Case: 1:22-cv-01064 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/01/22 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`
`
`
`
`WEPAY GLOBAL PAYMENTS LLC.,
`
`
` Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`
`MCDONALD’S CORPORATION.,
`
`
` Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`Case No.
`
`
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Wepay Global Payments LLC (“Wepay” or “Plaintiff”) brings this patent-
`
`infringement action against McDonalds Corporation (“McDonald’s” or “Defendant”).
`
`
`
`Parties
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal business
`
`address at 221 N. Broad Street, Suite 3A, Middletown DE, 19709.
`
`2.
`
` Upon information and belief, Defendant is an Illinois corporation, with
`
`established offices in the Northern District of Illinois, for example, at 110 N. Carpenter
`
`St. Chicago, IL 60607.
`
`Jurisdiction and Venue
`
`3.
`
`This lawsuit is a civil action for patent infringement arising under the patent
`
`laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 271, et seq. The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction
`
`pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332, 1338(a), and 1367.
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1058, p. 1
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`
`
`
`
`WEPAY GLOBAL PAYMENTS LLC.,
`
`
` Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`
`MCDONALD’S CORPORATION.,
`
`
` Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`Case No.
`
`
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Wepay Global Payments LLC (“Wepay” or “Plaintiff”) brings this patent-
`
`infringement action against McDonalds Corporation (“McDonald’s” or “Defendant”).
`
`
`
`Parties
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal business
`
`address at 221 N. Broad Street, Suite 3A, Middletown DE, 19709.
`
`2.
`
` Upon information and belief, Defendant is an Illinois corporation, with
`
`established offices in the Northern District of Illinois, for example, at 110 N. Carpenter
`
`St. Chicago, IL 60607.
`
`Jurisdiction and Venue
`
`3.
`
`This lawsuit is a civil action for patent infringement arising under the patent
`
`laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 271, et seq. The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction
`
`pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332, 1338(a), and 1367.
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1058, p. 1
`
`
`
`Case: 1:22-cv-01064 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/01/22 Page 2 of 5 PageID #:2
`
`4.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over McDonald’s because McDonald’s
`
`has committed acts giving rise to this action within Illinois and within this judicial district.
`
`Defendants regularly do business or solicit business in this District and in Illinois, engage
`
`in other persistent courses of conduct and derive substantial revenue from products and
`
`services provided in this District and in Illinois, and have purposefully established
`
`substantial, systematic, and continuous contacts within this District and should reasonably
`
`expect to be sued in a court in this District. For example, McDonald’s has offices within
`
`this district. The McDonald’s mobile products with the accused infringing GUI design are
`
`made, sold and distributed to consumers in this District and in Illinois. Given these
`
`contacts, the Court's exercise of jurisdiction over McDonald’s will not offend traditional
`
`notions of fair play and substantial justice.
`
`5.
`
`Venue in the Northern District of Illinois is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
`
`1391(b), (c) and l400(b) because McDonald’s has regular and established places of
`
`business in this District at 110 N. Carpenter St. Chicago, IL 60607, has committed acts
`
`within this judicial district giving rise to this action, and continues to conduct business in
`
`this judicial district, including multiple acts of making, selling, using, and offering for sale
`
`infringing products in this District.
`
`The Patent-In-Suit
`
`7.
`
`Wepay is the exclusive owner of United States Patent No. D930,702 (the
`
`“702 patent”) entitled, “Display screen portion with animated graphical user interface” and
`
`was duly and legally issued in accordance with 35 U.S. Code § 171 by the U.S. Patent and
`
`Trademark Office on September 14, 2021, attached hereto as “Exhibit A”.
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1058, p. 2
`
`
`
`Case: 1:22-cv-01064 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/01/22 Page 3 of 5 PageID #:3
`
`8.
`
`The ’702 Patent claim is valid and enforceable and directed to a unique
`
`ornamental design for a display screen portion with animated graphic user interface as
`
`shown and described.
`
`9.
`
`McDonald’s has not obtained permission from Wepay to use the ornamental
`
`design of the ’702 Patent.
`
`10.
`
`Attached hereto as “Exhibit B” and incorporated into this complaint as
`
`alleged herein a side-by-side claim chart setting forth an ornamental design element
`
`comparison of the second embodiment of the ’702 Patent’s design and the accused display
`
`screen portion articles made by McDonald’s. The known products infringing the patented
`
`design is the McDonald’s mobile GUI device app.
`
`Count I - Infringement of U.S. Patent No. D857,702
`
`11. Wepay reasserts and incorporates by reference (Exhibit B, pages 2-4) the
`
`preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as fully set forth herein.
`
`12. McDonald’s has infringed and continues to infringe the second embodiment
`
`of the ‘702 patent by making, using, distributing, offering to sell and/or selling in the
`
`United States the McDonald’s mobile device app component, which embodies the GUI
`
`design covered by the ‘702 patent. McDonald’s infringing activities violate 35 U.S.C. §
`
`271.
`
`Count II - Infringement of U.S. Patent No. D857,702
`
`13. Wepay reasserts and incorporates by reference (Exhibit B, pages 6-8) the
`
`preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as fully set forth herein.
`
`14. McDonald’s has infringed and continues to infringe the second embodiment
`
`of the ‘702 patent by making, using, distributing, offering to sell and/or selling in the
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1058, p. 3
`
`
`
`Case: 1:22-cv-01064 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/01/22 Page 4 of 5 PageID #:4
`
`United States the McDonald’s mobile device app component, which embodies the GUI
`
`design covered by the ‘702 patent. McDonald’s infringing activities violate 35 U.S.C. §
`
`271.
`
`Damages
`
`15. Wepay sustains damages as a direct result of McDonald’s infringement of the
`
`’702 Patent.
`
`16. As a consequence of McDonald’s present, continued, and future infringement
`
`of the ’702 Patent, Wepay is entitled to damages recovery for its infringement of the ’702
`
`Patent on a forward-going basis.
`
`Prayer for Relief
`
`WHEREFORE, WEPAY GLOBAL PAYMENTS LLC prays for the following
`
`relief against MCDONALD’S CORPORATION:
`
`(a)
`
`judgment that McDonald’s has infringed the second and first embodiment
`
`claims of the Asserted Patent, directly and/or indirectly, literally and/or
`
`under the standards of substantial similarity;
`
`(b)
`
`awarding the Plaintiff, the greater damages amount for Defendant’s
`
`infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 284 or 35 U.S.C. § 289 per asserted count;
`
`(c)
`
`post-judgement injunction relief for all products to discontinue the use,
`
`making, selling, and export of products infringing the asserted design
`
`counts;
`
`awarding Plaintiff their costs and expenses incurred in this action;
`
`awarding Plaintiff prejudgment and post-judgment interest; and
`
`granting Plaintiff such further relief as the Court deems just and appropriate.
`
`
`
`4
`
`(d)
`
`(e)
`
`(f)
`
`
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1058, p. 4
`
`
`
`Case: 1:22-cv-01064 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/01/22 Page 5 of 5 PageID #:5
`
` Demand for Summary Judgement or Jury Trial
`
`
`
`WEPAY GLOBAL PAYMENTS LLC demands a Summary Judgment or trial by
`
`jury on all matters and issues triable by jury issues triable by jury.
`
`
`
`Date: March 1, 2022
`
`
`/s/Matthew Wawrzyn_______
`
`Matthew M. Wawrzyn
`(ARDC#6276135)
`matt@wawrzynlaw.com
`
`WAWRZYN LLC
`
`200 East Randolph Street, Suite 5100
`
`Chicago, IL 60601
`
`(312) 235-3120 (telephone)
`
`(312) 233-0063 (facsimile)
`
`
`
` Counsel for WEPAY GLOBAL PAYMENTS LLC
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1058, p. 5
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
