Shenzhen Lianqi E-Commerce v. Huang - Complaint

Case: 1:20-cv-06071 Document #: 1 Filed: 10/12/20 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
SHENZHEN LIANQI E-COMMERCE

CO., LTD.
Civil Action No. 20-cv-6071
Plaintiff,
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
v.
PATENT CASE
WENJUAN HUANG,
Defendant.
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, Shenzhen Lianqi E-Commerce Co., Ltd. (“Plaintiff”), for its Complaint for
Declaratory Judgment against Defendant Wenjuan Huang (“Defendant”), alleges as follows:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This is an action for declaratory judgment of non-infringement, invalidity arising
under the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 et seq., and the Patent Laws of the Unites
States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., in which Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment of non-infringement
and invalidity of U.S. Patent No. D888,316 (the “’316 Patent”) against Defendant.
2. Furthermore, Plaintiff seeks a judgement that Defendant has tortiously interfered
with a contractual relationship and that Defendant has tortiously interfered with a prospective
business expectancy pursuant to the common law of the state of Illinois.
PARTIES
3. Plaintiff Shenzhen Lianqi E-Commerce Co., Ltd. is a company organized and
existing under the laws of the People’s Republic of China.
4. Upon information and belief, Defendant Wenjuan Huang is an individual citizen of
the People’s Republic of China, residing in Zhanjiang, China. Defendant may be served pursuant
1
to 35 U.S.C. § 293 through his registered agent with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
(“USPTO”): Raymond Chew, Chew Patents Group (Jumpy), 28039 Scott Rd., Ste. D-180,
Murrieta, CA 92563.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. §§1331,
1338(a), 1367 and 2201(a).
6. On information and belief, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because Defendant has constitutionally sufficient
contacts with Illinois and this District so as to make personal jurisdiction proper and Defendant
has committed the acts complained of herein within this District. Furthermore, on information and
belief, Defendant owns and/or controls the Amazon.com storefront Zuzito, through which he sells
products covered by the Defendant’s U.S. Design Patent No. D888,316 within the United Sates on
its Amazon.com storefront. Furthermore, Defendant has sold and/or offered for sale products with
the forum state.
7. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§1391(b)(2) and 1391(c)(3)
because Defendant is a foreign individual with no residence or regular and established place of
business in the United States and a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim alleged
herein occurred in this District.
U.S. PATENT NO. D888,316
8. United States Patent No. D888,316 is a design patent for an invention entitled
“Lamp.” A true and correct copy of the ’316 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
9. The ’316 Patent generally covers the ornamental design for a lamp.
2
10. U.S. Application No. 29/727,613 (the “’613 Application”) that issued as the ’316
Patent was filed on March 12, 2020.
11. The United States Patent and Trademark Office issued the ’316 Patent on June 23,
2020.
12. Defendant is the purported inventor of the ’316 Patent and the purported record
owner of the ’316 Patent with all rights in and to that patent.
13. Raymond Chew with the Chew Patents Group prosecuted the ’613 Application.
14. On information and belief Defendant sells vanity light fixtures which embody the
design of the ’316 Patent via his Zuzito Amazon.com storefront.
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
15. Plaintiff is a manufacturer and seller of, among other things, modern light fixtures.
16. Plaintiff’s modern light fixture products are sold online through marketplaces such
as Amazon.com and have enjoyed considerable commercial success.
17. Plaintiff’s Amazon.com sales are conducted under the Amazon Services Solutions
Agreement.
18. As previously noted, Defendant is the purported record owner of the ’316 Patent ⎯
a design patent for an invention entitled “Lamp.”
19. On or before September 9, 2020, Defendant filed a complaint with Amazon.com,
alleging that Plaintiff’s modern, crystal vanity light fixture product (Amazon ASINs:
B085L5L4PB, B085LCWWSD, B085L478MC, and B085KYBBWN) (the “Accused Product”)
infringe the ’316 Patent. A copy of the complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
3
20. Plaintiff began selling the Accused Product on Amazon.com, at least early as March
6, 2020 ⎯ i.e., at least as early as six (6) days prior to the March 12, 2020 priority date of the
’316 Patent.
21. The date on which the Accused Product was first listed on Amazon.com is made
available by Amazon.com on the public listing for the Accused Product. See Exhibit C.
22. As such, at the time of the filing his complaint with Amazon.com, Defendant was
aware that the Accused Product did not and does not infringe or is invalidating prior art to the ’316
Patent.
23. By filing a complaint for patent infringement with Amazon.com against Plaintiff
alleging infringement of the ’316 Patent, Defendant is and has made allegations that are objectively
false and in bad faith, with complete knowledge of their incorrectness.
24. As a result of Defendant’s conduct in making infringement allegations that are
objectively false and in bad faith, Amazon.com has removed Plaintiff’s listing of the Accused
Product, which has caused substantial harm to Plaintiff’s business operations.
25. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between the parties concerning whether
Plaintiff’s Accused Product identified by Defendant in his complaint to Amazon.com, infringe the
’316 Patent.
26. Furthermore, an actual and justiciable controversy exists between the parties as to
whether Defendant tortiously interfered with Plaintiff’s contractual relationship with
Amazon.com, Inc., and whether Defendant tortiously interfered with Plaintiff’s prospective
business expectancy.
27. Plaintiff now seeks a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of
the ’316 Patent as well as a judgment that Defendant has tortiously interfered with Plaintiff’s
4
contractual relationship with Amazon.com, Inc., and tortiously interfered with Plaintiff’s
prospective business expectancy.
COUNT I
NON-INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’316 PATENT
28. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
29. Through his complaint for Patent infringement filed with Amazon.com, Defendant
has asserted that Plaintiff has infringed the ’316 Patent.
30. As a result of Defendant’s false allegations of patent infringement of the ’316
Patent, an actual and justiciable controversy exists between the parties hereto regarding Plaintiff’s
right to continue manufacturing and offering for sale the Accused Product.
31. The manufacture, use, offer for sale, sale, and/or importation of the Accused
Product does not infringe the ’316 Patent.
32. Plaintiff began selling the Accused Product on Amazon.com at least as early as
March 6, 2020 ⎯ i.e., at least as early as six (6) days prior to the March 12, 2020 priority date of
the ’316 Patent.
33. Pursuant to the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 et seq.,
Plaintiff respectfully requests a declaration by this Court that the manufacture, use, offer for sale,
sale, and/or importation of the Accused Product does not and will not infringe the ’316 Patent.
COUNT II
INVALIDITY OF THE ’316 PATENT
forth herein.
5
35. The ’316 Patent is invalid for failure to comply with one or more conditions of
patentability set forth in 35 U.S.C §§ 101, 102, 103 and/or 171. For example, and without
limitation, the ’316 Patent is invalid under 35 U.S.C § 102 and/or 103 because it is anticipated or
rendered obvious by relevant prior art, specifically the Accused Product, which was offered for
sale on Amazon.com by Plaintiff at least as early as March 6, 2020. The ’613 Application that
issued as the ’316 Patent was filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office on March
12, 2020. Therefore, the available date for sale of the Accused Product pre-dates the priority date
of the ’316 Patent by at least six (6) days.
36. Pursuant to the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 et seq.,
Plaintiff respectfully requests a declaration by this Court that the ’316 Patent is invalid for failure
to comply with one or more conditions of patentability set forth in 35 U.S.C §§ 101, 102, 103
and/or 171.
COUNT III
TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACT
forth herein.
38. Plaintiff and Amazon.com, Inc. had a valid and enforceable contractual relationship
via Amazon.com, Inc.’s Amazon Services Business Solutions Agreement.
39. Defendant was aware of Plaintiff’s contractual agreement with Amazon.com as he
knew Plaintiff offered its products as an Amazon seller.
40. Defendant intentionally and unjustifiably induced Amazon.com to breach its
agreement with Plaintiff by filing his false and misleading infringement claim with full knowledge
that the ’316 Patent was either not infringed by Plaintiff’s products or was invalidated by Plaintiff’s
products, as those products were offered for sale prior to the filing of the ’316 Patent.
6
41. Amazon.com did in fact breach its agreement with Plaintiff as a result, removing
Plaintiff’s products from its marketplace.
42. Defendant’s actions have caused economic and financial harm to Plaintiff.
COUNT IV
TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE PROSPECTIVE BUSINESS EXPECTANCY
forth herein.
44. Plaintiff had a reasonable expectation of entering into a valid business relationship
with Amazon.com and with the consuming public via its online marketplace platform.
45. Defendant was fully aware of Plaintiff’s expectation as he knew Plaintiff sold its
products on the Amazon.com platform, as shown by his objectively false infringement claim.
46. Defendant purposefully interfered with Plaintiff’s prospective business
relationships by filing his false and misleading infringement claim with full knowledge that the
’316 Patent was either not infringed by Plaintiff’s products or was invalidated by Plaintiff’s
products, as those products were offered for sale prior to the filing of the ’316 Patent.
47. As a result of Defendant’s false and misleading infringement claim, Amazon.com
has removed Plaintiff’s products from its Amazon.com marketplace, thereby causing economic
and financial harm to Plaintiff.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff, under Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, requests a trial by jury of
any issues so triable by right.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment as follows:
a. A declaration that Plaintiff has not and will not infringe the ’316 Patent;
7
b. A declaration that the ’316 Patent is invalid;
c. A judgment against Defendant and in favor of Plaintiff that Defendant has
tortiously interfered with Plaintiff’s contractual relations;
d. A judgment against Defendant and in favor of Plaintiff that Defendant has
tortiously interfered with Plaintiff’s prospective business relationships;
e. A declaration that this case is exceptional and an award to Plaintiff of its costs,
expenses, and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C § 285;
and
f. Further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
DATED October 12, 2020 Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ David R. Bennett

David R. Bennett
DIRECTION IP LAW
P.O. Box 14184
Chicago, Illinois 60614
Tel: (312) 291-1667
dbennett@directionip.com
Of Counsel:
Timothy T. Wang
Texas Bar No. 24067927
twang@nilawfirm.com
NI, WANG & MASSAND, PLLC

8140 Walnut Hill Ln., Ste. 500
Dallas, TX 75231
Tel: (972) 331-4600
Fax: (972) 314-0900
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

SHENZHEN LIANQI
E-COMMERCE CO., LTD.
8
Case: 1:20-cv-06071 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 10/12/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:9
EXHIBIT LIST
Exhibit A United States Design Patent No. D888,316
Exhibit B Email re complaint to Amazon regarding Patent Number D888,316
Exhibit C Amazon listing showing date the Accused Product was first listed on Amazon
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
Hello,
We removed some of your listings because we received a report from a rights owner that they infringe the following
patent(s):
-- Patent number:D888,316
The listings we removed are at the bottom of this message.
Why did this happen?

One or more of your listings may be infringing the intellectual property rights of others.
We’re here to help.

If you need help better understanding what is causing this, please search for “Intellectual Property Violations” in Seller
Central Help (https://sellercentral.amazon.com/gp/help/external/201361070).
How do I reactivate my listing?

To reactivate your listing you may provide the following:
-- A letter of authorization or a licensing agreement from the manufacturer or rights owner demonstrating that your
product sales are lawful. External links are not accepted. For security reasons, we only accept attachments in the
following file formats: .jpeg, .jpg, .pjpeg, .gif, .png, .tiff.
How do I submit this information?

Go to Received Intellectual Property Complaints under the Product Policy Compliance section in account health
(https://sellercentral.amazon.com/performance/dashboard) and locate the deactivation record for this product listing.
Click on the Appeal button next to the listing deactivation record to submit information necessary to reactivate your
listing.
Have your listings been removed in error?

If you have never sold or listed the product, please reach out to us and tell us.
If you think that the rights owner has made an error in sending the notice, please reach out to the rights owner and ask
for a retraction of the notice. To retract the complaint, the rights owner must send the retraction to us at notice-
retraction@amazon.com or use the retraction function in Brand Registry.
1
These are the rights owner’s contact details:

--
3334229986@qq.com
We can only accept retractions if the rights owner clearly states that they made an error. For any other reason, please
explain to us why you were warned in error so that we can investigate the case.
What h
发自我的 iPhone
2
EXHIBIT C

Shenzhen Lianqi E-Commerce v. Huang - 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

Shenzhen Lianqi E-Commerce v. Huang - Complaint

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Case: 1:20-cv-06071 Document #: 1 Filed: 10/12/20 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SHENZHEN LIANQI E-COMMERCE

Declaratory Judgment against Defendant Wenjuan Huang (“Defendant”), alleges as follows:

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This is an action for declaratory judgment of non-infringement, invalidity arising

States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., in which Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment of non-infringement

2. Furthermore, Plaintiff seeks a judgement that Defendant has tortiously interfered

business expectancy pursuant to the common law of the state of Illinois.

3. Plaintiff Shenzhen Lianqi E-Commerce Co., Ltd. is a company organized and

existing under the laws of the People’s Republic of China.

4. Upon information and belief, Defendant Wenjuan Huang is an individual citizen of

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1338(a), 1367 and 2201(a).

the forum state.

7. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§1391(b)(2) and 1391(c)(3)

herein occurred in this District.

U.S. PATENT NO. D888,316

Patent was filed on March 12, 2020.

design of the ’316 Patent via his Zuzito Amazon.com storefront.

as Amazon.com and have enjoyed considerable commercial success.

a design patent for an invention entitled “Lamp.”

19. On or before September 9, 2020, Defendant filed a complaint with Amazon.com,

B085L5L4PB, B085LCWWSD, B085L478MC, and B085KYBBWN) (the “Accused Product”)

false and in bad faith, with complete knowledge of their incorrectness.

24. As a result of Defendant’s conduct in making infringement allegations that are

Product, which has caused substantial harm to Plaintiff’s business operations.

whether Defendant tortiously interfered with Plaintiff’s contractual relationship with

27. Plaintiff now seeks a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of

prospective business expectancy.

has asserted that Plaintiff has infringed the ’316 Patent.

30. As a result of Defendant’s false allegations of patent infringement of the ’316

Product does not infringe the ’316 Patent.

the ’316 Patent.

of the ’316 Patent by at least six (6) days.

via Amazon.com, Inc.’s Amazon Services Business Solutions Agreement.

39. Defendant was aware of Plaintiff’s contractual agreement with Amazon.com as he

knew Plaintiff offered its products as an Amazon seller.

40. Defendant intentionally and unjustifiably induced Amazon.com to breach its

Plaintiff’s products from its marketplace.

46. Defendant purposefully interfered with Plaintiff’s prospective business

47. As a result of Defendant’s false and misleading infringement claim, Amazon.com

and financial harm to Plaintiff.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

any issues so triable by right.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

b. A declaration that the ’316 Patent is invalid;

c. A judgment against Defendant and in favor of Plaintiff that Defendant has

tortiously interfered with Plaintiff’s contractual relations;

d. A judgment against Defendant and in favor of Plaintiff that Defendant has

tortiously interfered with Plaintiff’s prospective business relationships;

f. Further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

DATED October 12, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ David R. Bennett

NI, WANG & MASSAND, PLLC

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

Exhibit A United States Design Patent No. D888,316

Exhibit B Email re complaint to Amazon regarding Patent Number D888,316

The listings we removed are at the bottom of this message.

Why did this happen?

We’re here to help.

How do I reactivate my listing?

How do I submit this information?

Have your listings been removed in error?