1 in the United States District Court for the District Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Case 1:18-cv-01855-RGA Document 12 Filed 02/19/19 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 149 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE GEMAK TRUST, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 1:18-CV-01855-RGA v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED RECKITT BENCKISER LLC, Defendant. PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff GEMAK Trust (“GEMAK” or “Plaintiff”) files this First Amended Complaint for Patent Infringement against Reckitt Benckiser LLC (“Reckitt” or “Defendant”)1, and allege as follows: THE NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. This is a civil action arising out of Reckitt’s infringement of United States Patents Nos. 6,787,514 (“the ’514 Patent”) and 6,486,116 (“the ʼ116 Patent”) (collectively, “the Patents- in-Suit”) in violation of the Patent Laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. THE PARTIES 2. Plaintiff GEMAK Trust is established under the laws of New Zealand, with an address at 7 California Drive, Wakefield Europort, Castleford, West Yorks, United Kingdom, WF10 5QH. 1 Plaintiff reserves the right to join Reckitt Benckiser Group plc, should facts be developed during discovery indicating its involvement in infringing activities. 1 Case 1:18-cv-01855-RGA Document 12 Filed 02/19/19 Page 2 of 14 PageID #: 150 3. On information and belief, Defendant Reckitt Benckiser LLC is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Delaware, having a principal place of business at Morris Corporate Center IV, 399 Interpace Parkway, P.O. Box. 225, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054-0225. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). 5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Reckitt because, among other things, Reckitt has directly infringed, contributed to the infringement of, and/or actively induced infringement of the Patents-in-Suit within this judicial district. 6. This Court also has personal jurisdiction over Reckitt because Reckitt is incorporated in the State of Delaware and is, thus, a resident of the State. 7. On information and belief, Reckitt also conducts business in this judicial district, including offering to sell, selling, and importing infringing products in this district. 8. Upon further information and belief, Reckitt is amenable to litigating in this forum based on Reckitt’s conduct in another litigation in this District. In Civil Action No. 1:15- cv-00915-RGA (D.I. 8), Reckitt did not object to personal jurisdiction in this District. 9. Upon further information and belief, Reckitt has waived any challenge to personal jurisdiction in this District under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(1). See D.I. 9 (failing to assert a lack of personal jurisdiction defense in its first 12(b)(6) motion). 10. Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), because, among other reasons, Reckitt is incorporated in Delaware, and thus it resides in this District. 2 Case 1:18-cv-01855-RGA Document 12 Filed 02/19/19 Page 3 of 14 PageID #: 151 11. Upon further information and belief, Reckitt has waived any challenge to improper venue in this District under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(1). See D.I. 9 (failing to assert an improper venue defense in its first 12(b)(6) motion). BACKGROUND 12. While working in the industrial chemical and laundry industry in the late 1990s, inventor Gerald Thomas Hinton conceived of, developed, and patented a new detergent composition and monodose presentation—a water-dissolvable sachet or packet that included detergent percarbonate beads encapsulated by a specific blend of chemical compounds. 13. Reckitt is a manufacturer of automatic dishwasher detergent products and laundry products, including monodose detergent products. 14. Reckitt is a dominant player in the dishwasher detergent industry with its Finish® line of monodose dishwasher detergent products. Reckitt claims that “[h]ousehold names such as Lysol, Vanish, Finish and Air Wick are at the top of their markets.” See Ex. 1. Reckitt also claims that “80% of [its] unrivaled portfolio of leading brands are either 1 or 2 in their categories” including Finish®. Id. In its 2017 annual report, Reckitt reported that “Finish is No. 1 worldwide in automatic dishwashing.” See Ex. 2. 15. On information and belief, Reckitt makes, uses, sells, offers for sale, and imports monodose dishwasher detergent products including those described in detail below. On the Material Data Safety Sheets for certain monodose Finish® dishwasher detergent products, Reckitt Benckiser LLC is identified as the distributor. A. The Infringing Products 16. Reckitt manufactures, sells, offers to sell, and imports monodose detergent products, marketed under the trade name Finish®, that infringe one or more claims of the 3 Case 1:18-cv-01855-RGA Document 12 Filed 02/19/19 Page 4 of 14 PageID #: 152 Patents-in-Suit. Reckitt’s Finish® Powerball-Max-in-1 and Finish® Quantum Max (“Infringing Products”) are two representative examples of Reckitt’s infringing products. 17. Attached as Exs. 3-4 and 5-6 are photographs that fairly and accurately depict the product labels for Finish® Powerball-Max-in-1 and Finish® Quantum Max, respectively. 18. Attached as Exs. 7 and 8 are Product Information Sheets for Finish® Powerball- Max-in-1 and Finish® Quantum Max, respectively. On information and belief, Reckitt is not required to, and does not, list every chemical compound present in its product on the product’s Product Information Sheet. 19. Attached as Exs. 9 and 10 are Safety Data Sheets for Finish® Powerball-Max-in- 1 and Finish® Quantum Max, respectively. On information and belief, Reckitt is not required to, and does not, list every chemical compound present in its product on the product’s Safety Data Sheet. 20. The Infringing Products are dishwashing detergent products. See, e.g., Exs. 3-6. 21. The Infringing Products comprise a granulated percarbonate compound, specifically sodium percarbonate. See, e.g., Exs. 9 and 10. 22. Certain of the Infringing Products are in tablet form. See, e.g., Exs. 3-6. 23. On information and belief, the Infringing Products comprise a percarbonate, specifically sodium percarbonate, and a blend encapsulating the percarbonate. On information and belief, the existence of a percarbonate and a blend encapsulating the percarbonate will be demonstrated by either documents in Reckitt’s possession, custody, or control, or testing of the Infringing Products, or both. 24. On information and belief, the blend encapsulating the percarbonate in the Infringing Products contains a nonionic surfactant. Exhibits 7 and 8 show that the two 4 Case 1:18-cv-01855-RGA Document 12 Filed 02/19/19 Page 5 of 14 PageID #: 153 representative Infringing Products contain alcohol polyglycolether, a nonionic surfactant. See, e.g., Exs. 7 and 8. On information and belief, the existence of a nonionic surfactant in the blend encapsulating the percarbonate will be demonstrated by either documents in Reckitt’s possession, custody, or control, or testing of the Infringing Products, or both. 25. On information and belief, the blend encapsulating the percarbonate in the Infringing Products also contains a sulfate, specifically sodium sulfate. On information and belief, the existence of a sulfate in the blend encapsulating the percarbonate will be demonstrated by either documents in Reckitt’s possession, custody, or control, or testing of the Infringing Products, or both. 26. On information and belief, the blend encapsulating the percarbonate in the Infringing Products also contains carboxymethyl cellulose. On information and belief, the existence of carboxymethyl cellulose in the blend encapsulating the percarbonate will be demonstrated by either documents in Reckitt’s possession, custody, or control, or testing of the Infringing Products, or both. 27. On information and belief, the Infringing Products also contain sodium metasilicate. On information and belief, the existence of sodium metasilicate in the Infringing Products will be demonstrated by either documents in Reckitt’s possession, custody, or control, or testing of the Infringing Products, or both. 28. On information and belief, the Infringing Products do not contain a zeolite. On information and belief, the lack of a zeolite in the Infringing Products will be demonstrated by either documents in Reckitt’s possession, custody, or control, or testing of the Infringing Products, or both. 5 Case 1:18-cv-01855-RGA Document 12 Filed 02/19/19 Page 6 of 14 PageID #: 154 29. On information and belief, the Infringing Products do not contain a perborate. On information and belief, the lack of a perborate in the Infringing Products will be demonstrated by either documents in Reckitt’s possession, custody, or control, or testing of the Infringing Products, or both. 30. On information and belief, the Infringing Products do not contain a phosphate. On information and belief, the lack of a phosphate in the Infringing Products will be demonstrated by either documents in Reckitt’s possession, custody, or control, or testing of the Infringing Products, or both. 31. The Infringing Products comprise 1% to 15% percarbonate. See, e.g., Exs. 9 and 10. 32. On information and belief, the Infringing Products are capable of being stored in a water-soluble PVA film packaging for at least nine months, and, when stored in PVA film, the PVA film is 20-80 microns thick. 33. The Infringing Products also contain a perfume. See, e.g., Exs. 7 and 8. 34. The Infringing Products also contain an enzyme. See, e.g., Exs. 7 and 8. B. The Patents-In-Suit 35. On September 7, 2004, the ’514 Patent, titled “Detergent compositions comprising an encapsulated percarbonate compound,” was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent Office (“USPTO”) to inventor Gerald Thomas Hinton. A true and correct copy of the ’514 Patent is attached to this complaint as Exhibit 11.