DietGoal Innovations LLC v. ConAgra Foods, Inc.
Filing
1
COMPLAINT against ConAgra Foods, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 350 receipt number 0540-3632210.), filed by DietGoal Innovations LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Bukovcan, Niknaz)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
DIETGOAL INNOVATIONS LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
CONAGRA FOODS, INC.,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil Action No. ________________
Jury Trial Demanded
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Plaintiff DietGoal Innovations LLC files this Complaint against ConAgra Foods, Inc.
(the “Defendant”) and alleges as follows:
PARTIES
1.
Plaintiff DietGoal Innovations LLC (“DietGoal Innovations”) is a Texas Limited
Liability Company based in Austin, Texas.
2.
Upon information and belief, Defendant ConAgra Foods, Inc. (“ConAgra”) is a
corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal
place of business located at 1 Conagra Drive, Omaha, Nebraska 68102. ConAgra may be served
with process through its registered agent Prentice Hall Corp., 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin,
Texas 78701.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3.
This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the
United States of America, Title 35, United States Code.
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 1
4.
This Court has original jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
5.
Upon information and belief, ConAgra is subject to this Court’s general and/or
specific personal jurisdiction because it (a) is a resident of the State of Texas; and/or (b) has
designated an agent for service of process in the State of Texas; and/or (c) has committed acts of
infringement in the State of Texas as alleged below; and/or (d) is engaged in continuous and
systematic activities in the State of Texas. Therefore, this Court has personal jurisdiction over
ConAgra under the Texas long-arm statute, TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 17.042.
6.
Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(c) and 1400(b). On
information and belief, ConAgra has a regular and established place of business in this district,
and/or has transacted business in this district and has committed and/or induced acts of patent
infringement in this district.
THE PATENT-IN-SUIT
7.
On July 1, 2003, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued United
States Patent No. 6,585,516 (the “‘516 patent”) entitled “Method and System for Computerized
Visual Behavior Analysis, Training, and Planning,” a true copy of which is attached as
Exhibit A.
8.
DietGoal Innovations is the exclusive licensee of the ‘516 patent and possesses all
rights to sue for and recover all past, present and future damages for infringement of the ‘516
patent.
CLAIM 1 -- INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,585,516
9.
Defendant ConAgra has been and now is directly infringing one or more claims of
the ‘516 patent, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, by making and/or using in the United States the
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 2
computer implemented website www.conagrafoods.com, which has a computerized meal
planning interface at http://www.conagrafoods.com/consumer/brands/search/advanced.jsp.
10.
As a direct and proximate consequence of the acts and practices of ConAgra in
infringing, directly and/or indirectly, one or more claims of the ‘516 patent, DietGoal
Innovations has suffered, is suffering, and will continue to suffer injury and damages for which it
is entitled to relief under 35 U.S.C. § 284 in an amount to be determined at trial.
11.
The limitation of damages provision of 35 U.S.C. § 287(a) is not applicable to
DietGoal Innovations.
12.
This case presents exceptional circumstances within the meaning of 35 U.S.C.
§ 285 and DietGoal Innovations is thus entitled to an award of its reasonable attorneys’ fees.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
13.
DietGoal Innovations, under Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
requests a trial by jury of any issues so triable.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, DietGoal Innovations requests entry of judgment that:
1.
ConAgra has infringed the patent-in-suit;
2.
ConAgra account for and pay to Plaintiff all damages caused by its infringement
of the patent-in-suit; and
3.
Plaintiff be granted pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the damages
caused to it by reason of one or more of Defendants’ patent infringement;
4.
The Court declare this an exceptional case and that Plaintiff be granted reasonable
attorneys’ fees in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 285;
5.
Costs be awarded to Plaintiff; and
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 3
6.
Plaintiff be granted such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and
proper under the circumstances.
Dated: June 13, 2012
Respectfully submitted,
BUETHER JOE & CARPENTER, LLC
By: /s/ Niky Bukovcan
Christopher M. Joe (Lead Counsel)
State Bar No. 00787770
Chris.Joe@BJCIPLaw.com
Eric W. Buether
State Bar No. 03316880
Eric.Buether@BJCIPLaw.com
Brian A. Carpenter
State Bar No. 03840600
Brian.Carpenter@BJCIPLaw.com
Mark D. Perantie
State Bar No. 24053647
Mark.Perantie@BJCIPLaw.com
Niky Bukovcan
State Bar No. 24078287
Niky.Bukovcan@BJCIPLaw.com
Monica Tavakoli
State Bar No. 24065822
Monica.Tavakoli@BJCIPLaw.com
1700 Pacific Avenue
Suite 4750
Dallas, Texas 75201
Telephone:
(214) 466-1278
Facsimile:
(214) 635-1831
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
DIETGOAL INNOVATIONS LLC
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 4
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?