`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`
`JOSEPH NEEV,
`
`
`
`
`
`ABBOTT MEDICAL OPTICS INC.,
`a Delaware corporation; and
`RAINFOREST ACQUISITION INC.,
`a Delaware corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`C.A. No. 09-
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`_______________________________________________________________
`
`COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`_______________________________________________________________
`
`
`
`For its Complaint, Plaintiff alleges:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1. Plaintiff Joseph Neev is an individual.
`
`2. Defendant Abbott Medical Optics Inc. ("AMO"), upon information and
`
`belief, is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of
`
`Delaware, and is a successor in interest to Advanced Medical Optics, Inc. On
`
`information and belief, either AMO or its wholly owned and controlled subsidiary
`
`is a successor-in-interest of Intralase Corp.
`
`3. Defendant Rainforest Acquisition Inc. (“Rainforest”) is a corporation
`
`organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delawar, and was an
`
`Alcon Research, Ltd.
`Exhibit 1004 - Page 1
`
`
`
`Case 1:09-cv-00146-RBK-JS Document 1 Filed 03/05/09 Page 2 of 4 PageID #: 2
`
`acquisition vehicle by which Abbot Laboratories acquired Advanced Medical
`
`Optics, Inc. On information and belief, Rainforest is now, in fact, known as AMO
`
`by virtue of a name change, but is named as a separate entity out of caution. All
`
`references to AMO in this pleading refer to and include Rainforest.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and
`
`1338(a).
`
`5. AMO is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District because, upon
`
`information and belief, AMO is a Delaware corporation and is doing and has done
`
`substantial business in this District, including business relating to the sale and
`
`distribution for sale of the infringing products as described below.
`
`6. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b).
`
`COUNT I – PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`7. Mr. Neev incorporates and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1
`
`through 6 as if fully set forth herein.
`
`8. Mr. Neev is the owner of United States Patent No. 6,482,199 B1 ("the
`
`'199 Patent"), which was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office on November 19, 2002. A copy of the ‘199 Patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit A to this Complaint.
`
`9. AMO, directly, through wholly owned and controlled subsidiaries, or
`
`both, has infringed, induced infringement of, and contributed to the infringement
`
`Alcon Research, Ltd.
`Exhibit 1004 - Page 2
`
`
`
`Case 1:09-cv-00146-RBK-JS Document 1 Filed 03/05/09 Page 3 of 4 PageID #: 3
`
`of one or more claims of the '199 Patent by making, using, selling and/or offering
`
`to sell infringing products and processes.
`
`10. AMO has taken its actions without license from, or permission of, Mr.
`
`Neev.
`
`11. AMO has and has had actual notice of the '199 Patent.
`
`12. AMO has and has had constructive notice of the '199 Patent pursuant to
`
`35 U.S.C. § 287(a).
`
`13. Upon information and belief, AMO's infringement, contributory
`
`infringement, and inducement of infringement of the '199 Patent has been and
`
`continues to be willful and deliberate. As a result, Mr. Neev is entitled to increased
`
`damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 and to attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in
`
`prosecuting this action under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
`
`14. AMO’s infringement of Mr. Neev’s exclusive rights under the ‘199
`
`Patent will continue to damage Mr. Neev, causing irreparable harm for which there
`
`is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Mr. Neev prays:
`
`1. That this Court enjoin Defendant, its agents and employees, and any
`
`others acting in concert with it, from infringing, inducing the infringement of, or
`
`contributing to the infringement of the ‘199 Patent;
`
`Alcon Research, Ltd.
`Exhibit 1004 - Page 3
`
`
`
`Case 1:09-cv-00146-RBK-JS Document 1 Filed 03/05/09 Page 4 of 4 PageID #: 4
`
`2. That this Court award Mr. Neev his damages resulting from Defendant's
`
`infringement;
`
`3. That this Court award Mr. Neev treble damages as a result of Defendant's
`
`willful misconduct;
`
`4. That this Court declare this case an exceptional case pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 285; and
`
`5. That this Court award Mr. Neev his costs and attorneys' fees and such
`
`other relief as is just.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`Mr. Neev demands trial by jury.
`
`Dated:
`
`March 5, 2009
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ David L. Finger
`David L. Finger (DE Bae ID #2556)
`Finger, Slanina & Liebesman, LLC
`One Commerce Center
`1201 N. Orange Street, 7th Floor
`Wilmington, DE 19801-1186
`Tel. (302) 573-2525
`Fax (302) 573-2524
`dfinger@delawgroup.com
`
`Of Counsel:
`Kenneth G. Parker
`Teuton, Loewy & Parker LLP
`3121 Michelson Drive, Ste. 250
`Irvine, CA 92612
`(949) 442-7100 Telephone
`(949) 442-7105 Facsimile
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Joseph Neev
`
`Alcon Research, Ltd.
`Exhibit 1004 - Page 4
`
`