throbber
Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 1 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 1 of 17
`
`IN THE UNITED STATESDISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`MOLNLYCKE HEALTH CARE US,LLC,
`AND BROCKUSA, LLC
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`
`GREENWOOD MARKETING,LLC d/b/a
`RESTORATIVE MEDICALor SPRY
`THERAPEUTICS
`
`Defendants.
`
`[DEMANDFOR JURY TRIAL]
`
`Civil Action No. 7:22-cv-3719
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiffs MéInlycke Health Care US, LLC (‘MHC’), and Brock USA, LLC (“Brock”),
`
`(collectively “Plaintiffs”) by and through their attorneys, bring this action against Defendants
`
`Greenwood Marketing LLC d/b/a Restorative Medical or Spry Therapeutics (collectively
`
`“Restorative Medical”or “Defendants”) alleging as follows:
`
`INTRODUCTION AND ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS
`
`1.
`
`MHCis the USsubsidiary of Mélnlycke Health Care AB,a leading international
`
`medical solutions company headquartered in Gothenburg, Sweden. It manufactures andsells
`
`medical devices including, without limitation, wound care, single-use surgical, and pressure
`
`ulcer prevention (“PUP”) products to health care systems around the world.
`
`2.
`
`PUPproducts are generally used to prevent bedsores and other pressure ulcers
`
`from developing in immobilized patients, including byredistributing force over a greater
`
`surface area while maintaining proper body alignment throughthe use of the fluidized
`
`positioner products at issue in this matter. Pressure ulcers are specifically caused by prolonged
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 2 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 2 of 17
`
`pressure on localized areas of bony prominenceresulting in tissue damage and necrosis. PUP
`
`products are an imperative preventative measure that hospitals and health systems across the
`
`United States use to (1) prevent the creation of pressure ulcers and the added cost associated
`
`with treatment, and (2) maintain high quality of care standards to ensure any federal and state
`
`subsidies that the hospital or health system mayreceive.
`
`3.
`
`In February 2016, MHCacquired several integrated businesses ownedbyBill
`
`and Bob Purdy(the “Purdys”), the current owners of Defendant Restorative Medical, including,
`
`inter alia, the associated intellectual property owned by the Purdys individually (“the
`
`Acquisition”). The Acquisition was governed by the Amended and Restated Acquisition
`
`Agreement(the “Agreement”) and related closing documents including identical Non-Compete
`
`Agreements executed by each of Bill Purdy and Bob Purdy in their individual capacities
`
`(collectively, the “Non-Compete”). The Disclosure Schedule to the Agreement outlines the
`
`intellectual property assets MHC acquired through the acquisition, which include amongother
`
`such assets, US Patent 9,120,666 (“666 Patent’).
`
`4.
`
`Simultaneously, MHC and Restorative Medical entered into an Exclusive
`
`License and Agreement(“License Agreement’). Attachment A. The License Agreement
`
`granted Restorative Medical an exclusivelicense to the ’666 Patent, but only within the “fields
`
`of use” defined in relevant part as “restorative bracing, orthopedic bracing and. . . to the extent
`
`solelyfor over the counterretail sale, pregnancy products, sleep apnea pillows, and neck and
`
`lumbarsupport products ....” Attachment A J 1.3 (emphasis added).
`
`5.
`
`In Fall of 2019, during mediation ofa different issue with the Purdys, MHC
`
`became awarethat the Purdys, in violation of the Non-Compete, had begun to develop,
`
`manufacture, market, and sell wound or infection prevention products through Defendant
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 3 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 3 of 17
`
`Restorative Medical, including a fluidized heel boot covered by US Patent 8,858,478 (°°478
`
`Patent”), one of the patents transferred to MHC through the Acquisition and the ’666 Patent.
`
`MHCsubsequently brought a prior lawsuit in 2020 against the Purdys and Restorative Medical
`
`alleging, inter alia, willful patent infringementof the °478 Patent. The lawsuit later settled
`
`when Purdys and Restorative Medical agreed to redesign the infringing boot in December 2020
`
`and the parties agreed to terminate the Non-Compete.
`
`6.
`
`MHCandRestorative Medical simultaneously amended the License Agreement,
`
`reiterating that the “field of use” for Restorative Medical’s license of the ’666 Patent and now
`
`the °478 Patent is limited to “over-the-counterretail sale” for pregnancy products, sleep apnea
`
`pillows, and neck and lumbar supports. Attachment A J 1.3. In the amendments, Restorative
`
`Medical also warranted that it had ceased infringing upon both the ’666 and 478 Patents
`
`outside the permitted field of use.
`
`7.
`
`Also after the December 2020 settlement, MHC andthe Purdys were involved in
`
`a second lawsuit involving,inter alia, defamation claims and enforcementof the December
`
`2020 settlement agreement. This second lawsuit has since been resolved through settlement
`
`earlier this year.
`
`8.
`
`Thoughall patent-related disputes between the Purdys and Restorative Medical
`
`and MHCseemedresolved with the December 2020 settlement, MHC subsequently learned
`
`that the Purdys, through Restorative Medical, are developing, manufacturing, marketing, and
`
`selling yet another infringing product, the Flo-Form positioner, and potentially other fluidized
`
`positioners, which infringe both the ’666 Patent and US Patent 8,171,585 (585 Patent”).
`
`Restorative Medical advertises the Flo-Form positioner, and subsequently sells at least that
`
`product, to medical institutions directly for use in clinical settings. Restorative Medical
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 4 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 4 of 17
`
`advertises and markets its Flo-Form product, and other positioners, on-line as well as directly to
`
`clinicians and purchasers. For example, MHC has seen Restorative Medical marketits Flo-
`
`Form positioners at clinical seminars such as the New England Region WOCN Conference in
`
`Manchester, NH. MHCacquired samplesofinfringing positioners, such as the Flo-Form
`
`positioner, from Restorative Medical at that medical convention, which is aimedat servicing
`
`commercial medical providers.
`
`9.
`
`MHCcurrently has an exclusive license to the °585 Patent, which is owned by
`
`Brock, within the medical positioning commercial field.
`
`PARTIES
`
`10.
`
`M6lnlycke Health Care US, LLC,is a limited liability company organized under
`
`the laws of the State of Delaware and doing businessin the state of New York under the same
`
`name. MHC’s principal place of business is 5550 Peachtree Parkway Suite 500,
`
`Norcross, Georgia 30092.
`
`11.
`
`Brock USA, LLC,is a limited liability company organized under the lawsof the
`
`State of Colorado and doing businessin the state of Colorado under the same name. Brock’s
`
`principal place of business is 3090 Sterling Circle, Suite 102, Boulder, Colorado 80301.
`
`12.
`
`On information and belief, Greenwood Marketing, LLC d/b/a Restorative
`
`Medical or Spry Therapeutics is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the
`
`state of New York and registered to do business in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.
`
`According to the Secretary of State for New York, Restorative Medical’s principal place of
`
`businessis 79 Primrose Street, White Plains, NY 10606.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`13.
`
`This is an action for patent infringementarising under the patent laws ofthe
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 5 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 5 of 17
`
`United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1, et seg. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction regarding claims
`
`of willful patent infringementpursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`14.
`
`The Court has personal jurisdiction over Restorative Medical becauseit has
`
`sufficient minimum contacts stemming from its regular and established place of business within
`
`this judicial district, and because Restorative Medical has committed acts of infringement in
`
`this district through the sale, distribution, marketing/promotion, and education of the products
`
`discussed herein, and through the subsequentuse in an infringing manner.
`
`15.|Venueis proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c) and 1400(b).
`
`Defendants have committed, induced, and/or contributed to the acts alleged herein in this
`
`district and these claimsarise from those acts. Defendants have regularly engaged in business
`
`in this district, at a minimum throughthe presenceofits regular and established place of
`
`business in White Plains, New York. Further, Defendants have purposefully availed
`
`themselves of the privilege of conducting businessin thisdistrict, for example, by at least
`
`offering, selling, promoting, and/or marketing products in this district that infringe the patent
`
`described herein. Moreover, MHC seeks immediate and permanentinjunctiverelief to prevent
`
`the Defendants from continuing to injure and damage MHC.
`
`THE °666 PATENT
`
`16.
`
`On September 1, 2015, the United Stated Patent Office issued the ’666 Patent,
`
`entitled METHOD AND SYSTEM OF CHANGING FLOW CHARACTERISTICS OF A
`
`SUPPORT. See, Attachment B.
`
`17.
`
`MHC acquiredall rights, title, and interest in the ’666 Patent, including the right
`
`to sue, enforce, and recover damagesforall infringements. Restorative Medical has a license
`
`of the °666 Patent, limited to over-the-counter sales only.
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 6 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 6 of 17
`
`The ’666 Patent has not expired andis in full force and effect.
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 282, the 666 Patent and each ofits claims are valid and
`
`18.
`
`19.
`
`enforceable.
`
`20.
`
`The ’666 Patent contains claims, for example claims 1—23, directed to a method
`
`for determining a flow characteristic of a support comprising the steps of: (a) providing a
`
`support comprising a bladder includinga fluidized particulate material includinginterstitial
`
`spaces betweenparticles of the fluidized particulate material filled with a gas; (2) evacuating
`
`the gas by vacuum to a predetermined pressure; and (3) sealing the bladder such that the
`
`predetermined pressure is maintained permanently within the support to achieve a
`
`predetermined permanent flow characteristic within the support.
`
`THE °585 PATENT
`
`21.
`
`On May 8, 2012, the United Stated Patent Office issued the ’585 Patent, entitled
`
`LIGHTWEIGHTFLUID. See, Attachment C.
`
`22.
`
`Brock ownsall rights, title, and interest in and to the ’585 Patent, including the
`
`right to sue, enforce, and recover damagesforall infringements.
`
`23.
`
`On June 7, 2012, Brock entered into a Patent and Know-HowLicense
`
`Agreement with Greenwood Marketing, LLC under which Brock granted Greenwood
`
`Marketing, LLC an exclusive license in the medical positioning commercialfield of the ’585
`
`Patent.
`
`24.
`
`On February 10, 2016, Brock, Greenwood Marketing, LLC and MHCentered
`
`into an amendmentto the Patent and Know-How License Agreement under which Greenwood
`
`Marketing, LLC’s rights and obligations under the Patent and Know-How License Agreement,
`
`including the exclusive license in the medical positioning commercialfield of the 585 Patent,
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 7 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 7 of 17
`
`were assigned and transferred to MHC.
`
`The ’585 Patent has not expired and is in full force and effect.
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 282, the ’585 Patent and each ofits claims are valid and
`
`25.
`
`26.
`
`enforceable.
`
`27.
`
`The *585 Patent contains claims, for example, claim 3, directed to a fluid pad
`
`comprising a bladder, closed-cell foam beads, and a surroundingfluid, where the closed-cell
`
`foam beads and the surrounding fluid comprise a composite fluid, the closed-cell foam beads
`
`are substantially imperviousto the surrounding fluid, the closed-cell foam beads are
`
`exceedingly flooded by the surrounding fluid such thatinterstitial spaces between the closed-
`
`cell foam beadsare filled with the surrounding fluid, and the bladder houses the composite
`
`fluid within the interior of the bladder.
`
`RESTORATIVE MEDICAL’S SPRY POSITIONERS
`
`28.
`
`On information and belief, approximately a year ago, Restorative Medical began
`
`advertising, marketing, and selling the “Flo-Form”fluidized positioner and potentially other
`
`fluidized positioners not for over-the-counter sale that also maintain a predetermined, sub-
`
`atmospheric pressure within its bladder so as to achieve a predetermined permanent flow
`
`characteristic or comprise of small and large closed-cell foam beads(collectively, the “Spry
`
`positioners”).
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 8 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 8 of 17
`
`29.|MHCdiscovered a promotionalvideo of various Spry positioners,
`
`demonstrating the fluidized nature of the positioners.
`
`ites, Spry Therapeutics
`“aan »
`.
`; -. ® ~
`
`+ Follow °*:
`
`In addition to our filtered PPE pillow, Spry is excited to announcethat we are now
`offering healthcarefacilities a range of fluidized positioners, as well as turning and
`positioning devices — all of which improve patient and caregiver safety.
`
`To read our full announcementand learn more about our expanded productline,
`visit our website or check out the video below.
`
`#medicaldevice #patientpositioner #nicu #caregiversafety #patientsafety
`#infectioncontrol #medicalpositioner #fluidizedpositioner #hospitalequipment
`#patientproning
`
`en. ee 9
`
`Figure 1. A still from the Linked-In video showing the Flo-Form positioner (captured
`April 8, 2022)
`
`30.
`
`On April 2, 2021, MHCthen sent an infringementnotice letter to Restorative
`
`Medical, explaining that the Flo-Form positioner “must maintain a negative pressure to the
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 9 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 9 of 17
`
`surrounding atmosphere,” as claimed in the ’666 Patent, in order for the positioner to be
`
`moldable as demonstrated in the promotional video. Restorative Medical responded denyingit
`
`used sub-atmospheric pressure to create its positioners.
`
`31.
`
`On information and belief, the Spry positioners use the manufacturing method as
`
`claimed by claim 1 of the ’666 Patent to achieveits fluidized, moldable state. Based on
`
`experience and investigation of the Spry positioners, the products are able to retain their shape
`
`and possess physical characteristics which are obtained only by subjecting the positioners to
`
`negative, or sub-atmospheric pressure during manufacture. The official marketing pamphlet
`
`for the Flo-Form positioner further confirms the products retain their shape and are fluidized.
`
`Flo-Form™Positioner
`
`Instructions for Use
`
`: =ORY,
`
`THERAPEUTICS
`
`Indication for Use:
`
`Spry's Flo-Form™ Positioner easily contours to the patient's body and_maintains its shape
`until remolded. In doing so, Flo-Form™ redistributes and offloads bony prominencesin
`key areas for improved patient outcomes.
`
`Product Features:
`
`
`
`.
`;
`.
`;
`¢ Flo-Form™is a non-poweredfluidized medium, designed
`to maximize contouring and support
`
`¢ The Flo-Form™Positioner will not flow on its own,butit
`effectively contours when normal bodyforces are applied
`(regardless of the direction of the force)
`
`e Redistributes pressure over a greater surface area
`
`e Effectively positions patients and promotes neutral spine
`and limb alignment
`
`Figure 2. Restorative Medical’s instructions for the Flo-Form positioner (captured and
`downloaded April 8, 2022)
`
`32.
`
`Analysis confirmsthat a positioner able to retain its shape cannot be achieved to
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 10 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 10 of 17
`
`similar degree of success and effectiveness as that of MHC’s positioners unless a sub-
`
`atmospheric pressure is maintainedinside the positioner, as claimed by claim 1 of the ’666
`
`Patent. Comparing the characteristics of the Flo-Form positioner and MHC’s positioner as
`
`manufactured and sold, and then attempting to recreate a positioner with those same or
`
`comparable characteristics without creating a sub-atmospheric pressure with a vacuum during
`
`the manufacturing process confirmsthis. As the figures below show,a positioner with
`
`comparable characteristics could not be created without a vacuum:
`
`
`
`Figure 3. MHC’s positioner after the pinch test showing a tight, snug fit around the inner beads
`
`-10-
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 11 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 11 of 17
`
`it?
`7iy iM
`bs
`a)
`:
`
`Sao)
`PLAS
`
`YE"2
`beads
`
`Figure 4. Flo-Form positionerafter the pinch test showing a tight, snug fit around the inner
`
`Figure 5. Positioner created without vacuum after the pinch test showing a looser, non-snugfit
`over the inner beads
`
`-ll-
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 12 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 12 of 17
`
`33.
`
`In Novemberof 2021, Restorative Medical attended a wound-care conference
`
`for medical practitioners in New Hampshire whereit provided samples of its Spry positioner
`
`products. At this conference, representatives of MHC obtained a sample. On information and
`
`belief, one or more of the Spry positioners comprises foam beads, including closed-cell foam
`
`beads as required by claim 3 of the ’585 patent, as shownin the figure below.
`
` ;
`
`:
`id
`7
`a
`a _, ,
`,;
`Figure 6. Expanded view of the Flo-Form positioner showing the outlines of closed-cell foam
`beads within
`
`34.
`
`Furthermore, Fourier Transform Infrared (“FTIR”) spectroscopy tests show that
`
`the foam beads are composed of Poly(ethylene). Based on experience and industry knowledge,
`
`the beads are therefore closed-cell foam beads, as clatmed by claim 3 of the ’585 Patent.
`
`35.
`
`On information andbelief, Restorative Medical continues to manufacture,
`
`advertise, market, and sell the Spry positioners.
`
`-12-
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 13 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 13 of 17
`
`COUNT I: WILLFUL INFRINGEMENTOF THE ‘666 PATENT
`
`(brought by Plaintiff MéInlycke Health Care US, LLC)
`
`36.|MHCincorporate by reference the averments of paragraphs 1-35 ofthis
`
`Complaint as though fully set forth herein.
`
`37.
`
`Restorative Medical hasa limited exclusive license for the °666 Patent within
`
`the field of use as defined in the amended License Agreement: over-the-countersales.
`
`38.
`
`Restorative Medical, without license or authorization to do so, infringes the ’666
`
`Patent by manufacturing,selling, distributing, or otherwise making available the Flo-Form
`
`positioner and, on information andbelief, other Spry positioners.
`
`39.
`
`The Flo-Form positioner, for example, appears to be manufactured using a
`
`method comprising of the following steps: (1) providing a support comprising a bladder
`
`including fluidized particulate material with interstitial spaces filled with a gas; (2) evacuating
`
`the gas by vacuum to a predetermined pressure; and (3) sealing the bladder such that the
`
`predetermined pressure is maintained permanently within the support to achieve a
`
`predetermined permanent flow characteristic within the bladder, as claimed in claim 1 of the
`
`666 Patent.
`
`40.
`
`Atall times relevant to this cause of action, Restorative Medical has known of
`
`its infringement of the ’666 Patentor at the very least has been willfully blind toits
`
`infringementof the ’666 Patent. The Purdysare listed as the inventors on the 666 Patent and
`
`Defendant knowingly infringe on the patent through Restorative Medical’s manufacturing,
`
`selling, distributing, or otherwise making available the Flo-Form positioner and other
`
`infringing Spry positioners. Through their assignment to MHC, Defendant cannot challenge
`
`the validity of the ’666 Patent.
`
`-13-
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 14 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 14 of 17
`
`41.
`
`Because Restorative Medical knowsandat all times relevant has knownof its
`
`infringementof the 666 Patent or at the very least has been willfully blind to its infringement
`
`of the ’666 Patent, its infringementis deliberate and willful.
`
`42.|MHC hasbeenandcontinues to be damagedandirreparably harmed by
`
`Restorative Medical’s infringementof the ’666 Patent.
`
`43.|Such infringementhas been,and will continueto be, willful and upon further
`
`belief Restorative Medical lacks any reasonable non-infringement defenses making this case
`
`exceptional and entitling MHCto increased damages and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to
`
`34 US.C. §§ 284 and 285.
`
`COUNT HI: WILLFUL INFRINGEMENT OF THE‘585 PATENT
`
`(brought by Plaintiffs Brock USA, LLC and M6Inlycke Health Care US, LLC)
`
`44.
`
`Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the averments of paragraphs 1—43 ofthis
`
`Complaint as though fully set forth herein.
`
`45.
`
`Restorative Medical, without license or authorization to do so, infringes the ’585
`
`Patent by manufacturing,selling, distributing, or otherwise making available the Flo-Form
`
`positioner and, on information andbelief, other Spry positioners.
`
`46.
`
`The Flo-Form positioner is comprised a fluid pad with a bladder that houses a
`
`composite fluid comprising small closed-cell foam beads and a surroundingfluid, where the
`
`closed-cell foam beads are substantially impervious to the surrounding fluid and are
`
`exceedingly flooded by the surrounding fluid such that interstitial spaces between the closed-
`
`cell foam beadsare filled with the surroundingfluid, as claimed in claim 3.
`
`47.
`
`Restorative Medical has knownofits infringementof the 585 Patent or at the
`
`very least has been willfully blind to its infringement of the 585 Patent, at least as of the date
`
`_14-
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 15 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 15 of 17
`
`of filing of this Complaint. Restorative Medical has knownof the ’585 Patent since at least
`
`June 2012 when Restorative Medical took a license to the Brock ’585 Patent, which was
`
`subsequently transferred from Restorative Medical to MHC.
`
`48.
`
`Because Restorative Medical knowsofits infringement of the 585 Patent or at
`
`the very least has been willfully blind to its infringementof the ’585 Patent at least as of the
`
`date of filing of this Complaint if not since 2012, its continuing infringementis deliberate and
`
`willful.
`
`49.
`
`Plaintiffs have been and continues to be damaged andirreparably harmed by
`
`Restorative Medical’s infringement of the ’585 Patent.
`
`50.
`
`Such infringementhas been, and will continueto be, willful and upon further
`
`belief Restorative Medical lacks any reasonable non-infringement defenses makingthis case
`
`exceptional and entitling Plaintiffs to increased damages and reasonable attorneys’ fees
`
`pursuant to 34 U.S.C. §§ 284 and 285.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE,Plaintiffs request the followingrelief:
`
`A.
`
`JUDGMENTunder 35 U.S.C § 271 that Restorative Medical willfully infringes
`
`MHC’s ’666 and Brock’s 585 Patents referenced and detailed above;
`
`B.
`
`DAMAGESunder35 U.S.C § 284 adequate to compensate Plaintiffs for
`
`Restorative Medical’s willful infringement and continued infringement of MHC’s ’666 and
`
`Brock’s ’585 Patents referenced and detailed above;
`
`C.
`
`TREBLINGor other enhancement of the DAMAGESpursuantto 35 U.S.C. §
`
`284 as a result of Restorative Medical’s willful and deliberate acts of infringement;
`
`D.
`
`AWARD pursuant to 35 U.SC. § 284 of costs and pre- and post-judgment
`
`-15-
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 16 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 16 of 17
`
`interest on MHC’s compensatory damages;
`
`E.
`
`AWARD pursuant to 35 U.S.C § 285 of MHC’s attorneys’ fees incurred in this
`
`action;
`
`F,
`
`G.
`
`INJUNCTIVERELIEFenjoining Defendant’s patent infringement;
`
`ALL OTHER RELIEFthe Court deems warranted and appropriate.
`
`DEMANDFOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Plaintiff MéInlycke Health Care US LLC hereby demandsa trial by jury onall issues so
`
`triable of right.
`
`DATED: May6, 2022
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
`
`By:
`
`/s/Frederick L. Whitmer
`Frederick L. Whitmer (FW8888)
`fwhitmer@kilpatricktownsend.com
`The Grace Building
`1114 Avenue ofthe Americas
`New York, New York 10036
`Telephone: (212) 775-8773
`Facsimile: (212) 775-8821
`
`-16-
`
`

`

`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document 1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 17 of 17
`Case 7:22-cv-03719 Document1 Filed 05/06/22 Page 17 of 17
`
`STEVEN D. MOORE
`smoore@kilpatricktownsend.com
`(pro hac vice application to befiled)
`RISHI GUPTA
`rgupta@kilpatricktownsend.com
`(pro hac vice application to befiled)
`SARAH GLENDON
`sglendon@kilpatricktownsend.com
`(pro hac vice application to befiled)
`Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 1900
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`Telephone: 415 576 0200
`Facsimile:
`415 576 0300
`KILPATRICK TOWNSEND &
`STOCKTON,LLP
`
`D. CLAY HOLLOWAY
`cholloway@kilpatricktownsend.com
`(pro hac vice application to befiled)
`ANDREW N. SAUL
`asaul@kilpatricktownsend.com
`(pro hac vice application to befiled)
`Suite 2800, 1100 Peachtree Street NE
`Atlanta, GA, 30309-4528
`(404) 815-6537
`KILPATRICK TOWNSEND &
`STOCKTON,LLP
`
`Attorneys for PLAINTIFF
`MOLNLYCKE HEALTH CARE US, LLC
`
`DAVID J. SHEIKH
`dsheikh@leesheikh.com
`(pro hac vice application to befiled)
`111 W. Jackson Boulevard, Suite 2230
`Chicago, IL 60604
`(312) 982-0070
`LEE SHEIKH & HAAN LLC
`
`Attorney for PLAINTIFF
`BROCK USA LLC
`
`75861157V.1
`
`-17-
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket