Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 1 of 43 PageID 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

PROSLIDE TECHNOLOGY INC., Case No.: 6:20-cv-______

Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT v. AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

WHITEWATER WEST INDUSTRIES, LTD., (INJUNCTIVE RELIEF SOUGHT)

Defendant.

Plaintiff ProSlide Technology, Inc. (“ProSlide”), by and through its undersigned

attorneys, files this Complaint against WhiteWater West Industries, Ltd. (“WhiteWater”)

seeking damages and other relief for patent infringement, and alleges as follows:

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This is an action for patent infringement of United States Patent Nos.

10,702,783 B2, 10,500,508 B2, 9,079,111 B2, 10,369,480 B2, D901,613 S, D892,960 S, and

D903,804 S (collectively, “the Asserted Patents”) under the United States Title 35, United

States Code, §§ 100 et seq., including 35 U.S.C. § 271.

2. ProSlide brings this action against WhiteWater because of its systematic

infringement of ProSlide’s valuable patent rights. As explained herein, WhiteWater’s water

rides, including its “TailSpin,” “,” “AquaSphere,” and “Boogie Board Racer” water

rides infringe claims in one or more of the Asserted Patents. ProSlide brings this action to seek

damages and injunctive relief arising out of this patent infringement.

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 2 of 43 PageID 2

THE PARTIES

3. Plaintiff ProSlide Technology, Inc. is a Canadian corporation with a principal

place of business at 150-2650 Queensview Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K2B 8H6.

4. Defendant WhiteWater West Industries, Ltd. is a Canadian corporation with a

principal place of business at 6700 McMillan Way, Richmond, British Columbia, Canada,

V6W 1J7. WhiteWater maintains a U.S. sales offices in Florida.1 WhiteWater may be served

in accordance with the terms of the Hauge Convention at the address of its registered office at

Suite 950, 1090 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V6E 3V7.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the

United States Code 35 U.S.C. §101, et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).

6. This Court has personal jurisdiction over WhiteWater at least because, as shown

in the below image obtained from WhiteWater’s website depicting WhiteWater’s Florida

projects,2 WhiteWater regularly conducts and transacts business of selling, offering to sell,

using, and/or importing water rides in this District, including certain infringing rides described

herein. For example, ® in Orlando has multiple WhiteWater products, including an

accused AquaSphere product, listed herein.3 WhiteWater also has multiple products in Tampa,

1 See http://aftersales.whitewaterwest.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/After-Sales-and-Service-Brochure.pdf (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 2 See https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/projects/global-directory/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 3 See https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/projects/aquatica-orlando/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

2

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 3 of 43 PageID 3

including, e.g., at Adventure Island which includes an Accused TailSpin product, listed

herein.4

7. This Court also has personal jurisdiction over WhiteWater because WhiteWater

maintains a sales office in Florida.5

8. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and (c), and 28

U.S.C. § 1400(a) because this is an action for patent infringement and WhiteWater may be

found in this District based at least on the Florida projects noted above. Venue is also proper

in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and (c), and 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) because this

4 See https://adventureisland.com/water-slides/solar- vortex/#:~:text=America's%20first%20dual%20tailspin%20waterslide&text=Spin%20and%20splash%20at%20 Adventure,through%20two%20open%20tailspin%20features (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 5 See http://aftersales.whitewaterwest.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/After-Sales-and-Service-Brochure.pdf (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

3

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 4 of 43 PageID 4

is an action for patent infringement and WhiteWater has committed acts of infringement in this

District as described herein. Venue is also proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

1391(b) and (c) because this Court has personal jurisdiction over WhiteWater as noted above,

and WhiteWater, as a foreign corporation, is subject to suit in any District in which there is

personal jurisdiction over WhiteWater.

FACTS GIVING RISE TO THIS ACTION

ProSlide is an Innovator and Industry Leader

9. Founded in 1986, ProSlide has grown from humble beginnings to become one

of the largest designers and manufacturers of rides in North America and the world.

Today, ProSlide supplies water rides and related equipment to major entertainment companies

such as Walt Disney World, Universal Entertainment, Theme Parks, and Paramount

Parks. Customers consistently look to ProSlide as the industry pioneer for the freshest, most

innovative waterslides available.

10. ProSlide’s innovative product designs have had a significant impact on the

water-ride industry. ProSlide’s groundbreaking rides include its PIPELINE inner-tube water

rides in 1989; funnel-shaped rides in 2003; ROCKET uphill water coasters with

technology in 2005; TANTRUM-TWIST ride in 2009; “SurpriseAdventure” tubing

and “ActiveWaterPlay” structures via its TOPSY-TURVY and RIDEHOUSE rides in 2010;

and the ROCKET® and ® water rides incorporating ProSlide’s

HydroMAGNETIC® LIM technology in 2011-2015.

11. In recognition of its achievements, industry bodies such as the International

Association of Amusement Parks and Attractions (“IAAPA”), the World Waterpark

4

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 5 of 43 PageID 5

Association (“WWA”), and have consistently recognized ProSlide as an

industry pioneer. Indeed, over the past thirty years, ProSlide has received over one hundred

awards including IAAPA’s “Best New Water Park Ride,” “Best New Product,” and “Industry

Impact” awards, WWA’s “Leading Edge,” “Industry Impact,” “Industry Innovation,” “Best

New Water Park Ride,” and “Industry Leadership” awards, and Amusement Today’s “Best

Water Ride” and “Best New Water Park Ride” “Golden Ticket” awards, presented to the “Best

of the Best” of the amusement industry. In fact, ProSlide is the only company in the world to

win the industry’s highest honor–IAAPA’s Impact Award–more than once, and ProSlide has

won more “Best ” awards than all other manufacturers combined.6

ProSlide’s Innovative and Patented FlyingSAUCER®, ORBIT®, and RallyRACER® Technology

12. In some slide-based rides, riders enter the ride at a high elevation and travel to

a terminal destination at a lower elevation by sliding along a chute or flume. To facilitate

sliding, portions of a water slide may be lubricated with a volume of water. ProSlide’s

FlyingSAUCER® technology implements maximum curve and centrifugal forces to

create an exhilarating ride along the water ride edge for high speeds and thrills at a rate of

speed not achievable using their momentum alone. As a result, waterslide rides incorporating

ProSlide’s FlyingSAUCER® technology can be built higher, faster, with longer uphill

sections, and a higher rider capacity. ProSlide’s ORBIT® technology uses a concave sliding

surface to create an exhilarating and unpredictable ride not predetermined by typical flume ride

walls or channels. And ProSlide’s RallyRACER® is a slide designed for head-to-head racing

6 See https://www.proslide.com/about/awards/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

5

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 6 of 43 PageID 6

in neighboring lanes, where riders slide down side-by-side tunnels with enclosed flumes

building anticipation about the riders position in the race before transitioning into competitive

open lane portions with low separators that allow riders to see and hear each other before

transitioning again into enclosed flumes.

13. ProSlide has received many awards for its innovative and patented

FlyingSAUCER® water-slide technology. ProSlide received IAAPA’s “Best New Water Park

Ride” in 2015 and 2019, Amusement Today’s “Golden Ticket Award: Best Water Park Ride”

in 2017 and 2019, and WWA’s “Leading Edge Award” in 2016 for its FlyingSAUCER® water

rides.

WhiteWater’s Infringing TailSpin and Orbiter Water Rides

14. The tremendous popularity and commercial success of ProSlide’s patented

FlyingSAUCER® technology has spawned imitators. Chief among these has been

WhiteWater, which has been busy copying ProSlide’s FlyingSAUCER® design to sell knock-

off saucer waterslides.

15. At the November 2019 IAAPA trade show, located in Orlando, Florida,

WhiteWater unveiled, advertised, and promoted its “TailSpin” water ride. The description of

the TailSpin ride on WhiteWater’s website7 as installed as part of the “The Washout” water

ride at Whirlin’ Waters in North Charleston, South Carolina, United States, confirms that the

ride infringes numerous claims of ProSlide’s patents directed to its innovative

FlyingSAUCER® technology. In addition to WhiteWater’s infringing TailSpin sale and

installation as part of “The Washout” water ride at Whirlin’ Waters in North Charleston, South

7 See https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/products/water-slides/icons/tailspin/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

6

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 7 of 43 PageID 7

Carolina, ProSlide understands that WhiteWater has at least sold and installed TailSpin water

rides in other locations in the United States, including in this District, in Tampa (Adventure

Island, “Solar Vortex”)8, and Cherry Valley, Illinois (Six Flags Harbor Rockford,

“Tidal Wave”).9

16. WhiteWater makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, and has sold TailSpin water

rides in this District and elsewhere in the U.S.10 See also, ¶15, supra. The acts of making,

using, selling, and offering for sale the Accused TailSpin water ride in the U.S., and the act of

importing the same into the U.S., constitute infringement of some of the Asserted Patents as

detailed in the Counts below.

17. One year before debuting its TailSpin, on November 13-16, 2018, WhiteWater

unveiled, advertised, and promoted its “Orbiter” water ride at the IAAPA trade show in

Orlando, Florida. WhiteWater issued a press release on November 14, 2018, concerning the

Orbiter. 11 WhiteWater’s website for the Orbiter currently provides a link to contact

WhiteWater to “turn your vision into reality” by talking with WhiteWater’s “international team

of experts ready to discuss your project with you.”12 WhiteWater is also currently advertising

and offering to sell the Orbiter on the IAAPA website. See https://www.iaapa.org/iaapa-expos

(“Ascend to new entertainment heights with the ORBITER.”). The description of the Orbiter

8 See https://adventureisland.com/water-slides/solar- vortex/#:~:text=America's%20first%20dual%20tailspin%20waterslide&text=Spin%20and%20splash%20at%20 Adventure,through%20two%20open%20tailspin%20features (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 9 The Tidal Wave plans to open in 2020. See, e.g., https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190829005271/en/New-Water-Slide-New-Hurricane-Harbor- Coming (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 10 See https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/products/water-slides/icons/tailspin/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 11 See https://www.whitewaterwest.com/drive/uploads/2019/02/Press-Release-Brass-Ring-for-Orbiter-2018.pdf; https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/insights-and-events/news/worlds-first-orbiter-water-slide-opens-at-octs- adventure-bay-in-xiangyang-china/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 12 See https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/products/water-slides/icons/orbiter/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

7

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 8 of 43 PageID 8

ride on WhiteWater’s website13 confirms that the ride infringes numerous claims of ProSlide’s

patents directed to its innovative FlyingSAUCER® technology.

18. WhiteWater has and continues to offer for sale its Orbiter water ride in this

District and elsewhere in the U.S.14 See also, ¶17, supra. The act of offering for sale the

Accused Orbiter water ride in the U.S. constitutes infringement of some of the Asserted Patents

as detailed in the Counts below.

WhiteWater’s Infringing AquaSphere Water Rides

19. Whitewater has also been busy copying ProSlide’s patented ORBIT® design.

This first came to light at the 2013 IAAPA trade show, located in Orlando, where WhiteWater

unveiled, advertised, and promoted its AquaSphere water ride. The description of the

AquaSphere ride on Whitewater’s website15 as installed as part of the “The Washout” water

ride at Whirlin’ Waters in North Charleston, South Carolina, United States, confirms that

WhiteWater’s AquaSphere ride infringes numerous claims of ProSlide’s patents directed to its

innovative ORBIT® technology. In addition to WhiteWater’s infringing AquaSphere sale and

installation as part of “The Washout” water ride at Whirlin’ Waters in North Charleston, South

Carolina, ProSlide understands that WhiteWater has at least sold and installed AquaSphere

water rides in other locations in the United States, including in Orlando of this District

(Aquatica® Orlando, “Ray Rush”) 16 , Katy, Texas (Typhoon Texas, “the Twister”) 17 ,

13 See https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/products/water-slides/icons/orbiter/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 14 See id. 15 See https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/products/water-slides/icons/aquasphere/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 16 See id. 17 See id.

8

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 9 of 43 PageID 9

Tannersville, Pennsylvania (Camelback & Aquatopia Indoor Waterpark, “Venus

Slydetrap”)18, and Grand Prairie, Texas (Epic Waters, “Aquanaut”)19.

20. WhiteWater designs, manufactures, imports, offers for sale, sells, and has sold

AquaSphere water rides in this District and elsewhere in the U.S.20 See also, ¶19, supra. The

acts of making, using, selling, and offering for sale the Accused AquaSphere water ride in the

U.S., and the act of importing the same into the U.S., constitute infringement of some of the

Asserted Patents as detailed in the Counts below.

WhiteWater’s Infringing Boogie Board Racer Water Rides

21. In addition to copying ProSlide’s patented FlyingSAUCER® and ORBIT®

technologies, WhiteWater has copied ProSlide’s patented RallyRACER® designs.

Specifically, WhiteWater designed and manufactured a Boogie Board Racer for Carowinds

Amusement Park in Charlotte, North Carolina.21 The Boogie Board Racer is scheduled to debut

in 2021.22 The Boogie Board Racer is described as a water slide where, “[a]t the top of the

water slide, you and five other racers will grab a mat and toe the line.”23 “In an instant, you

will be released into the rushing current of Boogie Board Racer. Everyone will zoom through

their own chutes – sometimes enclosed, sometimes open to the sun – always accelerating to

18 See https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/projects/camelback-lodge-indoor-waterpark/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 19 See https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/products/water-slides/icons/aquasphere/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 20 See id. 21 See https://www.carowinds.com/play/carolina-harbor/boogie-board-racer (last visited Nov. 30, 2020); https://www.coaster101.com/2020/03/04/boogie-board-racer-rises-at-carowinds/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020); https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euxVAO25v08 (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 22 See https://www.carowinds.com/play/carolina-harbor/boogie-board-racer (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 23 Id.

9

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 10 of 43 PageID 10

fast speeds. Alongside each other, you’ll zip through multiple passes of outrageousness and

into a 360-degree loop before a surprise drop into a splashdown finish.”24

22. WhiteWater makes, uses, offers for sale, and has sold Boogie Board Racer

water rides in this District and elsewhere in the U.S.25 See also, ¶21, supra. The acts of making,

using, offering for sale, and selling the Accused Boogie Board Racer water ride in the U.S.,

and the act of importing the same into the U.S., constitute infringement of some of the Asserted

Patents as detailed in the Counts below.

THE ASSERTED PATENTS

U.S. Patent No. 10,702,783 B2

23. On July 7, 2020, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally

issued U.S. Patent No. 10,702,783 B2, entitled “Water Ride” (“the ’783 Patent”). A true and

accurate copy of the ’783 Patent is attached as Exhibit 1.

24. ProSlide Technology Inc. is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to

the ’783 Patent, including the right to sue for and collect past damages.

25. The ’783 Patent is valid and enforceable.

U.S. Patent No. 10,500,508 B2

26. On December 10, 2019, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly

and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 10,500,508 B2, entitled “Water Ride” (“the ’508 Patent”).

A true and accurate copy of the ’508 Patent is attached as Exhibit 2.

24 Id. 25 See, e.g., https://www.wcnc.com/article/entertainment/mat-racing-waterslide-coming-to-carowinds-in- 2020/275-0b0bdf7d-3212-4ebf-8d11-fc7524680032 (last visited Nov. 30, 2020); https://www.carowinds.com/blog/2020/boogieboardracerupdate (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

10

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 11 of 43 PageID 11

27. ProSlide Technology Inc. is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to

the ’508 Patent, including the right to sue for and collect past damages.

28. The ’508 Patent is valid and enforceable.

U.S. Patent No. 9,079,111 B2

29. On July 14, 2015, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and

legally issued U.S. Patent No. 9,079,111 B2, entitled “Water Slide” (“the ’111 Patent”). A true

and accurate copy of the ’111 Patent is attached as Exhibit 3.

30. ProSlide Technology Inc. is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to

the ’111 Patent, including the right to sue for and collect past damages.

31. The ’111 Patent is valid and enforceable.

U.S. Patent No. 10,369,480 B2

32. On August 6, 2019, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and

legally issued U.S. Patent No. 10,369,480 B2, entitled “Water Slide” (“the ’480 Patent”). A

true and accurate copy of the ’480 Patent is attached as Exhibit 4.

33. ProSlide Technology Inc. is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to

the ’480 Patent, including the right to sue for and collect past damages.

34. The ’480 Patent is valid and enforceable.

U.S. Patent No. D892,960 S

35. On August 11, 2020, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and

legally issued U.S. Patent No. D892,960 S, entitled “Water Slide” (“the ’960 Patent”). A true

and accurate copy of the ’960 Patent is attached as Exhibit 5.

11

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 12 of 43 PageID 12

36. ProSlide Technology Inc. is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to

the ’960 Patent, including the right to sue for and collect past damages.

37. The ’960 Patent is valid and enforceable.

U.S. Patent No. D901,613 S

38. On November 10, 2020, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly

and legally issued U.S. Patent No. D901,613 S, entitled “Water Slide” (“the ’613 Patent”). A

true and accurate copy of the ’613 Patent is attached as Exhibit 6.

39. ProSlide Technology Inc. is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to

the ’480 Patent, including the right to sue for and collect past damages.

40. The ’613 Patent is valid and enforceable.

U.S. Patent No. D903,804 S

41. On December 1, 2020, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and

legally issued U.S. Patent No. D903,804 S, entitled “Water Slide” (“the ’804 Patent”). A true

and accurate copy of the ’804 Patent is attached as Exhibit 7.

42. ProSlide Technology Inc. is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to

the ’480 Patent, including the right to sue for and collect past damages.

43. The ’804 Patent is valid and enforceable.

COUNT I INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 10,702,783 B2

44. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations above in

Paragraphs 1 – 25 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

45. Defendant has been and is directly infringing under 35 U.S.C. § 271, literally

or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least Claims 1, 3-4, 6-8, 15-34, 36-37, and 40-43 of the

12

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 13 of 43 PageID 13

ʼ783 Patent by making, using (including without limitation testing), selling, importing, and/or

offering to sell the Accused TailSpin water ride in the United States, including in this District

and elsewhere. See ¶¶15-16, supra.

46. Defendant has also been and continues to induce its customers to directly

infringe at least Claims 1, 3-4, 6-8, 15-34, 36-37, and 40-43 of the ʼ783 Patent by intentionally

promoting, aiding, and instructing customers to purchase and use the Accused TailSpin water

ride in the United States, including in this District and elsewhere. See ¶¶15-16, supra.

Defendant knew or should have known that the use of the Accused TailSpin water ride by its

customers directly infringes at least Claims 1, 3-4, 6-8, 15-34, 36-37, and 40-43 of the ʼ783

Patent in the United States, including in this District and elsewhere.

47. Defendant has also contributed and continues to contribute to infringement of

the ’783 Patent since at least the filing of this Complaint and knew or should have known that

the use of the Accused TailSpin water ride by its customers directly infringes at least Claims

1, 3-4, 6-8, 15-34, 36-37, and 40-43 of the ʼ783 in the United States, including in this District

and elsewhere. See ¶¶15-16, supra.

48. The following claim chart demonstrates that each and every element of

independent Claim 31 of the ʼ783 Patent is found in the Accused TailSpin slide feature as

installed as part of the “The Washout” water ride at Whirlin’ Waters in North Charleston, South

Carolina, United States:

’783 Patent, Claim 31 WhiteWater’s TailSpin of Whirlin’ Waters’ “”26

26 Original images obtained from https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/products/water-slides/icons/tailspin/ and https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/projects/whirlin-waters-adventure-waterpark/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

13

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 14 of 43 PageID 14

A slide feature for an amusement ride adapted to carry a rider or ride vehicle sliding thereon, the slide feature comprising:

an inrun permitting ingress of the rider or ride vehicle; an outrun permitting egress of the rider or ride vehicle;

a sliding surface in communication with the inrun and the outrun;

14

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 15 of 43 PageID 15

wherein a radius of the sliding surface decreases along at least a portion of the sliding surface, the portion beginning where the sliding surface meets the inrun;

wherein the slide feature is oriented at a roll angle around a roll axis; and wherein the roll angle is nonzero when measured relative to a horizontal plane.

49. In addition, each and every element of Claims 1, 3-4, 6-8, 15-34, 36-37, and 40-

43 of the ’783 Patent is also found in the Accused TailSpin slide feature.

50. The description is based on publicly available information. Plaintiff reserves

the right to modify the description, including, for example, on the basis of information about

the Accused TailSpin slide feature that it obtains during discovery.

51. Defendant has had actual knowledge of the ʼ783 Patent at least as early as the

date of service of this Complaint. Defendant knew or should have known of the ’783 patent

when it issued on July 7, 2020. Defendant knew of the pending application that ultimately

issued as the ’783 patent because on October 6, 2017, Luc Benac, WhiteWater’s director of

commercial and risk management27, who signed a third-party submission to the U.S. Patent

27 See https://ca.linkedin.com/in/luc-benac-3948979 (last visited Nov. 25, 2020).

15

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 16 of 43 PageID 16

and Trademark Office in the pending application that ultimately issued as the ’508 patent,

which is a parent to the ’783 patent, wherein that third-party submission was filed with the

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on October 10, 2017.

52. Defendant’s acts of infringement have occurred within this District and

elsewhere in the United States within the term of the ’783 Patent.

53. The Accused TailSpin water ride has no substantial non-infringing uses and is

not a staple article of commerce.

COUNT II INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 10,500,508 B2

54. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations above in

Paragraphs 1 – 22 and 26 – 28 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

55. Defendant has been and is directly infringing under 35 U.S.C. § 271, literally

or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least Claims 1-2, 8-9, 12, 15-16, 23, 25-27, and 32-34

of the ʼ508 Patent by making, using (including without limitation testing), selling, importing,

and/or offering to sell the Accused TailSpin slide feature in the United States, including in this

District and elsewhere. See ¶¶15-16, supra.

56. Defendant has also been and continues to induce its customers to directly

infringe at least Claims 1-2, 8-9, 12, 15-16, 23, 25-27, and 32-34 of the ʼ508 Patent by

intentionally promoting, aiding, and instructing customers to purchase and use the Accused

TailSpin water ride in the United States, including in this District and elsewhere. See ¶¶15-16,

supra. Defendant knew or should have known that the use of the Accused TailSpin water ride

by its customers directly infringes at least Claims 1-2, 8-9, 12, 15-16, 23, 25-27, and 32-34 of

the ʼ508 Patent in the United States, including in this District and elsewhere.

16

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 17 of 43 PageID 17

57. Defendant has also contributed and continues to contribute to infringement of

the ’508 Patent since at least the filing of this Complaint and knew or should have known that

the use of the Accused TailSpin water ride by its customers directly infringes at least Claims

1-2, 8-9, 12, 15-16, 23, 25-27, and 32-34 of the ʼ783 in the United States, including in this

District and elsewhere. See ¶¶15-16, supra.

58. The following claim chart demonstrates that each and every element of

independent Claim 1 of the ’508 Patent is found in the Accused TailSpin slide feature as

installed as part of the “The Washout” water ride at Whirlin’ Waters in North Charleston, South

Carolina, United States:

’508 Patent, Claim 1 WhiteWater’s TailSpin of Whirlin’ Waters’ “Wipeout”28 A slide feature for an amusement ride adapted to carry a rider or ride vehicle sliding thereon, the slide feature comprising:

an inrun permitting ingress of the rider or ride vehicle at a first elevation,

28 Original images obtained from https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/products/water-slides/icons/tailspin/ and https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/projects/whirlin-waters-adventure-waterpark/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

17

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 18 of 43 PageID 18

an outrun permitting egress of the rider or ride vehicle at a second elevation, wherein the first elevation is higher than the second elevation,

a sliding surface in communication with the inrun and the outrun, wherein the sliding surface comprises a two- dimensional, planar surface portion substantially in the geometric shape of a sector of a closed curve, wherein the slide feature provides that the rider or ride vehicle, at least partially urged by gravity, slides along the sliding surface from the inrun to the outrun in an arcuate path, wherein the sliding surface is oriented at a pitch angle around a pitch axis, the pitch angle being measured relative to a horizontal plane, wherein the sliding surface is oriented at a roll angle around a roll axis, the roll angle being measured relative to the horizontal plane, wherein the pitch axis and the roll axis are mutually perpendicular, and

18

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 19 of 43 PageID 19

wherein at least one of the pitch angle and the roll angle is nonzero.

59. In addition, each and every element of Claims 2, 8-9, 12, 15-16, 23, 25-27, and

32-34 of the ’508 Patent is also found in the Accused TailSpin slide feature.

60. The description above is based on publicly available information. Plaintiff

reserves the right to modify the description, including, for example, on the basis of information

about the Accused TailSpin slide feature that Plaintiff obtains during discovery.

61. Defendant has had actual knowledge of the ʼ508 Patent at least as early as the

date of service of this Complaint. Defendant knew or should have known of the ’508 patent

when it issued on December 10, 2019. Defendant knew of the pending application that

ultimately issued as the ’508 patent on or before October 6, 2017, when a third-party

submission to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office was signed by Luc Benac, who is

19

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 20 of 43 PageID 20

WhiteWater’s director of commercial and risk management 29 , wherein that third-party

submission was filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on October 10, 2017.

62. Defendant’s acts of infringement have occurred within this District and

elsewhere in the United States within the term of the ’508 Patent.

63. The Accused TailSpin slide feature has no substantial non-infringing uses and

is not a staple article of commerce.

COUNT III INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 10,702,783 B2

64. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations above in

Paragraphs 1 – 25 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

65. Defendant has been and is directly infringing under 35 U.S.C. § 271, literally

or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least Claims 1-40, 42, and 43 of the ʼ783 Patent by

offering to sell and/or selling the Accused Orbiter water ride in the United States, including in

this District and elsewhere. See ¶¶17-18, supra.

66. Defendant has also been and continues to induce its customers to directly

infringe at least Claims 1-40, 42, and 43 of the ʼ783 Patent by intentionally promoting, aiding,

and instructing customers to purchase and use the Accused Orbiter water ride in the United

States, including in this District and elsewhere. See ¶¶15-16, supra. Defendant knew or should

have known that the use of the Accused Orbiter water ride by its customers directly infringes

at least Claims 1-40, 42, and 43 of the ʼ783 Patent in the United States, including in this District

and elsewhere.

29 See https://ca.linkedin.com/in/luc-benac-3948979 (last visited Nov. 25, 2020).

20

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 21 of 43 PageID 21

67. Defendant has also contributed and continues to contribute to infringement of

the ’783 Patent since at least the filing of this Complaint and knew or should have known that

the use of the Accused Orbiter water ride by its customers directly infringes at least Claims 1-

40, 42, and 43 of the ʼ783 in the United States, including in this District and elsewhere. See

¶¶15-16, supra.

68. The following claim chart demonstrates that each and every element of

independent Claim 31 of the ʼ783 Patent is found in the Accused Orbiter slide feature displayed

on WhiteWater’s website:

’783 Patent, Claim 31 WhiteWater’s Orbiter30 A slide feature for an amusement ride adapted to carry a rider or ride vehicle sliding thereon, the slide feature comprising:

an inrun permitting ingress of the rider or ride vehicle;

30 Original images obtained from https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/products/water-slides/icons/orbiter/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

21

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 22 of 43 PageID 22

an outrun permitting egress of the rider or ride vehicle;

a sliding surface in communication with the inrun and the outrun;

wherein a radius of the sliding surface decreases along at least a portion of the sliding surface, the portion beginning where the sliding surface meets the inrun;

See also Orbiter images above.

22

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 23 of 43 PageID 23

wherein the slide feature is oriented at a roll angle around a roll axis; and wherein the roll angle is nonzero when measured relative to a horizontal plane.

69. In addition, each and every element of Claims 1-40, 42, and 43 of the ’783

Patent is also found in the Accused Orbiter slide feature.

70. The description is based on publicly available information. Plaintiff reserves

the right to modify the description, including, for example, on the basis of information about

the Accused Orbiter slide feature that it obtains during discovery.

71. Defendant has had actual knowledge of the ʼ783 Patent at least as early as the

date of service of this Complaint. Defendant knew of the pending application that ultimately

issued as the ’508 patent on or before October 6, 2017, when a third-party submission to the

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office was signed by Luc Benac, who is WhiteWater’s director of

commercial and risk management31, wherein that third-party submission was filed with the

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on October 10, 2017.

31 See https://ca.linkedin.com/in/luc-benac-3948979 (last visited Nov. 25, 2020).

23

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 24 of 43 PageID 24

72. Defendant’s acts of infringement have occurred within this District and

elsewhere in the United States within the term of the ’783 Patent.

73. The Accused Orbiter water ride has no substantial non-infringing uses and is

not a staple article of commerce.

COUNT IV INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 10,500,508 B2

74. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations above in

Paragraphs 1 – 22 and 26 – 28 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

75. Defendant has been and is directly infringing under 35 U.S.C. § 271, literally

or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least Claims 1-8, 12, 15-16, 23, 25-26, and 28-33 of the

ʼ508 Patent by offering to sell and/or selling the Accused Orbiter slide feature in the United

States, including in this District and elsewhere. See ¶¶15-16, supra.

76. Defendant has also been and continues to induce its customers to directly

infringe at least Claims 1-8, 12, 15-16, 23, 25-26, and 28-33 of the ʼ508 Patent by intentionally

promoting, aiding, and instructing customers to purchase and use the Accused Orbiter water

ride in the United States, including in this District and elsewhere. See ¶¶15-16, supra.

Defendant knew or should have known that the use of the Accused Orbiter water ride by its

customers directly infringes at least Claims 1-8, 12, 15-16, 23, 25-26, and 28-33 of the ʼ508

Patent in the United States, including in this District and elsewhere.

77. Defendant has also contributed and continues to contribute to infringement of

the ’508 Patent since at least the filing of this Complaint and knew or should have known that

the use of the Accused Orbiter water ride by its customers directly infringes at least Claims 1-

24

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 25 of 43 PageID 25

8, 12, 15-16, 23, 25-26, and 28-33 of the ʼ508 Patent in the United States, including in this

District and elsewhere. See ¶¶15-16, supra.

78. The following claim chart demonstrates that each and every element of

independent Claim 1 of the ’508 Patent is found in the Accused Orbiter slide feature displayed

on WhiteWater’s website:

’508 Patent, Claim 1 WhiteWater’s Orbiter32 A slide feature for an amusement ride adapted to carry a rider or ride vehicle sliding thereon, the slide feature comprising:

an inrun permitting ingress of the rider or ride vehicle at a first elevation, an outrun permitting egress of the rider or ride vehicle at a second elevation, wherein the first elevation is higher than the second elevation,

32 Original images obtained from https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/products/water-slides/icons/orbiter/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

25

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 26 of 43 PageID 26

a sliding surface in communication with the inrun and the outrun, wherein the sliding surface comprises a two- dimensional, planar surface portion substantially in the geometric shape of a sector of a closed curve, wherein the slide feature provides that the rider or ride vehicle, at least partially urged by gravity, slides along the sliding surface from the inrun to the outrun in an arcuate path, wherein the sliding surface is oriented at a pitch angle around a pitch axis, the pitch angle being measured relative to a horizontal plane, wherein the sliding surface is oriented at a roll angle around a roll axis, the roll angle being measured relative to the horizontal plane, wherein the pitch axis and the roll axis are mutually perpendicular, and wherein at least one of the pitch angle and the roll angle is nonzero.

79. In addition, each and every element of Claims 1-8, 12, 15-16, 23, 25-26, and

28-33 of the ’508 Patent is also found in the Accused Orbiter slide feature.

80. The description above is based on publicly available information. Plaintiff

reserves the right to modify the description, including, for example, on the basis of information

about the Accused Orbiter slide feature that Plaintiff obtains during discovery.

81. Defendant has had actual knowledge of the ʼ508 Patent at least as early as the

date of service of this Complaint. Defendant knew or should have known of the ’508 patent

26

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 27 of 43 PageID 27

when it issued on December 10, 2019. Defendant knew of the pending application that

ultimately issued as the ’508 patent on or before October 6, 2017, when a third-party

submission to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office was signed by Luc Benac, who is

WhiteWater’s director of commercial and risk management 33 , wherein that third-party

submission was filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on October 10, 2017.

82. Defendant’s acts of infringement have occurred within this District and

elsewhere in the United States within the term of the ’508 Patent. The Accused Orbiter slide

feature has no substantial non-infringing uses.

COUNT V INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,079,111 B2

83. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations above in

Paragraphs 1 – 22 and 29 – 31 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

84. Defendant has been and is directly infringing under 35 U.S.C. § 271, literally

or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least Claims 1-2, 4-6, 9, 11-13, and 18-19 of the ʼ111

Patent by making, using (including without limitation testing), selling, importing, and/or

offering to sell the Accused AquaSphere slide feature in the United States, including in this

District and elsewhere. See ¶¶17-18, supra.

85. Defendant has also been and continues to induce its customers to directly

infringe at least Claims 1-2, 4-6, 9, 11-13, and 18-19 of the ʼ111 Patent by intentionally

promoting, aiding, and instructing customers to purchase and use the Accused AquaSphere

water ride in the United States, including in this District and elsewhere. See ¶¶17-18, supra.

33 See https://ca.linkedin.com/in/luc-benac-3948979 (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

27

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 28 of 43 PageID 28

Defendant knew or should have known that the use of the Accused AquaSphere water ride by

its customers directly infringes at least Claims 1-2, 4-6, 9, 11-13, and 18-19 of the ʼ111 Patent

in the United States, including in this District and elsewhere.

86. Defendant has also contributed and continues to contribute to infringement of

the ’111 Patent since at least the filing of this Complaint and knew or should have known that

the use of the Accused AquaSphere water ride by its customers directly infringes at least

Claims 1-2, 4-6, 9, 11-13, and 18-19 of the ʼ111 in the United States, including in this District

and elsewhere. See ¶¶17-18, supra.

87. The following claim chart demonstrates that each and every element of

independent Claim 1 of the ’111 Patent is found in the Accused AquaSphere slide feature as

installed as part of the “The Washout” water ride at Whirlin’ Waters in North Charleston, South

Carolina, United States:

’111 Patent, Claim 1 WhiteWater’s AquaSphere of Whirlin’ Waters’ “Wipeout”34 A water slide feature comprising

34 Original images obtained from https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/products/water-slides/icons/aquasphere/ and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ-HtXpTVaM&t=5s (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

28

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 29 of 43 PageID 29

a sliding surface concave about three axes sized and adapted to carry one or more riders and/or ride vehicles sliding thereon on a non-predetermined path from an entry to an exit,

29

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 30 of 43 PageID 30

the entry sized and positioned to direct the one or more riders and/or ride vehicles along the sliding surface on a path which is at least partially upward;

wherein the sliding surface is a shape approximating one-half of a sphere.

88. In addition, each and every element of Claims 2, 4-6, 9, 11-13, and 18-19 of the

’111 Patent is also found in the Accused AquaSphere slide feature.

89. The description above is based on publicly available information. Plaintiff

reserves the right to modify the description, including, for example, on the basis of information

about the Accused AquaSphere slide feature that Plaintiff obtains during discovery.

30

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 31 of 43 PageID 31

90. Defendant has had actual knowledge of the ʼ111 Patent at least as early as the

date of service of this Complaint.

91. Defendant’s acts of infringement have occurred within this District and

elsewhere in the United States within the term of the ’111 Patent.

92. The Accused AquaSphere slide feature has no substantial non-infringing uses

and is not a staple article of commerce.

COUNT VI INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 10,369,480 B2

93. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations above in

Paragraphs 1 – 22 and 32 – 34 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

94. Defendant has been and is directly infringing under 35 U.S.C. § 271, literally

or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9, and 11 of the ʼ480 Patent by

making, using (including without limitation testing), selling, importing, and/or offering to sell

the Accused AquaSphere slide feature in the United States, including in this District and

elsewhere. See ¶¶17-18, supra.

95. Defendant has also been and continues to induce its customers to directly

infringe at least Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9, and 11 of the ʼ480 Patent by intentionally promoting,

aiding, and instructing customers to purchase and use the Accused AquaSphere water ride in

the United States, including in this District and elsewhere. See ¶¶17-18, supra. Defendant knew

or should have known that the use of the Accused AquaSphere water ride by its customers

directly infringes at least Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9, and 11 of the ʼ480 Patent in the United States,

including in this District and elsewhere.

31

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 32 of 43 PageID 32

96. Defendant has also contributed and continues to contribute to infringement of

the ’480 Patent since at least the filing of this Complaint and knew or should have known that

the use of the Accused AquaSphere water ride by its customers directly infringes at least

Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9, and 11 of the ʼ480 in the United States, including in this District and

elsewhere. See ¶¶17-18, supra.

97. The following claim chart demonstrates that each and every element of

independent Claim 1 of the ’480 Patent is found in the Accused AquaSphere slide feature as

installed as part of the “The Washout” water ride at Whirlin’ Waters in North Charleston, South

Carolina, United States:

’480 Patent, Claim 1 WhiteWater’s AquaSphere of Whirlin’ Waters’ “Wipeout”35 A water slide feature comprising a spherical sliding surface adapted to carry one or more riders and/or ride vehicles sliding thereon from an entry to an exit,

35 Original images obtained from https://www.whitewaterwest.com/en/products/water-slides/icons/aquasphere/ and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ-HtXpTVaM&t=5s (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

32

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 33 of 43 PageID 33

the entry sized and positioned to direct the one or more riders and/or ride vehicles along the sliding surface on a path which is at least partially upward and

having a first path segment with a first horizontal component of movement in a first direction across the sliding surface and a second path segment with an upward vertical component of movement and a second horizontal component of movement in a second direction across the sliding surface opposite the first horizontal direction; and

33

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 34 of 43 PageID 34

wherein the entry is substantially perpendicular to the sliding surface where the entry meets the sliding surface.

98. In addition, each and every element of Claims 2-7, 9, 11, and 14 of the ’480

Patent is also found in the Accused AquaSphere slide feature.

99. The description above is based on publicly available information. Plaintiff

reserves the right to modify the description, including, for example, on the basis of information

about the Accused AquaSphere slide feature that Plaintiff obtains during discovery.

100. Defendant has had actual knowledge of the ʼ480 Patent at least as early as the

date of service of this Complaint.

34

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 35 of 43 PageID 35

101. Defendant’s acts of infringement have occurred within this District and

elsewhere in the United States within the term of the ’480 Patent.

102. The Accused AquaSphere slide feature has no substantial non-infringing uses

and is not a staple article of commerce.

COUNT VII INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. D901,613 S

103. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations above in

Paragraphs 1 – 22 and 38 – 40 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

104. In the eye of the ordinary observer familiar with the relevant prior art, giving

such attention as a purchaser usually gives, the claimed design of the ’613 Patent and the

corresponding design of WhiteWater’s Boogie Board Racer water ride are substantially the

same, such that the ordinary observer would be deceived into believing that WhiteWater’s

Boogie Board Racer design is the design claimed in the ’613 Patent.

105. In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, WhiteWater has directly infringed the ’613

Patent by making, importing, using, offering for sale, and selling the Boogie Board Racer in

the United States.

106. In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 289, WhiteWater has directly infringed the ’613

Patent by applying the patented design of the ’613 Patent, or a colorable imitation thereof, to

an article of manufacture, including the Boogie Board Racer, for the purpose of sale and/or by

selling, offering, or exposing for sale an article of manufacture, including the Boogie Board

Racer, to which the patented design of the ’613 Patent or a colorable imitation thereof has been

applied.

35

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 36 of 43 PageID 36

107. The following side-by-side images provides an example demonstrating that the

claimed design of the ’613 Patent is copied by the Accused Boogie Board Racer slide as

manufactured for, sold to, and scheduled to be installed at Carowinds ,

Charlotte, North Carolina, United States:

U.S. D901,613 (FIG. 15) WhiteWater Boogie Board Racer36

108. The description above is based on publicly available information. Plaintiff

reserves the right to modify the description, including, for example, on the basis of information

about the Accused Boogie Board Racer slide that Plaintiff obtains during discovery.

109. Defendant has had actual knowledge of the ʼ613 Patent at least as early as the

date of service of this Complaint.

110. Defendant’s acts of infringement have occurred within this District and

elsewhere in the United States within the term of the ’613 Patent.

111. The Accused Boogie Board Racer slide feature has no substantial non-

infringing uses and is not a staple article of commerce.

36 Image obtained from https://www.carowinds.com/play/carolina-harbor/boogie-board-racer (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

36

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 37 of 43 PageID 37

COUNT VIII INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. D903,804 S

112. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations above in

Paragraphs 1 – 22 and 41 – 43 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

113. In the eye of the ordinary observer familiar with the relevant prior art, giving

such attention as a purchaser usually gives, the claimed design of U.S. Patent No. D903,804 S

(“the ’804 Patent”) and the corresponding design of WhiteWater’s Boogie Board Racer water

ride are substantially the same, such that the ordinary observer would be deceived into

believing that WhiteWater’s Boogie Board Racer design is the design claimed in the ’613

Patent.

114. In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, WhiteWater has directly infringed the ’804

Patent by making, importing, using, offering for sale, and selling the Boogie Board Racer in

the United States.

115. In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 289, WhiteWater has directly infringed the ’804

Patent by applying the patented design of the ’804 Patent, or a colorable imitation thereof, to

an article of manufacture, including the Boogie Board Racer, for the purpose of sale and/or by

selling, offering, or exposing for sale an article of manufacture, including the Boogie Board

Racer, to which the patented design of the ’804 Patent or a colorable imitation thereof has been

applied.

116. The following side-by-side images provides an example demonstrating that the

claimed design of the ’804 Patent is copied by the Accused Boogie Board Racer slide as

manufactured for, sold to, and scheduled to be installed at Carowinds Amusement Park,

Charlotte, North Carolina, United States:

37

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 38 of 43 PageID 38

U.S. D903,804 S (FIG. 1) WhiteWater’s Boogie Board Racer37

117. The description above is based on publicly available information. Plaintiff

reserves the right to modify the description, including, for example, on the basis of information

about the Accused Boogie Board Racer slide that Plaintiff obtains during discovery.

118. Defendant has had actual knowledge of the ʼ613 Patent at least as early as the

date of service of this Complaint.

119. Defendant’s acts of infringement have occurred within this District and

elsewhere in the United States within the term of the ’613 Patent.

120. The Accused Boogie Board Racer slide feature has no substantial non-

infringing uses and is not a staple article of commerce.

COUNT IX INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. D892,960 S

121. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations above in

Paragraphs 1 – 22 and 35 – 37 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

37 Image obtained from https://www.carowinds.com/play/carolina-harbor/boogie-board-racer (last visited Nov. 30, 2020).

38

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 39 of 43 PageID 39

122. In the eye of the ordinary observer familiar with the relevant prior art, giving

such attention as a purchaser usually gives, the claimed design of U.S. Patent No. D892,960 S

(“the ’960 Patent”) and the corresponding design of WhiteWater’s Boogie Board Racer water

ride are substantially the same, such that the ordinary observer would be deceived into

believing that WhiteWater’s Boogie Board Racer design is the design claimed in the ’960

Patent.

123. In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, WhiteWater has directly infringed the ’960

Patent by making, importing, using, offering for sale, and selling the Boogie Board Racer in

the United States.

124. In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 289, WhiteWater has directly infringed the ’960

Patent by applying the patented design of the ’960 Patent, or a colorable imitation thereof, to

an article of manufacture, including the Boogie Board Racer, for the purpose of sale and/or by

selling, offering, or exposing for sale an article of manufacture, including the Boogie Board

Racer, to which the patented design of the ’960 Patent or a colorable imitation thereof has been

applied.

125. The following side-by-side images provides an example demonstrating that the

claimed design of the ’960 Patent is copied by the Accused Boogie Board Racer slide as

manufactured for, sold to, and scheduled to be installed at Carowinds Amusement Park,

Charlotte, North Carolina, United States:

39

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 40 of 43 PageID 40

U.S. D892,960 S (FIG. 1) WhiteWater Boogie Board Racer38

WhiteWater’s Boogie Board Racer39

126. The description above is based on publicly available information. Plaintiff

reserves the right to modify the description, including, for example, on the basis of information

about the Accused Boogie Board Racer slide that Plaintiff obtains during discovery.

127. Defendant has had actual knowledge of the ʼ960 Patent at least as early as the

date of service of this Complaint.

128. Defendant’s acts of infringement have occurred within this District and

elsewhere in the United States within the term of the ’960 Patent.

38 Image obtained from https://www.carowinds.com/play/carolina-harbor/boogie-board-racer (last visited Nov. 30, 2020). 39 See id.

40

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 41 of 43 PageID 41

129. The Accused Boogie Board Racer slide feature has no substantial non-

infringing uses and is not a staple article of commerce.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief against Defendant as follows:

(a) A judgment that Defendant has infringed and is infringing each of the Asserted

’783, ’508, ’111, ’480, ’613, ’960, and ’804 Patents;

(b) A judgment that Defendant has contributed to and induced infringement of each of

the Asserted ’783, ’508, ’111, ’480, ’613, ’960, and ’804 Patents, and is actively contributing

to and inducing infringement of each of the Asserted ’783, ’508, ’111, ’480, ’613, ’960, and

’804 Patents;

(c) An award of damages adequate to compensate Plaintiff for the infringement that

has occurred, under 35 U.S.C. §§ 284 or 289, including with pre-judgment and post-judgment

interest;

(d) An order requiring Defendant to account for and pay to Plaintiff any and all profits

made by Defendant from sales of the TailSpin, Orbiter, and Boogie Board Racer water rides

under 35 U.S.C. § 289.

(e) An award of treble damages for Defendant’s willful infringement of the Asserted

Patents, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;

(f) An accounting and/or supplemental damages for all damages occurring after any

discovery cutoff and through the Court’s decision regarding imposition of a compulsory

ongoing royalty;

41

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 42 of 43 PageID 42

(g) An order under 35 U.S.C. § 283 permanently enjoining WhiteWater from

continuing to make, use, sell, and/or offer to sell the products accused of infringing the ’783

Patent and from further inducing or contributing to the infringement of the ’783 Patent.

(h) An order under 35 U.S.C. § 283 permanently enjoining WhiteWater from

continuing to make, use, sell, and/or offer to sell the products accused of infringing the ’508

Patent and from further inducing or contributing to the infringement of the ’508 Patent.

(i) An order under 35 U.S.C. § 283 permanently enjoining WhiteWater from continuing

to make, use, sell, and/or offer to sell the products accused of infringing the ’111 Patent and

from further inducing or contributing to the infringement of the ’111 Patent.

(j) An order under 35 U.S.C. § 283 permanently enjoining WhiteWater from continuing

to make, use, sell, and/or offer to sell the products accused of infringing the ’480 Patent and

from further inducing or contributing to the infringement of the ’480 Patent.

(k) An order under 35 U.S.C. § 283 permanently enjoining WhiteWater from

continuing to make, use, sell, and/or offer to sell the products accused of infringing the ’613

Patent and from further inducing or contributing to the infringement of the ’613 Patent.

(l) An order under 35 U.S.C. § 283 permanently enjoining WhiteWater from continuing

to make, use, sell, and/or offer to sell the products accused of infringing the ’960 Patent and

from further inducing or contributing to the infringement of the ’960 Patent.

(m) An order under 35 U.S.C. § 283 permanently enjoining WhiteWater from

continuing to make, use, sell, and/or offer to sell the products accused of infringing the ’804

Patent and from further inducing or contributing to the infringement of the ’804 Patent.

42

Case 6:20-cv-02189-CEM-DCI Document 1 Filed 12/01/20 Page 43 of 43 PageID 43

(n) An award of attorneys’ fees, expenses and costs based on this being an exceptional

case under 35 U.S.C. § 285, including prejudgment interest on such fees, expenses and costs;

(o) Costs and expenses in this action; and

(p) Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff requests a trial by jury as to all issues so triable.

Dated: December 1, 2020

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Taylor F. Ford Taylor F. Ford Florida Bar No.: 0041008 Dustin Mauser-Claassen Florida Bar No.: 0119289 KING, BLACKWELL, ZEHNDER & WERMUTH, P.A. 25 E. Pine St. P.O. Box 1631 Orlando, FL 32802-1631 Telephone: (407) 422-2472 Facsimile: (407) 648-0161 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

James R. Barney* Trial Counsel Justin E. Loffredo* FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP 901 New York Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001-4413 202-408-4000 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

*(Motions to appear pro hac vice forthcoming)

Counsel for Plaintiff ProSlide Technology, Inc.

43