Ficep v. Voortman
-
Upload
priorsmart -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of Ficep v. Voortman
-
7/29/2019 Ficep v. Voortman
1/5
4840-3464-7570.4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
FICEP CORPORATION,2301 Industry Court,Forest Hill Industrial Park,
Forest Hill, Maryland 21050
Maryland County of Residence: Harford
County
Plaintiff, Civil Action No.: _______
v.
VOORTMAN USA CORP.,
450 South Spruce Street,
Manteno, Illinois 60950
Defendant.
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
I. PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Ficep Corporation (Ficep) is a Maryland corporation having offices at
2301 Industry Court, Forest Hill Industrial Park, Forest Hill, Maryland 21050.
2. On information and belief, defendant Voortman USA Corp. (Voortman) is an
entity organized under the laws of Illinois and having a place of business at 450 South Spruce
Street, Manteno, Illinois 60950.
II. BACKGROUND
3. This action for patent infringement arises under the patent laws of the United
States, 35 U.S.C. 1 et seq.
-
7/29/2019 Ficep v. Voortman
2/5
- 2 -4840-3464-7570.4
4. Ficep is the owner of all rights, title and interest including the right to bring a
suit for patent infringement in U.S. Patent No. 7,974,719, entitled Method and Apparatus for
Automatic Manufacture of an Object with Multiple Intersecting Components (the 719
Patent) (copy attached as Exhibit A, hereto).
5. Ficep is an industry leader and principal supplier of structural steel and plate
fabrication and processing systems. The 719 patent generally relates to systems and methods
for the manufacture of construction components, such as steel beams, including for example by
cutting or shaping the component or marking particular locations thereon based upon
construction information that may be stored in a computer.
6. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action under 28 U.S.C.
1331 and 1338(a).
III. CLAIM FOR RELIEF
7. Ficep incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs, as if fully stated
herein.
8. Defendant Voortman has directly and/or indirectly infringed one or more claims
of the 719 Patent, in violation of one or more subsections of 35 U.S.C. 271 including at least
one or more of subsections 271(a), (b), (c), (f) and (g).
9. By correspondence from its counsel dated March 20, 2012 and/or April 16, 2012,
Ficep told Voortman of Voortmans infringements on account of at least one or more of
Voortmans V704M layout marking system products, V806 and V808 coping products, V603
and V630 drilling products, and V330C and V330S plate processing products.
-
7/29/2019 Ficep v. Voortman
3/5
- 3 -4840-3464-7570.4
10. Voortmans direct infringements and/or the direct infringements of others, for
which Voortman would be liable as an indirect infringer satisfy all the limitations of one or
more claims of the 719 Patent, either literally or by equivalents.
11. Defendant Voortman is liable as a direct infringer because it has made, used, sold,
offered to sell, or imported into the U.S., products or services that are within the scope of one or
more claims of the 719 Patent and/or Defendant Voortman has made, used, sold, offered to sell,
or imported into the U.S. products, made by methods claimed in the 719 Patent.
12. Defendant Voortman is liable as an indirect infringer for the direct infringement
of others that have made, used, sold or offered to sell, or imported into the U.S., products or
services that are within the scope of one or more claims of the 719 Patent and/or that have
made, used, sold, offered to sell, or imported into the U.S., products made by methods claimed in
the 719 Patent.
13. On information and belief, defendant Voortman has actively induced infringement
of the 719 Patent, at least by intentionally encouraging the direct infringement of one or more
claims of the 719 Patent by customers, buyers, sellers and others. On information and belief,
prior to this action, Voortman had knowledge of and intended to cause direct infringement by
others and/or Voortman willfully blinded itself to the existence of the 719 Patent and such
infringement.
14. On information and belief, defendant Voortman is also a contributory infringer of
one or more claims of the 719 Patent, at least because it sells, offers to sell, or imports into the
U.S. a material or apparatus for use in practicing subject matter claimed in the 719 Patent,
constituting a material part of the invention, knowing the same to be especially made or
especially adapted for use in such infringement, and not a staple article or commodity of
-
7/29/2019 Ficep v. Voortman
4/5
- 4 -4840-3464-7570.4
commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. On information and belief, prior to this
action Voortman had knowledge of the 719 Patent and intended to cause direct infringement by
others, and/or Voortman willfully blinded itself to the existence of the 719 Patent and such
infringement.
15. Ficep has sustained damages as a result of Voortmans direct and/or indirect
infringement of the 719 Patent identified herein and Voortman is liable for such damages in this
action, including pre-suit damages.
16. Ficep has no adequate remedy at law for Voortmans continued infringement of
the 719 Patent such that the Court must enjoin Voortman from further acts of infringement.
17. On information and belief, Voortmans direct and/or indirect infringement of the
719 Patent is and has been willful and deliberate, justifying increased damages under 35 U.S.C.
284.
18. In addition, Voortmans infringement of the 719 Patent is exceptional and
entitles Ficep to an award of attorneys fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this action under
35 U.S.C. 285.
IV. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Ficep hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable in this action.
V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Ficep respectfully requests the following relief:
A. Enjoin Voortman and each of its respective affiliates, subsidiaries; officers, directors,
employees, agents, representatives, licensees, successors, assigns and all those
acting for them, on their behalf, or in concert with them from further infringement
of the 719 Patent as alleged herein.
-
7/29/2019 Ficep v. Voortman
5/5
- 5 -4840-3464-7570.4
B. Award Ficep compensatory damages, costs, prejudgment interest, and postjudgment
interest for infringement of the 719 Patent;
C. Award Ficep treble damages per 35 U.S.C. 284;
D. Declare the claim for relief asserted herein to be exceptional under 35 U.S.C. 285
and award Ficep its reasonable attorneys fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this
action; and
E. Award such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
Dated: February 7, 2013 /s/ Lisa S. Mankofsky
Lisa S. MankofskyGen. Bar No. 04940FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
3000 K Street, N.W. Suite 600
Washington, D.C. 20007-5109Telephone: (202) 672-5300
Facsimile: (202) 672-5399
Attorneys for Plaintiff
FICEP CORPORATION
Of Counsel:
Robert J. SilvermanFOLEY & LARDNER LLP
111 Huntington Avenue
Boston, MA 02199
Telephone: (617) 342-4000Facsimile: (617) 342-4001