Bergstrom v. Idle Free Systems

Document Sample
Bergstrom v. Idle Free Systems Powered By Docstoc
					      Case: 3:12-cv-50254 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/05/12 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:1



                         IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                            NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
                                   WESTERN DIVISION


BERGSTROM, INC.,

            Plaintiff,                             Case No.

v.                                                 Honorable

IDLE FREE SYSTEMS, INC.                            Jury Trial Demanded

            Defendant.


                                         COMPLAINT

       Plaintiff Bergstrom, Inc. files this Complaint for patent infringement against the

Defendant, Idle Free Systems, Inc., and alleges as follows:

                                           The Parties

       1.      Plaintiff Bergstrom, Inc. (“Bergstrom”) is an Illinois corporation with its principal

place of business located at 2390 Blackhawk Road, P.O. Box 6007, Rockford, IL 61125.

       2.      Upon information and belief, Defendant Idle Free Systems, Inc. (“Idle Free”) is a

Wisconsin corporation with its principal place of business at 7633 Ganser Way, Suite 102

Madison, WI 53719.

                                     Jurisdiction and Venue

       3.      This is an action for patent infringement founded upon the patent laws of the

United States, 35 U.S.C § 100 et seq.

       4.      Subject matter jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a).

       5.      Venue is based on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b).
       Case: 3:12-cv-50254 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/05/12 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:2



       6.      This Court has personal jurisdiction over Idle Free because, upon information and

belief, Defendant Idle Free regularly transacts business in the State of Illinois and in this judicial

district by, among other things, the sale, offer for sale, and advertisement of battery-based

climate control systems that are primarily used in the cab of trucks. Idle Free’s battery-based

climate control systems, including those mentioned in the paragraphs that follow, are available

for purchase and installation at a number of different authorized dealers in this judicial district.

At a minimum, Idle Free has placed its battery-based climate control systems in the stream of

Illinois’ commerce and purposefully availed its self of the benefits resources of Illinois.

                                         The Patent-in-Suit

       7.      On September 22, 2009, United States Patent No. 7,591,303 (“the ’303 patent”)

was duly and properly issued to Terry Zeigler and Eric Elias, for an invention entitled “Vehicle

air conditioning and heating method providing engine on and engine off operation.”

       8.      Bergstrom is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and interest in and to the

’303 patent, including the right to sue for past damages.

       9.      A true and correct copy of the ’303 patent is attached as Exhibit A.

                                               Count I

                                 Infringement of the ’303 Patent

       10.     Plaintiff incorporates and realleges as if fully set forth herein each and every

allegation contained in paragraphs 1-11.

       11.     Bergstrom designs, manufactures, and sells heating and air conditioning systems

that are primarily used in the cab of trucks that incorporate one or more limitations and/or

elements described and claimed in the ’303 patent.




                                                  2
         Case: 3:12-cv-50254 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/05/12 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:3



         12.    Bergstrom has complied with the notice and marking requirements of 35 U.S.C.

§ 287 for the ‘303 patent.

         13.    Upon information and belief, Idle Free has infringed and continues to infringe at

least Claim 17 of the ’303 patent by its manufacture, use, offer for sale, and/or sale of certain

climate control systems, including the “battery-based Idle Free electric APU” and variants

thereof.

         14.    The acts of Idle Free complained of herein constitute infringement of the ’303

patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271.

         15.    As a direct and proximate result of Idle Free’s infringement of the ’303 patent,

Bergstrom has suffered injury and damage, and Bergstrom is entitled to recover from Idle Free

damages sustained by Bergstrom, which continue to accrue in an amount to be determined at

trial.

         16.    As a further result of Idle Free’s infringement of the ’303 patent, Bergstrom has

suffered and continue to suffer irreparable injury, for which there is no adequate remedy at law,

unless Idle Free is enjoined by this Court.

                                          Jury Trial Demand

         Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all matters and issues triable by a jury.

                                      PRAYER FOR RELIEF

         WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that this Court enter judgment in its favor and against

Idle Free as follows:

         A.     Enter judgment that Idle Free has infringed the ’303 patent under 35 U.S.C.

                § 271;




                                                   3
      Case: 3:12-cv-50254 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/05/12 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:4



      B.     Award damages, which shall be no less than a reasonable royalty, to Plaintiff

             under 35 U.S.C. § 284, along with interest and costs for Idle Free’s infringement

             of the ’303 patent;

      C.     Enter a permanent injunction under 35 U.S.C. § 283 to enjoin Idle Free, its

             officers, partners, employees, agents, parents, subsidiaries, attorneys, and

             anyone acting or participating with them, from manufacturing, making,

             selling, offering for sale, importing, or using a product that infringes the ’303

             patent;

      D.     Find that this case is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285, and award

             Plaintiff its attorneys fees; and

      E.     Award to Plaintiffs such other and further relief as the Court may deem just

             and equitable.



Dated: July 5, 2012                        MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP


                                           By:      /s/ Jason C. White
                                                 Jason C. White
                                                 Scott D. Sherwin
                                                 77 West Wacker Drive, Suite 500
                                                 Chicago, IL 60601-5094
                                                 Telephone: 312.324.1000
                                                 Facsimile: 312.324.1001
                                                 jwhite@morganlewis.com
                                                 ssherwin@morganlewis.com

                                                 Attorneys for Plaintiff Bergstrom, Inc.




                                                 4

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:4
posted:7/27/2012
language:
pages:4