hma v. famco - complaint

8/11/2019 HMA v. FAMCO - Complaint

1/28

-1-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

HARD METAL ADVANTAGE, LLC, ) CIVIL ACTION NO. ________________

)Plaintiff, )VERSUS )

) JUDGE ___________________________FAMCO MACHINE SHOP )a Texas Corporation, and DOES 1-10, inclusive )

)Defendants. ) MAGISTRATE JUDGE _______________

)****************************************

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Hard Metal Advantage, LLC (Plaintiff) hereby pleads and alleges as follows

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This is an action for willful patent infringement under the Patent Act of the Unite

States, including 35 U.S.C. 271.

2. This action arises under the Patent Laws of the United States, Title 35 of th

United States Code, and under the Trademark Act of 1946, Title 15 of the United States Cod

This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 15 USC 1121 (actio

arising under the Lanham Act), 28 USC 1331 (actions arising under the laws of the Unit

States), 28 USC 1338(a) (acts of Congress relating to patents), and 28 USC 1338(b) (ci

actions asserting a claim of unfair compensation). This Court further has supplemen

jurisdiction over any claims in this action that arise under state statutory and common l

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367 in that any such claims that may arise under state law claims are

related to the federal claims that they form part of the same case or controversy and derive fr

a common nucleus of operative facts.

Case 6:14-cv-02769 Document 1 Filed 09/19/14 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1


2/28

-2-

3. Venue over these claims is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

1400(b) and 1391(b) and (c) because, among other reasons, Defendant FAMCO MACHIN

SHOP (Defendant and/or FAMCO) is subject to personal jurisdiction in this judicial distr

and has committed, induced and/or contributed to acts of patent infringement in this judic

district.

4. On information and belief, Defendant is subject to the Courts specific and

general personal jurisdiction, including by and on account of its conducting business transacti

in Lafayette Parish and/or other locations in this judicial district, its direct sales and oth

activities via its website, pursuant to due process and/or the Louisiana Long Arm Statute, adue at least to its substantial business in this forum, including; (i) at least a portion of t

infringements alleged herein; and (ii) regularly doing or soliciting business, engaging in ot

persistent courses of conduct, and/or deriving substantial revenue from sales of products and

services provided to persons in Lafayette Parish, Louisiana and in this judicial district.

THE PARTIES

5. Plaintiff Hard Metal Advantage, LLC is a limited liability company organized an

existing under the laws of the State of Louisiana.

6. Plaintiff is the sole owner of U.S. Patent No. D649,987 (the 987 Patent

entitled Carbide Chip and U.S. Patent No. D656,167 (the 167 Patent) entitled Mill.

7. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendan

FAMCO, is, and at all relevant times was, a corporation organized and existing under the laws

the State of Texas, with its principal place of business at 14823 Hooper Rd, Houston, TX 770

FAMCOs products and services include mills incorporating six-sided hexagonal carbide chips



3/28

-3-

8. Plaintiff is unaware of the true names and capacities, whether individuals

corporations, partnerships, joint ventures, sole proprietorships or otherwise, of Defendants D

1 through 10, inclusive, and therefore sues said Defendants by such fictitious names. Plain

will amend this Complaint to show the true names and capacities of said Doe Defendants wh

they become known. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that ea

fictitiously named Defendant is responsible in some manner for the occurrences and wrongdo

herein alleged and that Plaintiffs damages were proximately caused by said Defendants acts.

9. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that each of th

Defendants was the agent, alter ego, servant co-conspirator and/or representative of each of of the other remaining Defendants and at all times herein relevant was acting within t

authorized scope and course of said agency and employment and all of said acts, conduct

omissions were subsequently ratified by the respective principals and accepted by the princip

of the corporate Defendants.

COUNT I

PATENT INFRINGEMENT (987 PATENT)

10. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 9 as though fully s

forth herein.

11. Plaintiff Hard Metal Advantage is the sole and exclusive owner of the entire righ

title and interest in and to the 987 Patent, entitled Carbide Chip which was duly issued

December 6, 2011. A copy of the 987 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

12. The 987 Patent is drawn to an ornamental design for a tungsten carbide chi

suitable for use on a variety of mills and other tools.



4/28

-4-

13. The patent application which matured into the 987 Patent was prepared and file

with the United States Patent and Trademark Office on February 4, 2010 under the name

Duane C. Dunnahoe, as inventor.

14. After search and examination of the subject patent application, the United State

Patent and Trademark Office allowed the subject application and issued the 987 Patent

December 6, 2011.

15. Duane C. Dunnahoe has assigned his interest in the 987 Patent to Hard Meta

Advantage, and Hard Metal Advantage is the owner by assignment of the 987 Patent.

16.

As the sole and exclusive owner of the 987 Patent, Plaintiff Hard MetaAdvantage has the right to pursue all rights, remedies and or causes of action for an

infringement thereof.

17. Upon information and belief, FAMCO has been and now is, literally and/or unde

the doctrine of equivalence, directly infringing, and indirectly infringing by way of induci

infringement and/or contributing to the infringement of the 987 Patent in the State of Louisia

in this judicial district, and elsewhere in the United States by, among other things, selling carb

chips which infringe the 987 Patent. Photographs of such an infringing carbide chip a

attached hereto as Exhibit C.

18. On information and belief, Defendant FAMCO has actual knowledge of the 98

Patent.

19. Defendant FAMCOs infringement of the 987 Patent has been and continues t

be willful and deliberate. The deliberate and willful acts of Defendant makes this an exceptio

case pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285.



5/28

-5-

20. Plaintiff has been injured and damaged, and will continue to be injured an

damaged, by Defendants infringement of the 987 Patent. Defendants infringement has caus

and will continue to cause, irreparable harm to Plaintiff unless and until enjoined by th

Honorable Court.

COUNT II

PATENT INFRINGEMENT (167 PATENT)

21. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 20 as though full

set forth herein.

22. Plaintiff Hard Metal Advantage is the sole and exclusive owner of the entire righ

title and interest in and to the 167 Patent, entitled Mill which was duly issued on March 2

2012. A copy of the 167 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B.

23. The 167 Patent is drawn to an ornamental design for a mill.

24. The patent application which matured into the 167 Patent was prepared and file

with the United States Patent and Trademark Office on August 8, 2011 under the name of Dua

C. Dunnahoe, as inventor.

25. After search and examination of the subject patent application, the United State

Patent and Trademark Office allowed the subject application and issued the 167 Patent

March 20, 2012.

26. Duane C. Dunnahoe has assigned his interest in the 167 Patent to Hard Meta

Advantage, and Hard Metal Advantage is the owner by assignment of the 167 Patent.

27. As the sole and exclusive owner of the 167 Patent, Plaintiff Hard Meta

Advantage has the right to pursue all rights, remedies and or causes of action for an

infringement thereof.



6/28

-6-

28. Upon information and belief, FAMCO has been and now is, literally and/or unde

the doctrine of equivalence, directly infringing, and indirectly infringing by way of induci

infringement and/or contributing to the infringement of the 167 Patent in the State of Louisia

in this judicial district, and elsewhere in the United States by, among other things, selling carb

chips which infringe the 167 Patent. Photographs of such an infringing mill are attached her

as Exhibit D.

29. On information and belief, Defendant FAMCO has actual knowledge of the 16

Patent.

30.

Defendant FAMCOs infringement of the 167 Patent has been and continues tbe willful and deliberate. The deliberate and willful acts of Defendant makes this an exceptio

case pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285.

31. Plaintiff has been injured and damaged, and will continue to be injured an

damaged, by Defendants infringement of the 167 Patent. Defendants infringement has caus

and will continue to cause, irreparable harm to Plaintiff unless and until enjoined by th

Honorable Court.

COUNT III

TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT

32. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth i

paragraphs 1 through 31 of this Complaint.

33. Plaintiff, long prior to the acts complained of herein, has been and is now engage

in interstate commerce and/or the foreign commerce of the United States by virtue of t

ongoing sales of a wide and diverse line of tungsten carbide products, and other related produ



7/28

-7-

including tungsten carbide chips, mills and/or variations thereof (hereinafter Infring

Products), and which are the subject of this litigation.

34. The Infringed Products have been sold in great numbers and continue to b

extensively sold and serviced by Plaintiff.

35. The appearance of the Infringed Products (hereinafter, the Trade Dress), mor

particularly, the product appearance including the size, shape and/or sculptural configuration i

protectable trade dress under 43(a) of the Lanham Act, which has been infringed by Defenda

See, Exhibits C and D attached hereto and made a part hereof.

36.

Plaintiff derives substantial benefits from selling products bearing the TradDress, and the infringement by Defendant has impaired Plaintiffs business.

37. Plaintiffs Infringed Products include distinctive non-functional elements whic

are incorporated in Defendants Infringing Products.

38. Plaintiff has used and continues to use its distinctive Trade Dress and, by virtue o

widespread sales, the Trade Dress has come to indicate origin with Plaintiff. Plaintiff, by vir

of use of said trade dress on its goods, and through Plaintiffs business and quality standards,

obtained a reputation of the highest quality. Such reputation has given Plaintiff and the Infring

Products and other products of plaintiff a pre-eminent position in the marketplace.

39. The design of the Infringed Products itself, namely their configuration, is

protectable trade dress under 43(a) of the Lanham Act, which has been infringed by Defend

and continues to be infringed on account of Defendants sale in commerce of Defendan

product.

40. Plaintiff has incurred expense and has devoted substantial resources to make th

Infringed Products famous and readily recognizable to consumers. Plaintiffs investments a



8/28

-8-

efforts have been successful as the Trade Dress has become highly distinctive in the marketpla

and denotes to purchasers goods which originate with Plaintiff.

41. Upon information and belief, long after Plaintiffs creation of the Infringe

Products, Defendant, with actual and/or constructive knowledge of Plaintiffs Trade Dre

without any authorization from Plaintiff, and in contravention of Plaintiffs trade dress righ

adopted and used a product configuration for its Infringing Products calculated to capitalize

the goodwill and reputation of Plaintiffs Trade Dress. Defendant had as its objective to mim

the distinctive elements of the Trade Dress as a means for unfairly taking advantage of a

profiting from the Infringed Products image and Plaintiffs reputation in the marketplace aunfairly increasing the sale of Defendants copycat Infringing Products. Defendant h

distributed and continues to distribute in interstate commerce to consumers, copycat goo

bearing an infringing derivative version of the distinctive features and layout of the Infring

Products Trade Dress for Defendants own commercial advantage.

42. Defendant has used and continues to use derivatives, and/or colorable imitation

of Plaintiffs Trade Dress in direct competition with Plaintiff. Defendant has used and contin

to use these infringing derivatives and/or colorable imitations of Plaintiffs Trade Dress

connection with sales, offering for sale or distribution, advertising and promotion of goods i

manner that is likely to cause confusion or mistake or to deceive purchasers as to the source

origin of such goods.

43. Defendant has deliberately misled and will continue to mislead purchasers, an

prospective purchasers, as well as the public at large, to believe, contrary to fact, th

Defendants goods are manufactured, marketed, sponsored or endorsed by, or affiliated w



9/28

-9-

Plaintiff. Defendant is unfairly competing with Plaintiff by trading on and disparaging Plainti

goodwill symbolized by its Trade Dress.

44. As a direct and proximate result of these acts of unfair competition and trade dre

infringement, Plaintiff has sustained and will continue to sustain monetary damages a

irreparable injury to its business, goodwill, reputation and profits, in an amount not presen

known. Plaintiff is entitled to judgment for Defendants profits and any damages sustained

Plaintiffs in consequence of the deliberate nature of the infringement by Defendant in an amou

equaling three times said damages.

45.

By reason of the acts of Defendant herein alleged, Plaintiff has been damagedand, unless restrained and enjoined Defendant has and will continue to deceive the public, a

otherwise will cause Plaintiff immediate and irreparable harm.

COUNT IV

UNFAIR COMPETITION

46. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth i

paragraphs 1 through 45 of this Complaint.

47. Defendant, with full knowledge of the fame of Hard Metal Advantages right

intended to and did trade on the goodwill associated with such trade dress.

48. Defendants acts have misled and continue to mislead and deceive consumers a

to the source of Defendants infringing products, permit and accomplish palming off

Defendants goods as those of Plaintiff, and falsely suggest a connection with Plaintiff.

49. Defendants have engaged in unfair competition, which constitutes an unfair trad

practice under Louisiana Revised Statutes 51:1401,et seq .



10/28

-10-

50. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants conduct, Plaintiff has suffere

damage to its valuable trade dress and other rights in an amount to be ascertained at trial.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Hard Metal Advantage respectfully prays for judgment in i

favor and against defendants as follows:

1. That Defendant FAMCO has infringed U.S. Patent No. D649,987 and U.S. Patent N

D656,167;

2. That Defendant FAMCO be ordered to account for and pay to Plaintiff the damage

to Plaintiff arising out of Defendants infringing activities, together with interest and costs;3. That the infringement by Defendant be adjudged willful and that the damages t

Plaintiff be increased under 35 U.S.C. 284 to three times the amount found or measured;

4. That Defendant FAMCO and its agents, servants, officers, directors, employees, an

all persons or entities acting in concert with Defendant directly or indirectly, be enjoined fro

infringing, inducing the infringement of or contributing to the infringement of U.S. Patent N

D649,987 and U.S. Patent No. D656,167;

5. That this be adjudged an exceptional case and that Plaintiff be awarded its attorney

fees in this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285;

6. A preliminary injunction enjoining and restraining Defendant, its officers, director

agents, servants, employees, attorneys and all others acting under or through them, directly

indirectly, from infringing the Trade Dress of Plaintiff;

7. For an order requiring Defendant to recall from its distributors, wholesalers, retaile

and customers any product bearing any reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation

the Trade Dress;



11/28

-11-

8. For an order requiring Defendant to be required to account to Plaintiff for any and a

profits derived by Defendant from the sale of its goods and for all damages sustained

Plaintiff by reason of said acts of trade dress infringement complained herein.

9. For judgment according to the circumstances of the case, for such sum above th

amount found in actual damages, but not to exceed three times such amount as the Court m

deem just.

10. For an order requiring that all products, documents, materials, labels, signs, product

packages, wrappings, receptacles and advertisements in Defendants possession or cont

bearing the design or any reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation thereof, and plates, molds, matrices, and other means of making the same shall be delivered up; and

11. That Plaintiff be awarded such other and further relief as the Court deems just an

proper.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff Hard Metal Advantage LLC hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues.

Dated: September 19, 2014 Respectfully submitted:

s/Ted M. AnthonyTed M. Anthony, La. Bar No. #21446 (T.A.)Karen T. Bordelon, La. Bar No. #20114BABINEAUX, POCH, ANTHONY

& SLAVICH, L.L.C.P. O. Box 52169Lafayette, Louisiana 70505-2169Telephone: (337) 984-2505Fax: (337) 984-2503Email: [email protected]

[email protected]



12/28

-12-

and

Steven B. Rabalais (La. Bar No. 17100)

RABALAIS & HEBERT701 Robley Drive, Suite 210,Lafayette, Louisiana 70503Telephone: (337) 981-0309Fax: (337) 981-0905Email:[email protected]



13/28

Case 6:14-cv-02769 Document 1-1 Filed 09/19/14 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 13


14/28



15/28



16/28



17/28



18/28



19/28



20/28



21/28



22/28



23/28


24/28



25/28



26/28



27/28

S 44 (Rev. 12/12) CIVIL COVER SHEETThe JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except asrovided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for theurpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)

. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OFTHE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)

I. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an X in One Box for Plai(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)

1 U.S. Government 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEPlaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State 1 1 Incorporated or Principal Place 4

of Business In This State

2 U.S. Government 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State 2 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 5 Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State

Citizen or Subject of a 3 3 Foreign Nation 6 Foreign Country

V. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in One Box Only)CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Related Seizure 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 375 False Claims Act120 Marine 310 Airplane 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 423 Withdrawal 400 State Reapportionment130 Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Product Liability 690 Other 28 USC 157 410 Antitrust140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 367 Health Care/ 430 Banks and Banking150 Recovery of Overpayment 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS 450 Commerce

& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury 820 Copyrights 460 Deportation151 Medicare Act 330 Federal Employers Product L iabi lity 830 Patent 470 Racketeer Influenced a152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability 368 Asbestos Personal 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations

Student Loans 340 Marine Injury Product 480 Consumer Credit (Excludes Veterans) 345 Marine Product Liability LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY 490 Cable/Sat TV

153 Recovery of Overpayment Liabilit y PERSONAL PROPERTY 710 Fair Labor Standards 861 HIA (1395ff) 850 Securities/Commoditie of Veterans Benefits 350 Motor Vehicle 370 Other Fraud Act 862 Black Lung (923) Exchange

160 Stockholders Suits 355 Motor Vehicle 371 Truth in Lending 720 Labor/Management 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) 890 Other Statutory Action190 Other Contract Product Liability 380 Other Personal Relations 864 SSID Title XVI 891 Agricultural Acts195 Contract Product Liability 360 Other Personal Property Damage 740 Railway Labor Act 865 RSI (405(g)) 893 Environmental Matter196 Franchise Injury 385 Property Damage 751 Family and Medical 895 Freedom of Informatio

362 Personal Injury - Product Liability Leave Act Act Medical Malpractice 790 Other Labor Litigation 896 Arbitration

REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 791 Employee Retirement FEDERAL TAX SUITS 899 Administrative Proced210 Land Condemnation 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: Income Security Act 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff Act/Review or Appeal of220 Foreclosure 441 Voting 463 Alien Detainee or Defendant) Agency Decision230 Rent Lease & Ejectment 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate 871 IRSThird Party 950 Constitutionality of 240 Torts to Land 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 State Statutes245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations 530 General290 All Other Real Property 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION

Employment Other: 462 Naturalization Application 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - 540 Mandamus & Other 465 Other Immigration

Other 550 Civil Rights Actions 448 Education 555 P rison Condition

560 Civil Detainee - Conditions ofConfinement

V. ORIGIN (Place an X in One Box Only)1 Origina lProceeding

2 Removed fromState Court 3 Remanded fromAppellate Court

4 Reinstated or Reopened 5 Transferred fromAnother District

(specify)

6 MultidistrictLitigation

VI. CAUSE OF ACTIONCite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity ): Brief description of cause:

VII. REQUESTED INCOMPLAINT:

CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTIONUNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P.

DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:JURY DEMAND: Yes No

VIII. RELATED CASE(S)IF ANY (See instructions): JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER

DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD

OR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE


HARD METAL ADVANTAGE, LLC

LAFAYETTE

Babineaux, Poche', Anthony & Slavich, LLC1201 Camellia Blvd., Suite 300, Lafayette, LA 70508 (337)984-2505

FAMCO MACHINE SHOP, a Texas Corporation,and DOES 1-10, Inclusive

HARRIS

35 U.S.C. 271

WILLFUL PATENT INFRINGEMENT

9/19/2014 s/TED M. ANTHONY

Print Save As... Reset


28/28

JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 1 2 /12)

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet

The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers asrequired by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, isrequired for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:

I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use

only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency andthen the official, giving both name and title.(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the

time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In landcondemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)

(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, notingin this section "(see attachment)".

II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendmentto the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes

precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, thecitizenship of the different parties must be checked . (See Section III below ; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversitycases. )

III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark thissection for each principal party.

IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If the nature of suit cannot be determined, be sure the cause of action, in Section VI below, issufficient to enable the deputy clerk or the statistical clerk(s) in the Administrative Office to determine the nature of suit. If the cause fits more thanone nature of suit, select the most definitive.

V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the six boxes.Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.

When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filingdate.Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers ormultidistrict litigation transfers.Multidistrict Litigation. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1407.When this box is checked, do not check (5) above.

VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictionalstatutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service

VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.

VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docketnumbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.

Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.


hma v. famco - complaint

Documents