Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`
`
`YEOSHUA SORIAS and
`ZILICON ACCESSORIES LLC )
`
`
`
`
`
`) Civil Action No.
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT
`
`
`
`
`
`) INFRINGEMENT, MAJOR BREACH
`NATIONAL CELLULAR USA, INC. ) AND REQUEST FOR RECISSION OF
`MARK GROSSMAN, ZEEV ) AGREEMENT AND, ALTERNATIVELY,
`GROSSMAN, DAVID GROSSMAN ) FOR DECLARATION OF NO
`and DOEs 1 through 10,
`
`
`) AGREEMENT BREACH
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`)
`____________________________________)
`
`
`
`
`
` COMPLAINT
`
`
`Yeoshua Sorias ("Sorias") and Zilicon Accessories, LLC ("Zilicon"), collectively,
`
`"Plaintiffs", by and through their attorneys, complaining of the Defendants National Cellular
`
`USA, Inc. ("National Cellular"), Mark Grossman, Zeev Grossman and David Grossman
`
`(collectively "the Grossmans"), all collectively "the Defendants", allege upon knowledge as
`
`to themselves and their own actions, and upon information and belief as to all other matters
`
`alleged below, as follows.
`
`NATURE OF ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement, breach of and request for rescission
`
`of an agreement and, alternatively, for a declaratory judgment of no breach of agreement by
`
`1
`
`Plaintiffs.
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 1
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 2 of 17 PageID #: 2
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Plaintiff Sorias is a resident of the County of Kings, State of New York.
`
`Plaintiff Zilicon is a limited liability company of New York, in which Sorias
`
`is a principal and officer.
`
`4.
`
`National Cellular is a domestic corporation engaged in the production,
`
`marketing of cell phone accessories with its principle place of business located at 620 First
`
`Avenue, Brooklyn, New York.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`Mark Grossman is principal and officer of National Cellular.
`
`Zeev Grossman is a principal and officer of National Cellular.
`
`David Grossman is a principal and officer of National Cellular.
`
`Mark Grossman, Zeev Grossman and David Grossman are brothers and
`
`jointly run all the affairs and make all of the key decisions relative to the business of
`
`National Cellular.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`9.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants by reason of their
`
`residence status in this District, their transaction of business in this District, and their
`
`commission of tortious acts within this District.
`
`10.
`
`Subject matter jurisdiction is conferred upon this Court pursuant to
`
`28 U.S.C. §1331 and §1338(a). Venue is proper in this Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391
`
`and §1400.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 2
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 3 of 17 PageID #: 3
`
`FACTS
`
`
`
`The Sorias Patents and the Defendants' Infringement Thereof
`
`11.
`
`Sorias is a named inventor and owns all rights, title and interest in and to the
`
`just issued U.S. patent no. 8,712,486 ("the '486 Patent") directed to an invention entitled
`
`Detachably Integrated Battery Charger For Mobile Cell Phones And Like Devices. See
`
`Exhibit A attached hereto.
`
`12.
`
`The invention in the '486 Patent is primarily directed to a mobile phone
`
`charger that can be kept attached to the backside of the phone, with AC prongs folding in
`
`opposite directions flatly onto the back of the charger, so the phone with its charger can
`
`easily fit in one's pocket.
`
`13.
`
`The invention in the '486 Patent was made in 2010. The '486 Patent claims
`
`priority to provisional patent application no. 61/432,050 filed on January 12, 2011 ("the '050
`
`Patent Application"). See Exhibit B attached hereto.
`
`14.
`
`On information and belief, National Cellular has invested great sums over the
`
`past two years and, with the intimate involvement of the Grossman brothers, has produced a
`
`telephone charger that is uniquely configured to be attached to the backside of the telephone
`
`and which has AC prongs that fold in opposite directions flatly onto the back of the charger
`
`(the "NC Charger"). The NC Charger reads on many of the patent claims of the '486 Patent.
`
`15.
`
`On information and belief, National Cellular continues to be engaged in the
`
`making, using, selling and offering to sell the NC Charger to various entities in the United
`
`States.
`
`16.
`
`On information and belief, National Cellular and its principals have been
`
`actively monitoring the patent activities of Sorias and are fully aware of the issuance of the
`
`3
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 3
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 4 of 17 PageID #: 4
`
`'486 Patent and despite requests to cease and desist from selling the NC Charger and/or to
`
`negotiate with Sorias to purchase their molds, equipment and other information related to
`
`the NC Charger, National Cellular has refused to do so, insisting that it has a right to
`
`continue to offer to sell and sell the NC Chargers to the United States marketplace.
`
`17.
`
`The Defendants' activities complained of herein constitute willful and
`
`knowing infringement upon the '486 Patent.
`
`18.
`
`On information and belief, the NC Charger has been deemed by many to be
`
`an exceptional product. Tim Cook, the president of Apple Corporation ("Apple"), has
`
`himself seen the NC Charger and expressed his amazement with it. The favorable
`
`impression of the marketplace about the NC Charger product is entirely due to its
`
`incorporation of the teachings and its utilization of the unique disclosures and concepts in
`
`the '486 Patent.
`
`19.
`
`The Grossmans and National Cellular have been aware of the contents and
`
`disclosure provided by the '486 Patent since at least January 13, 2011.
`
`20.
`
`Sorias is also a named inventor and owns all rights, title and interest in and to
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,712,482 ("the '482 Patent"). See Exhibit C attached hereto.
`
`21.
`
`The application for the '482 Patent was filed July 12, 2012. The '482 Patent
`
`builds upon and adds additional functionality and improvements to the teachings of Sorias'
`
`first, '486 Patent. An important feature provided by the '482 Patent is a "cover structure"
`
`which conceals the AC prongs in their stowed position.
`
`22.
`
`Certain features and functionality, including the "cover structure", which is
`
`disclosed in the '482 Patent were invented sometime after January 2, 2012.
`
`4
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 4
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 5 of 17 PageID #: 5
`
`23.
`
`On information and belief, during negotiations between National Cellular and
`
`Apple to market the NC Charger, an earlier version of the NC Charger was inspected and the
`
`Apple people commented that it would be useful to add to the NC Charger a "cover
`
`structure" to conceal the AC prongs in the stowed position.
`
`24.
`
`On information and belief, National Cellular thereafter retained a designer
`
`and successfully constructed such cover structure which is included in the NC Charger being
`
`presently offered for sale to the marketplace.
`
`25.
`
`At various times during meetings between the Parties hereto, National
`
`Cellular was informed by the Plaintiffs that the cover feature in the NC Charger is the
`
`subject of a separate patent application being prosecuted by Sorias and its incorporation in
`
`the NC Charger is outside the scope of any Agreement between the parties hereto and that
`
`its sale will constitute willful and knowing infringement of Sorias' patent rights.
`
`26.
`
`National Cellular and its principals ignored Plaintiffs' demands and insisted
`
`that they have a right to make the NC Charger with the cover structure.
`
`27.
`
`The Defendants' activities complained of herein constitute willful and
`
`knowing infringement upon Sorias' '482 Patent.
`
`28.
`
`The continued marketing by Defendants of the NC Charger is a brazen and
`
`willful infringement on at least several of the patent claims of the '482 Patent and the
`
`continued infringement thereof, if not enjoined, has caused and is causing the Plaintiffs
`
`herein irreparable harm.
`
`
`
`The December 2011 Sorias and National Cellular Agreement
`
`29.
`
`On January 13, 2011, the day after he filed the '050 Patent Application,
`
`Sorias met with Mark Grossman and others at National Cellular, and discussed forming a
`
`5
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 5
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 6 of 17 PageID #: 6
`
`business enterprise for marketing the charger described in the '050 Patent Application.
`
`Sorias provided to National Cellular a full copy of the '050 Patent Application.
`
`30.
`
`National Cellular executed a Non Disclosure Agreement in relation to the
`
`invention disclosed by Sorias.
`
`31.
`
`Shortly before his January 13, 2011 meeting with National Cellular, Sorias
`
`purchased from Amazon, two, so-called, kickstand units, each of which consists of a cover
`
`that attaches to the phone and a leg at the back which can be flipped out to allow a cell
`
`phone to stand inclined on a desktop. Sorias modified one of the Amazon-purchased stands
`
`to have two kickstands at the back, for the purpose of creating a mockup of what a charger
`
`with foldable AC prongs might look like. A photo of the Sorias mockup is shown directly
`
`below (the "Mockup").
`
`
`
`32.
`
`During the January 13, 2011 meeting with National Cellular, Sorias exhibited
`
`the Mockup, to enable the National Cellular people to quickly grasp the concept of the
`
`involved invention.
`
`33.
`
`The Mockup contained no electrical circuits at all, nor any charging circuit
`
`for a phone, nor any AC prongs, nor any electrical connectors. The kickstand legs in the
`
`6
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 6
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 7 of 17 PageID #: 7
`
`Mockup had bent distal ends that did not allow the Mockup to be inserted into an AC wall
`
`outlet. Moreover, the rear wall of the Mockup is extremely thin and cannot contain any
`
`charging circuitry therein. Parenthetically, photos showing the Mockup resting against a
`
`wall socket were obtained by using 2-sided adhesive tape to demonstrate the "concept".
`
`34.
`
`The Grossmans enthusiastically embraced the idea of developing this product
`
`jointly with Sorias and offered a 50/50 equal partnership in such venture.
`
`35.
`
`The Grossmans stated to Sorias that he would earn millions by allowing
`
`National Cellular to develop this product. About three and a half years have passed and
`
`Sorias has thus far received not a penny.
`
`36.
`
`During the ensuing weeks and months, National Cellular had an apparent
`
`change of heart, initially stating that they would only agree to pay Sorias a small percentage
`
`royalty, insisting that patent and technology licensors typically are paid only a royalty of just
`
`a few percentage points.
`
`37.
`
`Later in 2011, National Cellular informed Sorias that it is no longer interested
`
`in pursuing the Sorias product altogether, because its patent counsel, having performed a
`
`prior art search and analysis, advised National Cellular that no patent could or would ever
`
`issue on the device disclosed in Sorias patent application (Exhibit B).
`
`38.
`
`Sorias indefatigably fought on. He asked National Cellular to allow its patent
`
`counsel to discuss the matter directly with his patent counsel. And, indeed, the two patent
`
`attorneys discussed the matter, but no further progress resulted, as National Cellular
`
`persisted that it is not interested in a product that cannot be protected by patent.
`
`39.
`
`Sorias persisted in his pursuit of National Cellular and National Cellular
`
`eventually relented by preparing a draft Agreement, pursuant to which Sorias would receive
`
`7
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 7
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 8 of 17 PageID #: 8
`
`a royalty of a few percentage points and National Cellular would have the rights under
`
`certain circumstances to acquire ownership of any patents that might issue. Sorias rejected
`
`that Agreement offer.
`
`40.
`
`The breakthrough came in late 2011, when National Cellular proposed new
`
`agreement terms, whereby it would be granted the exclusive right to sell the subject
`
`telephone charger at a thickness of 16 or more millimeters, and Sorias would retain the
`
`exclusive right to sell the same charger at a thickness below 16 millimeters.
`
`41.
`
`Sorias accepted this key term, as he regarded the right to make his own
`
`product at less than 16 millimeters to be very valuable.
`
`42.
`
`After further negotiations, the Parties executed a "Product License
`
`Agreement" dated December 22, 2011 (the "December 2011 Agreement"). See attached
`
`Exhibit D.
`
`43.
`
`The December 2011 Agreement refers to Sorias' "concept of an extra thin
`
`telephone charger that employs electrical prongs that pivot into flattened positions,…in the
`
`form of Exhibit A". A selection of those Exhibit A photos are attached hereto as Exhibit E.
`
`Those photos do not show an operable charger. They are photos of the aforementioned
`
`Mockup Model which Sorias made from two kickstand covers he purchased from Amazon.
`
`44.
`
`The December 2011 Agreement provided, inter alia:
`
`3. Yeoshua Sorias grants National Cellular exclusive right and
`license to make the Sorias Product at the thickness which is equal to or
`greater than 16 mm, and until December 31, 2018. …
`
`4. Yeoshua Sorias retains exclusive rights to manufacture and
`market, either himself or through his assignees and/or licensees, the
`Sorias Product with thicknesses of less than 16 mm. … (Emphasis
`added).
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 8
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 9 of 17 PageID #: 9
`
`10. National Cellular represents that within 180 days of the
`signing of this Agreement it will have first production runs of the Sorias
`Product and will provide at least three samples thereof to Yeoshua
`Sorias, as soon as available. If it fails to meet that requirement, its
`License herein shall expire." (Emphasis added).
`
`45.
`
`Despite repeated requests by Sorias to be kept informed about the
`
`
`
`development of the Sorias Product, National Cellular was decidedly coy and secretive with
`
`Sorias, refusing to divulge anything about the product development.
`
`46.
`
`Eventually, National Cellular invited Sorias to meet with them in their offices
`
`on June 20, 2012. The meeting occurred a day or two after the expiration of the 180 days
`
`period, in paragraph 10 of the December 2011 Agreement.
`
`47.
`
`At the meeting on June 20, 2012 Sorias met with the Grossmans and with
`
`National Cellular's director of operations, Levy Salvay.
`
`48.
`
`On that day and at that meeting, National Cellular refused to show or to
`
`provide to Sorias the charger samples required by paragraph 10 of the December 2011
`
`Agreement, insisting that Sorias must first sign a June 20, 2012 letter (the "June 2012
`
`Letter") (attached as Exhibit F) prepared by National Cellular, which states:
`
`"Dear Josh,
`By signing below you are confirming receipt of the 3 working
`and completed samples of the iPhone case with outlet prongs as per our
`agreement specks (sic) (please see pictures below). Also, you agree that
`you have seen and verified the documentation from our overseas
`producers that the product production has begun."
`
`Prior to signing the June 2012 Letter, Sorias requested to see the
`
`49.
`
`"documentation" referred to in the Letter. Levy Salvay provided a white sheet of paper,
`
`sized about 1x1 inches, apparently torn off of another sheet of paper, with just three words
`
`9
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 9
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 10 of 17 PageID #: 10
`
`on it. On information and belief, the three words on that piece of paper were "we start
`
`production" or "we begin production". Nothing else was on the paper.
`
`50.
`
`Sorias demanded to see the name of the company that purportedly wrote that
`
`note and the signature line. The Grossmans informed him that they would not trust him with
`
`this information and would not show it to him. They said words to the effect: "if you don't
`
`sign this letter, you will never get to see the product samples". Sorias expressed his concern
`
`that if he signed the letter, the Grossmans might not give him the samples, to which they
`
`responded: "You either sign, or you don't see or receive the samples." Sorias decided to
`
`trust them, he signed the June 2012 Letter and was provided with three product samples.
`
`51.
`
`As he was leaving the offices of National Cellular, Sorias saw Mr. Salvay
`
`crumble up the 1x1 inch paper and throw it into the wastebasket.
`
`52. While at National Cellular, Sorias could not determine anything about the
`
`"specks" of the charger prototypes. Specialized tools are needed to make the appropriate
`
`electrical and mechanical measurements. Nonetheless, Sorias was very excited that such
`
`products finally existed and simply rushed out believing that those samples complied with
`
`the "specks".
`
`53.
`
`Eventually, Sorias gained access to tools that allowed him to measure the
`
`thickness of the charger samples and it was at that time that he determined that the samples'
`
`thicknesses measured below 16 mm, in clear breach of the terms of the December 2011
`
`Agreement. Eventually, he informed National Cellular of that fact.
`
`54.
`
`The key 2011 document that explains which dimension of the charger
`
`represented its "thickness" is the '050 Patent Application, which became the '486 Patent.
`
`That document unambiguously states that "thickness" refers to the thickness of the charger
`
`10
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 10
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 11 of 17 PageID #: 11
`
`itself, not the combined thicknesses of the charger with the telephone to which it is
`
`attachable.
`
`55.
`
`The photos attached to the December 2011 Agreement (Exhibit E hereto) do
`
`not show an actual charger. In fact, they are photos of a kickstand, not a telephone charger,
`
`and they are meaningless and useless to determine therefrom any "thickness" measurement.
`
`Some of the photos show the mockup mounted on a Blackberry® phone. But the intent was
`
`for the charger to be sold in different sizes to fit different phone models.
`
`56.
`
`Regardless, National Cellular's ludicrous assertion that the parties intended
`
`the "thickness" dimension to include the "height" of the side panels is squarely refuted by
`
`the attached March 17, 2011 e-mail (to National Cellular and its patent counsel) showing the
`
`Mockup and stating that its "thickness" is 4 mm (Exhibit G).
`
`57.
`
` Also, the December 2011 Agreement refers to a single "thickness", not to a
`
`"thickness" that depends on the phone model to which the charger is designed to be attached.
`
`National Cellular's Breach Of The December 2011 Agreement
`
`58.
`
`The December 2011 Agreement, in paragraph 2 thereof, provides "The NDA
`
`Agreement shall continue in force to the extent that National Cellular will not disclose any
`
`confidential information provided by Yeoshua Sorias…nor file its own patent applications
`
`relative to the Sorias Products" (emphasis added).
`
`59.
`
`Despite the clear agreement language that National Cellular is not to file its
`
`own patent applications, National Cellular conspired to circumvent this requirement by
`
`having such patent applications filed indirectly through one of its investors, Sorias Capital,
`
`whose principal, Samuel Zelnick, wrote in an e-mail message dated November 5, 2013:
`
`"MOHS [an entity related to National Cellular] also has patents pending on many of the
`
`11
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 11
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 12 of 17 PageID #: 12
`
`features and functionalities that were developed over their collaboration with Apple which
`
`they will defend should any other manufacturer come to market with similar
`
`designs/features." (Exhibit H).
`
`60.
`
`In breach of paragraph 10 of the December 2011 Agreement, National
`
`Cellular did not have and did not provide to Sorias "first production runs of the Sorias
`
`Product" within the required 180 days.
`
`61.
`
`The three charger samples provided to Sorias on June 20, 2012 were not first
`
`production runs of the Sorias Product. The documentation provided to Sorias during the
`
`June 20, 2012 meeting with National Cellular did not constitute proof that the NC Charger
`
`was "in production".
`
`62.
`
`Pursuant to paragraph 12 of the December 2011 Agreement, Sorias has
`
`informed National Cellular repeatedly that the NC Charger violates the terms of the
`
`Agreement, because it has a thickness which is smaller than 16 mm. National Cellular
`
`ignored Sorias' notices, insisting, erroneously, that its chargers had a thickness greater than
`
`16 mm.
`
`63.
`
`The June 20, 2012 date on which National Cellular purports to have provided
`
`the production samples was beyond the 180 days period stipulated in the December 2011
`
`Agreement.
`
`64.
`
`National Cellular has breached the December 2011 Agreement in at least four
`
`major respects. National Cellular made the Sorias Product at a thickness of below 16 mm.
`
`Secondly, National Cellular did not provide first production runs of Sorias chargers to this
`
`very date. For example, National Cellular never provided to Sorias a sample of the NC
`
`Charger that it attempted to sell to Apple. Thirdly, the NC Charger samples that were
`
`12
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 12
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 13 of 17 PageID #: 13
`
`provided on June 20, 2012 were beyond the 180-day period for doing so. Lastly, National
`
`Cellular filed its own patent applications, indirectly through its collaborators, in clear
`
`violation of a provision in the December 2011 Agreement.
`
`65.
`
`The December 2011 Agreement provides explicitly in paragraph 12 thereof,
`
`that the aggrieved party or parties will have the right to submit the matter to a Court to
`
`decide whether the Agreement should be deemed null and void for a major breach thereof.
`
`66.
`
`National Cellular did, in fact, breach major provisions of the December 2011
`
`Agreement. Therefore, pursuant to the Agreement, the December 2011 Agreement must be
`
`deemed breached, rescinded and null and void, ab initio.
`
`Zilicon's Telephone Charger
`
`67.
`
`Sorias formed Zilicon to enable him to exploit his rights under the December
`
`Agreement and Zilicon has now developed its own phone charger and that charger is
`
`becoming available shortly (the "Sorias Charger").
`
`68.
`
`The Sorias Charger has a thickness that measures less than 16 mm when
`
`measured at the charger body.
`
`69.
`
`Contrary to National Cellular, the thickness measurement referred to in the
`
`December 2011 Agreement, refers to the thickness of the body of the charger itself, and not
`
`the combined thickness of the charger with the telephone to which it is attached.
`
`70.
`
`Therefore, even if the December 2011 Agreement is deemed to remain in full
`
`force and effect, the marketing and selling of the Sorias Charger does not constitute a
`
`violation or a breach of the December 2011 Agreement.
`
`13
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 13
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 14 of 17 PageID #: 14
`
`COUNT I
`(Patent Infringement)
`
`71.
`
`Plaintiffs repeat and reassert the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 69
`
`herein, as though fully set forth herein.
`
`72.
`
`The activities of the Defendants complained of herein constitute a knowing
`
`and willful infringement of at least one of the claims of the '486 Patent.
`
`73.
`
`The activities of the Defendants complained of herein constitute a knowing
`
`and willful infringement of at least one of the claims of the '482 Patent.
`
`74.
`
`The activities of the Defendants complained of herein are causing the
`
`Plaintiffs continuing and irreparable harm and Plaintiffs are entitled to both a permanent and
`
`a preliminary Injunction, directing Defendants to immediately cease their infringements of
`
`the '486 Patent and the '482 Patent.
`
`75.
`
`As a result of the Defendants' infringement upon the Plaintiffs' patents, the
`
`Plaintiffs have suffered and will suffer great monetary losses, loss of good will, erosion of
`
`the price that Plaintiffs could realize upon introducing to the marketplace their own Sorias
`
`chargers, and Plaintiffs are entitled to compensatory monetary damages which should be
`
`trebled, owing to the knowing and willful infringement of the patents, and attorneys' fees
`
`and costs, in amounts to be determined at trial, but not less than 10,000,000 dollars assessed
`
`against the Defendants jointly and severally.
`
`COUNT II
`(Breach of Contract)
`
`76.
`
`Plaintiffs repeat and reassert the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 74
`
`herein, as though fully set forth herein.
`
`14
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 14
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 15 of 17 PageID #: 15
`
`77.
`
`The December 2011 Agreement has been brazenly and willfully breached by
`
`the Defendants in several material respects.
`
`78.
`
`The Defendants materially breached terms of the December 2011 Agreement
`
`by not providing to Sorias to this very day, first production runs of the NC Charger, by filing
`
`their own patent applications (albeit, indirectly), and by marketing chargers that have a
`
`thickness of less than 16 mm, despite the reservation to Sorias of the exclusive right to
`
`make, sell and market such chargers.
`
`79.
`
`Defendants therefore breached the December 2011 Agreement with Sorias,
`
`and Sorias has been damaged thereby and is therefore entitled to compensatory and
`
`consequential damages in an amount to be proven at trial, including attorneys' fees and
`
`costs, in amounts to be determined at trial, but not less than 10,000,000 dollars assessed
`
`against the Defendants jointly and severally.
`
`COUNT III
`(Rescission of Contract)
`
`80.
`
`Plaintiffs repeat and reassert the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 78
`
`herein, as though fully set forth herein.
`
`81.
`
`The Defendants' activities complained of above have been major breaches
`
`and, as provided in paragraph 12 of the December 2011 Agreement, Sorias is entitled to
`
`judgment by the Court declaring the December 2011 Agreement to be rescinded, null and
`
`void, ab initio.
`
`COUNT IV
`(Declaration of No Agreement Infringement)
`
`82.
`
`Plaintiffs repeat and reassert the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 80
`
`herein, as though fully set forth herein.
`
`15
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 15
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 16 of 17 PageID #: 16
`
`83.
`
`The Plaintiffs' marketing of the Sorias chargers which have thicknesses of
`
`less than 16 mm at the charger body are permissible under the clear terms of the December
`
`2011 Agreement.
`
`84.
`
`As such, if the Court does not grant Plaintiffs' request that a judgment be
`
`entered rescinding the December 2011 Agreement, then Sorias is entitled to a judgment
`
`declaring the Sorias chargers to be permitted to be advertised and sold to the marketplace
`
`under the very terms of the December 2011 Agreement.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray as follows:
`
`A.
`
`That United States Letters Patent No. 8,712,486 be adjudged valid and
`
`enforceable;
`
`B.
`
`That United States Letters Patent No. 8,712,482 be adjudged valid and
`
`enforceable;
`
`C.
`
`That Defendants be adjudged to have infringed United States Letters Patent
`
`Nos. 8,712,486 and 8,712,482, including by contributing to and actively inducing
`
`infringement of said patents;
`
`D.
`
`That the acts of infringement by the Defendants be adjudged to have been
`
`willful and deliberate;
`
`E.
`
`That Defendants be ordered to account for and pay to the Plaintiffs the
`
`damages sustained by the Plaintiffs due to the Defendants' infringement of United States
`
`Letters Patent Nos. 8,712,486 and 8,712,482, but in no event less than the reasonable
`
`royalties, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §284 and §289;
`
`16
`
`
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 16
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 17 of 17 PageID #: 17
`
`F.
`
`That Defendants be ordered to pay pre-judgment and post-judgment interest
`
`on the damages awarded against them;
`
`G.
`
`That Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees and attorneys and
`
`any and all persons in active concert or participation with them be preliminarily and
`
`permanently enjoined and restrained from infringing rights in United States Letters Patent
`
`Nos. 8,712,486 and 8,712,482;
`
`H.
`
`That this case be adjudged an exceptional case, and that the Plaintiffs be
`
`awarded their costs and attorneys' fees, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §285 and that such award
`
`include trebling of the monetary damages awarded to the Plaintiffs;
`
`I.
`
`That the December 2011 Agreement be adjudged to have been breached in
`
`major respects by the Defendants and be declared rescinded, null and void, ab initio;
`
`J.
`
`That the December 2011 Agreement be adjudged to have been breached by
`
`the Defendants, if determined to be valid;
`
`K.
`
`That the Sorias chargers being offered to the marketplace be adjudged not to
`
`be in violation or breach of any of the terms of the December 2011 Agreement; and
`
`L.
`
`That the Court grant such other and further relief as it deems just and proper
`
`under the circumstances.
`
`Dated: Brooklyn, New York
`
` May 8, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` /s/ Tovia Jakubowitz
`Tovia Jakubowitz
`JAKUBOWITZ & CHUANG LLP
`3019 Avenue J
`Brooklyn, NY 11210
`Telephone: (347) 230-6622
`Facsimile: (347) 764-4294
`Attorneys for Plaintiffs Yeoshua Sorias and
`Zilicon Accessories LLC
`
`17
`
`Prong, Inc. Exh. 1002 p. 17
`
`

`
`(cid:45)(cid:54)(cid:3)(cid:23)(cid:23)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:11)(cid:53)(cid:72)(cid:89)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:18)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:22)(cid:12)
`
`Case 1:14-cv-02897 Document 1-1 Filed 05/08/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 18
`CIVIL COVER SHEET
`(cid:55)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:45)(cid:54)(cid:3)(cid:23)(cid:23)(cid:3)(cid:70)(cid:76)(cid:89)(cid:76)(cid:79)(cid:3)(cid:70)(cid:82)(cid:89)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:3)(cid:86)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:72)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:73)(cid:82)(cid:85)(cid:80)(cid:68)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:3)(cid:70)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:68)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:72)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:3)(cid:81)(cid:72)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:3)(cid:85)(cid:72)(cid:83)(cid:79)(cid:68)(cid:70)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:81)(cid:82)(cid:85)(cid:3)(cid:86)(cid:88)(cid:83)(cid:83)(cid:79)(cid:72)(cid:80)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:73)(cid:76)(cid:79)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:74)(cid:3)(cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:86)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:89)(cid:76)(cid:70)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:79)(cid:72)(cid:68)(cid:71)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:74)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:82)(cid:85)(cid:3)(cid:82)(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:68)(cid:83)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:68)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:85)(cid:72)(cid:84)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:85)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:69)(cid:92)(cid:3)(cid:79)(cid:68)(cid:90)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:72)(cid:91)(cid:70)(cid:72)(cid:83)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:68)(cid:86)
`(cid:83)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:89)(cid:76)(cid:71)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:69)(cid:92)(cid:3)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:70)(cid:68)(cid:79)(cid:3)(cid:85)(cid:88)(cid:79)(cid:72)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:70)(cid:82)(cid:88)(cid:85)(cid:87)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:55)(cid:75)(cid:76)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:73)(cid:82)(cid:85)(cid:80)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:68)(cid:83)(cid:83)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:89)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:69)(cid:92)(cid:3)(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:45)(cid:88)(cid:71)(cid:76)(cid:70)(cid:76)(cid:68)(cid:79)(cid:3)(cid:38)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:73)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:70)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:56)(cid:81)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:54)(cid:87)(cid:68)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:3)(cid:54)(cid:72)(cid:83)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:80)(cid:69)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:23)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:76)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:85)(cid:72)(cid:84)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:85)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:73)(cid:82)(cid:85)(cid:3)(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:88)(cid:86)(cid:72