MMI v. Rich Godfrey Assocs. - Complaint

Case 2:15-cv-00449-ESW Document 1 Filed 03/12/15 Page 1 of 35
1
2
3
4
5
MICHAEL GERITY, BAR NO. 015750

ISRAEL & GERITY, PLLC
3300 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE, SUITE 2000
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012
TELEPHONE: (602) 274-4400
FACSIMILE: (602) 274-4401
MGERITY@IG-LAW.COM
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
7
8
MMI, Inc., an Arizona corporation,

Plaintiff,
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
11
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
85012
3300
NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE, SUITE
ISRAEL & GERITY, P.L.L.C.
2000
10
12
13
14
15
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT

INFRINGEMENT
v.
Rich Godfrey & Associates, Inc., an
Arizona Corporation, dba Coleman
Powersports; Richard W. Godfrey and
Jane Doe Godfrey, husband and wife;
Cabelas, Inc., a foreign corporation;
BJs Wholesale Club, Inc., a foreign
corporation; Recon Enterprise, LLC,
an Arizona limited liability company;
John and Jane Does 1-97, and Black
and White Companies 1-97,
16
No.
AND
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Defendants.
17
18
19
Plaintiff MMI, Inc. (hereinafter Plaintiff), for its Complaint against the
Defendants, alleges as follows:
THE PARTIES
20
21
1.
Plaintiff MMI, Inc., (hereinafter MMI) is a corporation organized and
22
existing under the laws of the State of Arizona, with its principal place of business at
23
8512 East Jenan in Scottsdale, Arizona.
24
2.
At all times relevant, Defendant Rich Godfrey & Associates, Inc.
25
(hereinafter RGA), was an Arizona corporation doing business in Maricopa County,
26
Arizona, and doing business as Coleman Powersports.
27
28
3.
At all times relevant, and upon information and belief, Defendants
Richard W. Godfrey and Jane Doe Godfrey (hereinafter Godfrey), were husband
and wife, and reside in Maricopa County, Arizona. At all times material to the
Complaint, Defendant Richard Godfrey, if married, acted on behalf of and in
furtherance of his marital community with his wife, Jane Doe Godfrey. The name
Jane Doe Godfrey is a fictitious name used to represent the wife of Defendant
Godfrey until her true identity is discovered
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
85012
3300
2000
4.
At all times relevant, Defendant Cabelas, Inc (hereinafter Cabelas),
was a Nebraska corporation authorized to and doing business in Maricopa County,
Arizona.
5.
At all times relevant, Defendant BJs Wholesale Club, Inc. (hereinafter
10
BJs), was a Delaware corporation authorized to and doing business in Maricopa
11
County, Arizona.
12
13
14
6.
At all times relevant, Recon Enterprise, LLC (hereinafter Recon), was
an Arizona limited liability company doing business in Maricopa County, Arizona.

7.
The true names or capacities, whether individuals, corporations,
15
associations or otherwise of defendants John and Jane Does 1 through 97, and Black
16
and White Companies 1-97, are unknown to Plaintiff, who therefore sues said
17
Defendants by fictitious names. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon
18
alleges, that each of the Defendants designated herein as such is legally responsible in
19
some manner for the events and happenings herein referred to, and thereby
20
proximately caused injury and damage to Plaintiff as herein alleged. Plaintiff prays for
21
leave to amend this Complaint so as to allege their true names and capacities as
22
ascertained.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
23
24
25
26
27
8.
Subject matter jurisdiction is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
1331 and 1338 because this action, at least in part, is for patent infringement and
arises under the Patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United States Code.
Jurisdiction also exists pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332(a) because complete diversity of
28
2
citizenship exists between the parties and the amount in controversy exceeds the sum
or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. This Court has jurisdiction over
any Arizona state law claims under principles of pendent, ancillary, and supplemental
jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. 1338(b) and 1367(a).
9.
Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b), (d), and
1400(b) because, inter alia, one or more of the acts of infringement complained of took
place in this district and have had or will have had effect in this judicial district.
GENERAL AVERMENTS
8
9
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
85012
3300
2000
10
MMI Background and the Patent

10.
MMI and its principal have been leaders in designing and developing
11
motorbike and related products for decades.
12
resources to remain on the cutting edge of an ever-changing and challenging market.
13
11.
Plaintiff has dedicated substantial
To protect its investment in its designs and technology, Plaintiff has
14
procured several patents, including design patents. Plaintiffs products built around
15
these patented designs have been widely successful, appreciated and embraced by the
16
industry.
17
12.
On April 28, 2009, United States Patent No. D591,203S (the 203
18
Patent) was duly and legally issued to Christopher V. Martin. MMI is the assignee of
19
all rights in and title to the 203 Patent. A true and correct copy of the 203 Patent is
20
attached as Exhibit A, and incorporated herein by this reference.
21
13.
The 203 Patent applies, at least in part, to the ornamental design of an
22
asymmetrical mini bike.
23
Defendants and the Infringing Activity
24
25
26
27
14.
Defendant Richard Godfrey is the sole owner, director and officer of
Defendant RGA. He formerly associated with Plaintiff, both as an employee of other

companies and on his own, in the business of distributing and selling mini bikes,
including those incorporating the design of the 203 Patent and other patented designs.
28
3
engaged and continue to engage in the manufacture, marketing, distribution and sale of
mini bikes.
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
2000
85012
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
16.
As an employee of a former licensee of 203 Patent, Defendant Richard
Godfrey was made well aware of the existence, value and scope of that Patent, as well
as other patents owned by or otherwise assigned to Plaintiff. In fact, Defendant
Godfrey was a material witness in a prior lawsuit for infringement of the 203 Patent
that was brought against Defendants prior employer.
Both Defendant Richard Godfrey and Defendant RGA engage, have
3300
15.
17.
After that litigation against his former employer was concluded,
10
Defendant Godfrey entered into discussions with Plaintiff to license the 203 Patent
11
and sell mini bikes pursuant to such a license.
12
18.
As part of those discussions, and in furtherance of the proposed license,
13
Defendant Godfrey was provided with a prototype mini bike that Plaintiff had built
14
using the design set forth in the 203 Patent. That prototype remained the property of
15
Plaintiff at all times. Defendant Godfrey specifically agreed he would return the
16
prototype to Plaintiff after he had used it to attempt to secure manufacturing and
17
distributing agreements for the mini bike pursuant to the proposed license.
18
19.
Instead of using the prototype mini bike for the intended purposes,
19
Defendant Godfrey took possession and control of it, deprived Plaintiff of it. Upon
20
information and belief, Defendant Godfrey shipped or caused the prototype to be
21
shipped to China to be copied into an almost identical mini bike model that directly
22
incorporated the design elements of the 203 Patent (hereinafter referred to as the
23
Infringing Products).
24
25
26
27
20.
Defendant Godfrey failed and refused to return the prototype mini bike,
in violation of the parties agreement.

21.
While the parties had come to a licensing agreement in principle,
Defendant Godfrey failed and refused to reduce the terms to writing. Nonetheless,
28
4
the parties very plainly agreed, and Defendant Godfrey specifically acknowledged, that
he would only manufacture, market, import, distribute or sell mini bikes pursuant to a
license agreement with Plaintiff.
purposes of manufacturing, marketing, importing, distributing and selling the
Infringing Products.
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
2000
85012
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
23.
Notwithstanding Defendant Godfreys knowledge and appreciation of
the value and scope of the 203 Patent, upon information and belief, Defendant
Godfrey, by himself or in conjunction with Defendant RGA, has made, imported,
10
Thereafter, Defendant Godfrey formed Defendant RGA for the
3300
22.
11
distributed, sold, offered for sale and/or used Infringing Products.

24.
Upon information and belief, Defendants Godfrey and/or RGA have
12
sold the Infringing Products to, or have otherwise made the Infringing Products
13
available for subsequent purchase by, Defendant Cabelas.
14
15
16
25.
Upon information and belief, Defendant Cabelas has thereafter made,
imported, distributed, sold, offered for sale and/or used Infringing Products.
26.
17
18
available for subsequent purchase by, Defendant BJs.
19
20
21
27.
Upon information and belief, Defendant BJs has thereafter made,
28.
22
23
available for subsequent purchase by, Defendant Recon.
24
25
29.
Upon information and belief, Defendant Recon has thereafter made,
26
27
28
5
actively induced and currently are actively inducing others to infringe one or more
claims of the 203 Patent through their sale of certain products.
their offer for sale and sale of certain products.
85012
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
2000
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
contributorily infringed and currently are contributorily infringing the 203 Patent by
31.
3300
30.
32.
Defendants Godfreys and/or RGAs Infringing Products infringe the
claim of the 203 Patent.

33.
10
been aware of their infringing activity since the time the prototype was taken on or
11
around October 21, 2013.
12
34.
Upon information and belief, Defendants Cabelas, BJs and Recon have
13
been aware of the infringing activity since at least June 25, 2014, when they were sent a
14
demand letter on behalf of Plaintiff by undersigned counsel.
15
16
17
35.
Despite notice of their infringing activity, Defendants have continued
and continue the above activities to date.

36.
The activities of the Defendants, with regard to their manufacture,
18
importation, distribution, sale, offers for sale and/or use of the Infringing Products,
19
are and have been without authorization from Plaintiff.
20
COUNT I
21
PATENT INFRINGEMENT
22
23
24
25
37.
This cause of action arises under the Laws of the United States, Title 35,
United States Code.

38.
Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates all of the allegations contained
in the above Paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.
26
27
28
6
under 35 U.S.C. 271 et seq. Upon information and belief, this infringement was
intentional.
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
2000
85012
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
40.
Upon information and belief, Defendants continue to infringe the 203
Patent under 35 U.S.C. 271 et seq. Upon information and belief, these ongoing acts
of infringement are intentional.
Upon information and belief, Defendants have infringed the 203 Patent
3300
39.
41.
Upon information and belief, Defendants, acting through and by their
respective officers and owners, have, without authority, consent, right or license, and
in direct infringement of the 203 Patent, made, imported, distributed, sold, offered for
10
sale and/or used the Infringing Products in this country, and such Infringing Products
11
have been sold and used in this jurisdiction and district.
12
13
14
42.
Defendants infringing conduct is intentional and unlawful and, upon
information and belief, will continue unless enjoined by this Court.

43.
Because the 203 Patent is a design patent, the additional remedy
15
provided for by 35 U.S.C. 289 applies, and Defendants are liable to Plaintiff to the
16
extent of their total profit on the Infringing Products, but not less than $250.
17
COUNT II
18
INDUCEMENT OF PATENT INFRINGEMENT
19
20
21
22
23
44.
This cause of action arises under the Patent Laws of the United States,
Title 35, United States Code, in particular under 35 U.S.C. 271(b).

45.

46.
Upon information and belief, Defendants, acting through and by their
24
respective officers and owners, have, in this country, actively and/or intentionally
25
induced others to make, import, distribute, sell, offer for sale and/or use the Infringing
26
Products, in direct infringement of the 203 Patent.
27
28
7
1
2
CONTRIBUTORY PATENT INFRINGEMENT
7
8
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
85012
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
2000

COUNT III
3300
47.
48.
This cause of action arises under the Patent Laws of the United States,
Title 35, United States Code, in particular under 35 U.S.C. 271(c).

49.

50.
Upon information and belief, Defendants are furthermore liable for
10
contributory infringement, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271(c), in that Defendants have
11
made, imported, distributed, sold, offered for sale and/or used within the United
12
States a component of a patented combination or composition, consisting of a
13
material part of the invention, knowing the same to be especially made or adapted for
14
use in the infringement of the 203 Patent and not a staple article or commodity of
15
commerce suitable for substantial non infringing use.
16
17
51.
18
COUNT IV
19
BREACH OF CONTRACT
20
(As to Defendant Godfrey)
21
22
23
52.

53.
Plaintiff and Defendant Godfrey entered into valid and binding
24
agreements regarding the use of the prototype mini bike and any subsequent sales of
25
mini bike products.
26
27
28
8
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
2000
85012
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
Plaintiff has made demand upon Defendant Godfrey for the return of
the prototype mini bike. Defendant Godfrey has failed and refused to return it,
although demand therefor has been made.
3300
54.
55.
Plaintiff has made demand upon Defendant Godfrey to cease and desist
all sales of Infringing Products, or to finalize a license agreement as was agreed by the
parties. Defendant Godfrey has failed and refused to do so, although demand therefor
has been made.
56.
There is now due, owing and unpaid from Defendant Godfrey to
Plaintiff, an amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than the value of the
10
prototype mini bike, plus interest on the amount unpaid at the rate of ten percent
11
(10%) per annum until paid, which amount remains due and owing despite demand
12
therefor.
13
57.
By virtue of the foregoing, Defendant Godfrey has breached his
14
contractual and legal obligations to Plaintiff, thereby causing Plaintiff to suffer damage,
15
injury, and loss for which it is entitled to recover against Defendant. In addition,
16
Plaintiff seeks its costs, expenses, and attorneys fees, and such other and further relief
17
as the court deems just and reasonable, pursuant to A.R.S. 12-341.01 and the terms
18
of the parties agreement.
19
COUNT V
20
BREACH OF COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING
21
22
23
24
25
58.

59.
The law implies in every contract, including the agreements referenced
herein, a covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The actions of Defendant Godfrey,
26
27
28
9
including but not limited to those described above, constitute breaches of the
covenant of good faith and fair dealing imposed on him.
3
4
FRAUD
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
85012
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
2000
10
and fair dealing, Plaintiff has suffered damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
COUNT VI
As a direct result of Defendants breach of the covenant of good faith
3300
60.
61.

62.
In requesting that Plaintiff provide Defendant Godfrey with its
11
prototype, Defendant Godfrey made false representations of material facts, omitted to
12
state material facts necessary to prevent statements made from being false, and/or
13
made promises he did not intend to fulfill. Defendant Godfrey knew that these
14
statements were false when made, that the omissions rendered certain statements false,
15
and that Defendant had no intention of fulfilling his promises.
16
17
18
63.
Upon information and belief, Defendant Godfrey intended that Plaintiff
rely on such misrepresentations, omissions and promises.

64.
Defendant Godfreys misrepresentations, omissions and promises were
19
material to Plaintiffs decision to provide the prototype to Defendant Godfrey.
20
Plaintiff was unaware of the falsity of the statements or omissions or Defendant
21
Godfreys intention not to fulfill his promises to Plaintiff.
22
23
24
65.
Plaintiff reasonably relied on Defendant Godfreys misrepresentations,
omissions and promises, and had a right to so rely.

66.
As a direct result of their detrimental reliance on Defendant Godfreys
25
misrepresentations, omissions and promises, Plaintiff has suffered damages in an
26
amount to be proven at trial.
27
28
10
material facts or making promises he did not intend to fulfill was in conscious
disregard of Plaintiffs rights and interests and therefore warrants the imposition of
punitive damages.
COUNT VII
FRAUDULENT INDUCEMENT
85012
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
2000
10
Defendant Godfreys conduct and misrepresenting or omitting certain
3300
67.
68.

69.
Defendant Godfrey made untrue misrepresentations to and/or failed to
11
disclose to Plaintiff facts and conditions concerning his intentions of entering into a
12
licensing agreement with Plaintiff.
13
70.
Defendant Godfrey knew or should have known that his statements or
14
failure to disclose all relevant facts and conditions surrounding that proposed
15
agreement would have the effect of materially misleading Plaintiff into providing
16
Defendant Godfrey with the prototype mini bike. Upon information and belief,
17
Defendant Godfrey intended to induce Plaintiff to rely upon misrepresentations and
18
omissions.
19
71.
The misleading or undisclosed facts, particularly those regarding
20
Defendants inability or unwillingness to enter into a licensing agreement, were central
21
to Plaintiffs basic decisions concerning Defendant Godfrey, and Plaintiff would not
22
have provided the prototype mini bike to Defendant Godfrey but for his
23
misrepresentations.
24
25
72.
Plaintiff did not and should not have known that the misleading or
undisclosed facts were either untrue or had failed to be disclosed.
26
27
28
11
73.
Godfrey.
74.
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
2000
85012
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
Defendant Godfreys untrue statements and omissions fraudulently
induced Plaintiff to provide him with the prototype mini bike, and Plaintiff is entitled
to recover from Defendant Godfrey the damages resulting from Plaintiffs reliance
along with all costs and reasonable attorneys fees.
COUNT VIII
NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION
10
3300
Plaintiff reasonably relied upon the representations made by Defendant
11
12
75.

76.
Defendant Godfrey had a duty to impart true and correct information to
13
Plaintiff with regard to Defendant Godfreys willingness or ability to enter into a
14
licensing agreement, and to otherwise deal in good faith.
15
16
17
77.
Defendant Godfrey breached his duty to Plaintiff by falsely and recklessly
asserting that Defendant would enter a licensing agreement.

78.
Defendant Godfrey knew or should have known that Plaintiff would rely
18
on this information in making its decision to provide Defendant with the prototype
19
mini bike.
20
79.
21
22
23
Plaintiff materially relied on this information when it decided to provide
Defendant Godfrey with the prototype mini bike.

80.
As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Godfreys breach of his
duty of care, Plaintiff has suffered damages.
24
25
26
27
28
12
COUNT IX
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
3
4
5
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
2000
85012
PHOENIX, ARIZONA

82.
Defendants wrongful conduct has caused and threatens to cause
irreparable harm to Plaintiff that is incapable of being adequately determined and
adequately remedied by money damages.
3300
81.
83.
Plaintiff will continue to suffer irreparable harm unless Defendants are
enjoined from continuing improper acts, including but not limited to, wrongfully
10
infringing, inducing infringement of, and contributing to the infringement of the 203
11
Patent.
12
84.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to a preliminary injunction and a
13
permanent injunction, prohibiting Defendants from making, using, selling, offering for
14
sale, importing and offering to import any and all Infringing Products.
15
85.
A Preliminary Injunction is appropriate in this matter:
(a) because
16
Plaintiff has a likelihood of success on the merits; (b) Plaintiff faces immediate and
17
irreparable harm due to Defendants acts and conduct; (c) that there is a special
18
urgency warranting the grant of injunctive relief; and (d) the balance of hardship tips in
19
favor of Plaintiff.
20
21
DAMAGES
86.
Plaintiff has suffered, is suffering, and will continue to suffer irreparable
22
harm and injury as a result of Defendants aforesaid activities. Defendants will, unless
23
restrained and enjoined, continue to act in the unlawful manner complained of herein,
24
all to Plaintiffs irreparable damage.
25
compensate it for the injuries suffered and threatened.
Plaintiffs remedy at law is not adequate to
26
27
28
13
suffered monetary damages in an amount that has not yet been determined, but upon
information and belief, is substantially in excess of the sum or value of $75,000,
exclusive of interest and costs.
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
2000
85012
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
88.
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284, Plaintiff is entitled to: an accounting by
Defendants of all revenues received through the commercial exploitation of the
Infringing Products; the imposition of a constructive trust for the benefit of Plaintiff
upon all such funds in the custody or control of Defendants; and to such other
damages to which Plaintiff may be determined to be entitled.
10
By reason of Defendants acts complained of herein, Plaintiff has
3300
87.
89.
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 289, Plaintiff is entitled to recover Defendants
11
total profit on the Infringing Products, but not less than $250, as an additional remedy
12
for infringement of a design patent.
13
14
REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL

90.
Plaintiff hereby demands that this cause be tried by a jury.
15
16
17
PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays as follows:
A.
That judgment be entered that Defendants have infringed, actively
18
induced others to infringe, and/or contributorily infringed United States Letters Patent
19
No. D591,203S.
20
B.
That Defendants, their agents, officers, directors, employees,
21
servants, attorneys, privies, successors and assigns, and all holding by, through or
22
under Defendants, and all those acting for or on the behalf of Defendants, or in active
23
concert, participation, or combination with them, be enjoined and restrained,
24
immediately and preliminarily, during the pendency of this action and permanently
25
thereafter from:
26
27
28
14
1
2
(1)
Products, or any colorable imitation thereof,
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
85012
3300
2000
making, using, selling and/or importing the Infringing
(2)
C.
otherwise infringing upon Plaintiffs Patent.
That this Court order Defendants, and their officers, agents,
servants and employees, to deliver up to this Court, and to permit the seizure by
Officers appointed by the Court of all articles and materials infringing upon the rights
of Plaintiff, and particularly, without limitation, all products or other merchandise
which embodies or includes the Infringing Products, and to be delivered up for
destruction on the issuance of a final Order in this action, including all Infringing
10
Products, and all equipment, molds and other matter or materials for reproducing such
11
Infringing Products.
12
D.
That Defendants be required to file with the Court within thirty
13
(30) days after entry of final judgment of this cause a written statement under oath
14
setting forth the manner in which Defendants have complied with the final judgment.
15
16
17
E.
That Defendants be required to pay to Plaintiff such damages as
Plaintiff has sustained in consequence of Defendants infringement of the 203 Patent.

F.
That Defendants, as an additional remedy for infringement of a
18
design patent, be ordered to account for and pay over to Plaintiff all their respective
19
gains, profits and advantages derived from the infringement of Plaintiffs Patents,
20
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 289, or such damages as may appear to the Court as proper
21
within the Patent Laws.
22
G.
23
pursuant to 35. U.S.C. 284.
24
H.
That in the alternative, a reasonable royalty be awarded to Plaintiff

Due inter alia to Defendants willful infringement of Plaintiffs
25
patent rights, that Defendants be ordered to pay Plaintiff enhanced damages (e.g.,
26
treble damages).
27
28
15
1
2
3
4
5
I.
That Defendants be ordered to pay to Plaintiff the costs of this
action, prejudgment interest, and post-judgment interest.

J.
That Defendants be ordered to pay to Plaintiff its reasonable
attorneys fees, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285, as well as pursuant to A.R.S. 12-341.01.

K.
Due inter alia to Defendants willful and flagrant disregard of
Plaintiffs patent rights, that this case be found to be exceptional and that Defendants
be ordered to pay Plaintiffs reasonable attorneys fees and experts fees.
8
9
L.
That Plaintiff has such other and further relief as the Court may
deem just and proper.
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
85012
3300
2000
10
11
12
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 11th day of March 2015.

13
14
17
By: /s/Michael Gerity

Michael Gerity
Israel & Gerity, PLLC
3300 North Central Avenue, Suite 2000
Phoenix, Arizona 85012
18
Attorneys for Plaintiff
15
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
16
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 11th day of March 2015, I electronically transmitted
Plaintiffs Complaint and Jury Demand using the CM/ECF system for filing. There
are no CM/ECF registrants at this time.
3
4
5
6
DATED this 11th day of March 2015.

7
8
9
(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401
PHOENIX, ARIZONA
85012
3300
2000
10
By: /s/Michael Gerity

Michael Gerity
3300 North Central Avenue
Suite 2000
Phoenix, Arizona 85012
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
17
EXHIBIT A
203 Patent

MMI v. Rich Godfrey Assocs. - Complaint

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

MMI v. Rich Godfrey Assocs. - Complaint

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Case 2:15-cv-00449-ESW Document 1 Filed 03/12/15 Page 1 of 35

MICHAEL GERITY, BAR NO. 015750

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

MMI, Inc., an Arizona corporation,

(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401

NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE, SUITE

ISRAEL & GERITY, P.L.L.C.

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT

Plaintiff MMI, Inc., (hereinafter MMI) is a corporation organized and

8512 East Jenan in Scottsdale, Arizona.

At all times relevant, Defendant Rich Godfrey & Associates, Inc.

(hereinafter RGA), was an Arizona corporation doing business in Maricopa County,

Arizona, and doing business as Coleman Powersports.

At all times relevant, and upon information and belief, Defendants

Case 2:15-cv-00449-ESW Document 1 Filed 03/12/15 Page 2 of 35

Complaint, Defendant Richard Godfrey, if married, acted on behalf of and in

Godfrey until her true identity is discovered

(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401

NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE, SUITE

ISRAEL & GERITY, P.L.L.C.

At all times relevant, Defendant Cabelas, Inc (hereinafter Cabelas),

was a Nebraska corporation authorized to and doing business in Maricopa County,

At all times relevant, Defendant BJs Wholesale Club, Inc. (hereinafter

BJs), was a Delaware corporation authorized to and doing business in Maricopa

At all times relevant, Recon Enterprise, LLC (hereinafter Recon), was

an Arizona limited liability company doing business in Maricopa County, Arizona.

The true names or capacities, whether individuals, corporations,

Defendants by fictitious names. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon

Subject matter jurisdiction is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

Case 2:15-cv-00449-ESW Document 1 Filed 03/12/15 Page 3 of 35

jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. 1338(b) and 1367(a).

Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b), (d), and

(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401

NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE, SUITE

ISRAEL & GERITY, P.L.L.C.

MMI Background and the Patent

motorbike and related products for decades.

resources to remain on the cutting edge of an ever-changing and challenging market.

Plaintiff has dedicated substantial

To protect its investment in its designs and technology, Plaintiff has

attached as Exhibit A, and incorporated herein by this reference.

The 203 Patent applies, at least in part, to the ornamental design of an

asymmetrical mini bike.

Defendants and the Infringing Activity

Defendant Richard Godfrey is the sole owner, director and officer of

Defendant RGA. He formerly associated with Plaintiff, both as an employee of other

Case 2:15-cv-00449-ESW Document 1 Filed 03/12/15 Page 4 of 35

(602) 274-4400 / FAX : (602) 274-4401

NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE, SUITE

As an employee of a former licensee of 203 Patent, Defendant Richard

as other patents owned by or otherwise assigned to Plaintiff. In fact, Defendant

that was brought against Defendants prior employer.

ISRAEL & GERITY, P.L.L.C.

Both Defendant Richard Godfrey and Defendant RGA engage, have

After that litigation against his former employer was concluded,

and sell mini bikes pursuant to such a license.

As part of those discussions, and in furtherance of the proposed license,

prototype to Plaintiff after he had used it to attempt to secure manufacturing and

information and belief, Defendant Godfrey shipped or caused the prototype to be

in violation of the parties agreement.

While the parties had come to a licensing agreement in principle,

Case 2:15-cv-00449-ESW Document 1 Filed 03/12/15 Page 5 of 35

license agreement with Plaintiff.