Download - Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
1/102
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
SHANE ROSADO,
Plaintiff,
-v-
NY2O, LLC, NEW DUTCH WATER CORP.,ELIAS SLUBSKI and ESTHER SLUBSKI,
Defendants.
Civil Action No.:
COMPLAINT
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF DEMANDEDDEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff, SHANE ROSADO, sues Defendants NY2O, LLC, NEW DUTCH WATER
CORP., ELIAS SLUBSKI and ESTHER SLUBSKI, and states the following in support thereof:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
This is an action for correction of inventorship of four design patents for a bottle1.
design issued to defendant Esther Slubski and assigned to defendant New Dutch Water Corp.
(New Dutch), US Patent Nos. D576,495, D596,037, D611,819 and D663623 (collectively the
Bottle Patents).
Shane Rosado brings this action because Rosado, not Esther Slubski, is the true2.
sole inventor of the Bottle Patents, the designs for which were misappropriated by Elias Slubski
and Esther Slubski for the benefit of New Dutch and NY2O, LLC without the permission or
authority of Shane Rosado.
Rosado seeks a determination from the Court that based upon the evidence of his3.
conception of the designs in the Bottle Patents Rosado is the inventor of the Bottle Patents.
Rosado also seeks restitution from defendants Elias Slubski, New Dutch and NY2O, LLC who
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 21 PageID #: 1
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
2/102
2
have been unjustly enriched by their use of and patenting of Rosados bottle design, an
accounting and the placement of a constructive trust on the Bottle Patents, and damages for loss
of income from royalties, loss of reputational interests, and other damages in an amount to be
proven at trial.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
This is an action arising under the Patent Act for Correction of Inventorship4.
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 256.
This Court has exclusive subject matter jurisdiction of plaintiffs patent claims5.
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a).
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the non-federal claims alleged in6.
this action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(a), because such claims are so related to the federal
claim alleged in this action that they form part of the same case or controversy.
In the alternative, this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the non-federal7.
claims alleged in this action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332(a), because complete diversity of
citizenship exists between the parties and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive
of interest and costs.
Defendants are citizens of New York and subject to personal jurisdiction in New8.
York.
Venue is proper in this district, pursuant 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2), because the9.
wrongful acts of Defendants, as discussed infra, occurred, in substantial part, in this judicial
district.
In the alternative, venue is proper in this district, pursuant 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(3),10.
because Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this judicial district.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 21 PageID #: 2
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
3/102
3
PARTIES
Shane Rosado is an individual who resides in the State of New Jersey.11.
NY2O, LLC is a New York limited liability company with its principal place of12.
business in Elmsford, New York.
New Dutch Water Corp. is a New York corporation with its principal place of13.
business in Old Bethpage, New York.
Elias Slubski is an individual who resides in Old Bethpage, New York.14.
Esther Slubski is an individual who resides in Old Bethpage, New York.15.
FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS
Shane Rosado is an accomplished industrial and product designer. Rosado studied16.
industrial and product design first at the Art Institute of Ft. Lauderdale, and thereafter at the Pratt
Institute School of Design. Rosados industrial and product design experience includes a myriad
of automotive accessories including wheel covers, floor mats, steering wheel covers, seat covers,
automotive LED lights, automotive speakers, amplifiers, mini-bikes, mini-choppers, and
packaging design for all these products and others.
Elias Slubski (Elias) is an entrepreneur.Elias incorporated New Dutch on April17.
21, 2005. Elias is the Chief Executive Officer of New Dutch and the Manager of NY2O, LLC.
Esther Slubski (Esther) is an architect and also is Eliass mother.18.
Rosado and Elias attended junior high school and high school together in Mill19.
Basin, Brooklyn. Rosado and Elias met in sixth grade, became friends, and continued their
friendship throughout junior high school and high school. After high school, the two kept in
touch and saw each other often. Elias was a groomsman in Rosados wedding in March of 2003.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 21 PageID #: 3
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
4/102
4
Elias was aware of Rosados skills and abilities in industrial and product design.20.
In the summer of 2006, Elias contacted Rosado and requested his assistance with a matter in
Rosados area of expertise. Elias explained to Rosado that he was preparing to launch a
company to sell bottled water and wanted a unique bottle design that would distinguish his
product from the other bottled waters in the marketplace. Elias told Rosado that he had hired
Pentgram Design, a well known and highly regarded design firm with offices in Manhattan, to
design a bottle. Elias had agreed to pay Pentagram just under $100,000 for their design work,
and had already paid $33,000 to prepare initial concepts.
Elias said he was disappointed in Pentagrams initial concept work on the bottle.21.
Elias asked Rosado to accompany him to a meeting with Petagram because he thought Rosado,
with his extensive design experience, could be of assistance. Rosado agreed and attended a
meeting with Elias at Petagrams offices. After the meeting, Elias told Rosado that he was still
unhappy with Pentagrams concepts.
Elias asked Rosado if Rosado would design a bottle for Elias instead of22.
Pentagram. Rosado agreed to help his friend. Thereafter, Elias fired Pentagram.
Rosado began work on his bottle design in September of 2006. Rosado worked23.
on a PC computer in SolidWorks, a three-dimensional computer aided design (CAD) software
program commonly used by industrial and product designers. SolidWorks is very technical
and requires extensive training and a high level of proficiency to use and produce designs that
can be employed in product manufacturing. Rosado is experienced in SolidWorks, having
used it to design many products.
Rosado worked on his bottle design throughout the fall of 2006. Elias visited24.
Rosados home in New Jersey on several occasions to view his progress. Elias told Rosado that
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 4 of 21 PageID #: 4
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
5/102
5
he planned to bottle water from the Catskill watershed where New York Citys water originates.
Elias told Rosado he planned to call his water NY2O. Elias asked Rosado if he could also
design a logo for Eliass NY2O product and Rosado again agreed to help his friend.
At a certain point in the design process, Rosado advised Elias that prototypes of25.
his bottle design could be made. Rosado contacted a prototyping company in New Jersey and
gave the prototyping company his SolidWorks file containing his bottle design for their use in
making the prototypes. When they were ready, Rosado picked up the sample bottles and showed
Elias. Elias was pleased with the samples and with Rosados design.
In or about February of 2007 Rosados bottle design was complete. Rosado is in26.
possession of his final SolidWorks file for his bottle design and it reflects that he made his last
modifications to the design on February 13, 2007. That same month, Rosado gave his bottle
design in SolidWorks format and a logo design he created to Elias. Elias paid Rosado by
check approximately $6,000 for his work as an independent contractor. Rosado has not heard
from Elias since.
At no time prior to, during or after Rosado created his bottle design did Elias ever27.
inform Rosado that Elias intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosados
bottle design.
Elias, acting on behalf of New Dutch, concealed from Rosado that Elias intended28.
to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosados bottle design.
Elias and New Dutch owed Rosado a duty to disclose to Rosado that they29.
intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs pursuant to the
Patent Act which requires the truthful disclosure of inventorship in connection with every
application for a patent.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 5 of 21 PageID #: 5
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
6/102
6
Elias owed Rosado a duty to disclose to Rosado that he intended to file patent30.
applications and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs pursuant to their close personal
relationship of over twenty years during which time the two friends frequently reposed trust and
confidence in each other.
At no time prior to, during or after Rosado created his bottle design did he ever31.
assign his rights in his bottle design to Elias or New Dutch.
THE BOTTLE PATENTS
On May 4, 2007, less than three months after Eliass receipt of Rosados bottle32.
design, Esther filed U.S. design patent application number 29/279,662 entitled Bottle (the
662 Application). The 662 Application claims the ornamental design for a bottle and
contains 6 drawings.
On September 9, 2008, U.S. Patent No. D576,495, which is based upon the 66233.
Application, was issued to Esther and assigned to New Dutch (the 495 Patent). A copy of the
495 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
On September 8, 2008, Esther filed U.S. design application number 29/324,24434.
entitled Bottle (the 244 Application). The 244 Application claims the ornamental design
for a bottle and contains 6 drawings. The 244 Application was filed as a continuation-in-part of
the 662 Application and claims priority based upon it.
On July 14, 2009, U.S. Patent No. D596,037, which is based upon the 24435.
Application, was issued to Esther and assigned to New Dutch (the 037 Patent). A copy of the
037 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.
On September 9, 2008, Esther filed U.S. design application number 29/324,22736.
entitled Removable Elastic Band on a Bottle (the 227 Application). The 227 Application
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 6 of 21 PageID #: 6
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
7/102
7
claims the ornamental design for a removable elastic band on a bottle and contains 6 drawings.
The 227 Application was filed as a continuation-in-part of the 662 Application and claims
priority based upon it.
On March 16, 2010, U.S. Patent No. D611,819, which is based upon the 22737.
Application, was issued to Esther and assigned to New Dutch (the 819 Patent). A copy of the
819 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 3.
On December 23, 2010, Esther filed U.S. design application number 29/381,81638.
entitled Bottle (the 816 Application). The 816 Application claims the ornamental design
for a bottle and contains 6 drawings.
On July 17, 2012, U.S. Patent No. D663,623, which is based upon the 81639.
Application, was issued to Esther and assigned to New Dutch (the 623 Patent). A copy of the
623 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 4.
ROSADOS INVENTORSHIP
Rosado did not discover the existence of the Bottle Patents until recently.40.
Rosado is the sole inventor of the Bottle Patents.41.
The 495 Patent, the 037 Patent, and the 623 Patent are directed to designs for a42.
bottle.
Rosado conceived of his bottle design prior to the filing of the 662 Application,43.
the 244 Application, and the 816 Application.
The 819 Patent is directed to the design of a removable elastic band on a bottle.44.
Rosado conceived of his design for a removable elastic band on a bottle prior to45.
the filing of the 227 Application.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 7 of 21 PageID #: 7
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
8/102
8
Rosado reduced his bottle design and his design for a removable elastic band on a46.
bottle to practice prior to the filing of the 662 Application, the 244 Application, the 227
Application, and the 816 Application, by creating his bottle design in SolidWorks and by
producing prototypes of his design.
Exhibits 5, 6, 7, and 8 attached hereto show side-by-side comparisons of Rosados47.
bottle design and each drawing sheet of the 495 Patent, the 037 Patent, the 819 Patent and the
623 Patent.
As demonstrated in Exhibits 5, 6, 7, and 8 attached hereto, Rosado is the true48.
inventor of the 495 Patent, the 037 Patent, the 819 Patent and the 623 Patent.
Esther is not an inventor of the Bottle Patents.49.
Esther was named as the inventor of the Bottle Patents through error without any50.
deceptive intent on the part of Rosado.
THE SUCCESS OF NY2O AT ROSADOS EXPENSE
In 2009, New Dutch launched the NY2O bottled water product using the Rosado51.
bottle design.
On July 6, 2012, Elias formed NY2O, LLC to market and sell NY2O bottled52.
water.
The NY2O bottled water product has enjoyed great success in the marketplace.53.
The success of NY2O has been due, in significant part, to Rosados innovative bottle design. On
its website atwww.ny2o.comand in press releases, the company has touted Rosados bottle
design as a key product attribute. The home page of the NY2O website devotes as much space to
laudatory statements praising Rosados bottle design as it does to descriptions of the water inside
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 8 of 21 PageID #: 8
http://www.ny2o.com/http://www.ny2o.com/http://www.ny2o.com/http://www.ny2o.com/ -
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
9/102
9
the bottle. Superimposed over images of Rosados bottle design, the NY2O website homepage
proclaims in all capitals and large type:
A VESSEL AS ICONIC AS THE CITY
FROM THE MOMENT YOU HOLD NY2O IN YOUR HAND,YOU CAN FEEL THE SPIRIT OF INNOVATION. THE SHAPECALLS TO MIND THE OUTLINE OF NEW YORKS FAMOUS
SKYLINE. THE CONTEMPORARY DESIGNCONSIDERATIONS REFLECT THE ARTISTRY AND VISION
OF ONE OF THE CITYS ORIGINAL ARCHITECTS, WHOALSO HAPPENS TO BE ONE OF OUR FOUNDERS.1
On the NY2O website, and on Facebook, Twitter and elsewhere, Elias and his54.
companies have repeatedly publicized the numerous international design awards that the Rosado
bottle design has received since the NY2O product was launched. To date, at least two
international awards for excellence in design have been bestowed upon the Rosado bottle design
for NY2O:
The 2013 Global Bottled Water Award for Best Package Design or Label
awarded by Zenith International, a leading international food and drinks
consultancy. According to NY2O, Zenith chose the Rosado bottle design because
NY2Os packaging achieves an effective stand-out through excellent and
original design.
The 2014 Silver Pentaward for Beverages, recognizing excellence in creative
packaging, a juried prize awarding creativity, innovation, impact, branding,
communication and quality of execution in packaging design. The Pentaward
jury is composed of thirteen personalities from the world of packaging design,
1This appears to be a reference to Esther Slubski claiming, falsely, that she conceived of the Rosado bottle design.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 9 of 21 PageID #: 9
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
10/102
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
11/102
11
Rosado is the sole inventor of the claims in the 495 Patent.60.
Through omission and error, Rosado was not listed on the 495 Patent as the61.
inventor.
The omission of Rosado as the inventor on the 495 Patent was without any62.
deceptive intent on the part of Rosado.
Rosado has an expectation of ownership of the 495 Patent based upon his sole63.
inventorship and because he retained ownership of, and did not assign away, his bottle design.
Rosado has a concrete financial interest in the 495 Patent based upon his rightful64.
ownership of the 495 Patent, his financial interest in royalties from the 495 Patent as well as
damages in the form of an infringers profits earned from use of the 495 Patent, and from his
reputational interests that accrue from being named the sole inventor of the 495 Patent.
Based on the foregoing, Rosado prays that this Court issue an Order to the65.
Director of the USPTO and Defendants requiring that Rosado be listed as the sole inventor of the
495 Patent.
COUNT IICORRECTION OF INVENTORSHIP OF THE 037 PATENT
Rosado repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through57 as66.
though fully set forth herein.
This is a count against Esther Slubski and New Dutch for correction of67.
inventorship pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 256.
Rosado is the sole inventor of the claims in the 037 Patent.68.
Through omission and error, Rosado was not listed on the 037 Patent as the69.
inventor.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 11 of 21 PageID #: 11
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
12/102
12
The omission of Rosado as the inventor on the 037 Patent was without any70.
deceptive intent on the part of Rosado.
Rosado has an expectation of ownership of the 037 Patent based upon his sole71.
inventorship and because he retained ownership of, and did not assign away, his bottle design.
Rosado has a concrete financial interest in the 037 Patent based upon his rightful72.
ownership of the 037 Patent, his financial interest in royalties from the 037 Patent as well as
damages in the form of an infringers profits earned from use of the 037 Patent, and from his
reputational interests that accrue from being named the sole inventor of the 037 Patent.
Based on the foregoing, Rosado prays that this Court issue an Order to the73.
Director of the USPTO and Defendants requiring that Rosado be listed as the sole inventor of the
037 Patent.
COUNT IIICORRECTION OF INVENTORSHIP OF THE 819 PATENT
Rosado repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through57 as74.
though fully set forth herein.
This is a count against Esther Slubski and New Dutch for correction of75.
inventorship pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 256.
Rosado is the sole inventor of the claims in the 819 Patent.76.
Through omission and error, Rosado was not listed on the 819 Patent as the77.
inventor.
The omission of Rosado as the inventor on the 819 Patent was without any78.
deceptive intent on the part of Rosado.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 12 of 21 PageID #: 12
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
13/102
13
Rosado has an expectation of ownership of the 819 Patent based upon his sole79.
inventorship and because he retained ownership of, and did not assign away, his design for a
removable elastic band on a bottle.
Rosado has a concrete financial interest in the 819 Patent based upon his rightful80.
ownership of the 819 Patent, his financial interest in royalties from the 819 Patent as well as
damages in the form of an infringers profits earned from use of the 819 Patent, and from his
reputational interests that accrue from being named the sole inventor of the 819 Patent.
Based on the foregoing, Rosado prays that this Court issue an Order to the81.
Director of the USPTO and Defendants requiring that Rosado be listed as the sole inventor of the
819 Patent.
COUNT IVCORRECTION OF INVENTORSHIP OF THE 623 PATENT
Rosado repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through57 as82.
though fully set forth herein.
This is a count against Esther Slubski and New Dutch for correction of83.
inventorship pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 256.
Rosado is the sole inventor of the claims in the 623 Patent.84.
Through omission and error, Rosado was not listed on the 623 Patent as the85.
inventor.
The omission of Rosado as the inventor on the 623 Patent was without any86.
deceptive intent on the part of Rosado.
Rosado has an expectation of ownership of the 623 Patent based upon his sole87.
inventorship and because he retained ownership of, and did not assign away, his bottle design.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 13 of 21 PageID #: 13
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
14/102
14
Rosado has a concrete financial interest in the 623 Patent based upon his rightful88.
ownership of the 623 Patent, his financial interest in royalties from the 623 Patent as well as
damages in the form of an infringers profits earned from use of the 623 Patent, and from his
reputational interests that accrue from being named the sole inventor of the 623 Patent.
Based on the foregoing, Rosado prays that this Court issue an Order to the89.
Director of the USPTO and Defendants requiring that Rosado be listed as the sole inventor of the
623 Patent.
COUNT VUNJUST ENRICHMENT
Rosado repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through57 as90.
though fully set forth herein.
This is a count for common law unjust enrichment against New Dutch, NY2O,91.
LLC and Elias Slubski.
Rosado expended substantial time, labor, and skill to develop his bottle design.92.
Elias never disclosed to Rosado his intention to apply for patents on Rosados93.
bottle design.
Elias paid Rosado a de minimussum of money for his bottle design.94.
Elias, New Dutch and NY2O, LLC were enriched by their use of and patenting of95.
Rosados bottle design.
Elias, New Dutch and NY2O, LLC obtained immediate, direct, and substantial96.
commercial advantages from Rosados bottle design and the patents on Rosados bottle design.
These advantages include, but are not limited to, (i) not having to invest extensive significant
money, time, labor, or skill to develop Rosados bottle design, and (ii) preventing New Dutchs
and NY2O, LLCs direct competitors from copying and exploiting Rosados bottle design.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 14 of 21 PageID #: 14
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
15/102
15
Defendantsaforementioned unjust enrichment was at the expense of Rosado.97.
Specifically, as result of Elias,New Dutchs and NY2O, LLCs use of and98.
patenting of Rosados bottle design, Rosado has been damaged, and continues to suffer damages
including, but not limited to, loss of income from royalties that he could have earned from the
licensing of his bottle design, as well as the reputational interests that would have accrued from
being named the sole inventor of the Bottle Patents.
Accordingly, by misappropriating Rosados bottle design, Defendants have been99.
unjustly enriched.
Based on the forgoing, equity and good conscience dictate that Defendants make100.
restitution to Rosado in an amount to be determined at trial.
COUNT VIFRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT
Rosado repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through57 as101.
though fully set forth herein.
This is a count for fraudulent concealment under New York common law against102.
New Dutch and Elias Slubski.
Elias and Rosado had a close personal relationship that lasted over twenty years103.
during which time the two friends frequently reposed trust and confidence in each other.
Elias asked Rosado to utilize his skills and experience to create a bottle design for104.
Elias.
Elias, acting on behalf of himself and New Dutch, concealed from Rosado that105.
Elias intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosado s bottle design.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 15 of 21 PageID #: 15
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
16/102
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
17/102
17
Dutch was filing these applications to Rosado, and without disclosing Rosados inventorship to
the USPTO.
The Bottle Patents were issued to Esther and assigned to New Dutch as a result of115.
the filing of the applications for Rosados bottle design with the USPTO.
Elias and New Dutch obtained immediate, direct, and substantial commercial116.
advantages from Rosados bottle design and the patents on Rosados bottle design, including, but
are not limited to, (i) not having to invest extensive significant money, time, labor, or skill to
develop Rosados bottle design, and (ii) preventing New Dutchs and NY2O, LLCs direct
competitors from copying and exploiting Rosados bottle design.
Rosado was damaged, and continues to suffer damages including, but not limited117.
to, loss of income from royalties that he could have earned from the licensing of his bottle
design, as well as the reputational interests that would have accrued from being named the sole
inventor of the Bottle Patents.
Rosado was also damaged to his property because patents are a property right, and118.
by and through the acts set forth herein, Rosado was denied his right to his patents.
COUNT VIINEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION OR OMISSION
Rosado repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through57 as119.
though fully set forth herein.
This is a count for negligent misrepresentation or omission under New York120.
common law against New Dutch and Elias Slubski.
Elias and Rosado had a close personal relationship that lasted over twenty years121.
during which time the two friends frequently reposed trust and confidence in each other.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 17 of 21 PageID #: 17
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
18/102
18
Elias asked Rosado to utilize his skills and experience to create a bottle design for122.
Elias.
Elias, acting on behalf of himself and New Dutch, negligently concealed from123.
Rosado that Elias intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosados bottle
design.
Elias, acting on behalf of himself and New Dutch, possessed superior knowledge,124.
not readily available to Rosado, that New Dutch intended to file patent applications and obtain
patents on Rosados bottle design.
Elias, acting on behalf of himself and New Dutch, knew or had reason to know125.
that Rosado had no knowledge that New Dutch intended to file patent applications and obtain
patents on Rosados bottle design, and knew or had reason to know that Rosado was acting
without such knowledge.
Elias had a duty to disclose to Rosado that he intended to file patent applications126.
and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs.
Elias had a duty to disclose to Rosado that he intended to file patent applications127.
and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs pursuant to the Patent Act which requires the
truthful disclosure of inventorship in connection with every application for a patent.
Elias had a duty to disclose to Rosado that he intended to file patent applications128.
and obtain patents on Rosados bottle designs pursuant to their close personal relationship.
The fact that Elias intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on129.
Rosados bottle designs was material to Rosado.
Rosado, in reliance upon Elias, created his bottle design, reduced it to practice,130.
and provided it to Elias for a de minimuspayment.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 18 of 21 PageID #: 18
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
19/102
19
At no time prior to, during or after Rosado created his bottle design did Elias ever131.
inform Rosado that Elias intended to file patent applications and obtain patents on Rosado s
bottle design.
Elias caused New Dutch to file the 662 Application, the 244 Application, the132.
227 Application and the 816 Application with the USPTO without disclosing the fact that New
Dutch was filing these applications to Rosado, and without disclosing Rosados inventorship to
the USPTO.
The Bottle Patents were issued to Esther and assigned to New Dutch as a result of133.
the filing of the applications for Rosados bottle design with the USPTO.
Elias and New Dutch obtained immediate, direct, and substantial commercial134.
advantages from Rosados bottle design and the patents on Rosados bottle design, including, but
are not limited to, (i) not having to invest extensive significant money, time, labor, or skill to
develop Rosados bottle design, and (ii) preventing New Dutchs and NY2O, LLCs direct
competitors from copying and exploiting Rosados bottle design.
Rosado was damaged, and continues to suffer damages including, but not limited135.
to, loss of income from royalties that he could have earned from the licensing of his bottle
design, as well as the reputational interests that would have accrued from being named the sole
inventor of the Bottle Patents.
Rosado was also damaged to his property because patents are a property right, and136.
by and through the acts set forth herein, Rosado was denied his right to his patents.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Rosado demands judgment and relief against NY2O, LLC, New Dutch
Water Corp., Elias Slubski and Esther Slubski as follows:
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 19 of 21 PageID #: 19
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
20/102
20
A. An Order to the Director of the USPTO and Defendants requiring that Rosado
be listed as the sole inventor of the Bottle Patents;
B. Constructive trusts placed upon the Bottle Patents awarding Rosado all of the
benefits realized by New Dutch Water Corp., NY2O, LLC and Elias Slubski
from the Bottle Patents, and requiring that any and all references to the creator
of the Bottle Design made by defendants be corrected to reflect that Rosado is
the creator of the bottle design.
C. An order requiring New Dutch Water Corp. to assign all right, title, and
interest in and to the Bottle Patents to Rosado.
D. An accounting of all benefits realized by New Dutch Water Corp., NY2O,
LLC and Elias Slubski from the Bottle Patents;
E. Restitution be made to Rosado by New Dutch Water Corp., NY2O, LLC and
Elias Slubski for all benefits received by them from the Rosado bottle design;
F. Damages be awarded to Rosado for, inter alia, loss of income from royalties,
loss of reputational interests, and other damages to be proven at trial, along
with pre and post-judgment interest; and
G. Such other and further relief as is just and proper.
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 20 of 21 PageID #: 20
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
21/102
21
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all claims so triable.
Dated: November 12, 2014
Respectfully submitted,
By:Joel B. Rothman (JR 0352)[email protected]
Schneider Rothman Intellectual Property LawGroup PLLC4651 North Federal HighwayBoca Raton, FL 33431
Tel: 561-404-4350Fax: 561-404-4353Attorneys for Plaintiff
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 21 of 21 PageID #: 21
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
22/102
JS44 (Rev. 1/2013)
CIVIL
C O V E R S H EE T
The JS44 civil coversheetand the information containedhereinneitherreplacenor supplementthefilingand serviceof pleadingsorotherpt^ere as requiredby law, exceptas
provided twlocal
rules
ofcourt. This
form, approved by the
Judicial Conference oflhe
United Slates
inSeptember 1974, is
required
for theuseofthe
(Jlerk
ofCourt forlhe
purpose ofinitiating thecivildocket sheet.
(SEE INSTRUCTIONS
ON
NliXT
PAGE OFTHIS
form.)
I. (a ) PLAINTIFFS
SHANE ROSADO
fb>
Countv ofResidence of First Listed
Plaintiff
Monmonth CountV. NJ
DEFENDANTS
NY20. LLC,
NEW DUTCH
WATER CORP., ELIAS
SLUBSKI an d
ESTHER SLUBSKI,
Countv ofResidence of First Lis ted Defendant Nassau
(EXCEPTIN
US PUINTIFF
CASES)
(c)
Attorneys
(Firm
Name,
Address,
and
TelephoneNumber)
Schneider Rothman Intellectual Property Law Group, 4651 North Federal
Highway,Boca Raton, FL33431; 561-404-4350
(INU.S. PLAINTIFFCASES ONLY)
NOTE:
IN
LAND
CONDEMNATION CASES. USE
THE
LOCATION
OF
TH E TR AC T O F LA N D I N VO LVED .
Attorneys (IfKnown)
Hoffman &Baron, LLP, 6900 Jericho Turnpike, Syosset, NY11791;
516 822 355
II .
BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X mOneBoxOnly)
0 I U.S. Goveramenl 3 Federal Question
Plaintiff
(U S
Covemmeni Not a Party)
2 U.S. Govermnent 4 Divcraity
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship
of
Parties inItemIII)
III.
CITIZENSHIP
OF
PRINCIPAL PARTIES
(P/o
aw
X
InOneBox
far
Plain
(For DiversityCases Only) and One Boxfor Defendant)
PTF DEF PTE DEF
CitizenofThis Slate O 1 O 1 Incotporaiedor PrincipalPlace O 4 O 4
o f
Business
In
Th i sS t a t e
Citizen
of
Another State O 2 0 2 Incorporated an'ment O t h e n
d 462 Naturalization Application
44 6
Amer.
w/Disabilitics -
O 540 Mandamus &
Odier
O 465 Other Immigration
Other O 550 Civil
Ri^its
Actions
44 8 Education 55 5 Prison Condition
0 56 0 Civil
Detainee-
Conditions o f
Confinement
V. ORIGIN
(Place
cm X inOne
Box
Only)
1 Original 2 Removed from
Proceeding State Court
3 Remanded from
Appellate Court
4
Reinstated or
O 5
Transferred from
6
Multidistrict
Reopened Another District Litigation
(specify)
VI. CAUSE
OF ACTION
Cite theU.S. Civil Statute underwhich you are filing (Donotcitejurisdiclionalsiatuies unlessdiversity):
35 u s e 256
Brief
description ofcause;
Claimof (nventorship
VII.
REQUESTED
IN
CHECK TF THIS
is ACLASS
ACTION
COMPLAINT:
UNDERRULE23. F.RCv.P.
VIII. RELATED
CASE(S)
IF ANY
(See inslruciion':):
JUDGE
DEM ANDS
DATE * \
SIGNATUR
ORNEY
OF RECORD
FO R OFFICE
USE
ONLY
RECEIPT#
AMOUNT
APPLMN
JUDGE
CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
JURY DEMAND: Yes No
DOCKET NUMBER
MAG. JUDGE
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-1 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 22
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
23/102
CERTIFICATION OF ARBITRATION
ELIGIBILITY
Local Arbitration Rule
83.10 provides
that
with
certain exceptions, actions seeking money damages only
inan
amount not
in
excess
of
150,000,
exclusive of
interest
and costs, areeligible forcompulsory arbitration. Tlie amount ofdamages ispresumed tobebelow thethreshold amount unless a
certification to the contrary is filed.
Joel
Rothman
,
counscl
for ,
do
hereby
certify
that the
above
captioned
civil
action is
ineligible for compulsory arbitration for the following reason(s):
monetary damages sought
are
in
excess of150,000,
exclusive
of
interest
and
costs,
[x] the complaint seeks injunctive relief,
the matter is otherwise ineligible for the following reason
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT - FEDERAL RULES CIVIL
PROCEDURE
7.1
Identify
anyparent corporation andany publicly held corporation thatowns10 ormoreor its stocks:
Not applicable.
RELATED
CASE STATEMENT (Section VIII on th e Front of this Forml
Please listallcases thatarearguably related pursuant toDivision of Business Rule 50.3.1 inSection VTIl onthe
front
of this
form.
Rule 50.3.1 (a)
provides that
A
civil case
is
telaied
to
another civil
case
for
purposes
of
tills guideline
when,
because
of
the similarity
of
facts and legal issues
or
because
the casesarisefrom the sametransactions or events,a substantial savingof judicial
resources
is likelyto result fromassigning bothcasesto the
same
judge and magistrate judge.
Rule 50.3.1 (b) provides
that A
civil
case
shall not be deemed related
to
another civil case merely
because
the civi
case:
0 ^
involves
identical
legal
issues,
or (B) involves the same parties. Rule 50.3.1 (c) ftuther provides tliat Presumptively, and subject tothepower
ofa judge to
determine
otherwise
pursuant
to
paragraph
(d),
civil
cases shall
not
be
deemed
tobe related
unless
both
cases
are still pending before the
court .
NY-E DIVISION
OF BUSINESS
RULE
50.Udlf2>
1.) Isthe civil
action
being filed intheEastern District removed from aNew
York
State Court
located in
Nassau
or
Suffolk
County: nq
2.)
If
you answered no above:
a)Didthe
events
or
omissions giving
risetotheclaim or
claims,
or a
substantial
part
thereof,
occur in
Nassau
or
Suffolk
County
b)Didtheeventsor omissions givingriseto theclaim or
claims,
or a
substantial
part thereof, occurin theEastern
Disu-ici? Yes
Ifyour answer to
question
2(b)is
No, docs
the
defendant
(ora
majority
ofthedefendants, if
there
ismore
than one) reside
in
Nassau
or
Suffolk County, or,inan
interpleader
action, does the
claimant
(oramajority oftheclaimants, if there is
more than
one) reside in
Nassau
or Suffolk County?
(Note:
A
corporation
shall be
considered
a
resident
of theCounty inwhich ithasthe
most significant
contacts).
B A R
ADMISS ION
I amcurrently admitted in the
Eastern
DistrictofNewYorkandcurrently a
member
ingood
standing
of the barof thiscourt.
g
Yes
No
Areyoucurrently thesubjectof anydisciplinary action (s) inthisor anyotherstateor federal court?
|~|
Yes (Ifyes,
please explain) ^
No
I
certify the ap
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
24/102
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTfor the
__________ District of __________
)
)))))))))))
Plaintiff(s)
v. Civil Action No.
Defendant(s)
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To: (Defendants name and address)
A lawsuit has been filed against you.
Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) or 60 days if you
are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiffs attorney,whose name and address are:
If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.You also must file your answer or motion with the court.
CLERK OF COURT
Date:Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk
DOUGLAS C. PALMER
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-2 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 24
Eastern District of New York
SHANE ROSADO,
NY20, LLC, NEW DUTCH WATER CORP., ELIAS
SLUBSKI and ESTHER SLUBSKI,
NY20 LLC
6 WESTCHESTER PLAZA
ELMSFORD, NEW YORK 10523
Joel B. RothmanSchneider Rothman Intellectual Property Law Group4651 North Federal HighwayBoca Raton, Florida 33431
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
25/102
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)
Civil Action No.
PROOF OF SERVICE
(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))
This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)
was received by me on(date) .
I personally served the summons on the individual at(place)
on (date) ; or
I left the summons at the individuals residence or usual place of abode with (name)
, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,
on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individuals last known address; or
I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is
designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)
on (date) ; or
I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or
Other (specify):
.
My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date:Servers signature
Printed name and title
Servers address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-2 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 25
0.00
Print Save As... Reset
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
26/102
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTfor the
__________ District of __________
)
)))))))))))
Plaintiff(s)
v. Civil Action No.
Defendant(s)
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To: (Defendants name and address)
A lawsuit has been filed against you.
Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) or 60 days if you
are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiffs attorney,whose name and address are:
If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.You also must file your answer or motion with the court.
CLERK OF COURT
Date:Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk
DOUGLAS C. PALMER
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-3 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 26
Eastern District of New York
SHANE ROSADO,
NY20, LLC, NEW DUTCH WATER CORP., ELIAS
SLUBSKI and ESTHER SLUBSKI,
NEW DUTCH WATER CORP.
14 MAHAN ROAD
OLD BETHPAGE, NEW YORK 11804
Joel B. RothmanSchneider Rothman Intellectual Property Law Group4651 North Federal HighwayBoca Raton, Florida 33431
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
27/102
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)
Civil Action No.
PROOF OF SERVICE
(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))
This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)
was received by me on(date) .
I personally served the summons on the individual at(place)
on (date) ; or
I left the summons at the individuals residence or usual place of abode with (name)
, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,
on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individuals last known address; or
I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is
designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)
on (date) ; or
I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or
Other (specify):
.
My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date:Servers signature
Printed name and title
Servers address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-3 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 27
0.00
Print Save As... Reset
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
28/102
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTfor the
__________ District of __________
)
)))))))))))
Plaintiff(s)
v. Civil Action No.
Defendant(s)
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To: (Defendants name and address)
A lawsuit has been filed against you.
Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) or 60 days if you
are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiffs attorney,whose name and address are:
If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.You also must file your answer or motion with the court.
CLERK OF COURT
Date:Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk
DOUGLAS C. PALMER
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-4 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 28
Eastern District of New York
SHANE ROSADO,
NY20, LLC, NEW DUTCH WATER CORP., ELIAS
SLUBSKI and ESTHER SLUBSKI,
ELIAS SLUBSKI
14 MANHAN ROAD
OLD BETHPAGE, NEW YORK 11804
Joel B. RothmanSchneider Rothman Intellectual Property Law Group4651 North Federal HighwayBoca Raton, Florida 33431
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
29/102
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)
Civil Action No.
PROOF OF SERVICE
(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))
This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)
was received by me on(date) .
I personally served the summons on the individual at(place)
on (date) ; or
I left the summons at the individuals residence or usual place of abode with (name)
, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,
on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individuals last known address; or
I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is
designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)
on (date) ; or
I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or
Other (specify):
.
My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date:Servers signature
Printed name and title
Servers address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-4 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 29
0.00
Print Save As... Reset
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
30/102
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTfor the
__________ District of __________
)
)))))))))))
Plaintiff(s)
v. Civil Action No.
Defendant(s)
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To: (Defendants name and address)
A lawsuit has been filed against you.
Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) or 60 days if you
are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiffs attorney,whose name and address are:
If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.You also must file your answer or motion with the court.
CLERK OF COURT
Date:Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk
DOUGLAS C. PALMER
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-5 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 30
Eastern District of New York
SHANE ROSADO,
NY20, LLC, NEW DUTCH WATER CORP., ELIAS
SLUBSKI and ESTHER SLUBSKI,
ESTHER SLUBSKI
14 MANHAN ROAD
OLD BETHPAGE, NEW YORK 11804
Joel B. RothmanSchneider Rothman Intellectual Property Law Group4651 North Federal HighwayBoca Raton, Florida 33431
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
31/102
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)
Civil Action No.
PROOF OF SERVICE
(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))
This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)
was received by me on(date) .
I personally served the summons on the individual at(place)
on (date) ; or
I left the summons at the individuals residence or usual place of abode with (name)
, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,
on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individuals last known address; or
I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is
designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)
on (date) ; or
I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or
Other (specify):
.
My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date:Servers signature
Printed name and title
Servers address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-5 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 31
0.00
Print Save As... Reset
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
32/102
F=====i
I I
{ ] T u
I I
i I
Claim,
6 Drawing
Sheets
FIG. 1 is a top, front, right side perspective view
of
a bottle
showing my new design;
FIG. 2 is a top plan view thereof;
FIG.
3
is a front elevation view thereof;
FIG. 4 is a left side elevation view thereof;
FIG. 5 is a rear elevation view thereof; and,
FIG. 6 is a bottom plan view thereof.
The dot-dash broken lines shown in the drawings represent
unclaimed environment and are for illustrative purposes only,
forming no part
of
the claimed design.
DESCRIPTION
The ornamental design for a bottle, as shown and described.
CLAIM
57)
* cited by examiner
Primary Examiner=Ynii Simmons
Assistant Examiner=Deiu: L Sipos
74)
Attorney Agent or Firm~Hoffmann&
Baron, LLP
5/1998 Monaghanet al. D9/520
12/1998 Bell et al. D9/686
12/1998 Bell et al. D9/693
12/2003 Irvine D7/300.l
412004 Hall et al. D9/550
412006 Corbett et al. D9/500
D394,607 s *
D402,192 S *
D402,193 S *
D483,982
S
*
D488,386 S *
D518,722 S
*
12/1929 Burvenick 220/568
8/1965 Hershberger t al D32/30
4/1976 Hunt D9/522
10/1981 Epperson D9/522
3/1987 Hartung D9/522
12/1991 Knudsenet al. D9/516
12/1994 Klitsner D9/500
1,740,223 A *
D201,791 S *
D239,697 S *
D261,361 S
*
D288,530 S
*
D322,027 s
*
D353,771 s *
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
56)
51)
LOC
8) Cl. 09-01
52) U.S. Cl. D9/537; D9/549
58)
Field of Classification Search
D9/500,
D9/516, 529, 549,557~558, 575, 682, 686~694,
D9/522, 545, 530, 537, 540, 767; 215/379,
215/381~384; 220/660, 662, 669~673, 675;
D7/608, 300.1
See application file for complete search history.
References Cited
May 4, 200722) Filed:
54) BOTTLE
75)
Inventor:
Esther
Slubskl, Old Bethpage, NY US)
73) Assignee:
New Dutch Water
Corp., Old Bethpage,
NY(US)
**) Term: 14 Years
21) Appl. No.: 29/279,662
US D576,495
S
Sep. 9, 2008
10) Patent No.:
45) Date of Patent:
c12) United States Design Patent
Slubski
I
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
USOOD576495S
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-6 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 32
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
33/102
US D576,495 S
~ - - - - - .. _
~ I I - - 0 f
I ' - - = - - -
~
. . . .
I
- - - -
- - - . . . _ _ _
- - - - -
1 I
I .
- - - - - - - -
~------~
..;::-------- I
- -
------
1 I
: I
~~-----~
~~~--=-. - : . : -
S h e e t 1o f 6
e p . 9 2 0 0 8
FIG. 1
U.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-6 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 33
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
34/102
. . . . . . . . . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ /
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . _ _
_
FIG. 2
US D576,495
S
h e e t
2
o f
6
ep . 9 2008.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-6 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 34
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
35/102
US D576,495
S
I
~-
, / __ ,
_ _ //
..----------------------
F--------~
- - - - - - - - - - 1
I
I
~--------)
L T _ _ : _ - - : - _ _ : _ - - : - _ _ : _ - - : - _ _ : _ _ : : : J
S h e e t
3
o f
6
ep . 9 2008
FIG. 3
U.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-6 Filed 11/12/14 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 35
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
36/102
&------ - ; : : )
- 1
j
i
-------------------
_ j
US D576,495
S
F
-------~
I - - - - - - - - - - 1
I I
I
:J
~-
= -
- = < = ; J
S h e e t 4 o f
6
ep . 9 2008
FIG.
4
U.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-6 Filed 11/12/14 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 36
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
37/102
US D576,495
S
I
I
~------~
----------------------
F
-------~
I - - - - - - - - - - 1
I I
~--------J
. . . . . : . . . . 7 . . . . . : . . . . 7 . . . . . : . . . . 7 . . . . . : . . . . _ : : . : . J
S h e e t
5
o f
6
ep . 9 2008
FIG.
5
U.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-6 Filed 11/12/14 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 37
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
38/102
US D576,495
S
h e e t
6
o f
6
ep . 9 2008
FIG. 6
U.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-6 Filed 11/12/14 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 38
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
39/102
Claim, 6
Drawing
Sheets
FIG. 1 is a top, front, right side perspective view
of
a bottle
showing my new design;
FIG. 2 is a top plan view thereof;
FIG.
3
is a front elevation view thereof;
FIG. 4 is a left side elevation view thereof;
FIG. 5 is a rear elevation view thereof; and,
FIG. 6 is a bottom plan view thereof.
The dot-dash broken lines shown in the drawings represent
unclaimed environment and are for illustrative purposes only,
forming no part
of
the claimed design.
DESCRIPTION
The ornamental design for a bottle, as shown and described.
CLAIM
57)
* cited by examiner
Primary Examiner=Ynii
Simmons
Assistant Examiner=Deiu:
L Sipos
74) Attorney Agent or Firm~Hoffmann& Baron, LLP
412004 Hall et al. D9/550
6/2004 Curtis et al. D9/556
412006 Corbett et al. D9/500
10/2006 Lalanne et
al
D9/544
3/2008 Reimann et al. . D9/516
9/2008 Slubski D9/537
1112008 Younget al. D9/516
D488,386 S *
D492,203 S *
D518,722 S *
D529,390
S
*
D563,788 S *
D576,495 S
*
D580,766 S
*
1,740,223 A
*
12/1929 Burvenick 220/568
D201,791
S
* 8/1965 Hershbergeret al D32/30
D483,982
S
* 12/2003 Irvine D7 300.
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
56)
( 51) LOC 9) Cl. 09-01
52)
U.S. Cl. D9/537;
D9/549
58) Field of Classification Search D9/500,
D9/516, 529, 549,557~558, 575, 682, 686~694,
D9/522, 545, 530, 537, 540, 767; 215/379,
215/381~384; 220/660, 662, 669~673, 675;
D7/608, 300.1
See application file for complete search history.
References
Cited
Related
U.S.
Application Data
63) Continuation-in-part
of
application No. 29/279,662,
filed on May 4, 2007, now Pat. No. Des. 576,495.
Sep.9 200822) Filed:
54) BOTTLE
75)
Inventor:
Esther
Slubskl, Old Bethpage, NY US)
73) Assignee:
New Dutch Water
Corp., Bethpage, NY
US)
**) Term: 14 Years
21) Appl. No.: 29/324,244
US D596,037
S
Jul.
14, 2009
10) Patent No.:
45) Date of Patent:
I
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
U S O O D 5 9 6 0 3 7 S
c12)
United States Design Patent
Slubski
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-7 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 39
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
40/102
~-- -- - - - - - - -
- -
-
- - --
-
1
~
\ _ _ , / A
. . . . . . . . . .
,, , /1
I ~-----, I
I I
US D596,037
S
Jul. 14, 2009 Sheet 1 of
6
FIG. I
U.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-7 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 40
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
41/102
FIG. 2
US D596,037
S
heet
2
of
6ul.
14, 2009
.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-7 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 41
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
42/102
1 1
l \
l
-----
\
\
US D596,037 S
heet
3of6
ul.
14, 2009
FIG.
3
U.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-7 Filed 11/12/14 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 42
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
43/102
-------
\'
\;:
\ \
\ ~
'
/
\
I
/I
I
I
1 1
I
I
I
\
~
'
\
J
F--------=
- - - - - - - - - - 1
I I
L _ _J
C
'------~
r
. L .
Sheet 4 of
6 US D596,037
S
ul.
14, 2009
FIG. 4
U.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-7 Filed 11/12/14 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 43
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
44/102
/
US D596,037
S
heet
5
of
6ul.
14, 2009
F = : : . .
- - - - - - - - - - 1
I
I
i_
_J
C
_ ,
.__,
r
.
.:
\'\
0
I
\
\
\ \
I \ \
(
1
1 1
FIG. 5
U.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-7 Filed 11/12/14 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 44
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
45/102
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
46/102
Claim,
6
Drawing
Sheets
DESCRIPTION
FIG.
1
is a top, front, right side perspective view
of
a remov
able elastic band on a bottle showing my new design;
FIG. 2 is a top plan view thereof;
FIG. 3 is a front elevation view thereof;
FIG. 4 is a left side elevation view thereof;
FIG. 5 is a rear elevation view thereof; and,
FIG.
6
is a bottom plan view thereof.
The dot-dash broken lines in the drawings showing the major
ity
of
a bottle illustrate the portions
of
he design that form no
part
of
the claim. The evenly dashed broken lines in the
drawings define the bounds
of
the claim and form no part
thereof.
The ornamental design for a removable elastic band on a
bottle, as shown and described.
CLAIM
57)
Primary Examiner=Ynii
Simmons
Assistant Examiner=Deiu:
L Sipos
74) Attorney Agent or Firm~Hoffmann& Baron, LLP
Irvine D7/300.l
Brown Dll/4
Brown Dll/4
Brown
Dll/4
Brown Dll/4
Brown
Dll/4
Slubski D9/537
12/1929 Burvenick 220/568
1/1951 Gushard et al. 215/382
611971 Gruber et al.
222192
9/1971 Donoghue D9/501
9/1971 Donoghue D9/501
3/2000 Herrmann D9/69
10/2003 Owens D9/455
1,740,223 A *
2,538,684 A
*
3,583,602 A *
D222,032
S
*
D222,033 S *
D421,384 S
*
D480,969
S
*
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
56)
(
51)
LOC
(9) Cl. 09-01
52) U.S. Cl. D9/516; D9/434
58) Field of Classification Search D9/500,
D9/516, 529, 549,557~558, 575, 682, 686~694,
D9/522, 545,530,537,540, 767, 501, 517,
D9/719; 215/379, 381~384; 220/660, 662,
220/669~673, 675; D7/608, 300.1; D20/22;
Dll/3,
4,
6
See application file for complete search history.
References
Cited
Related U.S. Application Data
63) Continuation
of
application No. 29/279,662, filed on
May 4, 2007, now Pat. No. Des. 576,495.
22) Filed: Sep. 9, 2008
54) REMOVABLE ELASTIC BAND ON A BOTTLE
D483,982 S
*
12/2003
D542,167 S
*
5/2007
76)
Inventor:
Esther
Slubskl,
14
Mahan Rd., Old
D542,687 S
*
5/2007
Bethpage, NY US) 11804
D546,225
S
*
7/2007
D546,226 S
*
7/2007
**)
D546,227 S
*
7/2007
Term:
14 Years
D576,495 S
*
9/2008
21) Appl. No.: 29/324,227
* cited by examiner
US D611,819
S
Mar.
16, 2010
10) Patent No.:
45) Date of Patent:
I
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
USOOD611819S
c12)
United States Design Patent
Slubski
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-8 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 46
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
47/102
VS
D611,819
S
>
4l~1lA
I .
j I
I
i i i
i i i
i
i
i
j I i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i i i
i i i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i i i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
I
i
i
i
i i
i \
j
i
(
\ i j
~--.l_ , , / /
, . , . . . . - - - .. - ..
- - - -
. . . . . . . . .
'
~
~-----::::4.
------ -
I
-- .. --.,_.
I .
.
J
~ . . . ..
~ ~
( . . . . . . . : - : : : : : : = = = =
rzzs:
~-
__ .
" '
/' /'
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
48/102
US D611,819 S
/ . . : . : : : : : : - - ~:
~'
/ - ~
// \
./ \
l i }
J
\\ , .
. .
//
''
. .
.
. . . . . _
.//
r=:
i
. ....
t>
'' \
/'
Mar. 16, 2010 Sheet 2 of 6
FIG. 2
U.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-8 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 48
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
49/102
US D611,819
S
i I
i
I
i I
i I
i
I
i i
i
I
I
i
I i
i I i
\
j
i
\
1
I i
\ \
i i
i \ i
i
\
i
j
i
i
\
i
i
\
i j i
\ i i
i \ I I
I I
I
I
I I I
' I I )
\
I
I
~ \
~
...._ ~ __ .....l....___._
F
-------~
----------
. I
I .
~
: . . . . : . . : . . . . : . . : . . . . : . . : ~
-r=r=>:
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
50/102
US D611,819
S
i j
i i
i i
\ i
i i
i
j
\
i
i i
i i
\
j
\ i
\
i
\ j
\
i
\
i
\ i
\ j
\
i
\ i
\ I
\ j
'
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
51/102
US D611,819
S
i
i
i i
\
i
\
i
\ i
i
\
i
i
\ i
i
i
\
i
\ i
\ i
\
i
\ i
\
i
\
i
\ i
\ i
j
'
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,
F
-------~
---------
. I
I .
~
.
...:....-:-...:....-:-...:....-:-)
J_=------::r
/'
-------
.,_
/'
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
52/102
US D611,819 S
heet
6
of
6a r . 16 2 0 10
FIG.
6
U.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-8 Filed 11/12/14 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 52
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
53/102
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
54/102
Sheet
1of6
US D663,623
S
ul.
17, 2012
.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-9 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 54
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
55/102
Sheet
2
of
6 US D663,623
S
ul.
17, 2012
.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-9 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 55
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
56/102
Sheet
3
of
6
US D663,623
S
ul.
17, 2012
.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-9 Filed 11/12/14 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 56
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
57/102
Sheet 4 of
6 US D663,623
S
ul.
17, 2012
.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-9 Filed 11/12/14 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 57
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
58/102
Sheet
5
of
6 US D663,623
S
ul.
17, 2012
.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-9 Filed 11/12/14 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 58
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
59/102
Sheet
6
of
6
US D663,623
S
ul.
17, 2012
.S. Patent
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-9 Filed 11/12/14 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 59
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
60/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D576,495
1
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 495 Drawings filed 5/7/07
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-10 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: 60
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
61/102
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
62/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D576,495
3
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 495 Drawings filed 5/7/07
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-10 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 4 PageID #: 62
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
63/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D576,495
4
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 495 Drawings filed 5/7/07
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-10 Filed 11/12/14 Page 4 of 4 PageID #: 63
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
64/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D596,037
1
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 037 Drawings filed 9/9/08
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-11 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 64
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
65/102
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
66/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D596,037
3
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 037 Drawings filed 9/9/08
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-11 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 5 PageID #: 66
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
67/102
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
68/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D596,037
5
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 037 Drawings filed 9/9/08
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-11 Filed 11/12/14 Page 5 of 5 PageID #: 68
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
69/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D611,819
1
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 819 Drawings filed 9/9/08
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-12 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 69
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
70/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D611,819
2
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 819 Drawings filed 9/9/08
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-12 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 70
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
71/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D611,819
3
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 819 Drawings filed 9/9/08
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-12 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 71
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
72/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D611,819
4
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 819 Drawings filed 9/9/08
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-12 Filed 11/12/14 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 72
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
73/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D611,819
5
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 819 Drawings filed 9/9/08
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-12 Filed 11/12/14 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 73
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
74/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D611,819
6
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 819 Drawings filed 9/9/08
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-12 Filed 11/12/14 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 74
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
75/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D663,623
1
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 623 Drawings filed 12/23/10
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-13 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 75
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
76/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D663,623
2
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 623 Drawings filed 12/23/10
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-13 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 76
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
77/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D663,623
3
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 623 Drawings filed 12/23/10
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-13 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 77
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
78/102
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
79/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D663,623
5
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 623 Drawings filed 12/23/10
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-13 Filed 11/12/14 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 79
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
80/102
Shane Rosado Inventorship Chart for Patent Number US D663,623
6
Rosado SolidWorks File 2/13/07 623 Drawings filed 12/23/10
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-13 Filed 11/12/14 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 80
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
81/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D576,495
1
495 Drawings filed 5/7/07 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-14 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 81
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
82/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D576,495
2
495 Drawings filed 5/7/07 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-14 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 5 PageID #: 82
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
83/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D576,495
3
495 Drawings filed 5/7/07 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-14 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 5 PageID #: 83
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
84/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D576,495
4
495 Drawings filed 5/7/07 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-14 Filed 11/12/14 Page 4 of 5 PageID #: 84
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
85/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D576,495
5
495 Drawings filed 5/7/07 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-14 Filed 11/12/14 Page 5 of 5 PageID #: 85
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
86/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D596,037
1
037 Drawings filed 9/9/08 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-15 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 86
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
87/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D596,037
2
037 Drawings filed 9/9/08 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-15 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 5 PageID #: 87
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
88/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D596,037
3
037 Drawings filed 9/9/08 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-15 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 5 PageID #: 88
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
89/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D596,037
4
037 Drawings filed 9/9/08 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-15 Filed 11/12/14 Page 4 of 5 PageID #: 89
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
90/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D596,037
5
037 Drawings filed 9/9/08 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-15 Filed 11/12/14 Page 5 of 5 PageID #: 90
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
91/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D611,819
1
819 Drawings filed 9/9/08 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-16 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 91
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
92/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D611,819
2
819 Drawings filed 9/9/08 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-16 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 92
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
93/102
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
94/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D611,819
4
819 Drawings filed 9/9/08 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-16 Filed 11/12/14 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 94
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
95/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D611,819
5
819 Drawings filed 9/9/08 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-16 Filed 11/12/14 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 95
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
96/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D611,819
6
819 Drawings filed 9/9/08 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-16 Filed 11/12/14 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 96
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
97/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D663,623
1
623 Drawings filed 12/23/10 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-17 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 97
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
98/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D663,623
2
623 Drawings filed 12/23/10 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-17 Filed 11/12/14 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 98
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
99/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D663,623
3
623 Drawings filed 12/23/10 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-17 Filed 11/12/14 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 99
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
100/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D663,623
4
623 Drawings filed 12/23/10 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-17 Filed 11/12/14 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 100
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
101/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D663,623
5
623 Drawings filed 12/23/10 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-17 Filed 11/12/14 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 101
-
8/10/2019 Rosado v. NY20 - Complaint
102/102
Shane Rosado Litigation Chart for Patent Number US D663,623
623 Drawings filed 12/23/10 NY20 Bottle Photo 10/12/14
Case 9:14-cv-06636 Document 1-17 Filed 11/12/14 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 102