Você está na página 1de 81

Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 23 Page ID #:1

1 Michael K. Friedland (SBN 157,217)


michael.friedland@knobbe.com
2 Lauren Keller Katzenellenbogen (SBN 223,370)
lauren.katzenellenbogen@knobbe.com
3 Ali S. Razai (SBN 246,922)
ali.razai@knobbe.com
4 James F. Smith (SBN 313,015)
james.smith@knobbe.com
5 KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
2040 Main Street, Fourteenth Floor
6 Irvine, CA 92614
Telephone: (949) 760-0404
7 Facsimile: (949) 760-9502
8 Attorneys for Plaintiff
OAKLEY, INC.
9
10
11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
14 OAKLEY, INC., a Washington ) Civil Action No. 8:18-cv-00402
corporation, )
15 )
Plaintiff, )
16 ) COMPLAINT FOR
v. ) PATENT INFRINGEMENT,
17 ) TRADE DRESS
THE US HULTAN GROUP d/b/a ) INFRINGEMENT, FALSE
18 SHARP FACTOR, d/b/a APOLLO ) DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN,
) AND UNFAIR COMPETITION
19 ENTERPRICE EYEWEAR, a/f/k/a )
APOLLO ENTERPRISE ) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
20 INTERNATIONAL, INC., a California )
corporation, )
21 )
Defendant. )
22 )
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 2 of 23 Page ID #:2

1 Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. (“Oakley”) hereby complains of The US Hultan


2 Group d/b/a Sharp Factor, d/b/a Apollo Enterprice Eyewear, a/f/k/a/ Apollo
3 Enterprise International, Inc. (“Defendant”) and alleges as follows:
4 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5 1. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over the claims
6 in this action that relate to patent infringement, trade dress infringement, false
7 designation of origin, and federal unfair competition pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§
8 271 and 281, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338, and 15 U.S.C. §§ 1116(a), 1121(a),
9 and 1125(a), as these claims arise under the laws of the United States. The
10 Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the claims in this Complaint which
11 arise under state statutory and common law pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a)
12 because the state law claims are so related to the federal claims that they form
13 part of the same case or controversy and derive from a common nucleus of
14 operative facts.
15 2. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because
16 Defendant has a continuous, systematic, and substantial presence within this
17 judicial district including by selling and offering for sale infringing products in
18 this judicial district, and by committing acts of patent and trade dress
19 infringement in this judicial district, including but not limited to selling
20 infringing eyewear directly to consumers and/or retailers in this district and
21 selling into the stream of commerce knowing such products would be sold in
22 California and this district, which acts form a substantial part of the events or
23 omissions giving rise to Oakley’s claim.
24 3. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that venue is
25 proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (d), and 1400(b)
26 because Defendant is a resident in this judicial district, and Defendant has
27 committed acts of infringement in this district and has a regular established
28 place of business in this district.
-1-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 3 of 23 Page ID #:3

1 THE PARTIES
2 4. Oakley is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
3 the State of Washington, having its principal place of business at One Icon,
4 Foothill Ranch, California 92610.
5 5. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
6 Defendant The US Hultan Group is a corporation organized and existing under
7 the laws of the State of California, having its principal place of business at 400
8 South Alameda Street, Los Angeles, California 90013.
9 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
10 6. Oakley has been actively engaged in the manufacture and sale of
11 high quality eyewear since at least 1985. Oakley is the manufacturer and
12 retailer of several lines of eyewear that have enjoyed substantial success and are
13 protected by various intellectual property rights owned by Oakley.
14 7. On August, 16, 2016, the United States Patent and Trademark
15 Office (“U.S.P.T.O.”) duly and lawfully issued United States Design Patent No.
16 D763,947 (“the D947 Patent”), titled “EYEGLASSES.” Oakley is the owner by
17 assignment of all right, title, and interest in the D947 Patent. A true and correct
18 copy of the D947 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
19 8. On February 16, 2016, the U.S.P.T.O. duly and lawfully issued
20 United States Design Patent No. D749,670 (“the D670 Patent”), titled “SET OF
21 EYEGLASS COMPONENTS.” Oakley is the owner by assignment of all right,
22 title, and interest in the D670 Patent. A true and correct copy of the D670
23 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.
24 9. On June 5, 2012, the U.S.P.T.O. duly and lawfully issued United
25 States Design Patent No. D661,339 (“the D339 Patent”), titled “EYEGLASS.”
26 Oakley is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and interest in the D339
27 Patent. A true and correct copy of the D339 Patent is attached hereto as
28 Exhibit 3.
-2-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 4 of 23 Page ID #:4

1 10. On May 8, 2012, the U.S.P.T.O. duly and lawfully issued United
2 States Design Patent No. D659,180 (“the D180 Patent”), titled “EYEGLASS.”
3 Oakley is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and interest in the D180
4 Patent. A true and correct copy of the D180 Patent is attached hereto as
5 Exhibit 4.
6 11. On February 7, 2012, the U.S.P.T.O. duly and lawfully issued
7 United States Design Patent No. D653,699 (“the D699 Patent”), titled
8 “EYEGLASS.” Oakley is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and
9 interest in the D699 Patent. A true and correct copy of the D699 Patent is
10 attached hereto as Exhibit 5.
11 12. On November, 29, 2011, the U.S.P.T.O. duly and lawfully issued
12 United States Design Patent No. D649,579 (“the D579 Patent”), titled
13 “EYEGLASS.” Oakley is the owner by assignment of all right, title, and
14 interest in the D579 Patent. A true and correct copy of the D579 Patent is
15 attached hereto as Exhibit 6.
16 13. On July 8, 2008, the U.S.P.T.O. duly and lawfully issued United
17 States Design Patent No. D572,745 (“the D745 Patent”), titled “EYEGLASS
18 FRAME.” Oakley is the owner by assignment of all right, title and interest in
19 the D745 Patent. A true and correct copy of the D745 Patent is attached hereto
20 as Exhibit 7.
21 14. On December 11, 2007, the U.S.P.T.O. duly and lawfully issued
22 United States Design Patent No. D557,326 (“the D326 Patent”), titled
23 “EYEGLASS COMPONENTS.” Oakley is the owner by assignment of all
24 right, title, and interest in the D326 Patent. A true and correct copy of the D326
25 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 8.
26 15. Defendant manufactures, uses, sells, offers for sale, and/or imports
27 into the United States eyewear that have infringed Oakley’s patent rights,
28 including the D947 Patent, D670 Patent, D339 Patent, D180 Patent, D699
-3-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 5 of 23 Page ID #:5

1 Patent, D579 Patent, D745 Patent, and D326 Patent (collectively, the “Asserted
2 Patents”).
3 16. Oakley manufactures and sells sunglasses under the mark
4 HOLBROOK bearing distinctive trade dress in the overall design of the
5 sunglasses (“HOLBROOK Trade Dress”). An example of an Oakley product
6 bearing the distinctive HOLBROOK Trade Dress is depicted in the photograph
7 attached as Exhibit 9.
8 17. As a result of Oakley’s widespread use and display of the
9 HOLBROOK Trade Dress in association with its eyewear, (a) the public has
10 come to recognize and identify eyewear bearing the HOLBROOK Trade Dress
11 as emanating from Oakley, (b) the public recognizes that products bearing the
12 HOLBROOK Trade Dress constitute high quality products that conform to the
13 specifications created by Oakley, and (c) the HOLBROOK Trade Dress has
14 established strong secondary meaning and extensive goodwill.
15 18. The HOLBROOK Trade Dress is not functional. The design
16 features embodied by the HOLBROOK Trade Dress are not essential to the
17 function of the product, do not make the product cheaper or easier to
18 manufacture, and do not affect the quality of the product. The design of the
19 HOLBROOK Trade Dress is not a competitive necessity.
20 19. Subsequent to Oakley’s use and adoption of the HOLBROOK
21 Trade Dress, Defendant has developed, manufactured, imported, advertised,
22 and/or sold products that use trade dress that is confusingly similar to the
23 HOLBROOK Trade Dress.
24 20. Defendant’s acts complained of herein have caused Oakley to
25 suffer irreparable injury to its business. Oakley will continue to suffer
26 substantial loss and irreparable injury unless and until Defendant is enjoined
27 from its wrongful actions complained of herein.
28 ///
-4-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 6 of 23 Page ID #:6

1 21. Oakley is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that
2 Defendant’s acts complained of herein are willful and deliberate.
3 22. Defendant’s acts complained of herein have caused Oakley to
4 suffer irreparable injury to its business. Oakley will suffer substantial loss of
5 goodwill and reputation unless and until Defendant is preliminarily and
6 permanently enjoined from its wrongful actions complained of herein.
7 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
8 (Patent Infringement)
(35 U.S.C. § 271)
9
10 23. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-22 of
11 this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
12 24. This is a claim for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271.
13 25. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and/or servants has, and
14 continues to, knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringe the D947 Patent by
15 making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a
16 design that would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to
17 the claim of the D947 Patent, for example, Defendant’s 915RV model
18 sunglasses as shown below.
19 Defendant’s 915RV Model Oakley’s D947 Patent
Sunglasses
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27 26. Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D947 Patent were
28 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Oakley is informed and
-5-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 7 of 23 Page ID #:7

1 believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakley’s
2 rights in the design claimed in the D947 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs
3 are well-known throughout the eyewear industry, and Defendant’s 915RV
4 model sunglasses are an identical copy of Oakley’s patented design.
5 Accordingly, Defendant’s actions constitute willful and intentional infringement
6 of the D947 Patent. Defendant infringed the D947 Patent with reckless
7 disregard of Oakley’s patent rights. Defendant knew, or it was so obvious that
8 Defendant should have known, that its actions constitute infringement of the
9 D947 Patent. Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D947 Patent were not
10 consistent with the standards of commerce for its industry.
11 27. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and/or servants has, and
12 continues to, knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringe the D670 Patent by
13 making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a
14 design that would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to
15 the claim of the D670 Patent, for example, Defendant’s 915RV model
16 sunglasses as shown below.
17 Defendant’s 915RV Model Oakley’s D670 Patent
Sunglasses
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25 28. Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D670 Patent were
26 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Oakley is informed and
27 believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakley’s
28 rights in the design claimed in the D670 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs
-6-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 8 of 23 Page ID #:8

1 are well-known throughout the eyewear industry, and Defendant’s 915RV


2 model sunglasses are an identical copy of Oakley’s patented design.
3 Accordingly, Defendant’s actions constitute willful and intentional infringement
4 of the D670 Patent. Defendant infringed the D670 Patent with reckless
5 disregard of Oakley’s patent rights. Defendant knew, or it was so obvious that
6 Defendant should have known, that its actions constitute infringement of the
7 D670 Patent. Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D670 Patent were not
8 consistent with the standards of commerce for its industry.
9 29. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and/or servants has, and
10 continues to, knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringe the D339 Patent by
11 making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a
12 design that would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to
13 the claim of the D339 Patent, for example, Defendant’s 9911 model sunglasses
14 as shown below.
15 Defendant’s 9911 Model Sunglasses Oakley’s D339 Patent
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 30. Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D339 Patent were
25 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Oakley is informed and
26 believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakley’s
27 rights in the design claimed in the D339 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs
28 are well-known throughout the eyewear industry, and Defendant’s 9911 model
-7-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 9 of 23 Page ID #:9

1 sunglasses are an identical copy of Oakley’s patented design. Accordingly,


2 Defendant’s actions constitute willful and intentional infringement of the D339
3 Patent. Defendant infringed the D339 Patent with reckless disregard of
4 Oakley’s patent rights. Defendant knew, or it was so obvious that Defendant
5 should have known, that its actions constitute infringement of the D339 Patent.
6 Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D339 Patent were not consistent with
7 the standards of commerce for its industry.
8 31. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and/or servants has, and
9 continues to, knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringe the D180 Patent by
10 making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a
11 design that would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to
12 the claim of the D180 Patent, for example, Defendant’s PL7006 model
13 sunglasses as shown below.
14 Defendant’s PL7006 Model Oakley’s D180 Patent
Sunglasses
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27 32. Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D180 Patent were
28 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Oakley is informed and

-8-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 10 of 23 Page ID #:10

1 believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakley’s
2 rights in the design claimed in the D180 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs
3 are well-known throughout the eyewear industry, and Defendant’s PL7006
4 model sunglass is an identical copy of Oakley’s patented design. Accordingly,
5 Defendant’s actions constitute willful and intentional infringement of the D180
6 Patent. Defendant infringed the D180 Patent with reckless disregard of
7 Oakley’s patent rights. Defendant knew, or it was so obvious that Defendant
8 should have known, that its actions constitute infringement of the D180 Patent.
9 Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D180 Patent were not consistent with
10 the standards of commerce for its industry.
11 33. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and/or servants has, and
12 continues to, knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringe the D699 Patent by
13 making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a
14 design that would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to
15 the claim of the D699 Patent, for example, Defendant’s 917RV model
16 sunglasses as shown below.
17 Defendant’s 917RV Model Oakley’s D699 Patent
Sunglasses
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26 34. Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D699 Patent were
27 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Oakley is informed and
28 believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakley’s
-9-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 11 of 23 Page ID #:11

1 rights in the design claimed in the D699 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs
2 are well-known throughout the eyewear industry, and Defendant’s 917RV
3 model sunglasses are an identical copy of Oakley’s patented design.
4 Accordingly, Defendant’s actions constitute willful and intentional infringement
5 of the D699 Patent. Defendant infringed the D699 Patent with reckless
6 disregard of Oakley’s patent rights. Defendant knew, or it was so obvious that
7 Defendant should have known, that its actions constitute infringement of the
8 D699 Patent. Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D699 Patent were not
9 consistent with the standards of commerce for its industry.
10 35. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
11 Defendant, through its agents, employees, and/or servants has, and continues to,
12 knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringe the D579 Patent by making,
13 using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a design that
14 would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to the claim of
15 the D579 Patent, for example, Defendant’s sunglasses shown below.
16 Defendant’s Sunglasses Oakley’s D579 Patent
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 36. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
25 Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D579 Patent were undertaken without
26 permission or license from Oakley. Oakley is informed and believes, and
27 thereon alleges, that Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakley’s rights in the
28 design claimed in the D579 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs are well-
-10-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 12 of 23 Page ID #:12

1 known throughout the eyewear industry, and Defendant’s sunglasses are an


2 identical copy of Oakley’s patented design. Accordingly, Oakley is informed
3 and believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant’s actions constitute willful and
4 intentional infringement of the D579 Patent. Oakley is informed and believes,
5 and thereon alleges, that Defendant infringed the D579 Patent with reckless
6 disregard of Oakley’s patent rights. Oakley is informed and believes, and
7 thereon alleges, that Defendant knew, or it was so obvious that Defendant
8 should have known, that its actions constitute infringement of the D579 Patent.
9 Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant’s acts of
10 infringement of the D579 Patent were not consistent with the standards of
11 commerce for its industry.
12 37. Defendant, through its agents, employees, and/or servants has, and
13 continues to, knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringe the D745 Patent by
14 making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a
15 design that would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to
16 the claim of the D745 Patent, for example, Defendant’s PL911A model
17 sunglasses as shown below.
18 Defendant’s PL911A Sunglasses Oakley’s D745 Patent
19 .

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-11-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 13 of 23 Page ID #:13

1 38. Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D745 Patent were


2 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Oakley is informed and
3 believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakley’s
4 rights in the design claimed in the D745 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs
5 are well-known throughout the eyewear industry, and Defendant’s PL911A
6 model sunglasses are an identical copy of Oakley’s patented design.
7 Accordingly, Defendant’s actions constitute willful and intentional infringement
8 of the D745 Patent. Defendant infringed the D745 Patent with reckless
9 disregard of Oakley’s patent rights. Defendant knew, or it was so obvious that
10 Defendant should have known, that its actions constitute infringement of the
11 D745 Patent. Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D745 Patent were not
12 consistent with the standards of commerce for its industry.
13 39. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
14 Defendant, through its agents, employees, and/or servants has, and continues to,
15 knowingly, intentionally, and willfully infringe the D326 Patent by making,
16 using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing eyewear having a design that
17 would appear to an ordinary observer to be substantially similar to the claim of
18 the D326 Patent, for example, Defendant’s PL911A model sunglasses as shown
19 below.
20 Defendant’s PL911A Sunglasses Oakley’s D326 Patent
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-12-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 14 of 23 Page ID #:14

1 40. Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D326 Patent were


2 undertaken without permission or license from Oakley. Oakley is informed and
3 believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant had actual knowledge of Oakley’s
4 rights in the design claimed in D326 Patent. Oakley and its iconic designs are
5 well-known throughout the eyewear industry, and Defendant’s PL911A model
6 sunglasses are an identical copy of Oakley’s patented design. Accordingly,
7 Defendant’s actions constitute willful and intentional infringement of the D326
8 Patent. Defendant infringed the D326 Patent with reckless disregard of
9 Oakley’s patent rights. Defendant knew, or it was so obvious that Defendant
10 should have known, that its actions constitute infringement of the D326 Patent.
11 Defendant’s acts of infringement of the D326 Patent were not consistent with
12 the standards of commerce for its industry.
13 41. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s acts of
14 infringement, Defendant has derived and received gains, profits, and advantages
15 in an amount that is not presently known to Oakley.
16 42. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, Oakley is entitled to damages for
17 Defendant’s infringing acts and treble damages together with interests and costs
18 as fixed by this Court.
19 43. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285, Oakley is entitled to reasonable
20 attorneys’ fees for the necessity of bringing this claim.
21 44. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 289, Oakley is entitled to Defendant’s total
22 profits from Defendant’s infringement of the Asserted Patents.
23 45. Due to Defendant’s actions, constituting patent infringement,
24 Oakley has suffered great and irreparable injury, for which Oakley has no
25 adequate remedy at law.
26 46. Defendant will continue to infringe Oakley’s patent rights to the
27 great and irreparable injury of Oakley, unless and until Defendant is enjoined by
28 this Court.
-13-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 15 of 23 Page ID #:15

1 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF


2 (Trade Dress Infringement)
(15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))
3
4 47. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-46 of
5 this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
6 48. This is a claim for trade dress infringement under 15 U.S.C.
7 § 1125(a).
8 49. Subsequent to Oakley’s use and adoption of the HOLBROOK
9 Trade Dress, Defendant has developed, manufactured, imported, advertised,
10 and/or sold products that use trade dress that is confusingly similar to the
11 HOLBROOK Trade Dress. As shown below, for example, Defendant’s
12 7598RV-1 model sunglasses, which are sold and/or offered for sale, for
13 example, at Defendant’s 401 South Los Angeles Street, Suite 2, Los Angeles,
14 California 90013 store location, use a trade dress that is confusingly similar to
15 Oakley’s HOLBROOK Trade Dress.
16 Defendant’s 7598RV-1 Model Oakley’s HOLBROOK Trade Dress
Sunglasses
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 50. Defendant’s use of the HOLBROOK Trade Dress in connection
25 with its sunglasses is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to
26 deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of Defendant with
27 Oakley.
28 ///
-14-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 16 of 23 Page ID #:16

1 51. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that


2 Defendant infringed Oakley’s trade dress rights with the intent to unfairly
3 compete with Oakley, to trade upon Oakley’s reputation and goodwill by
4 causing confusion and mistake among customers and the public, and to deceive
5 the public into believing that Defendant’s products are associated with,
6 sponsored by, originated from, or are approved by Oakley, when they are not,
7 resulting in a loss of reputation in, and mischaracterization of, Oakley’s
8 products and its brand, damaging its marketability and saleability.
9 52. Defendant’s activities constitute willful and intentional
10 infringement of Oakley’s trade dress rights in total disregard of Oakley’s
11 proprietary rights, and were done despite Defendant’s knowledge that use of the
12 HOLBROOK Trade Dress was and is in direct contravention of Oakley’s rights.
13 53. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
14 Defendant has derived and received, and will continue to derive and receive,
15 gains, profits, and advantages from Defendant’s trade dress infringement in an
16 amount that is not presently known to Oakley. By reason of Defendant’s
17 actions, constituting trade dress infringement, Oakley has been damaged and is
18 entitled to monetary relief in an amount to be determined at trial.
19 54. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117, Oakley is entitled to damages for
20 Defendant’s infringing acts, up to three times actual damages as fixed by this
21 Court, and its reasonable attorneys’ fees for the necessity of bringing this claim.
22 55. Due to Defendant’s actions, constituting trade dress infringement,
23 Oakley has suffered great and irreparable injury, for which Oakley has no
24 adequate remedy at law.
25 56. Defendant will continue to infringe Oakley’s trade dress rights to
26 the great and irreparable injury of Oakley, unless and until Defendant is
27 enjoined by this Court.
28 ///
-15-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 17 of 23 Page ID #:17

1 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF


2 (Federal Unfair Competition & False Designation of Origin)
(15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))
3
4 57. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-22
5 and 47-56 of this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
6 58. This is a claim for unfair competition and false designation of
7 origin arising under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
8 59. Defendant’s use of the HOLBROOK Trade Dress without Oakley’s
9 consent constitutes a false designation of origin, false or misleading description
10 of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which is likely to cause
11 confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or
12 association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship,
13 or approval of his or her goods or commercial activities by another person in
14 violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
15 60. Defendant’s use of the HOLBROOK Trade Dress without Oakley’s
16 consent constitutes a false designation of origin, false or misleading description
17 of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which in commercial
18 advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or
19 geographic origin of his or her or another person’s goods or commercial
20 activities in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
21 61. Such conduct by Defendant is likely to confuse, mislead, and
22 deceive Defendant’s customers, purchasers, and members of the public as to the
23 origin of the HOLBROOK Trade Dress or cause said persons to believe that
24 Defendant and/or its products have been sponsored, approved, authorized, or
25 licensed by Oakley or are in some way affiliated or connected with Oakley, all
26 in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) and constitutes unfair competition with
27 Oakley.
28 ///
-16-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 18 of 23 Page ID #:18

1 62. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that


2 Defendant’s actions were undertaken willfully with full knowledge of the falsity
3 of such designation of origin and false descriptions or representations.
4 63. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
5 Defendant has derived and received, and will continue to derive and receive,
6 gains, profits, and advantages from Defendant’s false designation of origin, false
7 or misleading statements, descriptions of fact, false or misleading
8 representations of fact, and/or unfair competition in an amount that is not
9 presently known to Oakley. By reason of Defendant’s actions, constituting false
10 designation of origin, false or misleading statements, false or misleading
11 descriptions of fact, false or misleading representations of fact, and/or unfair
12 competition, Oakley has been damaged and is entitled to monetary relief in an
13 amount to be determined at trial.
14 64. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117, Oakley is entitled to damages for
15 Defendant’s acts constituting false designation of origin, false or misleading
16 statements, false or misleading descriptions of fact, false or misleading
17 representations of fact, and/or unfair competition, up to three times actual
18 damages as fixed by this Court, and its reasonable attorneys’ fees for the
19 necessity of bringing this claim.
20 65. Due to Defendant’s actions, constituting false designation of origin,
21 false or misleading statements, false or misleading description of fact, false or
22 misleading representations of fact, and/or unfair competition, Oakley has
23 suffered and continues to suffer great and irreparable injury, for which Oakley
24 has no adequate remedy at law.
25 66. Defendant will continue its false designation of origin, false or
26 misleading statements, false or misleading description of fact, false or
27 misleading representations of fact, and unfair competition, unless and until
28 Defendant is enjoined by this Court.
-17-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 19 of 23 Page ID #:19

1 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF


2 (California Unfair Competition)
3 67. Oakley repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-22
4 and 47- 66 of this Complaint as if set forth fully herein.
5 68. This is a claim for unfair competition, arising under California
6 Business & Professions Code § 17200, et seq. and California common law.
7 69. Defendant’s acts of trade dress infringement and false designation
8 of origin complained of herein constitute unfair competition with Oakley under
9 the common law and statutory laws of the State of California, particularly
10 California Business & Professions Code § 17200, et seq.
11 70. Oakley is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
12 Defendant has derived and received, and will continue to derive and receive,
13 gains, profits, and advantages from Defendant’s unfair competition in an
14 amount that is not presently known to Oakley. By reason of Defendant’s
15 wrongful acts as alleged in this Complaint, Oakley has been damaged and is
16 entitled to monetary relief in an amount to be determined at trial.
17 71. By its actions, Defendant has injured and violated the rights of
18 Oakley and has irreparably injured Oakley, and such irreparable injury will
19 continue unless Defendant is enjoined by this Court.
20
21 WHEREFORE, Oakley prays for judgment in its favor against
22 Defendant for the following relief:
23 A. An Order adjudging Defendant to have willfully infringed the
24 Asserted Patents under 35 U.S.C. § 271;
25 B. A preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its
26 respective officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and
27 those persons in active concert or participation with Defendant, from making,
28 using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing into the United States
-18-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 20 of 23 Page ID #:20

1 Defendant’s sunglass models 915RV, 9911, PL7006, 917RV, PL911A and the
2 sunglasses identified above as infringing the D579 Patent, as well as any
3 products that are not colorably different from these products;
4 C. A preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its
5 respective officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and
6 those persons in active concert or participation with Defendant, from directly or
7 indirectly infringing any of the Asserted Patents in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271;
8 D. That Defendant account for all gains, profits, and advantages
9 derived by Defendant’s infringement of the Asserted Patents in violation of
10 35 U.S.C. § 271, and that Defendant pay to Oakley all damages suffered by
11 Oakley and/or Defendant’s total profit from such infringement pursuant to 35
12 U.S.C. § 284 and § 289;
13 E. An Order for a trebling of damages and/or exemplary damages
14 because of Defendant’s willful conduct pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;
15 F. That the Court find for Oakley and against Defendant on Oakley’s
16 claims of trade dress infringement, false designation of origin, and unfair
17 competition under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a);
18 G. That the Court find for Oakley and against Defendant on Oakley’s
19 claims of unfair competition under California Business & Professions Code
20 § 17200, et seq. and California common law;
21 H. That the Court issue a preliminary and permanent injunction
22 against Defendant, its agents, servants, employees, representatives, successors,
23 and assigns, and all persons, firms, or corporations in active concert or
24 participation with Defendant, enjoining them from engaging in the following
25 activities and from assisting or inducing, directly or indirectly, others to engage
26 in the following activities:
27 1. Manufacturing, importing, marketing, displaying,
28 distributing, offering to sell, and/or selling Defendant’s
-19-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 21 of 23 Page ID #:21

1 7598RV-1 product shown above and any products that are


2 not colorably different therefrom;
3 2. using Oakley’s HOLBROOK Trade Dress, or any other trade
4 dress that is confusingly similar to Oakley’s HOLBROOK
5 Trade Dress;
6 3. falsely designating the origin of Defendant’s goods;
7 4. unfairly competing with Oakley in any manner whatsoever;
8 5. causing a likelihood of confusion or injuries to Oakley’s
9 business reputation; and,
10 6. manufacturing, importing, marketing, displaying,
11 distributing, offering to sell, and/or selling any goods that
12 infringe Oakley’s HOLBROOK Trade Dress.
13 I. That an accounting be ordered to determine Defendant’s profits
14 resulting from its trade dress infringement, false designation of origin, and
15 unfair competition, and that Oakley be awarded monetary relief in an amount to
16 be fixed by the Court in its discretion as it finds just as an equitable remedy and
17 as a remedy under 15 U.S.C. § 1117, including:
18 1. all profits received by Defendant as a result of its infringing
19 actions, said amount to be trebled;
20 2. all damages sustained by Oakley as a result of Defendant’s
21 acts of trade dress infringement, unfair competition, and
22 false designation of origin, and that such damages be trebled;
23 and
24 3. punitive damages stemming from Defendant’s willful,
25 intentional, and malicious acts;
26 J. That such damages and profits be trebled and awarded to Oakley
27 pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117;
28 K. An Order adjudging that this is an exceptional case;
-20-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 22 of 23 Page ID #:22

1 L. That, because of the exceptional nature of this case resulting from


2 Defendant’s deliberate infringing actions, this Court award to Oakley all
3 reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, and disbursements incurred as a result of this
4 action, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117 and/or 35 U.S.C. § 285;
5 M. That Oakley recover exemplary damages pursuant to California
6 Civil Code § 3294;
7 N. An award of pre-judgment and post-judgment interest and costs of
8 this action against Defendant; and,
9 O. Such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and
10 proper.
11 Respectfully submitted,
12 KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
13
14 Dated: March 13, 2018 By:/s/ Ali S. Razai
Michael K. Friedland
15 Lauren Keller Katzenellenbogen
Ali S. Razai
16 James F. Smith
17 Attorneys for Plaintiff OAKLEY, INC.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-21-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 23 of 23 Page ID #:23

1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL


2 Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so
3 triable.
4 Respectfully submitted,
5 KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
6
7 Dated: March 13, 2018 By:/s/ Ali S. Razai
Michael K. Friedland
8 Lauren Keller Katzenellenbogen
Ali S. Razai
9 James F. Smith
10 Attorneys for Plaintiff OAKLEY, INC.
11
12 27738526

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-22-
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 9 Page ID #:24

EXHIBIT 1
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 2 of 9 Page ID #:25

USOOD763947S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D763,947 S


Shin (45) Date of Patent: . Aug. 16, 2016
(54) EYEGLASSES D484, 173 S 12/2003 Jannard et al.
D496,064 S 9/2004 Mangum
D497,380 S 10/2004 Thixton et al.
(71) Applicant: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) D513,275 S 12/2005 Yee
(72) Inventor: Jae Shin, Irvine, CA (US) BS s 358, s
(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) (Continued)
(**) Term: 15 Years FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
DE 403055O2-0003 12/2003
(21) Appl. No. 29/540,370 JP 1456837 12/2012
JP 1509518 10/2014
(22) Filed: Sep. 23, 2015 OTHER PUBLICATIONS
Related U.S. Application Data U.S. Appl. No. 29/507, 138, Set of Eyeglass Components, filed Oct.
(62) Division of application No. 29/507,138, filed on Oct. 24, 2014.
24, 2014, now Pat. No. Des. 749,670. (Continued)
(51) LOC (10) Cl. ................................................ 16-06
(52) U.S. Cl. Primary Examiner — Susan Moon Lee
USPC ......................................................... D16/326 (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Knobbe Martens Olson &
(58) Field of Classification Search Bear, LLP
USPC ................ D16/300, 304, 309 311, 314-330,
D16/334 338, 341; D29/109, 110: (57) CLAM
D21/483, 65, 660, 661; D14/372: The ornamental design for eyeglasses, as shown and
351/41-46, 48, 49, 51, 52, 59, 61-63, described.
351/92, 103-126, 140–153, 158, 159, 178:
2/13, 15, 426-432, 434–437, 441, 447, DESCRIPTION
2/448, 449
CPC ........ G02C 2200/08; G02C 1/06; G02C5/14: FIG. 1 is a front perspective view of eyeglasses showing an
G02C 5/16 embodiment of the new design;
See application file for complete search history. FIG. 2 is a front elevational view thereof
(56) References Cited FIG. 3 is a rear elevational view thereof;
FIG. 4 is a left side elevational view thereof, the right side
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS elevational view being a mirror image thereof;
FIG. 5 is a top plan view thereof; and,
D192,884 S 5, 1962 Petitto FIG. 6 is a bottom plan view thereof.
D205419 S 8, 1966 Griss Broken lines and unshaded portions contained within broken
D209,862 S 1, 1968 McCraken lines depict portions of the eyeglasses that form no part of the
D218,569 S 9, 1970 McCracken
D243,237 S 2f1977 Teufelhart claimed design.
D400,232 S 10, 1998 Jannard et al.
D478,929 S 8, 2003 Baden et al. 1 Claim, 5 Drawing Sheets

EXHIBIT 1
- 23 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 3 of 9 Page ID #:26

US D763,947 S
Page 2

(56) References Cited D648,771 S 11/2011 Rohrbach


D648,773 S 11/2011 Thixton
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS D649,579 S 11/2011 Thixton
D650,825 S 12/2011 Yee et al.
D539,833 S 4/2007 Chuang D652,442 S 1, 2012 Yee et al.
D540,370 S 4/2007 Sheldon D653,699 S 2/2012 Shin
D540,846 S 4/2007 Sheldon D654,530 S * 2/2012 Markovitz ................... D16/326
D543,572 S 5, 2007 Yee et al. D659,179 S 5, 2012 Thixton
D543,573 S 5/2007 Chuang D659,181 S 5, 2012 Moritz
D545,348 S 6, 2007 Chen D659, 182 S 5, 2012 Shin et al.
D547,793 S 7/2007 Baden et al. D661,339 S 6, 2012 Thixton et al.
D547,794 S 7/2007 Jannard et al. D663,764 S 7/2012 Serlenga
D548,269 S 8, 2007 Baden et al. D664,590 S 7, 2012 Shin
D548,767 S 8/2007 Jannard et al. D670,325 S 11/2012 Chen
D549,268 S 8, 2007 Daems et al. D671,984 S 12/2012 Fuchs
D549,764 S 8/2007 Teng D674,836 S 1/2013 Chen
D550,272 S 9, 2007 Markovitz D676.479 S 2.2013 Yoo
D553,176 S 10/2007 Yee et al. D676,898 S 2/2013 Shin et al.
D553,368 S 10/2007 Yee et al. D681,100 S * 4/2013 Markovitz ................... D16/326
D554,689 S 11/2007 Jannard et al. D682,922 S * 5/2013 Stables ........................ D16/326
D555,187 S 11, 2007 Yee D683,389 S 5, 2013 Stables
D556,246 S 11, 2007 Yee D687,086 S 7/2013 Sheldon
D556,818 S 12/2007 Jannard et al. D691,193 S * 10/2013 Lombardi .................... D16/326
D557,326 S 12/2007 Jannard et al. D692,047 S 10/2013 Shin
D558,816 S 1, 2008 Yee D694,314 S 1 1/2013 Mage
D561,809 S 2, 2008 Yee D697.548 S 1/2014 Earley
D561,810 S 2/2008 Fox et al. D697.963 S 1/2014 Earley
D561,811 S 2/2008 Fox et al. D700,933 S 3/2014 Shin
D561,812 S 2/2008 Fox et al. D701,896 S * 4/2014 Markovitz ................... D16/326
D561,813 S 2/2008 Baden et al. D704,250 S * 5/2014 Miera .......... ... D16/313
D561,816 S 2/2008 Jannard et al. D706,858 S * 6/2014 Markovitz ... D16/326
D564,569 S 3/2008 Mage D706,859 S * 6/2014 Markovitz ................... D16/326
D564,572 S 3/2008 Yee et al. D707,284 S 6, 2014 Yoo
D565,088 S 3/2008 Baden et al. D710,430 S 8, 2014 Votel et al.
D565,089 S 3, 2008 Moritz D710,432 S 8, 2014 Votel et al.
D569,412 S 5/2008 Jannard et al. D710,434 S 8/2014 Thixton
D572.745 S 7/2008 Moritz et al. D717,363 S 11/2014 Moritz
D572,747 S 7/2008 Baden et al. D717,364 S 11/2014 Fuchs
D572,749 S 7, 2008 Yee D719,209 S 12/2014 Garfias
D573,172 S 7/2008 Baden et al. D720,798 S * 1/2015 Lee .............................. D16,300
D575,323 S 8/2008 Jannard et al. 8,931,434 B2 1/2015 Tu et al.
D577,759 S 9, 2008 Yee D723,092 S * 2/2015 Markovitz ................... D16,300
D581449 S 11/2008 Yee D723,610 S * 3/2015 Chen ............................ D16,300
D581,450 S 11/2008 Moritz D724,135 S 3, 2015 Shin
D582,957 S 12/2008 Moritz D724,647 S 3/2015 Rohrbach
D583.404 S 12/2008 Baden et al. D724,649 S 3, 2015 Shin
D586,379 S 2/2009 Thixton et al. D725,695 S 3/2015 Garfias
D594,052 S 6/2009 Yang D725,696 S 3/2015 Garfias
D599,836 S 9, 2009 Rohrbach D727.404 S * 4/2015 Markovitz ................... D16/326
D599,838 S 9, 2009 Rohrbach D727.407 S 4, 2015 Yoo
D599,839 S 9, 2009 Rohrbach D728,002 S 4, 2015 Uhm
D601,613 S 10/2009 Yee D728,664 S 5, 2015 Yoo
D604,756 S 11/2009 Shin et al. D730,975 S 6, 2015 Stables
D604,757 S 11/2009 Yee D735,261 S 7, 2015 HSu
D604,758 S 11/2009 Rohrbach et al. D735,262 S * 7/2015 Hsu .............................. D16/309
D604,759 S 11/2009 Rohrbach et al. D735,796 S 8/2015 Earley
D607,040 S 12/2009 Rohrbach et al. D735,800 S 8 2015 Earley
D609,736 S 2/2010 Wang D739,457 S 9, 2015 Moritz
D609,737 S 2/2010 Jannard et al. D746,361 S * 12/2015 Markovitz ................... D16/326
D610,603 S 2/2010 Thixton D746,362 S * 12/2015 Markovitz ... ... D16/326
D610,604 S 2/2010 Thixton D746,897 S * 1/2016 Markovitz ... ... D16/326
D612413 S 3/2010 Thixton D748,719 S * 2/2016 Hsu ....... ... D16/326
D613,329 S 4/2010 Jannard et al. D749,670 S * 2/2016 Shin ... ... D16/335
D616,919 S 6, 2010 Thixton D750,697 S * 3/2016 Hsu ... D16/326
D616,920 S 6, 2010 Thixton D750,698 S * 3/2016 Hsu ... ... D16/326
D617.366 S * 6/2010 Fulton .......................... D16/309 2005/0280771 A1* 12/2005 DiChiara ................. GO2C 1/08
D620,970 S 8/2010 Thixton 351,111
D622,755 S 8, 2010 Yee OTHER PUBLICATIONS
D629,830 S 12/2010 Markovitz et al.
D631,503 S 1/2011 Chou U.S. Appl. No. 29/471,270, filed Oct. 30, 2013, Yoo.
D632,721 S 2/2011 Chou U.S. Appl. No. 29/491,890, filed May 27, 2014. Thixton.
D633,550 S 3/2011 Chou
D633,553 S 3/2011 Cheng * cited by examiner

EXHIBIT 1
- 24 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 4 of 9 Page ID #:27

U.S. Patent Aug. 16, 2016 Sheet 1 of 5 US D763,947 S

EXHIBIT 1
- 25 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 5 of 9 Page ID #:28

U.S. Patent Aug. 16, 2016 Sheet 2 of 5 US D763,947 S

FIG. 2

FIG. 3

EXHIBIT 1
- 26 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 6 of 9 Page ID #:29

U.S. Patent Aug. 16, 2016 Sheet 3 of 5 US D763,947 S

EXHIBIT 1
- 27 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 7 of 9 Page ID #:30

U.S. Patent Aug. 16, 2016 Sheet 4 of 5 US D763,947 S

FIG. 5

EXHIBIT 1
- 28 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 8 of 9 Page ID #:31

U.S. Patent Aug. 16, 2016 Sheet 5 of 5 US D763,947 S

FIG. 6

EXHIBIT 1
- 29 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 9 of 9 Page ID #:32

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE


CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION
PATENT NO. : D763,947 S Page 1 of 1
APPLICATION NO. : 29/540370
DATED : August 16, 2016
INVENTOR(S) : Jae Shin

It is certified that error appears in the above-identified patent and that said Letters Patent is hereby corrected as shown below:

TITLE PAGE
In column 1 (page 1, item 56) at line 5, Under U.S. Patent Documents, change “McCraken to
--McCracken--.

Signed and Sealed this


Twenty-ninth Day of November, 2016
74-4-04- 2% 4 Michelle K. Lee
Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office

EXHIBIT 1
- 30 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-2 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 8 Page ID #:33

EXHIBIT 2
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-2 Filed 03/13/18 Page 2 of 8 Page ID #:34

USOOD74967OS

(12) Shin
United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D749,670 S
(45) Date of Patent: Feb. 16, 2016
(54) SET OF EYEGLASS COMPONENTS D539,831 S 4/2007 HSu
D539,833 S 4/2007 Chuang
(71) Applicant: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) D540,370 S 4/2007 Sheldon
D540,846 S 4/2007 Sheldon
D543,572 S * 5/2007 Yee .............................. D16/315
(72) Inventor: Jae Shin, Irvine, CA (US) D543,573 S * 5/2007 Chuang ........................ D16,323
D545,348 S 6, 2007 Chen
(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) D547,793 S 7/2007 Baden et al.

(**) Term: 14 Years (Continued)


FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
(21) Appl. No.: 29/507,138
DE 403055O2-0003 12/2000
(22) Filed: Oct. 24, 2014 JP 1456837 12/2012
JP 1509518 10/2014
(51) LOC (10) Cl. ................................................ 16-06
(52) U.S. C. OTHER PUBLICATIONS
USPC ......................................................... D16/335
(58) Field of Classification Search U.S. Appl. No. 29/444,559, filed Jan. 31, 2013, Yoo.
USPC ................ D16/300, 304, 309 311, 314-330, (Continued)
D16/334 338,341,342; D29/109, 110;
D21/483, 659, 660, 661; D14/372: Primary Examiner — Susan Moon Lee
351/41-46, 48, 49, 51, 52, 59, 61-63, (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Knobbe Martens Olson &
351/92, 103-126, 140–153, 158, 159, 178: Bear, LLP
2/13, 15, 426-432, 434–437, 441, 447,
2/448, 449 (57) CLAM
CPC ........ G02C 2200/08; G02C 1/06; G02C5/14: The ornamental design for a set of eyeglass components, as
GO2C5/16 shown and described.
See application file for complete search history.
DESCRIPTION
(56) References Cited
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS FIG. 1 is a front perspective view of a set of eyeglass compo
nents showing an embodiment of the new design;
D192,884 S 5, 1962 Petitto FIG. 2 is a front elevational view thereof
D205419 S 8, 1966 Griss FIG. 3 is a rear elevational view thereof;
D209,862 S 1, 1968 McCracken
D218,569 S 9, 1970 McCracken FIG. 4 is a left side elevational view thereof, the right side
D243,237 S 2f1977 Teufelhart elevational view being a mirror image thereof;
D400,232 S * 10/1998 Jannard ........................ D16/335 FIG. 5 is a top plan view thereof; and,
D478,929 S * 8/2003 Baden .......................... D16/326 FIG. 6 is a bottom plan view thereof.
D484, 173 S 12/2003 Jannard et al. The broken lines in the figures show portions of the glasses
D496,064 S 9/2004 Mangum
D497,380 S 10, 2004 Thixton et al. which form no part of the claimed design.
D513,275 S 12, 2005 Yee
D537.467 S 2/2007 Teng 1 Claim, 5 Drawing Sheets

EXHIBIT 2
- 31 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-2 Filed 03/13/18 Page 3 of 8 Page ID #:35

US D749,670 S
Page 2

(56) References Cited D629,830 S 12/2010 Markovitz et al.


D631,503 S * 1/2011 Chou ........................... D16/326
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS D632,721 S * 2/2011 Chou ... ... D16/326
D633,550 S * 3/2011 Chou ........................... D16,321
D547,794 S 7/2007 Jannard et al. D633,553 S * 3/2011 Cheng .......................... D16/326
D548,269 S 8, 2007 Baden et al. D648,771 S 11/2011 Rohrbach
D548,767 S 8/2007 Jannard et al. D648,773 S * 1 1/2011 Thixton ....................... D16/326
D549,268 S 8, 2007 Daems et al. D649,579 S 11/2011 Thixton
D549,764 S 8/2007 Teng D650,825 S 12/2011 Yee et al.
D550,272 S * 9/2007 Markovitz ................... D16/326 D652,442 S 1/2012 Yee et al.
D553,176 S 10/2007 Yee et al. D653,699 S * 22012 Shin............................. D16/320
D553,368 S 10/2007 Yee et al. D659,179 S 5/2012 Thixton
D554,689 S 11/2007 Jannard et al. D659,181 S * 5/2012 Moritz ......................... D16/326
D555,187 S 11, 2007 Yee D659, 182 S 5, 2012 Shin et al.
D556,246 S 11, 2007 Yee D661,339 S 6, 2012 Thixton et al.
D556,818 S 12/2007 Jannard et al. D663,764 S * 7.2012 Serlenga ...................... D16/326
D557,326 S 12/2007 Jannard et al. D664,590 S 7, 2012 Shin
D558,816 S 1, 2008 Yee D670,325 S * 1 1/2012 Chen . ... D16/326
D561,809 S * 2/2008 Yee .............................. D16/313 D671,984 S * 12/2012 Fuchs ... D16,314
D561,810 S 2/2008 Fox et al. D674,836 S * 1/2013 Chen ............................ D16/326
D561,811 S 2/2008 Fox et al. D676.479 S 2/2013 Yoo
D561,812 S 2/2008 Fox et al. D676,898 S 2/2013 Shin et al.
D561,813 S 2/2008 Baden et al. D683,389 S * 5/2013 Stables ........................ D16/326
D561,816 S 2/2008 Jannard et al. D687,086 S * 7.2013 Sheldon ....................... D16/326
D564,569 S * 3/2008 Mage ........................... D16/325 D692,047 S 10, 2013 Shin
D564,572 S 3/2008 Yee et al. D694,314 S * 1 1/2013 Mage ........................... D16/325
D565,088 S 3/2008 Baden et al. D697.548 S * 1/2014 Earley ... ... D16/326
D565,089 S * 3/2008 Moritz ......................... D16/326 D697.963 S * 1/2014 Earley .......................... D16/326
D569.412 S * 5/2008 Jannard ........................ D16,314 D700,933 S 3/2014 Shin
D572.745 S 7/2008 Moritz et al. D707,284 S 6, 2014 Yoo
D572,747 S 7/2008 Baden et al. D710,430 S * 8/2014 Votel ............................ D16,321
D572,749 S 7, 2008 Yee D710,432 S * 8/2014 Votel ... ... D16,321
D573,172 S 7/2008 Baden et al. D710,434 S * 8.2014 Thixton ....................... D16/335
D575,323 S 8/2008 Jannard et al. D717,363 S 11/2014 Moritz
D577,759 S * 9/2008 Yee .............................. D16/326 D717,364 S * 1 1/2014 Fuchs .......................... D16/326
D581449 S 11, 2008 Yee D719,209 S 12/2014 Garfias
D581450 S 11/2008 Moritz 8,931,434 B2 * 1/2015 Tu ........................ AOK 39,012
D582,957 S 12/2008 Moritz 119,5101
D583.404 S 12/2008 Baden et al. D724,135 S * 3/2015 Shin ............................. D16/335
D586,379 S 2/2009 Thixton et al. R724.6 s : 291 ... D16,309
D594,052 S * 6/2009 Yang ............................ D16/326 D724,649 S ck 3, 2015 ... D16/335
D599,836 S * 9/2009 Rohrbach ... D16/315 R721 S 429 ... D16/335
D599,838 S * 9/2009 Rohrbach ... ... D16/326 R72.992 S 29 D16,314
D599,839 S * 9/2009 Rohrbach ... D16/326 R266 S : 529 D16,300
D601,613 S * 10/2009 Yee .............................. D16/315 PSQ2.5 S 629 D16/326
D604,756 S 11/2009 Shin et al. RSS23 S 29 ... D16,309
D604,757 S * 1 1/2009 Yee .............................. D16/326 RSS 8, 2015 ... D16,321
D604,758 S * 1 1/2009 Rohrbach .................... D16/326 D735,800 S 8, 2015 ... D16/335
D604,759 S 11/2009 Rohrbach et al. D739,457 S * 9/2015 Moritz ......................... D16/335
D607,040 S * 12/2009 Rohrbach .................... D16/326
D609,736 S * 2/2010 Wang ........................... D16/315 OTHER PUBLICATIONS
D609,737 S 2/2010 Jannard et al.
D610,603 S 2/2010 Thixton U.S. Appl. No. 29/471,270, filed Oct. 30, 2013, Yoo.
D610,604 S 2, 2010 Thixton U.S. Appl. No. 29/471,271, filed Oct. 30, 2013, Shin.
B.E. s 3388 A. 1 U.S. Appl. No. 29/491,890, filed May 27, 2014. Thixton.
D616919 S 6, 2010 As et al. U.S. Appl. No. 29/494.752, filed Jun. 24, 2014, Garfias.
D616920 S 6, 2010 Thixton U.S. Appl. NO. 29/494.754, filed Jun. 24, 2014, Garfias.
D620,970 S 8, 2010 Thixton
D622,755 S * 8/2010 Yee .............................. D16/315 * cited by examiner

EXHIBIT 2
- 32 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-2 Filed 03/13/18 Page 4 of 8 Page ID #:36

U.S. Patent Feb. 16, 2016 Sheet 1 of 5 US D749,670 S

EXHIBIT 2
- 33 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-2 Filed 03/13/18 Page 5 of 8 Page ID #:37

U.S. Patent Feb. 16, 2016 Sheet 2 of 5 US D749,670 S

FG, 2.

FG, 3

EXHIBIT 2
- 34 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-2 Filed 03/13/18 Page 6 of 8 Page ID #:38

U.S. Patent Feb. 16, 2016 Sheet 3 of 5 US D749,670 S

EXHIBIT 2
- 35 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-2 Filed 03/13/18 Page 7 of 8 Page ID #:39

U.S. Patent Feb. 16, 2016 Sheet 4 of 5 US D749,670 S

FG. 5

EXHIBIT 2
- 36 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-2 Filed 03/13/18 Page 8 of 8 Page ID #:40

U.S. Patent Feb. 16, 2016 Sheet 5 of 5 US D749,670 S

F.G. 6

EXHIBIT 2
- 37 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-3 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:41

EXHIBIT 3
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-3 Filed 03/13/18 Page 2 of 6 Page ID #:42

USOOD661339S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D661,339 S


Thixton et al. (45) Date of Patent: Jun. 5, 2012

(54) EYEGLASS D581444 S 11/2008 Jannard et al.


D585.475 S 1/2009 Yang
D586,379 S * 2/2009 Thixton et al. ............... D16/325
(75) Inventors: RT is A (US); D599,838 S 9, 2009 Rohrbach
eter Yee, Irvine, CA (US) D601,613 S 10/2009 Yee
D601,614 S * 10/2009 Mouclier ..................... D16,321
(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) D604,756 S 11/2009 Shin et al.
D604,758 S 11/2009 Rohrbach et al.
(**) Term: 14 Years D604,759 S 11/2009 Rohrbach et al.
D607,040 S 12/2009 Rohrbach
D610,603 S 2/2010 Thixton
(21) Appl. No. 29/407,957 D610,604 S 2/2010 Thixton
D616,013 S 5, 2010 Reed
(22) Filed: Dec. 5, 2011 D616,919 S 6, 2010 Thixton
D620,970 S 8, 2010 Thixton
(51) LOC (9) Cl. .................................................. 16-06 D622,302 S * 8/2010 Yee .............................. D16,314
(52) U.S. Cl. ...................... D16/321; D16/326; D16/335 D622,304 S 8, 2010 Baden et al.
(58) Field of Classification Search ................. D16/101, D633,550 S 3/2011 Chou
D16/300–342,900; D29/109-110; D24/110.2: D636,010 S 4/2011 Moritz
351/41, 44, 51-52, 62, 158, 92, 103-123, R2
D649,579 S 39: Ruth
11/2011 Thixton
351/140, 153,45–46; 2/426 432,447. 449,
2/441, 434–437, 13, 15; D21/483, 659-661; cited by examiner
D14/372
See application file for complete search history. Primary Examiner — Raphael Barkai
(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Knobbe Martens Olson &
(56) References Cited Bear, LLP
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS (57) CLAM
D178,178 S 7/1956 Fleming The ornamental design for an eyeglass, as shown and
D192,885 S 5, 1962 Pettito described.
D210,418 S 3, 1968 Bloch et al.
D218,569 S 9, 1970 McCracken DESCRIPTION
D380,766 S 7, 1997 Simioni
D497,934 S 11/2004 Sheldon
D539,833 S 4/2007 Chuang FIG. 1 is a front perspective view of an eyeglass of the present
D542,330 S * 5/2007 Elmore ........................ D16/326 1nvention;
RSSSS . 7/2007 Chuang FIG. 2 is a front elevational view thereof
D549,270 S 8/2007 Daems et al. ................ D16,321 FIG. 3 is a rear elevational view thereof;
D550,272 S
D554,688 S * 1 9,1/2007
2007 Markovitz
Elmore ........................ D16/326 FIG. 4 i left side el
. 4 is a left side elevational1 view
vi h f, the right sid
thereof, the right side
D554,689 S 11/2007 Jannard et al. elevational view being a mirror image thereof;
D555,705 S 1 1/2007 Chuang FIG. 5 is a top plan view thereof; and,
R.S. S. 2/2008
D561,813 S
2298 Yes
Baden et al. ................. D16/325
FIG. 6 is a bottom plan view thereof.
The broken line portions of the drawings are for illustrative
D569,412 S 5/2008 Jannard et al.
D570,897 S 6, 2008 Fuchs purposes only and form no part of the claimed design.
D575,323 S 8/2008 Jannard et al.
D577,759 S 9, 2008 Yee 1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets

EXHIBIT 3
- 38 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-3 Filed 03/13/18 Page 3 of 6 Page ID #:43

U.S. Patent Jun. 5, 2012 Sheet 1 of 4 US D661,339 S

EXHIBIT 3
- 39 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-3 Filed 03/13/18 Page 4 of 6 Page ID #:44

U.S. Patent Jun. 5, 2012 Sheet 2 of 4 US D661,339 S

EXHIBIT 3
- 40 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-3 Filed 03/13/18 Page 5 of 6 Page ID #:45

U.S. Patent Jun. 5, 2012 Sheet 3 of 4 US D661,339 S

EXHIBIT 3
- 41 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-3 Filed 03/13/18 Page 6 of 6 Page ID #:46

U.S. Patent Jun. 5, 2012 Sheet 4 of 4 US D661,339 S

EXHIBIT 3
- 42 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-4 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:47

EXHIBIT 4
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-4 Filed 03/13/18 Page 2 of 7 Page ID #:48

USOOD659180S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D659,180 S


Moritz (45) Date of Patent: . May 8, 2012
(54) EYEGLASS D478,927 S 8/2003 Teng
D483,392 S 12/2003 Chen
D483,791 S 12/2003 Thixton et al.
(75) Inventor: Hans Moritz, Foothill Ranch, CA (US) D489,394 S 5, 2004 in O a
D505,150 S * 5/2005 Yee et al. ..................... D16,314
(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) D508,515 S 8, 2005 Yee et al.
D511,540 S 11/2005 HSu
(**) Term: 14 Years D513,275 S * 12/2005 Yee .............................. D16/326
D513,761 S 1/2006 Yee et al.
D514,613 S 2/2006 Jannard et al.
(21) Appl. No. 29/403,414 D519,148 S 4, 2006 Wu
D529,066 S 9, 2006 Matera
(22) Filed: Oct. 5, 2011 D533,889 S 12/2006 Sadlerholm et al.
D539,833 S 4/2007 Chuang
(51) LOC (9) Cl. .................................................. 16-06 D543,572 S 5/2007 Yee et al.
(52) U.S. Cl. ...................... D16/314: D16/321: D16/335 D543,574 S 5/2007 Jannard et al.
(58) Field of Classification Search ................. D16/101, 155-36 238, R
XO
tala
D16/300–342,900; D29/109-110; D24/110.2: D545,868 S 7/2007 Chuang
351/41, 44, 51-52, 62, 158, 92, 103-123, D553,173 S 10/2007 Baden et al.
351/140, 153, 45–46; 2/426-432, 447. 449, D555,705 S 1 1/2007 Chuang
2/441, 434–437, 13, 15; D21/483, 659-661; (Continued)
D14/372
See application file for complete search history. Primary Examiner — Raphael Barkai
(56) References Cited (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Knobbe Martens Olson &
Bear, LLP
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS (57) CLAM
D176,316 S 12/1955 Fleming The ornamental design for an eyeglass, as shown and
D178,178 S 7/1956 Fleming described.
D196,000 S 8, 1963 McNeill
5,760,868 A 6, 1998 Jannard et al. DESCRIPTION
D397,354 S 8, 1998 Kuo
D398,021 S 9, 1998 Bole
D399,866 S 10, 1998 Yee FIG. 1 is a front perspective view of an eyeglass of the present
5,903,331 A 5, 1999 Lin invention;
D415, 186 S 10, 1999 Tabacchi FIG. 2 is a front elevational view thereof
5,987,653 A 11/1999 Cyr FIG. 3 is a rear elevational view thereof;
D430,591 S 9, 2000 Arnette
D440,594 S 4/2001 Yasuhara FIG. 4 is a left side elevational view thereof, the right side
D441,781 S 5, 2001 Garneau elevational view being a mirror image thereof;
D447,162 S 8/2001 Jannard et al. FIG. 5 is a top plan view thereof; and,
D447,764 S 9, 2001 Chen FIG. 6 is a bottom plan view thereof.
D459,746 S 7/2002 Wang The broken line portions of the drawings are for illustrative
D469,459 S 1/2003 Moritz
D473,892 S 4/2003 Thixton et al. purposes only and form no part of the claimed design.
D474.223 S 5, 2003 Chen
D476,354 S 6, 2003 Chen 1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets

EXHIBIT 4
- 43 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-4 Filed 03/13/18 Page 3 of 7 Page ID #:49

US D659,180 S
Page 2

U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS D601,613 S 10, 2009 Yee


D561,809 S 2, 2008 Yee D603,443 S *ck 1 1/2009 Li ................................ D16,314
D564,568 S 3, 2008 Moritz D604,757 S 11/2009 Yee
D564,571 S 3, 2008 J detal D604,759 S 11/2009 Rohrbach et al.
D565,089 S 3, 2008 annard et al.
Moritz D609,266 S * 2/2010 Yasuhara et al. ............. D16,314
D569.412 S 5/2008 J detal D610,603 S 2/2010 Thixton
annard et al. D614,226 S * 4/2010 Fulton et al. ................. D16,314
D570,897 S 6, 2008 Fuchs D614,685 S ck 4/2010 Moritz ......................... D16,321
D575,324 S 8, 2008 Moritz D615,580 S 5, 2010 Baden et al.
D581443 S 11/2008 Jannard et al. D616,485 S 5, 2010 Thixton
D581444 S
D585.475 S
11/2008 Jannard et al.
1/2009 Y. D622,755 S 8, 2010 Yee
ang D630,675 S * 1/2011 Lampru ....................... D16/335
7,497,569 B2 3/2009 Webb D636,010 S 4/2011 Moritz
D590.432 S 4, 2009 Yee D640,725 S 6, 2011 MoritZetal
D591,787 S 5, 2009 Yee
D595,757 S * 7/2009 Yang ............................ D16,314
D600,269 S 9, 2009 Masui * cited by examiner

EXHIBIT 4
- 44 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-4 Filed 03/13/18 Page 4 of 7 Page ID #:50

U.S. Patent May 8, 2012 Sheet 1 of 4 US D659,180 S

EXHIBIT 4
- 45 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-4 Filed 03/13/18 Page 5 of 7 Page ID #:51

U.S. Patent May 8, 2012 Sheet 2 of 4 US D659,180 S

EXHIBIT 4
- 46 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-4 Filed 03/13/18 Page 6 of 7 Page ID #:52

U.S. Patent May 8, 2012 Sheet 3 of 4 US D659,180 S

EXHIBIT 4
- 47 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-4 Filed 03/13/18 Page 7 of 7 Page ID #:53

U.S. Patent May 8, 2012 Sheet 4 of 4 US D659,180 S

EXHIBIT 4
- 48 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-5 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:54

EXHIBIT 5
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-5 Filed 03/13/18 Page 2 of 7 Page ID #:55

USOOD653699S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D653,699 S


Shin (45) Date of Patent: Feb. 7, 2012
(54) EYEGLASS D555,705 S 1 1/2007 Chuang
D561,811 S 2/2008 Fox et al.
D561,812 S 2/2008 Fox et al.
(75) Inventor: Jae Shin, Irvine, CA (US) D561,813 S 2/2008 Baden
D570,897 S 6/2008 Fuchs
(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) D575,323 S 8/2008 Jannard et al.
D583.405 S 12/2008 Chen
(**) Term: 14 Years D585.475 S 1/2009 Yang
D586,379 S 2/2009 Thixton et al.
D595,333 S 6/2009 Markovitz et al.
(21) Appl. No. 29/383,492 D601,613 S 10, 2009 Yee
D604,756 S 11/2009 Shin et al.
(22) Filed: Jan. 18, 2011 (Continued)
(51) LOC (9) Cl. .................................................. 16-06
(52) U.S. Cl. ...................... D16/320: D16/326; D16/321 OTHER PUBLICATIONS
(58) Field of Classification Search ................. D16/101, Berthet Bondet, Publication of 1995 Catalog, p. 5, Hommes, Models
351/41, 44, 51-52, 62, 158, 92, 103-123,
351/140, 153, 45–46; 2/426-432, 447. 449, (Continued)
2/441, 434–437, 13, 15; D21/483, 659-661
See application file for complete search history. Primary Examiner — Raphael Barkai
(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Knobbe Martens Olson &
(56) References Cited Bear, LLP
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS (57) CLAM
D135,992 S 11/1942 Pomeranz The ornamental design for an eyeglass, as shown and
D178,178 S 7/1956 Fleming described.
D244.281 S 5, 1977 Teufelhart
4,405,214. A 9, 1983 Bole DESCRIPTION
D300,226 S 3/1989 Ramp
D314,780 S 2, 1991 Ramp FIG. 1 is a front perspective view of an eyeglass of the present
BSS
D430.59 S
'78. Sh
9, 2000 an
invention;
FIG. 2 is a front elevational view of the eyeglass of FIG. 1;
D488.499 S 4/2004 Mage FIG. 3 is a rear elevational view of the eyeglass of FIG. 1;
D497,934 S 11/2004 Sheldon FIG. 4 is a left side elevational view of the eyeglass of FIG. 1,
BSS s 58. Mage the right side elevational view being a minor image thereof;
D539,833 S 4/2007 Chuang FIG. 5 is a top plan view of the eyeglass of FIG. 1; and,
D545,348 S 6, 2007 Chen FIG. 6 is a bottom plan view of the eyeglass of FIG. 1.
D545,868 S 7/2007 Chuang
D550,272 S 9, 2007 Markovitz 1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets

EXHIBIT 5
- 49 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-5 Filed 03/13/18 Page 3 of 7 Page ID #:56

US D653,699 S
Page 2

U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS OTHER PUBLICATIONS


D604,758 S 11/2009 Rohrbach
D604,759 S 11/2009 Rohrbach B.B. Sol. 1981 Catalog, Antilles, p. 4, Models 2805-01, 2806-04,
D606,578 S 12, 2009 Markovitz et al. 2813-01.
D607,040 S 12, 2009 Rohrbach
D610,603 S 2, 2010 Thixton B.B. So. 1975 Catalog, Chrome—Jeans—Cuivre (Copper), Model
D629,830 S 12, 2010 Markovitz et al. 805-04.

EXHIBIT 5
- 50 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-5 Filed 03/13/18 Page 4 of 7 Page ID #:57

U.S. Patent Feb. 7, 2012 Sheet 1 of 4 US D653,699 S

EXHIBIT 5
- 51 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-5 Filed 03/13/18 Page 5 of 7 Page ID #:58

U.S. Patent Feb. 7, 2012 Sheet 2 of 4 US D653,699 S

EXHIBIT 5
- 52 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-5 Filed 03/13/18 Page 6 of 7 Page ID #:59

U.S. Patent Feb. 7, 2012 Sheet 3 of 4 US D653,699 S

EXHIBIT 5
- 53 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-5 Filed 03/13/18 Page 7 of 7 Page ID #:60

U.S. Patent Feb. 7, 2012 Sheet 4 of 4 US D653,699 S

FIG. 6

EXHIBIT 5
- 54 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-6 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:61

EXHIBIT 6
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-6 Filed 03/13/18 Page 2 of 6 Page ID #:62

USOOD649579S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D649,579 S


Thixton (45) Date of Patent: . Nov. 29, 2011
(54) EYEGLASS D570,897 S 6/2008 Fuchs
D575,323 S 8/2008 Jannard et al.
D581444 S 11/2008 Jannard et al.
(75) Inventor: Lek Thixton, Eastsound, WA (US) D583,405 S * 12/2008 Chen ............................ D16/326
D585.475 S 1/2009 Yang
(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) D586,379 S * 2/2009 Thixton et al. ............... D16/325
D595,333 S * 6/2009 Markovitz et al. ........... D16/326
(**) Term: 14 Years D599,838 S 9, 2009 Rohrbach
D601,613 S 10, 2009 Yee
D604,756 S 11/2009 Shin et al.
(21) Appl. No. 29/391,383 D604,758 S 11/2009 Rohrbach et al.
D604,759 S 11/2009 Rohrbach et al.
(22) Filed: May 6, 2011 D606,578 S * 12/2009 Markovitz et al. ........... D16/320
D607,040 S 12/2009 Rohrbach
(51) LOC (9) Cl. .................................................. 16-06 D610,603 S 2/2010 Thixton
(52) U.S. Cl. ...................................... D16/321; D16/326 D610,604 S 2/2010 Thixton
(58) Field of Classification Search ................. D16/101, D616,013 S 5/2010 Reed
D16/300–342,900; D29/109-110; D24/110.2: E888 s 388 Eston XO
351/41, 44, 51-52, 62, 158, 92, 103-123, D622,304 S 8, 2010 Baden et al.
351/140, 153, 45–46; 2/426-432, 447. 449, D629,830 S * 12/2010 Markovitz et al. ........... D16/326
2/441, 434–437, 13, 15; D21/483, 659-661 D636,010 S 4/2011 Moritz
See application file for complete search history. * cited by examiner
(56) References Cited Primary Examiner — Raphael Barkai
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Knobbe Martens Olson &
Bear, LLP
D178,178 S 7/1956 Fleming
D192,885 S 5, 1962 Pettito (57) CLAM
D210,418 S 3, 1968 Bloch et al. The ornamental design for an eyeglass, as shown and
D218,569 S 9, 1970 McCracken
D244,281 S * 5, 1977 Teufelhart .................... D16/326 described.
D380,766 S 7, 1997 Simioni
D488.499 S * 4/2004 Mage ........................... D16/326 DESCRIPTION
D497,934 S 11/2004 Sheldon
D534,573 S * 1/2007 Mage ........................... D16/326 FIG. 1 is a front perspective view of an eyeglass of the present
D539,833 S 4/2007 Chuang invention;
D545,348 S * 6/2007 Chen ............................ D16/326
D545,868 S 7/2007 Chuang FIG. 2 is a front elevational view of the eyeglass of FIG. 1;
D550,272 S 9, 2007 Markovitz FIG. 3 is a rear elevational view of the eyeglass of FIG. 1;
D554,689 S 11/2007 Jannard et al. FIG. 4 is a left side elevational view of the eyeglass of FIG. 1,
D555,705 S 1 1/2007 Chuang the right side elevational view being a mirror image thereof.
D561,809 S 2, 2008 Yee
D561,811 S * 2/2008 Fox et al. ..................... D16/325 FIG. 5 is a top plan view of the eyeglass of FIG. 1; and,
D561,812 S * 2/2008 Fox et al. ..................... D16/325 FIG. 6 is a bottom plan view of the eyeglass of FIG. 1.
D561,813 S * 2/2008 Baden et al. ................. D16/325
D569,412 S 5/2008 Jannard et al. 1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets

EXHIBIT 6
- 55 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-6 Filed 03/13/18 Page 3 of 6 Page ID #:63

U.S. Patent Nov. 29, 2011 Sheet 1 of 4 US D649,579 S

EXHIBIT 6
- 56 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-6 Filed 03/13/18 Page 4 of 6 Page ID #:64

U.S. Patent Nov. 29, 2011 Sheet 2 of 4 US D649,579 S

EXHIBIT 6
- 57 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-6 Filed 03/13/18 Page 5 of 6 Page ID #:65

U.S. Patent Nov. 29, 2011 Sheet 3 of 4 US D649,579 S

EXHIBIT 6
- 58 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-6 Filed 03/13/18 Page 6 of 6 Page ID #:66

U.S. Patent Nov. 29, 2011 Sheet 4 of 4 US D649,579 S

EXHIBIT 6
- 59 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-7 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:67

EXHIBIT 7
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-7 Filed 03/13/18 Page 2 of 6 Page ID #:68

USOOD572745S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D572.745S


Moritz (45) Date of Patent: . Jul. 8, 2008
(54) EYEGLASS FRAME D547,794 S 7/2007 Jannard et al.
D548,269 S * 8/2007 Baden et al. ............... D16/326
(75) Inventor: Hans Karsten Moritz, Foothill Ranch, D561,809 S * 2/2008 Yee ........................... D16/313
CA (US) OTHER PUBLICATIONS
(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) Asia Pacific Trading Co., Inc. Fashion Plastic Collection II. Asia
Pacific Trading Co. Catalogue 1999-2000, p. 31.
(**) Term: 14 Years Asia Pacific Trading Co., Inc. Metal & Plastic Combination V, Asia
Pacific Trading Co. Catalogue 1999-2000, p. 2.
(21) Appl. No. 29/294,672
y x- - - 9
Berthet-Bondet. B.B. sol 1968, Sunglass Catalogue, p. 2, 10.
Optical Journal & Review of Optometry, Nov. 1, 1971, p. 12.
(22) Filed: Jan. 22, 2008 U.S. Appl. No. 29/255,601, filed Mar. 9, 2006.
U.S. Appl. No. 29/262,974, filed Jul. 14, 2006.
(51) LOC (8) Cl. .................................................. 16-06 * cited by examiner
(52) U.S. Cl. ..................................... D16/313; D16/326 Primary Examiner Raphael Barkai
(58) Field of Classification Search ................ D16/101,
74). Att
SCS"So" i.p.). (74) Attorney, Agent,
Agent, oror FiFirm Gregory K.K. Nelson
Nel
351/41, 44, 51-52, 62, 158, 92, 103-123, (57) CLAM
351/140, 153; 2/426-432,447. 449, 441,
2/434 437 The ornamental design for an eyeglass frame, as shown and
See application file for complete search history. described.
(56) References Cited DESCRIPTION
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS FIG. 1 is a front perspective view of the eyeglass and the
D184,274 S 1, 1959 Darr eyeglass frame of the present invention;
D190,884 S 7, 1961 Rose et al. FIG. 2 is a front elevational view thereof
BE s SE Ras FIG. 3 is a left-side elevational view thereof, the right-side
D2007,4 S 3, 1965 Zus elevational view being a mirror image thereof;
D200,735 S 3, 1965 Mitchell FIG. 4 is a rear elevational view thereof;
D202,658 S 10, 1965 Pettito
D372,726 S 8, 1996 Simioni FIG. 5 is a top plan view thereof; and,
6,233,342 B1 5, 2001 Fernandez FIG. 6 is a bottom plan view thereof.
E. s 12S. lard et al. Phantom lining, where utilized, is for illustrative purposes
D514,613 S
eng
2, 2006 Jannard et al.
only and his not inintended
f ph
to limit the claimed design to the
D523,461 S 6/2006 Jannard et al. eatures shown in phantom.
D537,861 S 3/2007 Teng ......................... D16/325
D546,867 S 7/2007 Teng ......................... D16/313 1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets

EXHIBIT 7
- 60 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-7 Filed 03/13/18 Page 3 of 6 Page ID #:69

U.S. Patent Jul. 8, 2008 Sheet 1 of 4 US D572.745S

FIG. I.

EXHIBIT 7
- 61 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-7 Filed 03/13/18 Page 4 of 6 Page ID #:70

U.S. Patent Jul. 8, 2008 Sheet 2 of 4 US D572.745S

EXHIBIT 7
- 62 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-7 Filed 03/13/18 Page 5 of 6 Page ID #:71

U.S. Patent Jul. 8, 2008 Sheet 3 of 4 US D572.745S

EXHIBIT 7
- 63 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-7 Filed 03/13/18 Page 6 of 6 Page ID #:72

U.S. Patent Jul. 8, 2008 Sheet 4 of 4 US D572.745S

EXHIBIT 7
- 64 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-8 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:73

EXHIBIT 8
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-8 Filed 03/13/18 Page 2 of 7 Page ID #:74

USOOD557326S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D557,326 S


Jannard et al. (45) Date of Patent: . Dec. 11, 2007
(54) EYEGLASS COMPONENTS 6,233,342 B1 5, 2001 Fernandez
D461,834 S * 8/2002 J det al. ............ D16/326
(75) Inventors: James H. Jannard, Spjeden Island, WA D462.375 S * 9/2002 E. - - - - - D16/326
(US); Hans Karsten Moritz, Foothill D464,669 S * 10/2002 Thixton et al. ............ D16/326
Ranch, CA (US); Colin Baden, Irvine, D470,166 S * 2/2003 Yee et al. .................. D16/326
CA (US) D473,892 S * 4/2003 Thixton et al. ............ D16,314
D484, 173 S 12/2003 Jannard et al.
(73) Assignee: Oakley, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA (US) D485,570 S * 1/2004 Teng ......................... D16,314
(**) Term: 14 Years D489,394 S 5/2004 Teng
D497,380 S * 10/2004 Thixton et al. ............ D16/326
(21) Appl. No.: 29/288,607 D505,151 S * 5/2005 Windham .................. D16/326
D514,613 S 2/2006 Jannard et al.
(22) Filed: Jun. 15, 2007 D523,461 S 6/2006 Jannard et al.
7,182,459 B1* 2/2007 Chen .......................... 351,158
Related U.S. Application Data D539,830 S * 4/2007 Saderholm et al. ........ D16/326
- - - D542,330 S * 5/2007 Elmore ...................... D16/326
(62) Division of application No. 29/262.974, filed on Jul.
14, 2006. OTHER PUBLICATIONS
(51) LOC (8) Cl. ................................................. 16-06 Pending U.S. Appl. No. 29/227,719, filed Apr. 13, 2005, Jannard et
(52) U.S. Cl. ..................................................... D16/326 al.
(58) Field of Classification Search ............... D16/101,
D16/300–334, 335, 336 330, 332–338,341, (Continued)
D16/342; D21/190; D24/110.2: 2/12, 13, Primary Examiner T. Chase Nelson
2/426, 432, 434–437, 441, 447–449, 453; Assistant Examiner Barbara B Lohr
351/41, 44, 47, 51, 61-63, 83, 89,90, 158: (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm—Gregory K. Nelson
D14/137, 156, 157, 168, 169, 188, 189-199,
D14/265,446; D27/148; 359/618; 381/327 (57) CLAM
See application file for complete search history.
The ornamental design for eyeglass components, as shown
(56) References Cited and described.
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
DESCRIPTION
D184,274 S 1, 1959 Darr
D190,884 S 7, 1961 Rose et al. FIG. 1 is a front perspective view of the eyeglass compo
D192,884 S s 1962 Pettito nents of the present invention;
D198.939 S 8, 1964 Huggi
D200,734 S 3, 1965 Yes FIG. 2 is a front elevational view thereof;
D200,735 S 3, 1965 Mitchell FIG. 3 is a rear elevational view thereof
D202,658 S 10, 1965 Pettito
D209,892 S * 1/1968 McCracken ................ D12/605 E. 4 is stilying view t he right-side
3,591.263 A * 7/1971 Esterson ...... 14 elevational view being a mirror image thereof;
4,703,522 A * 11/1987 Schurle et al. ................. 2.432 FIG. 5 is a top plan view thereof; and,
D372,726 S 8, 1996 Simioni
D399,866 S * 10/1998 Yee ........................... so FIG. 6 is a bottom plan view thereof.
D420,035 S * 2/2000 Hartman .................... D16/325
D425,103 S * 5/2000 Yee et al. .................. D16/326 1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets

EXHIBIT 8
- 65 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-8 Filed 03/13/18 Page 3 of 7 Page ID #:75

US D557,326 S
Page 2

OTHER PUBLICATIONS Asia Pacific Trading Co., Inc. Metal & Plastic Combination V, Asia
Pacific Trading Co. Catalogue 1999-2000, p. 2.
Pending U.S. Appl. No. 29/262.974. Jannard et al. Berthet-Bondet. B.B. sol 1968, Sunglass Catalogue, p. 2, 10.
Asia Pacific Trading Co., Inc. Fashion Plastic Collection II, Asia Optical Journal & Review of Optometry, Nov. 1, 1971, p. 12.
Pacific Trading Co. Catalogue 1999-2000, p. 31. * cited by examiner

EXHIBIT 8
- 66 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-8 Filed 03/13/18 Page 4 of 7 Page ID #:76

U.S. Patent Dec. 11, 2007 Sheet 1 of 4 US D557,326 S

FIG. I.

EXHIBIT 8
- 67 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-8 Filed 03/13/18 Page 5 of 7 Page ID #:77

U.S. Patent Dec. 11, 2007 Sheet 2 of 4 US D557,326 S

FIG. 2

FIG. 3

FIG. 4

EXHIBIT 8
- 68 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-8 Filed 03/13/18 Page 6 of 7 Page ID #:78

U.S. Patent Dec. 11, 2007 Sheet 3 of 4 US D557,326 S

FIG. 5

EXHIBIT 8
- 69 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-8 Filed 03/13/18 Page 7 of 7 Page ID #:79

U.S. Patent Dec. 11, 2007 Sheet 4 of 4 US D557,326 S

FIG. 6

EXHIBIT 8
- 70 -
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-9 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:80

EXHIBIT 9
Case 8:18-cv-00402 Document 1-9 Filed 03/13/18 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:81

EXHIBIT 9
- 71 -