Cree v. Milwaukee Wholesale - Complaint

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
CREE, INC.
Plaintiff,
v. Case No. 17- cv - 1804
MILWAUKEE WHOLESALE LLC d/b/a

LED King and/or LEDKING.US and
SMART TECHNOLOGY LLC d/b/a LED
King and/or LEDKING.US,
Defendants.
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Cree, Inc. (“Cree”), for its Complaint against Defendants Milwaukee Wholesale
LLC and Smart Technology LLC (referred collectively herein as “Defendants”), states and
alleges as follows:
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Cree is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of
North Carolina with a principal place of business at 4600 Silicon Drive, Durham, North Carolina,
27703. Cree also has facilities located in Wisconsin at 9201 Washington Avenue, Racine,
Wisconsin 53406 (formerly the headquarters of Ruud Lighting, Inc. (“Ruud Lighting”), which
was acquired by Cree in 2011 and subsequently merged with Cree).
2. On information and belief, Defendant Milwaukee Wholesale LLC, doing business
as LED King and/or LEDKING.US, is a privately held company organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Wisconsin with a principal place of business at 400 W. Marquette Ave., Oak
136401053.7
Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 1 of 13 Document 1
Creek, WI 53154. Milwaukee Wholesale LLC’s registered agent for service of process in the
state of Wisconsin is Naseer A. Nasir, 400 W. Marquette Ave., Oak Creek, WI 53154.
3. On information and belief, Defendant Smart Technology LLC, doing business as
LED King and/or LEDKING.US, is a privately held company organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Wisconsin. Smart Technology LLC’s registered agent for service of process
in the state of Wisconsin is Bashir Ahmad, 9770 S. 54th Street, Franklin, WI 53132.
4. Defendants make, use, sell, offer to sell in, and/or import into the United States
lighting products including LED products and apparatuses utilizing LEDs.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5. Cree incorporates the foregoing paragraphs of the Complaint by reference as
though fully set forth herein.
6. This is a civil action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the
United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq, including without limitation 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 and 281. This
Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
7. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants under Wis. Stat. §
801.05(1)(d), among other provisions. Defendants regularly and deliberately engage in and
continue to engage in activities that result in using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing
infringing products in and/or into the State of Wisconsin and this judicial district. This Court has
personal jurisdiction over the Defendants because, among other things, Defendants conduct
business in the State of Wisconsin and in this judicial district and thus enjoy the privileges and
protections of Wisconsin law.
8. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b) because each
of the Defendants is subject to personal jurisdiction in this district, resides in this district, has
-2-
136401053.7
committed acts of infringement in this district, and has a regular and established place of business
in this district.
BACKGROUND
9. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation of the foregoing
paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.
10. Cree is a market-leading innovator engaged in the design, manufacture, and sale of
lighting products including light emitting diode (“LED”) products as well as devices and
apparatuses utilizing LEDs.
11. One of Cree’s products is the industry-leading CPY250® Canopy/Soffit luminaire,
an outdoor LED light that helps increase location visibility and incoming traffic at service
stations, convenience stores, drive-thru restaurants, parking garages or banking locations. Two
models of Cree’s CPY250® product are shown below:
12. Cree devoted substantial time, effort, and resources to the development and
promotion of the CPY250® luminaire. As a result, the public has come to recognize and rely
upon the CPY250® luminaire as an indication of the high quality associated with Cree.
-3-
136401053.7
13. The distinctive design of the CPY250® LED luminaire has become well known in
the industry. The CPY250® LED luminaire designs have a thin profile constructed of rugged cast
aluminum with a distinctive capital “I” shaped design through the center. The luminaires also
contain unique ribbing down the length of the fixtures. Cree has two design patents claiming
ornamental designs for light fixtures, as described below, relating to its CPY250® luminaire.
14. After the introduction of Cree’s CPY250® luminaire, Defendants Milwaukee
Wholesale LLC and Smart Technology LLC, began selling a knock-off “Canopy Light Modern
Design” product, the LED Canopy 130W 5700K, through a website called LED King
(ledking.us). The depiction below is from the LEDKING.US website, as compared to the
patented design in U.S. Patent No. D743,084:
http://www.ledking.us/hikashop-menu-for-categories-listing/product/69-canopylight130w5700k,
accessed on December 20, 2017. The depiction below is from the LEDKING.US website, as
compared to the patented design in U.S. Patent No. D721,844:
-4-
136401053.7
http://www.ledking.us/hikashop-menu-for-categories-listing/product/69-canopylight130w5700k,
accessed on December 20, 2017.
15. Defendants’ LED Canopy 100W and 130W 5700K luminaire products, and
substantially similar luminaires sold through LED King, ledking.us, Amazon, eBay or otherwise
are hereinafter referred to as the “LED King knock-off canopy luminaires.”
16. Upon information and belief, Defendants Smart Technology LLC and/or
Milwaukee Wholesale LLC are selling LED King knock-off canopy luminaires on eBay under the
username “ledking*us.” LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are being offered on eBay using
the same picture as in paragraph 14 above, for example as the “130Watt LED Gas Station Canopy
LED Light” at http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canopy-130W-LED-Light-Drop-Lens-Gas-Station-
Warehouse-Highbay-5700K-UL-DLC-130-W-
/121974668198?epid=1562731115&hash=item1c6641bba6:g:S2UAAOSwoydWlo8W, accessed
on December 20, 2017.
-5-
136401053.7
Milwaukee Wholesale LLC are selling LED King knock-off canopy luminaires on eBay under the
username “ourledhouse.” The LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are being offered for sale
through the “ourledhouse” username using the same pictures as described in paragraph 14 above,
for example as the “130Watt LED Gas Station Canopy LED light” at
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Canopy-130W-LED-Light-Drop-Lens-Gas-Station-Warehouse-
Highbay-5700K-UL-DLC-10yr/162072931194?hash=item25bc4cab7a:g:ZJcAAOSwZetXOdiH,
Milwaukee Wholesale LLC are also selling LED King knock-off canopy luminaires in 100 watts
on eBay under the username “ledking*us.” LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are being
offered on eBay using a near-identical picture as in paragraph 14 above, for example as the
“100Watt LED Gas Station Canopy LED Light” at https://www.ebay.com/itm/Canopy-100W-
LED-Light-Drop-Lens-Gas-Station-Warehouse-Highbay-5700K-UL-DLC-
10yrs/121991001150?epid=1562731115&hash=item1c673af43e:g:LtwAAOSwiYFXJ3OG,
Milwaukee Wholesale LLC are also selling LED King knock-off canopy luminaires on Amazon.
LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are being offered on Amazon using the same picture as in
paragraph 14 above, for example as the “130Watt LED Gas Station Canopy LED Light” at
https://www.amazon.com/LED-Station-Warehouse-130W-
5700K/dp/B01FL6AV8I/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1513806176&sr=8-
8&keywords=LED+king+canopy.
-6-
136401053.7
Milwaukee Wholesale LLC have knowledge of the ’844 and ’084 patents and/or have willfully
blinded themselves as to the infringing nature of their activities.
21. Defendants’ LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are copies of Cree’s
CPY250® luminaire design. Defendants’ sales of LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are
damaging to the goodwill associated with Cree’s product and Cree’s reputation.
COUNT I – INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. DESIGN PATENT NO. D721,844
22. Cree repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation of the foregoing paragraphs
as though fully set forth herein.
23. Cree is the owner of United States Design Patent No. 721,844 (“the ’844 Patent”)
titled “Light Fixture.” The ’844 Patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent
and Trademark Office on January 27, 2015. A true and correct copy of the ’844 Patent is attached
as Exhibit A.
24. Cree has practiced the ’844 patent in connection with the commercialization of its
CPY250® product. Cree marks its CPY250® products with the ’844 patent.
25. As the owner of the ’844 Patent, Cree is authorized and has standing to bring legal
action to enforce all rights arising under the ’844 Patent.
26. Defendants have infringed, and will continue to infringe, in violation of 35 U.S.C.
§ 271, by making, using, selling, offering, to sell in, and/or importing into the United States LED
King knock-off canopy luminaires. Milwaukee Wholesale LLC and Smart Technology LLC offer
the LED King knock-off canopy luminaires for sale through a website called LED King, which
can be found at the following hyperlink: http://www.ledking.us/hikashop-menu-for-categories-
listing/product/69-canopylight130w5700k, on Amazon, and on eBay.
-7-
136401053.7
27. Defendants infringe the ’844 Patent because, inter alia, in the eye of an ordinary
observer, giving such attention as a purchaser usually gives, the design of the ’844 Patent and the
designs of Defendants’ LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are substantially the same, the
resemblance being such as to deceive such an ordinary observer, inducing them to purchase one
supposing it to be the other.
28. Upon information and belief, Defendants have actual knowledge of the ’844 Patent
and actual knowledge that its activities constitute direct infringement of the ’844 Patent, or has
willfully blinded itself to the infringing nature of its activities, and yet continues its infringing
activities.
29. Defendants’ infringement of the ’844 Patent has been and will continue to be
willful, deliberate and intentional.
30. As a result of Defendants’ infringement of the ’844 Patent, Cree has suffered and
will continue to suffer irreparable and monetary damages in an amount to be determined at trial,
but in no event less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by the
Court.
COUNT II – INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. DESIGN PATENT NO. D743,084
32. Cree is the owner of United States Design Patent No. 743,084 (“the ’084 Patent”)
titled “Light Fixture.” The ’084 Patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent
and Trademark Office on November 10, 2015. A true and correct copy of the ’084 Patent is
attached as Exhibit B.
-8-
136401053.7
33. Cree has practiced the ’084 patent in connection with the commercialization of its
CPY250® product. Cree marks its CPY250® products with the ’084 patent.
34. As the owner of the ’084 Patent, Cree is authorized and has standing to bring legal
action to enforce all rights arising under the ’084 Patent.
35. Defendants have infringed, and will continue to infringe, in violation of 35 U.S.C.
§ 271, by making, using, selling, offering, to sell in, and/or importing into the United States LED
King knock-off canopy luminaires. Milwaukee Wholesale LLC and Smart Technology LLC offer
the LED King knock-off canopy luminaires for sale through a website called LED King, which
can be found at the following hyperlink: http://www.ledking.us/hikashop-menu-for-categories-
listing/product/69-canopylight130w5700k, on Amazon, and on eBay.
36. Defendants infringe the ’084 Patent because, inter alia, in the eye of an ordinary
observer, giving such attention as a purchaser usually gives, the design of the ’084 Patent and the
design of Defendants’ LED King knock-off canopy luminaires are substantially the same, the
resemblance being such as to deceive such an ordinary observer, inducing them to purchase one
supposing it to be the other.
37. Upon information and belief, Defendants have actual knowledge of the ’084 Patent
and actual knowledge that its activities constitute direct infringement of the ’084 Patent, or has
willfully blinded itself to the infringing nature of its activities, and yet continues its infringing
activities.
38. Defendants’ infringement of the ’084 Patent has been and will continue to be
willful, deliberate and intentional.
39. As a result of Defendants’ infringement of the ’084 Patent, Cree has suffered and
will continue to suffer irreparable and monetary damages in an amount to be determined at trial,
-9-
136401053.7
but in no event less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by the
Court.
COUNT III – TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT UNDER THE LANHAM

ACT, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(A)
41. Cree’s CPY250® luminaires constitute protectable trade dress pursuant to 15
U.S.C. § 1125. The protectable trade dress of Cree’s CPY250® luminaire are nonfunctional
features that identify the product and its source to customers.
42. Defendants unauthorized distribution and sale of the LED King knock-off canopy
luminaires is likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception of purchasers and potential
purchasers as to the origin, sponsorship, approval, or association of Defendants’ products.
43. On information and belief, Defendants have used in connection with sales of LED
King knock-off canopy luminaires, false designations of origin and false and misleading
descriptions and representations, which misrepresent the nature, characteristics and qualities of
those goods and falsely describe the origin, sponsorship, approval, or association of Defendants’
products.
44. Defendants’ sales of LED King knock-off canopy luminaires, which make use of
Cree’s CPY250® luminaire’s trade dress, falsely and misleadingly describe and suggest that the
product they are selling and offering for sale emanates from Cree, cause confusion and mistake,
deceive and mislead the purchasing public, trade upon Cree’s high quality reputation, and
improperly appropriate to Defendants the valuable rights of Cree.
45. Defendants’ wrongful acts constitute trade dress infringement in violation of
Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).

- 10 -
136401053.7
46. Upon information and belief, Defendants have actual knowledge that the sales of
LED King knock-off canopy luminaires, which make use of Cree’s CPY250® luminaire’s trade
dress, willfully, falsely, and misleadingly describe and suggest that the products they are selling
and offering for sale emanates from Cree; willfully causes confusion and mistake; willfully
deceive and mislead the purchasing public; willfully trade upon Cree’s high quality reputation,
and willfully and improperly appropriate to Defendants the valuable rights of Cree.
47. Defendants’ wrongful acts have and will continue to cause irreparable injury to
Cree and infringe upon Cree’s trade dress in the future unless and until they are enjoined by this
Court. Cree has no adequate remedy at law and is thus damaged in an amount that is yet to be
determined.
COUNT V – FRAUDULENT REPRESENTATIONS UNDER THE

WISCONSIN DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACT, WIS. STAT. § 100.18
49. Wis. Stat. § 100.18 provides that no “firm, corporation or association … with
intent to sell, distribute, increase the consumption of … any … merchandise … directly or
indirectly, to the public for sale … shall make, publish, disseminate, circulate, or place before the
public … in this state, in a … label … or in any other way similar or dissimilar to the foregoing,
an advertisement, announcement, statement or representation of any kind to the public … which
… contains any assertion, representation or statement of fact which is untrue, deceptive or
misleading.”
50. As alleged throughout this Complaint, Defendants deliberately engaged in
deceptive and unlawful marketing in violation of Wisconsin law, by misrepresenting to the public,
- 11 -
136401053.7
such as potential customers viewing the products on LEDKing.us, that they are selling Cree
products, when they do not have such authorization or consent from Cree.
51. Cree has suffered damages as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’
misrepresentations to the public and to the Plaintiff.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Cree prays for entry of judgment against each Defendant (and its
subsidiaries, successors, parents, affiliates, officers, directors, agents, servants, and employees)
as follows:
A. An entry of judgment in favor of Cree and against Defendants of all claims alleged
herein;
B. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283, 17 U.S.C. § 1116, 17 U.S.C. § 502, 15 U.S.C. §
1125(c)(1), and Defendants’ engaging in unfair competition, a preliminary and
permanent injunction from directly or indirectly making, having made, using, selling
or importing LED King knock-off canopy luminaires;
C. An award of all profits incurred by Defendants due to the unfair competition and
unauthorized sale or use of the products infringing the ’844 and the ’084 Patents, or in
the alternative, at least a reasonable royalty;
D. An award for all damages suffered by Cree and profits earned by Defendants from
Defendants’ acts of trade dress infringement;
E. An award for all damages, including costs and reasonable attorney fees, suffered by
Cree from Defendants’ fraudulent representations and deceptive trade practices;
F. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), 35 U.S.C. § 285, 17 U.S.C. § 505, and Defendant’s
fraudulent representations, a declaration finding this case to be exceptional, and
- 12 -
136401053.7
providing reasonable attorney's fees and costs, and interests on those fees and costs in
favor of Cree;
G. Punitive and exemplary damages against Defendants and in favor of Cree in an
amount sufficient to deter and punish Defendants for their willful and wrongful acts;
H. Cree be awarded all actual and compensatory damages; and
I. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
JURY DEMAND
Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Cree demands a trial by jury
on all issues triable by jury.
Dated: December 28, 2017 PERKINS COIE LLP
By s/ Christopher G. Hanewicz
Christopher G. Hanewicz
[email protected]
Michelle M. Umberger
[email protected]
Autumn N. Nero
[email protected]
1 East Main Street, Suite 201
Madison, WI 53703
(608) 663-7460 (Phone)
(608) 663-7499 (Facsimile)
Attorneys for Plaintiff,
Cree, Inc.
- 13 -
136401053.7
JS 44 (Rev. 06/17) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
Place an “X” in the appropriate box (required): Green Bay Division Milwaukee Division
I. (a) PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS

CREE, INC. 0,/:$8.((:+2/(6$/(//&GED/('.,1*DQGRU
/('.,1*86DQG60$577(&+12/2*<//&GED/('
Milwaukee County
.LQJDQGRU/('.,1*86 Milwaukee County
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
Christopher G. Hanewicz, Michelle M. Umberger, Autumn N. Nero
Perkins Coie LLP, 1 E. Main St., Ste. 201, Madison WI 53703

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
1 U.S. Government 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State 1 1 Incorporated or Principal Place 4 4
of Business In This State
2 U.S. Government 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State 2 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 5 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a 3 3 Foreign Nation 6 6

Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Related Seizure 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 375 False Claims Act
120 Marine 310 Airplane 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 423 Withdrawal 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
130 Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Product Liability 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 367 Health Care/ 400 State Reapportionment
150 Recovery of Overpayment 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury 820 Copyrights 430 Banks and Banking
151 Medicare Act 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability 830 Patent 450 Commerce
152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability 368 Asbestos Personal 835 Patent - Abbreviated 460 Deportation
Student Loans 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) 345 Marine Product Liability 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY 480 Consumer Credit
of Veteran’s Benefits 350 Motor Vehicle 370 Other Fraud 710 Fair Labor Standards 861 HIA (1395ff) 490 Cable/Sat TV
160 Stockholders’ Suits 355 Motor Vehicle 371 Truth in Lending Act 862 Black Lung (923) 850 Securities/Commodities/
190 Other Contract Product Liability 380 Other Personal 720 Labor/Management 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange
195 Contract Product Liability 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations 864 SSID Title XVI 890 Other Statutory Actions
196 Franchise Injury 385 Property Damage 740 Railway Labor Act 865 RSI (405(g)) 891 Agricultural Acts
362 Personal Injury - Product Liability 751 Family and Medical 893 Environmental Matters
Medical Malpractice Leave Act 895 Freedom of Information
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 790 Other Labor Litigation FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act
210 Land Condemnation 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: 791 Employee Retirement 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff 896 Arbitration
220 Foreclosure 441 Voting 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act or Defendant) 899 Administrative Procedure
230 Rent Lease & Ejectment 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate 871 IRS—Third Party Act/Review or Appeal of
240 Torts to Land 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision
245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations 530 General 950 Constitutionality of
290 All Other Real Property 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION State Statutes
Employment Other: 462 Naturalization Application
446 Amer. w/Disabilities - 540 Mandamus & Other 465 Other Immigration
Other 550 Civil Rights Actions
448 Education 555 Prison Condition
560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
1 Original 2 Removed from 3 Remanded from 4 Reinstated or 5 Transferred from 6 Multidistrict 8 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
35 U.S.C. 1 et seq. incl. 35 U.S.C. sections 271 and 281
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Plaintiff alleges Defendants have infringed Plaintiff's U.S. Patent Nos. D721,844 and D743,084
VII. REQUESTED IN CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: Yes No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
12/28/2017 s/ Christopher G. Hanewicz
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP

AMOUNT Filed
APPLYING IFP 12/28/17 Page 1 of 2 Document
JUDGE 1-1
MAG. JUDGE
JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 06/17)
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:
I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section "(see attachment)".
II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
cases.)
III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
section for each principal party.
IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code
that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.
Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing
Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or
multidistrict litigation transfers.
Multidistrict Litigation – Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C.
Multidistrict Litigation – Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to
changes in statue.
VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service
VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.
VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket
numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.
Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.
Case 2:17-cv-01804-PP Filed 12/28/17 Page 2 of 2 Document 1-1

Exhibit A

USOOD721844S
(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: USD721,844 S

Lay et al. (45) Date of Patent: Jan. 27, 2015
(54) LIGHT FIXTURE RES : 139 yet al. r E.

Oyer et al. .......
D668,370 S * 10/2012 Guercio et al. ... D26,71
(71) Applicant: Cree, Inc., Durham, NC (US) D673,720 S * 1/2013 Bailey et al. ... ... D26, 138
8.430,532 B2 * 4/2013 Lee et al. ........... ... 362,294
(72) Inventors: James Michael Lay, Apex, NC (US); 8,529,085 B2 * 9/2013 Josefowicz et al. ........... 362/158
Don Miletich, Franklin, WI (US) 8,651,693 B2 * 2/2014 Josefowicz et al. ........... 362,235
2009/0296403 Al 12/2009 Zhang et al.
(73) Assignee: Cree, Inc., Durham, NC (US) 2012, 0087118 A1 4/2012 Bailey et al.
(**) Term: 14 Years FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
WO O216826 A1 2, 2002
(21) Appl. No. 29/447,793
OTHER PUBLICATIONS
(22) Filed: Mar. 6, 2013 Security --Lighting Systems. UCL LED Recessed Petroleum Canopy
(51) LOC (10) Cl. ................................................ 26-05 Luminaire brochure. 4 pages.
(52) U.S. Cl.
USPC ........................................................... D26/71 * cited by examiner
(58) Field of Classification Search
CPC ........... F21S 8/085; F21S 8/086; F21S 8/088; Primary Examiner — Clare E Heflin
F21V 21 f14. (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Jansson Munger McKinley
USPC ............. D26/67 71,92: 362/249.01, 249.02, & Shape Ltd.
362/235. 237, 157
See application file for complete search history. (57) CLAIM
The ornamental design for a light fixture, as shown and
(56) References Cited described.
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS DESCRIPTION
5,918,842 A 7, 1999 Garfinkle FIG. 1 is a perspective view of the light fixture:

6,158,882 A 12/2000 Bischoff, Jr. FIG. 2 is a bottom plan view of the light fixture of FIG. 1;
6,679,461 B1 1/2004 Hawkins FIG. 3 is a top plan view of the light fixture of FIG. 1;
6,776,504 B2 8, 2004 Sloan et al.
6,882,111 B2 4/2005 Kanet al. FIG. 4 is a right-side elevation of the light fixture of FIG. 1,
7,163,328 B2 1/2007 Chang et al. the left-side elevation view being a mirror image thereof; and,
D577,455 S * 9/2008 Zheng et al. ................... D26/71 FIG.5 is a front elevation of the light fixture of FIG.1, the rear
7,513,659 B2 4/2009 Vukosic et al. elevation being a mirror image thereof.
7,559,672 B1 7/2009 Parkynet al. The phantom lines are provided for illustrative purposes only
D615,233 S * 5/2010 Josefowicz et al. ............ D26/71
D619,748 S * 7/2010 Jong .............................. D26/71 and form no part of the claimed design.
7,798,670 B2 9, 2010 Kinnune
D627,093 S * 1 1/2010 Shiau et al. .................... D26/71 1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets

U.S. Patent Jan. 27, 2015 Sheet 1 of 4 USD721,844 S

FG 2

FG. 3


Exhibit B

USOOD743O84S
(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D743,084 S

Lay et al. (45) Date of Patent: . Nov. 10, 2015
(54) LIGHT FIXTURE D577,455 S * 9/2008 Zheng ............................ D26/71
7,513,659 B2 4/2009 Vukosic et al.
- -- 7,559,672 B1 7/2009 Parkynet al.
(71) Applicant: Cree, Inc., Durham, NC (US) D615,233 S * 5/2010 Josefowicz .................... D26/71
(72) Inventors: James Michael Lay, Apex, NC (US); (Continued)
Don Miletich, Franklin, WI (US) FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
(73) Assignee: Cree, Inc., Durham, NC (US) WO O216826 A1 2, 2002
(**) Term: 14 Years OTHER PUBLICATIONS
(21) Appl. No. 29/514,861 Security Lighting Systems. UCL LED Recessed Petroleum Canopy
Luminaire brochure. 4 pages.
(22) Filed: Jan. 16, 2015
Primary Examiner — Clare E Heflin
Related U.S. Application Data (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Jansson Munger McKinley
(62) Division of application No. 29/447,793, filed on Mar. & Shape Ltd.
6, 2013, now Pat. No. Des. 721,844.
(51) LOC (10) Cl. ................................................ 26-05 (57) CLAM
(52) U.S. Cl. The ornamental design for a light fixture, as shown and
USPC ........................................................... D26/71 described.
(58) Field of Classification Search
USPC ............................................... D26/69 71,92
CPC ............. F21S 9/03; F21S 8/085; F21S 8/086: DESCRIPTION
F21W 2131f1 O3 F21V 15/O1
S lication file f let '. FIG. 1 is a perspective view of the light fixture:s
ee appl1cauon Ille Ior complete searcnh historv.
n1Story FIG. 2 is a bottom plan view of the light fixture of FIG. 1;
(56) References Cited FIG. 3 is a top plan view of the light fixture of FIG. 1;
FIG. 4 is a right-side elevation of the light fixture of FIG. 1,
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS the left-side elevation view being a mirror image thereof; and,
FIG.5 is a front elevation of the light fixture of FIG.1, the rear
5,918,842 A 7/1999 Garfinkle elevation being a mirror image thereof.
3. 38: f 1299 it. Jr. The phantom lines are provided for illustrative purposes only
6,776,504 B2 8/2004 Sloan et al. and form no part of the claimed design.
6,882,111 B2 4/2005 Kanet al.
7,163,328 B2 1/2007 Chang et al. 1 Claim, 4 Drawing Sheets

US D743,084 S
Page 2
(56) References Cited 8,529,085 B2* 9, 2013 Josefowicz ............. F21S 8,086
362,158
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS D721,844 S * 1/2015 Lay ................................ D26/71
2009, OO86472 A1* 4/2009 Kinnune ................. F21V 15.01
7,798,670 B2 9, 2010 Kinnune 362,157
D627,093 S * 11, 2010 Shiau ............................. D26/71 2009,0296403 A1 12, 2009 Zhang et al.
D630,790 S * 1, 2011 Josefowicz .................... D26/71 2012,0087118 A1* 4, 2012 Bailey ..................... F2V 29.75
D668,370 S * 10, 2012 Guercio ......................... D26/71 362,235
D673,720 S * 1, 2013 Bailey ...... D26, 138 2014/O247590 A1* 9, 2014 Wilcox ................... F21V 29.74
D676, 177 S * 2, 2013 Akinrele ........................ D26/71 362,231
8.430,532 B2* 4, 2013 Lee ....................... F21V 29/004
362,294 * cited by examiner

U.S. Patent Nov. 10, 2015 Sheet 1 of 4 US D743,084 S

FG. 2

FIG 3

- - - - .. .. . . . . .
v-sy... - - - - - - - - - - -, *

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

for the
Eastern District of Wisconsin
)
)
)
CREE, INC. )
Plaintiff )
v. ) Civil Action No.
MILWAUKEE WHOLESALE LLC d/ )
b/a LED King and/or LEDKING.US and )
SMART TECHNOLOGY LLC d/b/a )
LED King and/or LEDKING.US, )
Defendants )
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To: MILWAUKEE WHOLESALE LLC

Attention: Naseer A. Nasir, Registered Agent
400 West Marquette Avenue
Oak Creek, WI 53154
A lawsuit has been filed against you.
Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you receive 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 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or the plaintiff’s attorney,
whose name and address are:
Perkins Coie LLP
Madison, WI 53703
(608) 663-7460
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.
STEPHEN C. DRIES, CLERK OF COURT
Date:
Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

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 and the attached complaint for (name of individual and title, if any):
were received by me on (date) .
☐ I personally served the summons and the attached complaint on the individual at (place):
on (date) ; or
☐ I left the summons and the attached complaint at the individual’s 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 individual’s last known address; or
☐ I served the summons and the attached complaint 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 $ 0.00
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date:
Server’s signature
Printed name and title
Server’s address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc.:

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

for the
Eastern District of Wisconsin
)
)
)
CREE, INC. )
Plaintiff )
v. ) Civil Action No.
MILWAUKEE WHOLESALE LLC d/ )
b/a LED King and/or LEDKING.US and )
SMART TECHNOLOGY LLC d/b/a )
LED King and/or LEDKING.US, )
Defendants )
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To: SMART TECHNOLOGY LLC

Attention: Bashir Ahmad, Registered Agent
9770 South 54th Street
Franklin, WI 53132
A lawsuit has been filed against you.
Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you receive 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 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or the plaintiff’s attorney,
whose name and address are:
Perkins Coie LLP
Madison, WI 53703
(608) 663-7460
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.
STEPHEN C. DRIES, CLERK OF COURT
Date:
Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

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 and the attached complaint for (name of individual and title, if any):
were received by me on (date) .
☐ I personally served the summons and the attached complaint on the individual at (place):
on (date) ; or
☐ I left the summons and the attached complaint at the individual’s 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 individual’s last known address; or
☐ I served the summons and the attached complaint 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 $ 0.00
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date:
Server’s signature
Printed name and title
Server’s address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc.:

Cree v. Milwaukee Wholesale - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cree v. Milwaukee Wholesale - Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cree v. Milwaukee Wholesale - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

v. Case No. 17- cv - 1804

MILWAUKEE WHOLESALE LLC d/b/a

was acquired by Cree in 2011 and subsequently merged with Cree).

2. On information and belief, Defendant Milwaukee Wholesale LLC, doing business

3. On information and belief, Defendant Smart Technology LLC, doing business as

lighting products including LED products and apparatuses utilizing LEDs.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. Cree incorporates the foregoing paragraphs of the Complaint by reference as

though fully set forth herein.

protections of Wisconsin law.

paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.

apparatuses utilizing LEDs.

11. One of Cree’s products is the industry-leading CPY250® Canopy/Soffit luminaire,

models of Cree’s CPY250® product are shown below:

14. After the introduction of Cree’s CPY250® luminaire, Defendants Milwaukee

patented design in U.S. Patent No. D743,084:

compared to the patented design in U.S. Patent No. D721,844:

accessed on December 20, 2017.

are hereinafter referred to as the “LED King knock-off canopy luminaires.”

LED Light” at http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canopy-130W-LED-Light-Drop-Lens-Gas-Station-

on December 20, 2017.

accessed on December 20, 2017.

“100Watt LED Gas Station Canopy LED Light” at https://www.ebay.com/itm/Canopy-100W-

accessed on December 20, 2017.

blinded themselves as to the infringing nature of their activities.

COUNT I – INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. DESIGN PATENT NO. D721,844

as though fully set forth herein.

action to enforce all rights arising under the ’844 Patent.

can be found at the following hyperlink: http://www.ledking.us/hikashop-menu-for-categories-

listing/product/69-canopylight130w5700k, on Amazon, and on eBay.

supposing it to be the other.

willful, deliberate and intentional.

COUNT II – INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. DESIGN PATENT NO. D743,084

as though fully set forth herein.

action to enforce all rights arising under the ’084 Patent.

can be found at the following hyperlink: http://www.ledking.us/hikashop-menu-for-categories-

listing/product/69-canopylight130w5700k, on Amazon, and on eBay.

supposing it to be the other.

willful, deliberate and intentional.

COUNT III – TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT UNDER THE LANHAM

as though fully set forth herein.

41. Cree’s CPY250® luminaires constitute protectable trade dress pursuant to 15

features that identify the product and its source to customers.

luminaires is likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception of purchasers and potential

purchasers as to the origin, sponsorship, approval, or association of Defendants’ products.

improperly appropriate to Defendants the valuable rights of Cree.

45. Defendants’ wrongful acts constitute trade dress infringement in violation of

Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).

COUNT V – FRAUDULENT REPRESENTATIONS UNDER THE

as though fully set forth herein.

intent to sell, distribute, increase the consumption of … any … merchandise … directly or

an advertisement, announcement, statement or representation of any kind to the public … which

… contains any assertion, representation or statement of fact which is untrue, deceptive or

50. As alleged throughout this Complaint, Defendants deliberately engaged in

misrepresentations to the public and to the Plaintiff.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

B. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283, 17 U.S.C. § 1116, 17 U.S.C. § 502, 15 U.S.C. §

1125(c)(1), and Defendants’ engaging in unfair competition, a preliminary and