While the Indiana suit contains a boilerplate allegation “upon information and belief” that Sir Faucet is “making using, importing, selling, or offering for sale in the United States, including the Southern District of Indiana, products and/or services embodying the patent inventions,” it lacks the type of supporting detail that may be required to prove personal jurisdiction. The complaint also alleges in paragraph 12 that the case is “exceptional,” but states no fact to support this conclusion. If a court finds a case to be “exceptional,” it may award a prevailing party treble damages and attorney’s fees.
Practice Tip: If a defendant is selling an infringing product in the jurisdiction where a plaintiff desires to file a suit, it is helpful to make a representative purchase in that jurisdiction, and reference the sale in the Complaint. This may thwart an attempt by the defendant to have the case dismissed or transferred to the defendant’s preferred venue.
This case has been assigned to Judge Sarah Evans Barker and Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch in the Southern District of Indiana, and assigned case no. 1:11-cv-00404-SEB-DML.
Complaint – Masco v. Sir Faucet
Further Information for this case is as follows:
Filed: March 23, 2011 as 1:2011cv00404 Updated: March 27, 2011 22:37:08
Plaintiff: MASCO CORPORATION OF INDIANA
Defendant: SIR FAUCET, LLC
Presiding Judge:Sarah Evans Barker
Referring Judge:Debra McVicker Lynch
Cause Of Action: Patent Infringement
Court:Seventh Circuit > Indiana > Southern District Court
Type:Intellectual Property > Patent