
Northwestern, the failure of PN and Botros to name Stoddard as an inventor on each of the
Patents deprived Northwestern the ability to commercialize the inventions embodied and claimed
16
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 17 of 23 PageID #:17
55. For example, Northwestern was precluded from seeking partnerships with third
parties to develop technology and products that would embody the claimed inventions and seek
commercialization of such products. Moreover, to the extent Northwestern might have included
its rights in the Patents within the scope of intellectual property rights licensed to PN under the
License Agreement, PN’s and Botros’s failure to name Stoddart as a joint inventor permitted PN
56. Therefore, the failure by PN and Botros to name Stoddard as a co-inventor on the
Patents, led the Defendants to retain a benefit, namely exclusive ownership of the Patents, that
results in financial and economic harm to Northwestern, in addition to the reputational harm to
Stoddart resulting from not being acknowledged as a co-inventor on patents to which he was a
key contributor.
Patents, upon information and belief, PN and Botros were able to secure partnerships with third
parties, such as Beauty Molecules, Inc., to potentially utilize the inventions claimed by the
58. PN’s and Botros’s decision to not name Stoddart as an inventor on each of the
Patents violated the fundamental principles of justice, equity and good conscious.
Count I
59. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 58
17
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 18 of 23 PageID #:18
61. Based on his contributions to the joint conception of the invention covered by at
least one claim of the ’788 patent, Stoddart should have been named a joint inventor of the
’788 patent.
62. The nonjoinder of Stoddart as a joint inventor occurred without any deceptive
63. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 256, Stoddart and Northwestern request that the Court
order the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office to issue a certificate correcting the inventorship of the
Count II
64. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 63
66. Based on his contributions to the joint conception of the invention covered by at
least one claim of the ’803 patent, Stoddart should have been named a joint inventor of the ’803
patent.
67. The nonjoinder of Stoddart as a joint inventor occurred without any deceptive
68. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 256, Stoddart and Northwestern request that the Court
order the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office to issue a certificate correcting the inventorship of the
18
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 19 of 23 PageID #:19
Count III
69. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 68
71. Based on his contributions to the joint conception of the invention covered by at
least one claim of the ’049 patent, Stoddart should have been named a joint inventor of the
’049 patent.
72. The nonjoinder of Stoddart as a joint inventor occurred without any deceptive
73. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 256, Stoddart and Northwestern request that the Court
order the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office to issue a certificate correcting the inventorship of the
Count IV
74. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 73
76. Based on his contributions to the joint conception of the invention covered by at
least one claim of the ’147 patent, Stoddart should have been named a joint inventor of the
’147 patent.
19
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 20 of 23 PageID #:20
77. The nonjoinder of Stoddart as a joint inventor occurred without any deceptive
78. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 256, Stoddart and Northwestern request that the Court
order the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office to issue a certificate correcting the inventorship of the
Count V
79. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 78
81. Based on his contributions to the joint conception of the invention covered by at
least one claim of the ’967 patent, Stoddart should have been named a joint inventor of the
’967 patent.
82. The nonjoinder of Stoddart as a joint inventor occurred without any deceptive
83. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 256, Stoddart and Northwestern request that the Court
order the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office to issue a certificate correcting the inventorship of the
Count VI
84. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 83
20
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 21 of 23 PageID #:21
85. As a result of PN’s and Botros’s above actions, Northwestern has suffered
monetary damages. These damages include, without limitation, lost business opportunities for
Northwestern as a result of not being at least a partial owner of one or more of the Patents, which
relate to subject matter not being commercially pursued by PN. In addition, Northwestern, and
Stoddart, were denied the prestige stemming from issuance of one or more of the Patents naming
86. As a direct and proximate result of PN’s and Botros’s wrongful conduct, as
described more fully herein, Northwestern has sustained monetary damages in excess of
Count VII
(Unjust Enrichment)
87. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 86
88. As a result of the above actions by PN and Botros, they were able to secure more
lucrative agreements with third parties to license the Patents than if Northwestern was named as
would be inequitable for PN and Botros to retain these benefits without compensation to
JURY DEMAND
Northwestern and Stoddart hereby demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.
21
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 22 of 23 PageID #:22
Patents;
2. Order the United States Patent and Trademark Office to issue a certificate
correcting the inventorship of each of the Patents by joining Stoddart as joint inventor
22
Case: 1:20-cv-05729 Document #: 1 Filed: 09/25/20 Page 23 of 23 PageID #:23
23