measurement specialties v. logipen et. al

EAST\54972511. 6 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

(TRENTON DIVISION)

Plaintiff MEASUREMENT SPECIALTIES, INC. (“MEAS” or “Plaintiff”), by and

through its attorneys, DLA Piper LLP (US), alleges as follows against Defendants LOGIPEN

(“LogiPen”), 2CHECKOUT.COM, INC. (“2Co”), I.R.I.S. GROUP (“Iris Group”), I.R.I.S. INC.

(“Iris”), EFUN INC. (“EFun”), CREGLE INC. (“Cregle”), LIFETRONS SWITZERLAND AG

(“Lifetrons”), AIPTEK INC. (“Aiptek”), AIPTEK INTERNATIONAL INC. (“Aiptek Int'l”),

EXPANSYS (“Expansys”) and EXPANSYS USA (“Expansys USA”) (each a “Defendant” and

collectively the “Defendants”):

I. NATURE OF THE CASE

1. This is an action for patent infringement based on Defendants’ sales of handheld

digital pens and pen assemblies that infringe one or more patents held by MEAS, in violation of

the Patent Laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 101, et seq. MEAS seeks both monetary and

injunctive relief for these violations.

MEASUREMENT SPECIALTIES INC.

Plaintiff,

vs.

LOGIPEN,2CHECKOUT.COM, INC.,I.R.I.S. GROUP,I.R.I.S. INC.,EFUN INC.,CREGLE INC.,LIFETRONS SWITZERLAND AG,AIPTEK INC.,AIPTEK INTERNATIONAL INC.,EXPANSYS, andEXPANSYS USA

Defendants.

Civil Action No.:

COMPLAINT and JURY DEMAND

EAST\54972511. 6 2

II. PARTIES

2. Plaintiff MEAS is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State

of New Jersey, with its principal place of business located at 1000 Lucas Way, Hampton, VA

23666.

3. MEAS is a global designer and manufacturer of sensors and sensor-based

systems. MEAS designs and manufactures sensors for original equipment manufacturers

(OEMs) as well as end users. MEAS offers a large variety of sensor products to meet application

requirements in many industries including automotive, off-road, medical, industrial, consumer,

military/aerospace, test/measurement and traffic applications.

4. Upon information and belief, Defendant LogiPen is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of Israel, with its principal place of business located at 4 Pinkas St., Tel

Aviv, OT 56213, Israel.

5. Upon information and belief, LogiPen sells products and services to persons and

entities in this judicial district and elsewhere within the United States.

6. Upon information and belief, Defendant 2Co is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of the State of Ohio, with its principal place of business located at 1785

O’Brien Rd., Columbus, Ohio 43228.

7. Upon information and belief, 2Co sells products and services to persons and


8. Upon information and belief, Defendant Iris Group is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of Belgium, with its principal place of business located at 10 rue du

Bosquet, B-1348 Louvain la Neuve, Belgium.

9. Upon information and belief, Iris Group sells products and services to persons and


EAST\54972511. 6 3

10. Upon information and belief, Defendant Iris is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of the State of Florida, with its principal place of business located at 955

NW 17th Avenue, Unit A, Delray Beach, Florida 33445.

11. Upon information and belief, Iris sells products and services to persons and


12. Upon information and belief, Defendant EFun is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of State of California, with its principal place of business located at 136

N. Grand Avenue #148, West Covina, California 91791.

13. Upon information and belief, EFun sells products and services to persons and


14. Upon information and belief, Defendant Cregle is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of Commonwealth of Virginia, with its principal place of business

located at 4000 Legato Road, Suite 1100, Fairfax, Virginia 22033.

15. Upon information and belief, Cregle sells products and services to persons and


16. Upon information and belief, Defendant Lifetrons is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of Switzerland, with its principal place of business located at

Schulstrasse 3, 9115 Dicken, Switzerland.

17. Upon information and belief, Lifetrons sells products and services to persons and


18. Upon information and belief, Defendant Aiptek is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of State of California, with its principal place of business located at

17837 Rowland St., City of Industry, CA 91748.

EAST\54972511. 6 4

19. Upon information and belief, Aiptek sells products and services to persons and


20. Upon information and belief, Defendant Aiptek Int'l is a corporation organized

and existing under the laws of the Germany, with its principal place of business located at

Halskestr.13, D-47877 Willich, Germany.

21. Upon information and belief, Aiptek Int'l sells products and services to persons

and entities in this judicial district and elsewhere within the United States.

22. Upon information and belief, Defendant Expansys is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of the United Kingdom, with its principal place of business located at

Network House, Globe Park, Marlow, Buckinghamshire SL7 1EY, United Kingdom.

23. Upon information and belief, Expansys sells products and services to persons and


24. Upon information and belief, Defendant Expansys USA is a corporation

organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, with its principal place of business

located at 1702 GE Road, Unit #6, Bloomington, Illinois 61704.

25. Upon information and belief, Expansys USA sells products and services to

persons and entities in this judicial district and elsewhere within the United States.

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

26. This is a civil action arising under the Patent Laws of the United States, including

35 U.S.C. § 271 et seq. Exclusive subject matter jurisdiction over this matter is conferred upon

the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338, and under the principles of pendant

jurisdiction. Diversity jurisdiction is also conferred upon this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

1332, in that the Plaintiff and the various Defendants are citizens of different states, and the

amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.

EAST\54972511. 6 5

27. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 over Plaintiff’s

claims under New Jersey Law.

28. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant LogiPen because it transacts

business in this District, markets and sells infringing products to customers and prospective

customers in this District and State, and is otherwise subject to jurisdiction here.

29. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant 2Co because it transacts



30. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Iris Group because it

transacts business in this District, markets and sells infringing products to customers and

prospective customers in this District and State, and is otherwise subject to jurisdiction here.

31. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Iris because it transacts



32. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant EFun because it transacts



33. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Cregle because it transacts



34. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Lifetrons because it transacts



EAST\54972511. 6 6

35. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Aiptek because it transacts



36. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Aiptek Int'l because it



37. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Expansys because it transacts



38. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Expansys USA because it



39. Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because, upon

information and belief, a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims

herein occurred in this District.

40. Venue is also proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) because,

upon information and belief, a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the

claims herein occurred in this District.

EAST\54972511. 6 7

IV. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

A. Introduction

41. Plaintiff MEAS manufactures and sells, in the United States and throughout the

world, sensors and sensor-based systems.

42. MEAS manufactures and sells certain ultrasonic transducers and assemblies

which are used in handheld digital pens and pen assemblies to assist in locating the relative

position of the digital pen with respect to a writing surface.

43. As discussed in detail below, these ultrasonic transducers, and the housings

associated therewith, are protected by patents held by MEAS.

LogiPen and 2Co

44. Defendant LogiPen is a manufacturer and distributor of handheld digital pens and

pen assemblies.

45. Upon information and belief, and according to LogiPen’s website

(www.logipen.com), LogiPen is the manufacturer and a distributor of a handheld digital pen

product called the “LogiPen NOTES”

46. Upon information and belief, LogiPen distributes the “LogiPen NOTES” to

customers in the United States utilizing 2Co as an intermediary.

Iris and Iris Group

47. Defendants Iris and Iris Group are manufacturers and distributors of handheld

digital pens and pen assemblies.

48. Upon information and belief, and according to Iris and Iris Group’s websites

(www.iriscorporate.com and www.irislink.com), Iris and Iris Group manufacture and distribute a

handheld digital pen product called “IRISNotes.”

http://www.logipen.com/

http://www.iriscorporate.com/

http://www.irislink.com/

EAST\54972511. 6 8

49. Upon information and belief, Iris and Iris Group distribute the “IRISNotes”

product directly to customers in the United States utilizing the website www.irislink.com.

EFun

50. Defendant EFun is a manufacturer and distributor of handheld digital pens and

pen assemblies.

51. Upon information and belief, and according to EFun’s websites (www.e-

funusa.com and www.apenusa.com), EFun is a manufacturer and distributor of a handheld digital

pen product called the “APen.”

52. Upon information and belief, EFun distributes the “APen” product to customers in

the United States utilizing various on-line intermediary entities, including but not limited to

www.walmart.com, www.sears.com, www.kmart.com, www.antonline.com, www.qvc.com,

www.radioshack.com, and www.hsn.com.

Cregle

53. Defendant Cregle is a manufacturer and distributor of handheld digital pens and

pen assemblies.

54. Upon information and belief, and according to Cregle’s website

(www.cregle.com), EFun is a manufacturer and distributor of a handheld digital pen product

called the “iPen.”

55. Upon information and belief, Cregle distributes the “iPen” product directly to

customers in the United States utilizing the website www.cregle.com.

Lifetrons

56. Defendant Lifetrons is a manufacturer and distributor of handheld digital pens and

pen assemblies.

http://www.irislink.com/

http://www.e-funusa.com/

http://www.e-funusa.com/

http://www.apenusa.com/

http://www.walmart.com/

http://www.sears.com/

http://www.kmart.com/

http://www.antonline.com/

http://www.qvc.com/

http://www.radioshack.com/

http://www.hsn.com/

http://www.cregle.com/

http://www.cregle.com/

EAST\54972511. 6 9

57. Upon information and belief, and according to Lifetron’s website

(www.lifetrons.ch), Lifetrons is a manufacturer and distributor of a handheld digital pen product

called the “Business Note Writer.”

58. Upon information and belief, Lifetrons distributes the “Business Note Writer”

product directly to customers in the United States utilizing the website www.lifetrons.ch.

Aiptek and Expansys

59. Defendants Aiptek and Aiptek Int'l are manufacturers and distributors of handheld

digital pens and pen assemblies.

60. Upon information and belief, and according to Aiptek and Aiptek Int'l’s websites

(www.aiptek.com and www.aiptekshop.com), Aiptek and Aiptek Int'l are manufacturers and

distributors of a handheld digital pen product called “MyNote.”

61. Upon information and belief, and according to Expansys and Expansys USA’s

websites (www.expansys.com and www.expansys-usa.com), Expansys and Expansys USA are

involved in distributing the “MyNote” product, along with Aiptek and Aiptek Int'l, to customers

in the United States.

Yifang

62. Yifang Digital Technology Co. Ltd. (“Yifang”) is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of China, with its principal place of business located at Building #22 and

#23, Zone 5, Bai Wang Xin Industrial Park, Song Bai Road, Nan Shan District, Shenzhen

518108, P.R. China.

63. All of the Defendants are linked to one another in that, upon information and

belief, they all purchase digital pens, components for digital pens, and/or pen assemblies from

Yifang.

http://www.lifetrons.ch/

http://www.lifetrons.ch/

http://www.aiptek.com/

http://www.aiptekshop.com/

http://www.expansys.com/

http://www.expansys-usa.com/

EAST\54972511. 6 10

64. Upon information and belief, the digital pens, certain components for digital pens

and pen assemblies that the Defendants purchase from Yifang all include similar or identical

ultrasonic transducers, which are protected by patents held by MEAS.

65. Upon information and belief, due to the single source of the digital pens, certain

components for digital pens sold by all of the Defendants, and the similar or identical nature of

the ultrasonic transducers in each of the digital pens sold by the Defendants, each Defendant

listed above is manufacturing and or selling products that infringe on one or more of MEAS’

patents asserted below in the same manner.

B. The Digital Pen Industry

66. The Defendants all distribute digital pens and pen assemblies into the United

States.

67. MEAS sells digital pens and pen assemblies to third parties for sale within the

United States.

68. MEAS additionally sells ultrasonic transducers and assemblies to third parties.

These ultrasonic transducers and assemblies are incorporated into digital pens and pen

assemblies by such third parties and sold within the United States.

69. Ultrasonic transducers and assemblies sold by MEAS include: (1) the “40KHz

Digitizer Transmitter/Receiver,” (2) the “80KHz Ultrasound Transducer,” and (3) the “Pen Tip

PT80KHZ-1.”

70. MEAS also sells piezoelectric film elements to third parties. These piezoelectric

film elements are used to manufacture ultrasonic transducers and assemblies, which are

ultimately incorporated into digital pens and pen assemblies by such third parties and sold within

the United States.

EAST\54972511. 6 11

71. The Defendants are all competing with MEAS for the sale of digital pens and pen

assemblies within the United States.

72. The Defendants are all selling competing handheld digital pens and pen

assemblies which include ultrasonic transducers and housings that infringe one or more MEAS

patents, as described below.

73. Upon information and belief, each of the Defendants purchase these infringing

digital pens, components for digital pens and pen assemblies from Yifang and sell them to

customers within the United States.

74. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief and damages against Defendants for patent

infringement and unjust enrichment.

C. The ‘535 Patent

75. Plaintiff MEAS is the owner of United States Letters Patent No. US 6,239,535

(the “’535 Patent”) which issued on May 29, 2001. A copy of the '535 Patent is attached hereto

as Exhibit A.

76. The United States Government duly and legally issued the ‘535 Patent for a

“OMNI-DIRECTIONAL ULTRASONIC TRANSDUCER APPARATUS HAVING

CONTROLLED FREQUENCY RESPONSE” to Minoru Toda et al. (“Toda et al.”).

77. The ‘535 Patent was assigned to MEAS by Toda et al., and MEAS is the lawful

owner of the ‘535 Patent, and has had the right to sue and to recover for any and all

infringements of the ‘535 Patent.

78. The ‘535 Patent is valid and enforceable.

79. The ‘535 Patent describes and claims an ultrasonic transducer comprising a

piezoelectric film wrapped around a spool member.

EAST\54972511. 6 12

80. Claim 1 of the ‘535 Patent specifically describes a transducer in which the

piezoelectric film is separated from the spool by a predetermined gap for controlling the

resonance frequency of the transducer.

81. Defendants have all made, used, sold, and/or offered for sale within this judicial

district handheld digital pens and pen assemblies that infringe at least claim 1 of the ‘535 Patent,

including but not limited to the products mentioned above, such as the “LogiPen NOTES,” the

“IRISNotes,” the “APen,” the “iPen,” the “Business Note Writer” and the “MyNote”

(collectively, the “Accused Products”).

82. The Accused Products also infringe one or more additional claims of the ‘535

Patent which describe a transducer in which the piezoelectric film is separated from the spool by

a predetermined gap for controlling the resonance frequency of the transducer, including, but not

limited to, independent claims 12, 23, and 27.

83. Claim 28 of the ‘535 Patent specifically describes a transducer in which the

piezoelectric film is separated from the spool by a predetermined gap for controlling the spring

constant of the predetermined gap.

84. The Accused Products infringe at least claim 28 of the ‘535 Patent because they

include a piezoelectric film separated from the spool by a predetermined gap for controlling the

spring constant of the predetermined gap.

85. Upon information and belief, Defendants have actively induced others to make,

use, offer to sell, and sell ultrasonic transducers and housings that infringe one or more claims of

the ‘535 Patent.

EAST\54972511. 6 13

86. Upon information and belief, Defendants have contributed to the manufacture,

use, or sale of ultrasonic transducers and housings that infringe one or more claims of the ‘535

Patent.

87. At no time has MEAS given any of the Defendants permission, license, or

authorization to manufacture, use or sell products covered by the claims of ‘535 Patent.

88. In accordance with allegations above, Defendants have been and are infringing,

actively inducing the infringement of, and/or contributorily infringing the ‘535 Patent within the

United States, including without limitation, through advertising, marketing, selling and/or

offering to sell products and services, and products to facilitate such services, both within and

outside the state of New Jersey, all of which infringe the ‘535 Patent.

89. Defendants have therefore infringed, actively induced the infringement of and/or

contributorily infringed the ‘535 Patent within the State of New Jersey and within the United

States by advertising, marketing, selling and/or offering to sell such infringing products and

services; such infringement, active inducement of infringement and/or contributory infringement

of the ‘535 Patent has been willful and will continue unless rectified by this Court.

90. MEAS has been and will continue to be damaged by the Defendants’ infringing

activities, in an amount to be proven at trial (but in no event less than $75,000) and in a manner

that cannot be fully measured or compensated in economic terms for which there is no adequate

remedy at law.

91. Defendant’s wrongful acts have damaged, and will continue to damage, MEAS

irreparably, and MEAS has no adequate remedy at law for those wrongs and injuries. The

damages to MEAS include harm to it and its products, goodwill and reputation in the

marketplace that money cannot compensate. In addition to its actual damages, MEAS is entitled

EAST\54972511. 6 14

to injunctive relief restraining and enjoining Defendant and its officers, agents, servants,

employees, and those persons in active concert or participation with them, from infringing the

‘535 Patent, including without limitation, restraining and enjoining the advertising, marketing,

selling and/or offering for sale of infringing products and services that infringe the ‘535 Patent

within the United States, including the State of New Jersey.

D. The ‘987 Patent

92. Plaintiff MEAS is the owner of United States Letters Patent No. US 6,800,987

(the “’987 Patent”) which issued on October 5, 2004. A copy of the '987 Patent is attached hereto

as Exhibit B.

93. The United States Government duly and legally issued the ‘987 Patent for a

“PROTECTIVE HOUSING FOR ULTRASONIC TRANSDUCER APPARATUS” to Minoru

Toda (“Toda”). The ‘987 Patent was assigned to MEAS by Toda, and MEAS is the lawful

owner of the ‘987 Patent, and has had the right to sue and to recover for any and all

infringements of the ‘987 Patent.

94. The ‘987 Patent is valid and enforceable.

95. The ‘987 Patent describes and claims a housing for ultrasonic transducer

comprising base portion for receiving an ultrasonic transducer, and a cylindrical portion

extending from the base portion.

96. Claim 1 of the ‘987 Patent specifically describes a housing for a transducer with a

cylindrical portion including a plurality of slots which make up about fifty-five percent (55%) of

the total area of the cylindrical portion.

97. The Accused Products infringe at least claim 1 of the ‘987 Patent, because they all

include a transducer housing comprising a base portion and a cylindrical portion, where slots

EAST\54972511. 6 15

formed in the cylindrical portion make up about fifty-five percent (55%) of the total area of the

cylindrical portion.

98. The Accused Products also infringe one or more additional claims of the ‘987

Patent which also describe a transducer with a cylindrical portion including a plurality of slots

which make up about fifty-five percent (55%) of the total area of the cylindrical portion,

including, but not limited to, independent claim 14.

99. Claim 10 of the ‘987 Patent specifically describes a transducer housing with a

cylindrical portion including a plurality of slots, where the slots are arranged to operate as an

impedance matching layer.

100. The Accused Products infringe at least claim 10 of the ‘987 Patent because they

all include a transducer housing comprising a base portion and a cylindrical portion, where slots

formed in the cylindrical portion are arranged to operate as an impedance matching layer.

101. Upon information and belief, Defendants have actively induced others to make,

use, offer to sell, and sell ultrasonic transducers and housings that infringe one or more claims of

the ‘987 Patent.

102. Upon information and belief, Defendants have contributed to the manufacture,

use, or sale of ultrasonic transducers and housings that infringe one or more claims of the ‘987

Patent.

103. At no time has MEAS given any of the Defendants permission, license, or

authorization to manufacture, use or sell products covered by the claims of ‘987 Patent.

104. In accordance with allegations above, Defendants have been and are infringing,

actively inducing the infringement of, and/or contributorily infringing the ‘987 Patent within the

United States, including without limitation, through advertising, marketing, selling and/or

EAST\54972511. 6 16

offering to sell products and services, and products to facilitate such services, both within and

outside the state of New Jersey, all of which infringe the ‘987 Patent.

105. Defendants have therefore infringed, actively induced the infringement of and/or

contributorily infringed the ‘987 Patent within the State of New Jersey and within the United

States by advertising, marketing, selling and/or offering to sell such infringing products and

services; such infringement, active inducement of infringement and/or contributory infringement

of the ‘987 Patent has been willful and will continue unless rectified by this Court.

106. MEAS has been and will continue to be damaged by the Defendants’ infringing

activities, in an amount to be proven at trial (but in no event less than $75,000) and in a manner

that cannot be fully measured or compensated in economic terms for which there is no adequate

remedy at law.

107. Defendant’s wrongful acts have damaged, and will continue to damage, MEAS

irreparably, and MEAS has no adequate remedy at law for those wrongs and injuries. The

damages to MEAS include harm to it and its products, goodwill and reputation in the

marketplace that money cannot compensate. In addition to its actual damages, MEAS is entitled

to injunctive relief restraining and enjoining Defendant and its officers, agents, servants,

employees, and those persons in active concert or participation with them, from infringing the

‘987 Patent, including without limitation, restraining and enjoining the advertising, marketing,

selling and/or offering for sale of infringing products and services that infringe the ‘987 Patent

within the United States, including the State of New Jersey.

E. The Defendants’ Wrongful Activities

108. The Defendants have never been licensed by MEAS to sell products covered by

the claims of the ‘535 or ‘987 Patents.

EAST\54972511. 6 17

109. The Defendants’ making, using, selling, offering for sale and/or importing of the

Accused Products constitutes patent infringement.

110. MEAS has been damaged by the Defendants’ acts of patent infringement in the

manner described above, and in an amount to be determined at trial, but not less than $75,000.

111. Unless these acts of the Defendants are permanently restrained by this Court, they

will continue to cause irreparable injury to MEAS, and to the public, for which there is no

adequate remedy at law.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Patent Infringement of the ‘535 Patent(35 U.SC. § 271)

112. MEAS repeats and realleges each and every allegation of the Complaint contained

in Paragraphs 1 through 111 as if fully set forth herein.

113. Without authority from MEAS, Defendants have, upon information and belief,

engaged in making, using, selling, and offering for sale in the United States, and have imported

into the United States, handheld digital pens and pen assemblies which embody the invention of

one or more claims of Plaintiff’s ‘535 Patent.

114. The Defendants’ acts described above constitute patent infringement in violation

of 35 USC § 271 et seq.

115. Upon information and belief, the Defendants’ infringement of the ‘535 Patent has

been and continues to be willful and intentional and with full knowledge of the existence and

validity of Plaintiff’s ‘535 Patent.

116. The above infringement is injuring Plaintiff, causing financial damage, and

threatening to destroy its sensor business.

EAST\54972511. 6 18

117. Upon information and belief, the Defendants’ infringement of the ‘535 Patent will

continue unless enjoined by this Court.

118. Unless the Defendants’ infringement of the ‘535 Patent is enjoined, Plaintiff will

suffer irreparable injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Patent Infringement of the ‘987 Patent(35 U.SC. § 271)



120. Without authority from MEAS, Defendants have, upon information and belief,

engaged in making, using, selling, and offering for sale in the United States, and have imported

into the United States, handheld digital pens and pen assemblies which embody the invention of

one or more claims of Plaintiff’s ‘987 Patent.

121. The Defendants’ acts described above constitute patent infringement in violation

of 35 USC § 271 et seq.

122. Upon information and belief, the Defendants’ infringement of the ‘987 Patent has

been and continues to be willful and intentional and with full knowledge of the existence and

validity of Plaintiff’s ‘987 Patent.

123. The above infringement is injuring Plaintiff, causing financial damage, and

threatening to destroy its sensor business.

124. Upon information and belief, the Defendants’ infringement of the ‘987 Patent will

continue unless enjoined by this Court.

125. Unless the Defendants’ infringement of the ‘987 Patent is enjoined, Plaintiff will

suffer irreparable injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law.

EAST\54972511. 6 19

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Unjust Enrichment(Common Law of New Jersey)



127. The Defendants’ foregoing acts of patent infringement have conferred a benefit

upon Defendants, and Defendants appreciated that benefit under circumstances where it would

be inequitable for Defendants to retain the benefit without payment of its value to MEAS.

128. The Defendants’ retention of the benefits of MEAS’s labor, time, and investment

violates principles of justice, equity and good conscience.

129. Defendants’ unauthorized selling of handheld digital pens and pen assemblies in

violation of the ‘535 and 987 Patents, has caused Defendants to be unjustly enriched to the

detriment of MEAS.

130. Accordingly, MEAS is entitled to restitution in the amount of Defendants’ unjust

enrichment.

JURY DEMAND

MEAS hereby demands trial by jury as to all claims and defenses in this action pursuant

to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 38(b).

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Measurement Specialties, Inc. (“Plaintiff” or “MEAS”),

requests the following relief against the Defendants, as well as the Defendants’ employees and/or

agents:

A. Entry of a judgment that:

1. MEAS is the record owner of all right, title, and interest in and to United

States Patent No. 6,239,535 (the “’535 Patent”);

EAST\54972511. 6 20

2. The ‘535 Patent is good and valid in law, and has been infringed by the

Defendants, through their distribution and sale of handheld digital pens and pen assemblies, such

as the “LogiPen,” the “IRISNote,” the “APen,” the “iPen,” the “Business Note Writer” and the

“MyNote”;

3. MEAS is the record owner of all right, title, and interest in and to United

States Patent No. 6,800,987 (the “’987 Patent”);

4. The ‘987 Patent is good and valid in law, and has been infringed by the

Defendants, through their distribution and sale of handheld digital pens and pen assemblies, such

as the “LogiPen NOTES,” the “IRISNotes,” the “APen,” the “iPen,” the “Business Note Writer”

and the “MyNote”;

5. Defendants have been unjustly enriched by the sale of handheld digital

pens and pen assemblies, such as the “LogiPen NOTES,” the “IRISNotes,” the “APen,” the

“iPen,” the “Business Note Writer” and the “MyNote”.

B. Entry of judgment that the Defendants’ acts of patent infringement detailed herein

have been, and continue to be, willful and deliberate.

C. Entry of preliminary and permanent injunctions enjoining Defendants, their

agents, servants and employees, and those people in active concert or participation with it from:

1. making, using, advertising, offering for sale, or selling handheld digital

pens and pen assemblies which infringe upon the ‘535 Patent; and,

2. making, using, advertising, offering for sale, or selling handheld digital

pens and pen assemblies which infringe upon the ‘987 Patent;

D. Entry of judgment:

1. awarding MEAS damages adequate to compensate for the Defendants’

acts of patent infringement, together with an award of triple the amount of actual damages

because of the willful and deliberate character of the infringement, as provided by 35 U.S.C §

284;

EAST\54972511. 6 21

2. awarding MEAS attorneys’ fees, costs, and disbursements as provided by

35 U.S.C § 285, et seq., and otherwise to the extent permitted by law; and,

3. awarding MEAS interest, including statutory and prejudgment interest,

from the time of any infringement, and costs, including expert witness fees, as provided by 35

U.S.C § 284, 28 U.S.C § 1961, and otherwise.

E. Entry of judgment awarding MEAS the amount of the Defendants’ unjust

enrichment.

F. Affording MEAS such further and other relief as this Court may deem just and

proper.

Dated: February 15, 2013 On behalf of Plaintiff MeasurementSpecialties, Inc.

By: s/William L. Bartow/_________DLA Piper US LLP

William L. Bartow (I.D.NJ-02309-04)Darius C. Gambino(PHV to be filed)One Liberty Place1650 Market StreetSuite 4900Philadelphia, PA 19103P: (215) 656-2458F: (215) [email protected]@dlapiper.com

EAST\54972511. 6 22

CERTIFICATION

It is hereby certified that, pursuant to Local Civ. Rule 11.2, the matter in controversy is

not presently the subject of any other action pending in any court or of an arbitration proceeding

to date, nor is any other action or arbitration proceeding contemplated.

s/William L. Bartow/William L. Bartow

measurement specialties v. logipen et. al

Documents