endochoice v. austin medical et. al

8/3/2019 Endochoice v. Austin Medical et. al.

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/endochoice-v-austin-medical-et-al 1/8

----

, ,' .

, -»:

. '-:,---/ . '

RL£D INP!:ERIrsU.S.Dc.• ~ F f 1 C E

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DEC 1 4NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA JAMEi 011

ATLANTA DIVISION By! IV l;N,C/.rk

ENDOCHOICE, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

AUSTIN MEDICAL, INC.,

AVID MEDICAL, INC., &

CYGNUS MEDICAL LLC

Defendants.

BlfJliljeJiiti .

Civil Action No.:

1:11-CV-4347(JURY TRIAL DEMAND)

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, EndoChoice, Inc. ("EndoChoice") states its Complaint against

Austin Medical, Inc., AVID Medical, Inc. and Cygnus Medical, LLC. (collectively

"Defendants") as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws

of the United States, Title 35, United States Code to enjoin infringement and obtain

damages from Defendants' unauthorized manufacture, use, sale, offer to sell,

and/or importation into the United States for the subsequent use or sale of products



or methods that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,042,688, which is

attached as Exhibit A and is entitled "Combined Drape and Carrying Bag Unit."

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over all causes of action set

forth herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).

3. Venue is proper in this judicial district and division pursuant to 28

U.S.C. §§1391(b) and (c) and 1400(b) and because each Defendant is subject to

personal jurisdiction in this district and, upon information and belief, has

committed acts of infringement in this district.

4. Upon information and belief, the Court has personal jurisdiction over

each Defendant due to each Defendant's respective contacts with the State ofGeorgia

because each Defendant regularly transacts business in this judicial district by among

other things, offering its products and/or services to customers, affiliates, and partners

in this judicial district and/or arising at least from the sale, offer for sale, and/or use of

products in the State of Georgia by each Defendant that infringe EndoChoice's

patent, as described below.

PARTIES

5. EndoChoice is a Delaware corporation having its principal place of

business at 11810 Wills Road, Suite 100, Alpharetta, Georgia 30009.

2



6. Upon information and belief, Defendant Austin Medical, Inc.

(hereinafter "Austin Medical") is a Florida corporation having its principal place of

business at 370 North Main Street, Suite 300, Waynesville, NC 28786.

7. Upon information and belief, Defendant, Austin Medical may be

properly served this Complaint via registered agent, William E. Cannon, Jr., who is

located at 370 North Main Street, Suite 300, Waynesville, NC 28786.

8. Upon information and belief, Defendant AVID Medical, Inc.

(hereinafter "AVID Medical") is a Delaware corporation having its principal place

of business at 9000 Westmont Drive, Toano, Virginia 23168.

9. Upon information and belief, Defendant, AVID Medical may be

properly served this Complaint via registered agent, The Corporation Trust

Company, which is located at Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street,

Wilmington, New Castle, DE 1980I.

10. Upon information and belief, Defendant Cygnus Medical, LLC

(hereinafter "Cygnus Medical") is a Connecticut corporation having its principal

place of business at 965 West Main Street, Branford, Connecticut 06405.

II. Upon information and belief, Defendant, Cygnus Medical may be

properly served this Complaint via registered agent, Walter L. Maguire, Jr., who is

located at 13 Beaver Road, Branford, Connecticut 06405.

3



THE CONTROVERSY

12. EndoChoice is a global leader and best-in-class technology provider

for specialists treating a wide range of gastrointestinal diseases.

13. EndoChoice provides products to the GI endoscopy market.

14. EndoChoice is the owner, by assignment, of all right, title, and interest

in and to U.S. Patent No. 8,042,688, entitled "Combined Drape and Carrying Bag

Unit," which issued from the United States Patent and Trademark Office on

October 25, 2011, and is hereinafter referred to as "the '688 patent."

IS. A copy of the '688 patent is attached here to as Exhibit "A."

16. Upon information and belief, Defendant Austin Medical IS III the

business of at least making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing a

product referred to as a "Scope Transport Pad."

17. Upon information and belief, Defendant Austin Medical's Scope

Transport Pad is or may also be referred to by the following identification: "AU

0332NA."

18. Austin Medical's Scope Transport Pad is a medical equipment pad

that infringes one or more claims ofEndoChoice's '688 patent.

19. Upon information and belief, Defendant AVID Medical is in the

business of at least making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing

4



products that contain, include, and/or are integrated with a scope transport pad that

infringes the '688 patent.

20. Upon information and belief, at least one of the scope transport pads

that AVID Medical sells or offers to sell is the scope transport pad made, used,

sold, offered for sale, and/or imported by Austin Medical, as referenced above.

21. Upon information and belief, Defendant Cygnus Medical is in the

business of at least making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing

products that contain, include and/or are integrated with a scope transport pad that

infringes the'688 patent.

22. Upon information and belief, at least one of the scope transport pads

that Cygnus Medical sells or offers to sell is the scope transport pad made, used,

sold, offered for sale, and/or imported by Austin Medical, as referenced above.

23. Upon information and belief, at least one or more of the scope

transport pads that Cygnus Medical sells or offers to sell is also known as a

Kangaroo Transport Pad, which also infringes the '688 patent.

24. Upon information and belief, Cygnus Medical sells one or more of its

Kangaroo Transport Pads associated with the following SKU nos., which each

infringe the '688 patent: NS332-P, NS333-B, and NS334-B.

5



25. Upon information and belief, EndoChoice has been irreparably

harmed by the Defendants' infringements of its patent rights. Moreover,

Defendants' unauthorized and infringing uses of EndoChoice's patented medical

equipment pad and method have threatened the value of this intellectual property

because Defendants' conduct results in Plaintiffs loss of its lawful patent rights to

exclude others from making, using, selling, offering to sell and/or importing the

patented invention.

COUNT ONE:

INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,042,688

26. EndoChoice re-alleges and incorporates herein the allegations of the

preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

27. Defendants have in the past and continue to make, have made, offer

for sale, sell, use, and/or import into the United States one or more products,

services, and/or processes that constitute direct infringement, contributory

infringement, and/or inducement to infringe one or more claims of EndoChoice's

'688 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271.

28. Defendants' infringement has been, and continues to be, willful.

29. EndoChoice has and continues to suffer damages as a result of

Defendants' infringement of EndoChoice's '688 patent, and will suffer additional

6



and irreparable damages unless Defendants are permanently enjoined by this Court

from continuing its infringement. EndoChocie has no adequate remedy at law.

30. Because of Defendants' infringement of EndoChoice's '688 patent,

EndoChoice is entitled to: (I) damages adequate to compensate it for Defendants'

infringement, which amounts to, at a minimum, a reasonable royalty; (2) treble

damages; (3) its attorney's fees and costs; and (4) a preliminary and permanent

injunction.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff EndoChoice prays that the Court enter judgment in

favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants as follows:

A. That each Defendant, pursuant to 35 U.S.c. § 284, be ordered to pay

damages adequate to compensate EndoChoice for Defendants' infringement of

EndoChoice's United States Patent No. 8,042,688;

B. That Defendants, pursuant to 35 U.S.c. §§ 284 and 285, be ordered to

pay treble damages and attorney's fees;

C. That Defendants, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283, be enjoined from

further infringement ofEndoChoice's United States Patent No. 8,042,688;

D. That Defendants be ordered to pay prejudgment interest and all costs

associated with this action; and

7



E. That EndoChoice be granted such other and additional relief as the

Court deems just, equitable, and proper.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(b), Plaintiff EndoChoice demands a trial by

jury of all issues triable of right by a jury.

This 14th day of December, 20 II

/s/ N. Andrew Crain

N. Andrew Crain ([email protected])

Georgia State Bar No. 193081

Eric Maurer (eric.maurer((iJ,tkhr.com)

Georgia State Bar No. 478199

THOMAS, KAYDEN, HORSTEMEYER

& RISLEY, LLP

400 Interstate North Parkway, Ste. 1500

Atlanta, GA 30339

Telephone: (770) 933-9500Facsimile: (770) 951-0933

Attorneys for Plaintiff, EndoChoice, Inc.

8

endochoice v. austin medical et. al

Documents