Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 1 of 13 PageID #: 1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
`EASTERN DIVISION
`
`
`FREDMAN BROS. FURNITURE
`COMPANY, INC. D/B/A GLIDEAWAY
`SLEEP PRODUCTS,
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
` )
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`Defendant.
`____________________________________)
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`BEDGEAR, LLC,
`
`Case No.:
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`FREDMAN BROS. FURNITURE COMPANY, INC. D/B/A GLIDEAWAY
`SLEEP PRODUCTS’ COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
`OF PATENT NON-INFRINGEMENT
`
`This is an action for declaratory judgment of non-infringement regarding four
`
`patents previously asserted by Bedgear, LLC in a case filed in the United States District
`
`Court for the Eastern District of New York (Case No. 1:15-cv-6759) (“the New York
`
`Case”) in which plaintiff Fredman Bros. Furniture Company, Inc. d/b/a Glideaway Sleep
`
`Products (“Glideaway”), by its counsel, makes the following allegations in support of its
`
`Complaint against Defendant Bedgear, LLC (“Bedgear”):
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Glideaway is an Illinois corporation with its principal place of business at
`
`8226 Lackland Road, St. Louis, MO 63114.
`
`2.
`
`On information and belief, and based on Bedgear’s allegations in the
`
`Complaint, attached as Exhibit 1 hereto, from the New York Case (the “New York
`
`1
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 1
`
`

`
`Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 2 of 13 PageID #: 2
`
`Complaint”), Bedgear is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of
`
`business at 110 Bi-County Blvd., Suite 101, Farmingdale, NY.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`3.
`
`Bedgear has filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of New York alleging
`
`Glideaway is infringing one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,646,134 (“the ‘134
`
`Patent”), 8,887,332 (“the ‘332 Patent”), 9,015,883 (“the ‘883 Patent”), and 9,155,408
`
`(“the ‘408 Patent”) (collectively “the Patents-in-Suit”). In the New York Complaint,
`
`Bedgear alleges it is the owner by assignment of the Patents-in-Suit with ownership of all
`
`substantial rights in the Patents-in-Suit, including the right to exclude others and to sue
`
`and recover damages for the past and future infringement thereof.
`
`4.
`
`There is no basis for personal jurisdiction over Glideaway in the Eastern
`
`District of New York.
`
`5.
`
`Glideaway has requested to file a motion to dismiss the New York
`
`Complaint based on lack of personal jurisdiction in the letter brief attached as Exhibit 2
`
`hereto.
`
`6.
`
`Based on Bedgear’s filing of the New York Case and correspondence sent
`
`from Bedgear to Glideaway in this District, an actual controversy has arisen and now
`
`exists between Bedgear and Glideaway as to whether Glideaway has infringed or is
`
`infringing one or more claims of the Patents-in-Suit.
`
`7.
`
`The claims herein arise under the patent laws of the United States as
`
`enacted under Title 35 of the United States Code and the provisions of the Federal
`
`Declaratory Judgment Act.
`
`  
`
`2
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 2
`
`

`
`Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 3 of 13 PageID #: 3
`
`8.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over these claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
`
`1331, 1338, 2201, and 2202.
`
`9.
`
`On information and belief, Bedgear is subject to this Court’s specific and
`
`general personal jurisdiction, pursuant to due process and the Missouri Long Arm Statute,
`
`due at least to its substantial business in this forum and its substantial contacts with this
`
`forum. Without limitation, on information and belief, within this state, Bedgear
`
`maintains systematic and continuous contacts with this District and the State of Missouri
`
`and Bedgear has maintained contacts with this District out of which this cause of action
`
`arose.
`
`10.
`
`Bedgear sells its products, including its pillows that Bedgear has asserted
`
`practice the technology claimed in the Patents-in-Suit, through numerous retail stores
`
`located throughout this District, including numerous Mattress Direct stores, such as the
`
`Mattress Direct store located at 410 THF Blvd., Chesterfield, MO 63005. On
`
`information and belief, Bedgear regularly travels to this District to market its pillows that
`
`Bedgear contends practice the technology claimed in the Patents-in-Suit. By way of
`
`further example, Bedgear also has partnered with Mattress Direct and the St. Louis Blues
`
`hockey team to develop, market, and sell an exclusive, custom St. Louis Blues Bedgear
`
`performance pillow in this District that, on information and belief, Bedgear contends
`
`practices the Patents-in-Suit. Bedgear has traveled to this district relating to promotions
`
`for this pillow and it is being sold at the St. Louis Blues team store at Scottrade Center in
`
`this District.
`
`11.
`
`Further, on November 25, 2015, Bedgear has directed its patent assertion
`
`activities towards this District by sending correspondence to Glideaway’s principal place
`
`  
`
`3
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 3
`
`

`
`Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 4 of 13 PageID #: 4
`
`of business in St. Louis, Missouri in which Bedgear alleged that Glideaway was
`
`infringing on the Patents-in-Suit and demanded that Glideaway cease and desist selling
`
`its Sleepharmony Revolution Tech pillow line, the design of which occurred in this
`
`District. Bedgear has asserted that Glideaway’s Sleepharmony Revolution Tech pillow
`
`line has caused irreparable harm to Bedgear’s pillows that Bedgear contends practice the
`
`Patents-in-Suit due to alleged lost business opportunities, alleged lost market share, and
`
`alleged price erosion that, on information and belief, Bedgear contends has occurred in
`
`this District.
`
`12.
`
`Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b), 1391(c), and
`
`1400(b) at least because Bedgear is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District and
`
`does business in the State of Missouri and this District. Further, divisional venue in the
`
`Eastern Division of this District is proper under E.D.Mo. L.R. 2.07, at least because
`
`Plaintiff resides in the Eastern Division.
`
`COUNT I
`Declaration of Non-infringement of the ‘134 Patent
`
`13.
`
`Glideaway incorporates the foregoing paragraphs by reference as though
`
`set forth fully herein.
`
`14.
`
`The ‘134 Patent
`
`is entitled “Pillow with Gusset of Open Cell
`
`Construction.”
`
`15.
`
`A true and correct copy of the ‘134 Patent is attached as Exhibit 3 to this
`
`complaint.
`
`16.
`
`In the New York Complaint, Bedgear alleges Glideaway Revolution Tech
`
`pillows, including the Inspire pillow, infringe claims 11, 12, 13, and 15 of the ‘134
`
`Patent.
`
`  
`
`4
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 4
`
`

`
`Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 5 of 13 PageID #: 5
`
`17.
`
`18.
`
`Claim 11 recites a pillow.
`
`The pillow claimed in Claim 11 requires “a gusset perimetrically
`
`bounding, and joining, said first and second panels, said gusset being formed of an open
`
`cell construction and a base material, and said open cell construction is formed by
`
`apertures defined in said base material. . . .” among other limitations.
`
`19.
`
`Below is a representative figure of the Inspire pillow from Glideaway’s
`
`Revolution Tech pillow line, which Bedgear has accused of infringing Claims 11, 12, 13,
`
`Case 1:15-cv-06759 Document 1 Filed 11/24/15 Page 10 of 20 PageID #: 10
`
`38.
`and 15 of the ‘134 Patent.
`Glideaway’s so-called Inspire pillow product, shown below:
`
`By way of example, on information and belief, these infringing products include
`
`  
`
`20.
`
`21.
`
`By way of example and not limitation, the Inspire pillow does not have the
`See http://www.glideaway.com/
`39.
`As stated on Glideaway’s website, the Inspire pillow includes “Premium
`required gusset meeting the above claim limitations of Claim 11 of the ‘134 Patent.
`Ventilated Latex,” and “Feran Ice and Air+ Mesh Panels [with] breathable and wicking fabrics
`[that] keep you cool and fresh.” See http://glideaway.com/product/inspire/. According to
`By way of example and not limitation, no Revolution Tech Pillow has the
`Glideaway’s website, the “Air+ Mesh material, gel-beads and ventilation promote breathability
`and aid Cooling components.” See http://glideaway.com/products/pillows/revolution-tech-
`required gusset meeting the above claim limitations of Claim 11 of the ‘134 Patent.
`pillows/.
`40.
`On information and belief, Glideaway’s Inspire pillow product includes, among
`Claims 12, 13, and 15 of the ‘134 Patent are dependent claims, which
`other things, a cover that has two opposing panels both with edges that define a perimeter, a
`gusset that joins and/or perimetrically bounds the two panels and is formed of an open cell
`include the limitations of Claim 11 of the ‘134 Patent and are thus not met for at least
`construction and a base material, and an inner cavity defined by inner surfaces of the two panels
`
`22.
`
`these same reasons.
`
`and the gusset, which includes a fill material. On information and belief, the Inspire pillow
`
`allows air to enter the inner cavity through pores in the two panels and exit the inner cavity
`
`23.
`
`through pores in the gusset.
`No Revolution Tech Pillow infringes any claim of the ‘134 Patent for at
`41.
`As another example, on information and belief, these infringing products also
`include Glideaway’s so-called Legend pillow product, shown below:
`least the above exemplary reasons.
`
`24.
`
`10
`Pursuant to the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 et
`
`seq., there exists a substantial controversy of sufficient immediacy and reality between
`
`Glideaway and Bedgear to warrant issuance of a declaratory judgment, and Glideaway
`
`  
`
`5
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 5
`
`

`
`Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 6 of 13 PageID #: 6
`
`requests the declaration of the Court that Glideaway does not infringe and has not
`
`infringed any claim of the ‘134 Patent.
`
`COUNT II
`Declaration of Non-infringement of the ‘332 Patent
`
`25.
`
`Glideaway incorporates the foregoing paragraphs by reference as though
`
`set forth fully herein.
`
`26.
`
`The ‘332 Patent
`
`is entitled “Pillow with Gusset of Open Cell
`
`Construction.”
`
`27.
`
`A true and correct copy of the ‘332 Patent is attached as Exhibit 4 to this
`
`complaint.
`
`28.
`
`In the New York Complaint, Bedgear alleges Glideaway Revolution Tech
`
`pillows, including the Inspire and Legend pillow, infringe Claims 1, 6-9, 16, 22, 29, 31,
`
`and 34 of the ‘332 Patent.
`
`29.
`
`30.
`
`Claim 1 recites a pillow.
`
`The pillow claimed in Claim 1 requires a “gusset” that “joins” “a first
`
`panel having an edge defining a perimeter” and “a second panel having an edge defining
`
`a perimeter” and also comprises “a material having a greater porosity” than “a porous
`
`material” of which a first and second panel are comprised, among other limitations.
`
`31.
`
`Below is a representative figure of the Inspire pillow from Glideaway’s
`
`Revolution Tech pillow line, which Bedgear has accused of infringing Claims 1, 6-9, 16,
`
`Case 1:15-cv-06759 Document 1 Filed 11/24/15 Page 10 of 20 PageID #: 10
`
`38.
`By way of example, on information and belief, these infringing products include
`22, 29, 31, and 34 of the ‘332 Patent.
`Glideaway’s so-called Inspire pillow product, shown below:
`
`  
`
`  
`
`See http://www.glideaway.com/
`
`39.
`
`As stated on Glideaway’s website, the Inspire pillow includes “Premium
`6
`Ventilated Latex,” and “Feran Ice and Air+ Mesh Panels [with] breathable and wicking fabrics
`[that] keep you cool and fresh.” See http://glideaway.com/product/inspire/. According to
`
`Glideaway’s website, the “Air+ Mesh material, gel-beads and ventilation promote breathability
`
`and aid Cooling components.” See http://glideaway.com/products/pillows/revolution-tech-
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 6
`
`

`
`Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 7 of 13 PageID #: 7
`
`32.
`
`By way of example and not limitation, the Inspire pillow does not have the
`
`gusset meeting the above claim limitations of Claim 1 of the ‘332 Patent.
`
`33.
`
`Below is a representative picture of the Legend pillow from Glideaway’s
`Case 1:15-cv-06759 Document 1 Filed 11/24/15 Page 11 of 20 PageID #: 11
`Revolution Tech pillow line, which Bedgear has accused of infringing Claims 1, 6-9, 16,
`
`22, 29, 31, and 34 of the ‘332 Patent.
`
`  
`
`34.
`
`By way of example and not limitation, the Legend pillow does not have
`See http://www.glideaway.com/
`42.
`Similar to its Inspire product, Glideaway’s website states that the Legend pillow
`the gusset meeting the above claim limitations of Claim 1 of the ‘332 Patent.
`includes “Charcoal Infused Memory Foam,” and “Ventilated, Feran Ice, and Air+ Mesh Panels
`
`35.
`
`[with] breathability and wicking fabrics [that] keep you cool and fresh.” See
`By way of example and not limitation, no Revolution Tech Pillow has the
`http://glideaway.com/product/legend/.
`required gusset meeting the above claim limitations of Claim 1.
`43.
`On information and belief, Glideaway’s Legend pillow product includes, among
`
`36.
`
`other things, a cover that has two opposing panels both with edges that define a perimeter, a
`Claims 6-9, 22, and 29 of the ‘332 Patent are dependent claims, which
`gusset that joins the two panels and is formed of an open cell construction and a base material,
`include the limitations of Claim 1 of the ‘332 Patent and are thus not met for at least these
`and an inner cavity defined by inner surfaces of the two panels and the gusset, which includes a
`fill material. On information and belief, the Legend pillow allows air to enter the inner cavity
`
`same reasons.
`
`37.
`
`through pores in the two panels and exit the inner cavity through pores in the gusset. On
`Claim 31 of the ‘332 Patent requires “a first panel,” “a second panel
`information and belief, the Legend pillow further includes an opening extending through inner
`and outer surfaces of one of the panels, a patch covering the opening that is made from a
`opposite the first panel,” and “a gusset perimetrically bounding and joining said first and
`different material than the panels, a filter that engages the inner surface of the panel such that the
`
`opening is positioned between the patch and the filter and pores in the patch alternate with pores
`second panels” that “define a cover having an inner surface defining a chamber for fill
`
`material,” among other limitations.
`
`38.
`
`11
`By way of example and not limitation, the Inspire and Legend pillows do
`
`not meet at least these limitations of Claim 31 of the ‘332 Patent.
`
`39.
`
`Claim 34 of the ‘332 Patent requires a “gusset” joining “a first panel
`
`having an edge defining a perimeter” and “a second panel having an edge defining a
`
`  
`
`7
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 7
`
`

`
`Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 8 of 13 PageID #: 8
`
`perimeter” where the “gusset” is “formed of an open cell construction . . . being formed
`
`by space-apart strands,” among other limitations.
`
`40.
`
`By way of example and not limitation, the Inspire and Legend pillows do
`
`not meet at least these limitations of Claim 34 of the ‘332 Patent.
`
`41.
`
`By way of example and not limitation, no Revolution Tech Pillow
`
`infringes any claim of the ‘332 Patent for at least the above exemplary reasons.
`
`42.
`
`Pursuant to the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 et
`
`seq., there exists a substantial controversy of sufficient immediacy and reality between
`
`Glideaway and Bedgear to warrant issuance of a declaratory judgment, and Glideaway
`
`requests the declaration of the Court that Glideaway does not infringe and has not
`
`infringed any claim of the ‘332 Patent.
`
`COUNT III
`Declaration of Non-infringement of the ‘883 Patent
`
`43.
`
`Glideaway incorporates the foregoing paragraphs by reference as though
`
`set forth fully herein.
`
`44.
`
`The ‘883 Patent
`
`is entitled “Pillow with Gusset of Open Cell
`
`Construction.”
`
`45.
`
`A true and correct copy of the ‘883 Patent is attached as Exhibit 5 to this
`
`complaint.
`
`46.
`
`In the New York Complaint, Bedgear alleges Glideaway Revolution Tech
`
`pillows, including the Inspire and Legend pillows, infringe Claims 1-10 and 14 of the
`
`‘883 Patent.
`
`47.
`
`Claim 1 recites a pillow.
`
`  
`
`8
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 8
`
`

`
`Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 9 of 13 PageID #: 9
`
`48.
`
`The pillow claimed in Claim 1 requires “inner surfaces” of “a first panel
`
`having an edge defining a perimeter,” “a second panel having an edge defining a
`
`perimeter,” and “a gusset” joining the first and second panels that “define an inner
`
`cavity;” and the pillow is “configured to have air enter the cavity through pores in the
`
`first and second panels” and have that air “exit the cavity through pores in the gusset,”
`
`among other limitations.
`
`49.
`
`Below is a representative figure of the Inspire pillow from Glideaway’s
`
`Revolution Tech pillow line, which Bedgear has accused of infringing Claims 1-10 and
`
`Case 1:15-cv-06759 Document 1 Filed 11/24/15 Page 10 of 20 PageID #: 10
`
`14 of the ‘883 Patent.
`Glideaway’s so-called Inspire pillow product, shown below:
`
`38.
`
`By way of example, on information and belief, these infringing products include
`
`  
`
`50.
`
`51.
`
`By way of example and not limitation, the Inspire pillow does not meet at
`See http://www.glideaway.com/
`39.
`As stated on Glideaway’s website, the Inspire pillow includes “Premium
`least the above claim limitations of Claim 1 of the ‘883 Patent.
`Ventilated Latex,” and “Feran Ice and Air+ Mesh Panels [with] breathable and wicking fabrics
`[that] keep you cool and fresh.” See http://glideaway.com/product/inspire/. According to
`Below is a representative picture of the Legend pillow from Glideaway’s
`Glideaway’s website, the “Air+ Mesh material, gel-beads and ventilation promote breathability
`Case 1:15-cv-06759 Document 1 Filed 11/24/15 Page 11 of 20 PageID #: 11
`and aid Cooling components.” See http://glideaway.com/products/pillows/revolution-tech-
`Revolution Tech pillow line, which Bedgear has accused of infringing Claims 1-10 and
`pillows/.
`40.
`On information and belief, Glideaway’s Inspire pillow product includes, among
`
`14 of the ‘883 Patent.
`other things, a cover that has two opposing panels both with edges that define a perimeter, a
`gusset that joins and/or perimetrically bounds the two panels and is formed of an open cell
`
`construction and a base material, and an inner cavity defined by inner surfaces of the two panels
`
`and the gusset, which includes a fill material. On information and belief, the Inspire pillow
`
`allows air to enter the inner cavity through pores in the two panels and exit the inner cavity
`
`through pores in the gusset.
`
`41.
`
`As another example, on information and belief, these infringing products also
`
`include Glideaway’s so-called Legend pillow product, shown below:
`
`  
`
`52.
`
`By way of example and not limitation, the Legend pillow does not meet at
`See http://www.glideaway.com/
`10
`42.
`Similar to its Inspire product, Glideaway’s website states that the Legend pillow
`least the above claim limitations of Claim 1 of the ‘883 Patent.
`includes “Charcoal Infused Memory Foam,” and “Ventilated, Feran Ice, and Air+ Mesh Panels
`
`  
`
`[with] breathability and wicking fabrics [that] keep you cool and fresh.” See
`
`http://glideaway.com/product/legend/.
`
`43.
`
`On information and belief, Glideaway’s Legend pillow product includes, among
`other things, a cover that has two opposing panels both with edges that define a perimeter, a
`9
`gusset that joins the two panels and is formed of an open cell construction and a base material,
`
`and an inner cavity defined by inner surfaces of the two panels and the gusset, which includes a
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 9
`
`

`
`Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 10 of 13 PageID #: 10
`
`53.
`
`By way of example and not limitation, no Revolution Tech Pillow meets
`
`the limitations of Claim 1 for at least the above exemplary reasons.
`
`54.
`
`Claims 2-10 and 14 are dependent claims, which include the limitations of
`
`Claim 1 of the ‘883 Patent and are thus not met for at least these same reasons.
`
`55.
`
`By way of example and not limitation, no Revolution Tech Pillow
`
`infringes any claim of the ‘883 Patent for at least the above exemplary reasons.
`
`56.
`
`Pursuant to the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 et
`
`seq., there exists a substantial controversy of sufficient immediacy and reality between
`
`Glideaway and Bedgear to warrant issuance of a declaratory judgment, and Glideaway
`
`requests the declaration of the Court that Glideaway does not infringe and has not
`
`infringed any claim of the ‘883 Patent.
`
`COUNT IV
`Declaration of Non-infringement of the ‘408 Patent
`
`57.
`
`Glideaway incorporates the foregoing paragraphs by reference as though
`
`set forth fully herein.
`
`The ‘408 Patent is entitled “Pillow Protector.”
`
`A true and correct copy of the ‘408 Patent is attached as Exhibit 6 to this
`
`58.
`
`59.
`
`complaint.
`
`60.
`
`In the New York Complaint, Bedgear alleges Glideaway Revolution Tech
`
`pillows, including the Legend pillow, infringe Claims 1, 4, 5, 10, and 11 of the ‘408
`
`Patent.
`
`61.
`
`62.
`
`Claim 1 recites a pillow.
`
`The pillow claimed in Claim 1 requires an “opening” with a “patch
`
`covering the opening” and a “filter” with an opening “positioned between the patch and
`
`  
`
`10
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 10
`
`

`
`Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 11 of 13 PageID #: 11
`
`the filter,” and Claim 1 also requires that “the second panel is free of any openings
`
`having the size, shape, and arrangement of the opening in the first panel,” among other
`
`limitations.
`
`63.
`
`Below is a representative picture of the Legend pillow from Glideaway’s
`Case 1:15-cv-06759 Document 1 Filed 11/24/15 Page 11 of 20 PageID #: 11
`Revolution Tech pillow line, which Bedgear has accused of infringing Claims 1, 4, 5, 10,
`
`and 11 of the ‘408 Patent.
`
`  
`
`64.
`
`By way of example and not limitation, the Legend pillow does meet at
`See http://www.glideaway.com/
`42.
`Similar to its Inspire product, Glideaway’s website states that the Legend pillow
`least these claim limitations of Claim 1 of the ‘408 Patent.
`includes “Charcoal Infused Memory Foam,” and “Ventilated, Feran Ice, and Air+ Mesh Panels
`
`65.
`
`[with] breathability and wicking fabrics [that] keep you cool and fresh.” See
`By way of example and not limitation, no Revolution Tech Pillow meets
`http://glideaway.com/product/legend/.
`the limitations of Claim 1, for at least the above exemplary reasons.
`43.
`On information and belief, Glideaway’s Legend pillow product includes, among
`
`66.
`
`other things, a cover that has two opposing panels both with edges that define a perimeter, a
`Claims 4, 5, 10, and 11 of the ‘408 Patent are dependent claims, which
`gusset that joins the two panels and is formed of an open cell construction and a base material,
`include the limitations of Claim 1 of the ‘408 Patent and are thus not met for at least these
`and an inner cavity defined by inner surfaces of the two panels and the gusset, which includes a
`fill material. On information and belief, the Legend pillow allows air to enter the inner cavity
`
`same reasons.
`
`67.
`
`through pores in the two panels and exit the inner cavity through pores in the gusset. On
`By way of example and not limitation, no Revolution Tech Pillow
`information and belief, the Legend pillow further includes an opening extending through inner
`and outer surfaces of one of the panels, a patch covering the opening that is made from a
`infringes any claim of the ‘408 Patent for at least the above exemplary reasons.
`different material than the panels, a filter that engages the inner surface of the panel such that the
`
`68.
`
`opening is positioned between the patch and the filter and pores in the patch alternate with pores
`Pursuant to the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 et
`
`seq., there exists a substantial controversy of sufficient immediacy and reality between
`11
`Glideaway and Bedgear to warrant issuance of a declaratory judgment, and Glideaway
`
`requests the declaration of the Court that Glideaway does not infringe and has not
`
`infringed any claim of the ‘408 Patent.
`
`  
`
`11
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 11
`
`

`
`Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 12 of 13 PageID #: 12
`
`WHEREFORE, Glideaway asks the Court to:
`
`Prayer for Relief
`
`A.
`
`Declare that Glideaway does not infringe and has not infringed any claims of
`
`the ‘134 Patent;
`
`B.
`
`Declare that Glideaway does not infringe and has not infringed any claims of
`
`the ‘332 Patent;
`
`C.
`
`Declare that Glideaway does not infringe and has not infringed any claims of
`
`the ‘883 Patent;
`
`D.
`
`Declare that Glideaway does not infringe and has not infringed any claims of
`
`the ‘408 Patent;
`
`E.
`
`Order that Bedgear and each of its officers, employees, agents, attorneys, and
`
`any persons in active concert or participation with them are restrained and
`
`enjoined from further claiming that the Patents-in-Suit are infringed by
`
`Glideaway or from representing that Glideaway’s products infringe the
`
`Patents-in-Suit; and
`
`F.
`
`Award Glideaway its attorneys’ fees and nontaxable costs pursuant to 35
`
`U.S.C. § 285 and other applicable provisions.
`
`G.
`
`Grant Glideaway all other relief that the Court may deem just and proper.
`
`Jury Demand
`
`Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38, Glideaway hereby demands a jury
`
`12
`
`trial on all issues so triable.
`
`
`
`  
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 12
`
`

`
`Case: 4:16-cv-00083-SPM Doc. #: 1 Filed: 01/21/16 Page: 13 of 13 PageID #: 13
`
`Dated: January 21, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Megan J. Redmond
`Megan J. Redmond
`Erise IP, P.A.
`6201 College Blvd., Suite 300
`Overland Park, KS 66211
`Tel: (913) 777-5600
`Fax: (913) 777-5601
`megan.redmond@eriseip.com
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff Fredman Bros.
`Furniture Co., Inc. d/b/a Glideaway
`Sleep Products
`
`
`
`  
`
`13
`
`IPR2017-00351
`Fredman EX1054 Page 13