Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 1 of 17 Page ID #:1
`
`Michael J. Wise, Bar No. 143501
`MWise@perkinscoie.com
`Lauren Sliger, Bar No. 213880
`LSliger@perkinscoie.com
`Lara J. Dueppen, Bar No. 259075
`LDueppen@perkinscoie.com
`PERKINS COIE LLP
`1888 Century Park E., Suite 1700
`Los Angeles, CA 90067-1721
`Telephone: 310.788.9900
`Facsimile: 310.788.3399
`Attorneys for Plaintiffs
`FONTEM VENTURES B.V. and
`FONTEM HOLDINGS 1 B.V.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`Case No. CV14-1654
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT
`INFRINGEMENT
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`FONTEM VENTURES B.V., a
`Netherlands company; and FONTEM
`HOLDINGS 1 B.V., a Netherlands
`company
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`LOGIC TECHNOLOGY
`DEVELOPMENT LLC, a Florida
`limited liability company, and DOES 1-
`5, Inclusive,
`
`Defendant.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 1 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 2 of 17 Page ID #:2
`
`For its Complaint against Defendant LOGIC TECHNOLOGY
`DEVELOPMENT LLC (“Defendant”), Plaintiff Fontem Ventures B.V. (“Fontem
`Ventures”) and Plaintiff Fontem Holdings 1 B.V. (“Fontem Holdings”) allege as
`follows:
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`This is a civil action for patent infringement arising under the patent
`1.
`laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, et seq., and in particular § 271.
`2.
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this patent infringement
`action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`3.
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because it solicits
`and conducts business in California, including the provision of goods over the
`Internet, derives revenue from goods sold in California and within this judicial
`district, and has committed acts of infringement in this judicial district.
`4.
`Venue lies in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and
`(c), and 1400(b).
`
`PARTIES
`Plaintiff Fontem Ventures is a company organized and existing under
`5.
`the laws of the Netherlands, with its principal place of business at 12th Floor, 101
`Barbara Strozzilaan, 1083 HN Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Fontem Ventures is
`in the business of developing innovative non-tobacco products, including electronic
`cigarettes.
`Plaintiff Fontem Holdings is a company organized and existing under
`6.
`the laws of the Netherlands, with its principal place of business at 12th Floor, 101
`Barbara Strozzilaan, 1083 HN Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
`7.
`Plaintiffs Fontem Ventures and Fontem Holdings (together, “the
`Plaintiffs”) are informed and believe that: Defendant LOGIC TECHNOLOGY
`DEVELOPMENT LLC. (“LOGIC”) is a limited liability company organized and
`existing under the laws of the State of Florida, having its principal place of business
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`-1-
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 2 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 3 of 17 Page ID #:3
`
`at 2004 N.W. 25th Ave., Pompano Beach, Florida, 33069, USA. LOGIC is doing
`business in this judicial district related to the claims asserted in this Complaint.
`8.
`The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate,
`associate, or otherwise of defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 5, inclusive,
`are unknown to the Plaintiffs at the present time, and the Plaintiffs therefore sue
`said Defendants by such fictitious names. The Plaintiffs, after obtaining leave of
`court, if necessary, will amend this Complaint to show such true names and
`capacities when the same have been ascertained.
`FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
`(Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,365,742)
`The Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in
`9.
`paragraphs 1-8 above.
`10.
`Plaintiff Fontem Holdings is the owner of the entire right, title, and
`interest in and to United States Patent No. 8,365,742 (“the ’742 Patent”) and
`Plaintiff Fontem Ventures is the exclusive licensee of the ’742 Patent. The ’742
`Patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent Office on February
`5, 2013 and is valid, subsisting, and in full force and effect. A copy of the ’742
`Patent is attached to the Complaint as Exhibit A.
`11.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant has had
`knowledge of the ’742 Patent, and of the Plaintiffs’ rights therein, at least as of
`February 13, 2014. On that date, a Joint Status Report containing an assignment
`document identifying Plaintiff Fontem Holdings as the owner of the ’742 Patent
`was filed in a related case.1 The Joint Status Report was reviewed and signed by
`
`1See Joint Status Report filed February 13, 2014 (Dkt. No. 63, Exh. A) in
`Ruyan Investment Holdings Limited v. Sottera, Inc., Case No. CV 12-05454 GAF
`(FFMx) (C.D. Cal.), which is consolidated for purposes of discovery with Case
`Nos. CV 12-05455 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05456 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05462 GAF
`(FFMx), CV 12-05466 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05468 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05472
`GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05477 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05482 GAF (FFMx), and CV
`12-06268 GAF (FFMx).
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`-2-
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 3 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 4 of 17 Page ID #:4
`
`Defendant’s counsel. Defendant shall have additional knowledge of the ’742 Patent
`as of the date of service for the present Complaint.
`12.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant has directly
`infringed the ’742 Patent in violation of at least 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by, itself and/or
`through its agents, unlawfully and wrongfully making, using, importing, offering to
`sell, and/or selling electronic cigarette products embodying one or more of the
`inventions claimed in the ’742 Patent, within and/or from the United States without
`permission or license from the Plaintiffs, and will continue to do so unless enjoined
`by this Court. Examples of electronic cigarette products that directly infringe the
`’742 Patent include, but are not limited to, (1) LOGIC Rechargeable Electronic
`Cigarettes as found in the LOGIC Power Series Starter Kit, (2) LOGIC Refill
`Cartomizers, including LOGIC Black Label Cartomizers, LOGIC Platinum Label
`Cartomizers, LOGIC Gold Label Cartomizers, and LOGIC Zero Label Cartomizers;
`(3) LOGIC Power Series Batteries; (4) LOGIC Disposable Electronic Cigarettes,
`including LOGIC Black Label Disposable, LOGIC Platinum Label Disposable,
`LOGIC Gold Label Disposable, and LOGIC Zero Label Disposable; (5) LOGIC
`OnePack Disposable Electronic Cigarettes; and (6) LOGIC “The Cuban” ECigar.
`Such products infringe at least claims 2 and 3 of the ’742 Patent.
`13.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant has contributed
`to the infringement of the ’742 Patent in violation of at least 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) by,
`itself and/or through its agents, contributing to the direct infringement of the ’742
`Patent by its customers by unlawfully and wrongfully making, using, importing,
`offering to sell, and/or selling electronic cigarette components having no
`substantially non-infringing use, which, when purchased and/or used by its
`customers, result in direct infringement of one or more embodiments of the
`inventions claimed in the ’742 Patent, within and/or from the United States without
`permission or license from the Plaintiffs, and will continue to do so unless enjoined
`by this Court. Examples of electronic cigarette components that have no substantial
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`-3-
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 4 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 5 of 17 Page ID #:5
`
`noninfringing uses and that contribute to the direct infringement of the ’742 Patent
`include, but are not limited to, (1) LOGIC Refill Cartomizers (“LOGIC E-Cig
`Cartomizers”), including LOGIC Black Label Cartomizers, LOGIC Platinum Label
`Cartomizers, LOGIC Gold Label Cartomizers, and LOGIC Zero Label Cartomizers;
`and (2) LOGIC Power Series Batteries (“LOGIC E-Cig Batteries”).
`14.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Having knowledge of the
`’742 Patent, Defendant has been aware that its LOGIC E-Cig Cartomizers and
`LOGIC E-Cig Batteries, when purchased and/or used by its customers, result in
`direct infringement of one or more embodiments of the inventions claimed in the
`’742 Patent. Defendant states on its website that to use LOGIC’s electronic
`cigarettes, a user should “remove the battery and cartridge from [the] packaging,
`remove two plastic end caps on each end of the small cartridge, and twist the small
`cartridge onto the battery.”2 Further, each 5-Pack of LOGIC Refill Cartomizer is
`“equivalent to a carton of cigarettes and offer[s] consumers a large savings and a
`smarter way to smoke.”3 The website also states that “[o]nce you charge [the
`battery] 200+ times, you will need to purchase a new battery…directly on the
`Website.”4 Moreover, Defendant’s website states that the LOGIC E-Cig Batteries
`“can be used with only the Power Series Line of cartomizers (Black Label,
`Platinum, Gold and Zero).”5 As such, Defendant knows that its LOGIC E-Cig
`Cartomizers and LOGIC E-Cig Batteries that are sold separately from its Power
`Series Starter Kit have no substantial non-infringing uses other than to provide
`users with the ability to assemble and use an electronic cigarette that infringes at
`
`
`2 See, e.g., https://store.logicecig.com/faqs/#rechargeable (“How do I use
`Logic?”) (last visited March 5, 2014).
`3 See, e.g., https://store.logicecig.com/faqs/#rechargeable (“Why
`Rechargeable Logic Power Series?”) (last visited March 5, 2014).
`4 See, e.g., https://store.logicecig.com/faqs/#rechargeable (“Will my power
`series last forever or will I need to get more?”) (last visited March 5, 2014).
`5 See, e.g., http://store.logicecig.com/logic-power-series-battery/ (last visited
`March 5, 2014).
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`-4-
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 5 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 6 of 17 Page ID #:6
`
`least claims 2 and 3 of the ’742 Patent, and therefore that they are especially made
`or adapted for use in infringement of the ’742 Patent.
`15.
` As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing acts of Defendant,
`the Plaintiffs have suffered, and are entitled to, monetary damages in an amount not
`yet determined. The Plaintiffs are also entitled to their costs of suit and interest.
`16. Defendant’s continuing infringement has inflicted and, unless
`restrained by this court, will continue to inflict great and irreparable harm upon the
`Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law. The Plaintiffs are
`entitled to preliminary and permanent injunctions enjoining Defendant from
`engaging in further acts of infringement.
`SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
`(Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,375,957)
`The Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in
`17.
`paragraphs 1-8 above.
`18.
`Fontem Holdings is the owner of the entire right, title, and interest in
`and to United States Patent No. 8,375,957 (“the ’957 Patent”) and Fontem Ventures
`is the exclusive licensee of the ’957 Patent. The ’957 Patent was duly and legally
`issued by the United States Patent Office on February 19, 2013 and is valid,
`subsisting, and in full force and effect. A copy of the ’957 Patent is attached to the
`Complaint as Exhibit B.
`19.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant has had
`knowledge of the ’957 Patent, and of the Plaintiffs’ rights therein, at least as of
`February 13, 2014. On that date, a Joint Status Report containing an assignment
`document identifying Plaintiff Fontem Holdings as the owner of the ’957 Patent
`was filed in a related case.6 The Joint Status Report was reviewed and signed by
`
`6See Joint Status Report filed February 13, 2014 (Dkt. No. 63, Exh. A) in
`Ruyan Investment Holdings Limited v. Sottera, Inc., Case No. CV 12-05454 GAF
`(FFMx) (C.D. Cal.), which is consolidated for purposes of discovery with Case
`Nos. CV 12-05455 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05456 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05462 GAF
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`-5-
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 6 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 7 of 17 Page ID #:7
`
`Defendant’s counsel. Defendant shall have additional knowledge of the ’957 Patent
`as of the date of service for the present Complaint.
`20.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant has directly
`infringed the ’957 Patent in violation of at least 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by, itself and/or
`through its agents, unlawfully and wrongfully making, using, importing, offering to
`sell, and/or selling electronic cigarette products embodying one or more of the
`inventions claimed in the ’957 Patent, within and/or from the United States without
`permission or license from the Plaintiffs, and will continue to do so unless enjoined
`by this Court. Examples of electronic cigarette products that directly infringe the
`’957 Patent include, but are not limited to, (1) LOGIC Rechargeable Electronic
`Cigarettes as found in the LOGIC Power Series Starter Kit, (2) LOGIC Refill
`Cartomizers, including LOGIC Black Label Cartomizers, LOGIC Platinum Label
`Cartomizers, LOGIC Gold Label Cartomizers, and LOGIC Zero Label Cartomizers;
`(3) LOGIC Power Series Batteries; and (4) LOGIC Disposable Electronic
`Cigarettes, including LOGIC Black Label Disposable, LOGIC Platinum Label
`Disposable, LOGIC Gold Label Disposable, and LOGIC Zero Label Disposable.
`Such products infringe at least claims 1, 10, and 23 of the ’957 Patent.
`21.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant has contributed
`to the infringement of the ’957 Patent in violation of at least 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) by,
`itself and/or through its agents, contributing to the direct infringement of the ’957
`Patent by its customers by unlawfully and wrongfully making, using, importing,
`offering to sell, and/or selling electronic cigarette components having no
`substantially non-infringing use, which, when purchased and/or used by its
`customers, result in direct infringement of one or more embodiments of the
`inventions claimed in the ’957 Patent, within and/or from the United States without
`
`(FFMx), CV 12-05466 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05468 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05472
`GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05477 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05482 GAF (FFMx), and CV
`12-06268 GAF (FFMx).
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`-6-
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 7 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 8 of 17 Page ID #:8
`
`permission or license from the Plaintiffs, and will continue to do so unless enjoined
`by this Court. Examples of electronic cigarette components that have no substantial
`noninfringing uses and that contribute to the direct infringement of the ’957 Patent
`include, but are not limited to, (1) LOGIC Refill Cartomizers (“LOGIC E-Cig
`Cartomizers”), including LOGIC Black Label Cartomizers, LOGIC Platinum Label
`Cartomizers, LOGIC Gold Label Cartomizers, and LOGIC Zero Label Cartomizers;
`and (2) LOGIC Power Series Batteries (“LOGIC E-Cig Batteries”).
`22.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Having knowledge of the
`’957 Patent, Defendant has been aware that its LOGIC E-Cig Cartomizers and
`LOGIC E-Cig Batteries, when purchased and/or used by its customers, result in
`direct infringement of one or more embodiments of the inventions claimed in the
`’957 Patent. Defendant states on its website that to use LOGIC’s electronic
`cigarettes, a user should “remove the battery and cartridge from [the] packaging,
`remove two plastic end caps on each end of the small cartridge, and twist the small
`cartridge onto the battery.”7 Further, each 5-Pack of LOGIC Refill Cartomizer is
`“equivalent to a carton of cigarettes and offer[s] consumers a large savings and a
`smarter way to smoke.”8 The website also states that “[o]nce you charge [the
`battery] 200+ times, you will need to purchase a new battery…directly on the
`Website.”9 Moreover, Defendant’s website states that the LOGIC E-Cig Batteries
`“can be used with only the Power Series Line of cartomizers (Black Label,
`Platinum, Gold and Zero).”10 As such, Defendant knows that its LOGIC E-Cig
`Cartomizers and LOGIC E-Cig Batteries that are sold separately from its Power
`Series Starter Kit have no substantial non-infringing uses other than to provide
`
`7 See, e.g., https://store.logicecig.com/faqs/#rechargeable (“How do I use
`Logic?”) (last visited March 5, 2014).
`8 See, e.g., https://store.logicecig.com/faqs/#rechargeable (“Why
`Rechargeable Logic Power Series?”) (last visited March 5, 2014).
`9 See, e.g., https://store.logicecig.com/faqs/#rechargeable (“Will my power
`series last forever or will I need to get more?”) (last visited March 5, 2014).
`10 See, e.g., http://store.logicecig.com/logic-power-series-battery/ (last visited
`March 5, 2014).
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`-7-
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 8 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 9 of 17 Page ID #:9
`
`users with the ability to assemble and use an electronic cigarette that infringes at
`least claims 1, 10, and 23 of the ’957 Patent, and therefore that they are especially
`made or adapted for use in infringement of the ’957 Patent.
`23. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing acts of Defendant, the
`Plaintiffs have suffered, and are entitled to, monetary damages in an amount not yet
`determined. The Plaintiffs are also entitled to their costs of suit and interest.
`24. Defendant’s continuing infringement has inflicted and, unless
`restrained by this court, will continue to inflict great and irreparable harm upon the
`Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law. The Plaintiffs are
`entitled to preliminary and permanent injunctions enjoining Defendant from
`engaging in further acts of infringement.
`THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
`(Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,393,331)
`The Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in
`25.
`paragraphs 1-8 above.
`26.
`Fontem Holdings is the owner of the entire right, title, and interest in
`and to United States Patent No. 8,393,331 (“the ’331 Patent”) and Fontem Ventures
`is the exclusive licensee of the ’331 Patent. The ’331 Patent was duly and legally
`issued by the United States Patent Office on March 12, 2013 and is valid,
`subsisting, and in full force and effect. A copy of the ’331 Patent is attached to the
`Complaint as Exhibit C.
`27.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant has had
`knowledge of the ’331 Patent, and of the Plaintiffs’ rights therein, at least as of
`February 13, 2014. On that date, a Joint Status Report containing an assignment
`document identifying Plaintiff Fontem Holdings as the owner of the ’331 Patent
`was filed in a related case.11 The Joint Status Report was reviewed and signed by
`
`11See Joint Status Report filed February 13, 2014 (Dkt. No. 63, Exh. A) in
`Ruyan Investment Holdings Limited v. Sottera, Inc., Case No. CV 12-05454 GAF
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`-8-
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 9 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 10 of 17 Page ID #:10
`
`Defendant’s counsel. Defendant shall have additional knowledge of the ’331 Patent
`as of the date of service for the present Complaint.
`28.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant has directly
`infringed the ’331 Patent in violation of at least 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by, itself and/or
`through its agents, unlawfully and wrongfully making, using, importing, offering to
`sell, and/or selling electronic cigarette products embodying one or more of the
`inventions claimed in the ’331 Patent, within and/or from the United States without
`permission or license from the Plaintiffs, and will continue to do so unless enjoined
`by this Court. Examples of electronic cigarette products that directly infringe the
`’331 Patent include, but are not limited to, (1) LOGIC Rechargeable Electronic
`Cigarettes as found in the LOGIC Power Series Starter Kit, (2) LOGIC Refill
`Cartomizers, including LOGIC Black Label Cartomizers, LOGIC Platinum Label
`Cartomizers, LOGIC Gold Label Cartomizers, and LOGIC Zero Label Cartomizers;
`(3) LOGIC Power Series Batteries; (4) LOGIC Disposable Electronic Cigarettes,
`including LOGIC Black Label Disposable, LOGIC Platinum Label Disposable,
`LOGIC Gold Label Disposable, and LOGIC Zero Label Disposable; (5) LOGIC
`OnePack Disposable Electronic Cigarettes; and (6) LOGIC “The Cuban” ECigar.
`Such products infringe at least claims 1 and 2 of the ’331 Patent.
`29.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant has contributed
`to the infringement of the ’331 Patent in violation of at least 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) by,
`itself and/or through its agents, contributing to the direct infringement of the ’331
`Patent by its customers by unlawfully and wrongfully making, using, importing,
`offering to sell, and/or selling electronic cigarette components having no
`substantially non-infringing use, which, when purchased and/or used by its
`
`(FFMx) (C.D. Cal.), which is consolidated for purposes of discovery with Case
`Nos. CV 12-05455 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05456 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05462 GAF
`(FFMx), CV 12-05466 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05468 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05472
`GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05477 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05482 GAF (FFMx), and CV
`12-06268 GAF (FFMx).
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`-9-
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 10 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 11 of 17 Page ID #:11
`
`customers, result in direct infringement of one or more embodiments of the
`inventions claimed in the ’331 Patent, within and/or from the United States without
`permission or license from the Plaintiffs, and will continue to do so unless enjoined
`by this Court. Examples of electronic cigarette components that have no substantial
`noninfringing uses and that contribute to the direct infringement of the ’331 Patent
`include, but are not limited to, (1) LOGIC Refill Cartomizers (“LOGIC E-Cig
`Cartomizers”), including LOGIC Black Label Cartomizers, LOGIC Platinum Label
`Cartomizers, LOGIC Gold Label Cartomizers, and LOGIC Zero Label Cartomizers;
`and (2) LOGIC Power Series Batteries (“LOGIC E-Cig Batteries”).
`30.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Having knowledge of the
`’331 Patent, Defendant has been aware that its LOGIC E-Cig Cartomizers and
`LOGIC E-Cig Batteries, when purchased and/or used by its customers, result in
`direct infringement of one or more embodiments of the inventions claimed in the
`’331 Patent. Defendant states on its website that to use LOGIC’s electronic
`cigarettes, a user should “remove the battery and cartridge from [the] packaging,
`remove two plastic end caps on each end of the small cartridge, and twist the small
`cartridge onto the battery.”12 Further, each 5-Pack of LOGIC Refill Cartomizer is
`“equivalent to a carton of cigarettes and offer[s] consumers a large savings and a
`smarter way to smoke.”13 The website also states that “[o]nce you charge [the
`battery] 200+ times, you will need to purchase a new battery…directly on the
`Website.”14 Moreover, Defendant’s website states that the LOGIC E-Cig Batteries
`“can be used with only the Power Series Line of cartomizers (Black Label,
`Platinum, Gold and Zero).”15 As such, Defendant knows that its LOGIC E-Cig
`
`12 See, e.g., https://store.logicecig.com/faqs/#rechargeable (“How do I use
`Logic?”) (last visited March 5, 2014).
`13 See, e.g., https://store.logicecig.com/faqs/#rechargeable (“Why
`Rechargeable Logic Power Series?”) (last visited March 5, 2014).
`14 See, e.g., https://store.logicecig.com/faqs/#rechargeable (“Will my power
`series last forever or will I need to get more?”) (last visited March 5, 2014).
`15 See, e.g., http://store.logicecig.com/logic-power-series-battery/ (last visited
`March 5, 2014).
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`-10-
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 11 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 12 of 17 Page ID #:12
`
`Cartomizers and LOGIC E-Cig Batteries that are sold separately from its Power
`Series Starter Kit have no substantial non-infringing uses other than to provide
`users with the ability to assemble and use an electronic cigarette that infringes at
`least at least claims 1 and 2 of the ’331 Patent, and therefore that they are especially
`made or adapted for use in infringement of the ’331 Patent.
`31. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing acts of Defendant, the
`Plaintiffs have suffered, and are entitled to, monetary damages in an amount not yet
`determined. The Plaintiffs are also entitled to their costs of suit and interest.
`32. Defendant’s continuing infringement has inflicted and, unless
`restrained by this court, will continue to inflict great and irreparable harm upon the
`Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law. The Plaintiffs are
`entitled to preliminary and permanent injunctions enjoining Defendant from
`engaging in further acts of infringement.
`FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`(Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,490,628)
`The Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in
`33.
`paragraphs 1-8 above.
`34.
`Fontem Holdings is the owner of the entire right, title, and interest in
`and to United States Patent No. 8,490,628 (“the ’628 Patent”) and Fontem Ventures
`is the exclusive licensee of the ’628 Patent. The ’628 Patent was duly and legally
`issued by the United States Patent Office on July 23, 2013 and is valid, subsisting,
`and in full force and effect. A copy of the ’628 Patent is attached to the Complaint
`as Exhibit D.
`35.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant has had
`knowledge of the ’628 Patent, and of the Plaintiffs’ rights therein, at least as of
`February 13, 2014. On that date, a Joint Status Report containing an assignment
`document identifying Plaintiff Fontem Holdings as the owner of the ’628 Patent
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`-11-
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 12 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 13 of 17 Page ID #:13
`
`was filed in a related case.16 The Joint Status Report was reviewed and signed by
`Defendant’s counsel. Defendant shall have additional knowledge of the ’628 Patent
`as of the date of service for the present Complaint.
`36.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant has directly
`infringed the ’628 Patent in violation of at least 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by, itself and/or
`through its agents, unlawfully and wrongfully making, using, importing, offering to
`sell, and/or selling electronic cigarette products embodying one or more of the
`inventions claimed in the ’628 Patent, within and/or from the United States without
`permission or license from the Plaintiffs, and will continue to do so unless enjoined
`by this Court. Examples of electronic cigarette products that directly infringe the
`’628 Patent include, but are not limited to, (1) LOGIC Rechargeable Electronic
`Cigarettes as found in the LOGIC Power Series Starter Kit, (2) LOGIC Refill
`Cartomizers, including LOGIC Black Label Cartomizers, LOGIC Platinum Label
`Cartomizers, LOGIC Gold Label Cartomizers, and LOGIC Zero Label Cartomizers;
`(3) LOGIC Power Series Batteries; (4) LOGIC Disposable Electronic Cigarettes,
`including LOGIC Black Label Disposable, LOGIC Platinum Label Disposable,
`LOGIC Gold Label Disposable, and LOGIC Zero Label Disposable; (5) LOGIC
`OnePack Disposable Electronic Cigarettes; and (6) LOGIC “The Cuban” ECigar.
`Such products infringe at least claims 1, 7, and 8 of the ’628 Patent.
`37.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant has contributed
`to the infringement of the ’628 Patent in violation of at least 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) by,
`itself and/or through its agents, contributing to the direct infringement of the ’628
`Patent by its customers by unlawfully and wrongfully making, using, importing,
`
`16See Joint Status Report filed February 13, 2014 (Dkt. No. 63, Exh. A) in
`Ruyan Investment Holdings Limited v. Sottera, Inc., Case No. CV 12-05454 GAF
`(FFMx) (C.D. Cal.), which is consolidated for purposes of discovery with Case
`Nos. CV 12-05455 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05456 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05462 GAF
`(FFMx), CV 12-05466 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05468 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05472
`GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05477 GAF (FFMx), CV 12-05482 GAF (FFMx), and CV
`12-06268 GAF (FFMx).
`
`111971-0003.0010/LEGAL29627469.1
`
`-12-
`Complaint For Patent Infringement
`
`CV14-1654
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`IPR2015-01587
`Fontem Ex. 2023, Page 13 of 17
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01654-DSF-AS Document 1 Filed 03/05/14 Page 14 of 17 Page ID #:14
`
`offering to sell, and/or selling electronic cigarette components having no
`substantially non-infringing use, which, when purchased and/or used by its
`customers, result in direct infringement of one or more embodiments of the
`inventions claimed in the ’628 Patent, within and/or from the United States without
`permission or license from the Plaintiffs, and will continue to do so unless enjoined
`by this Court. Examples of electronic cigarette components that have no substantial
`noninfringing uses and that contribute to the direct infringement of the ’628 Patent
`include, but are not limited to, (1) LOGIC Refill Cartomizers (“LOGIC E-Cig
`Cartomizers”), including LOGIC Black Label Cartomizers, LOGIC Platinum Label
`Cartomizers, LOGIC Gold Label Cartomizers, and LOGIC Zero Label Cartomizers;
`and (2) LOGIC Power Series Batteries (“LOGIC E-Cig Batteries”).
`38.
`The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Having knowledge of the
`’628 Patent, Defendant has been aware that its LOGIC E-Cig Cartomizers and
`LOGIC E-Cig Batteries, when purchased and/or used by its customers, result in
`direct infringement of one or more embodiments of the inventions claimed in the
`’628 Patent. Defendant states on its website that to use LOGIC’s electronic
`cigarettes, a user should “remove the battery and cartridge from [the] packaging,
`remove two plastic end caps on each end of the small cartridge, and twist the small
`cartridge onto the battery.”17 Further, each 5-Pack of LOGIC Refill Cartomizer is
`“equivalent to a carton of cigarettes and offer[s] consumers a large savings and a
`smarter way to smoke.”18 The website also states that “[o]nce you charge [the
`battery] 200+ times, you will need to purchase a new battery…directly on the
`Website.”19 Moreover, Defendant’s website states that the LOGIC E-Cig Batter