7452-1002

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEWYORK


)
WORLDWIDE DIAMOND )
TRADEMARKS, LTD. ) Civil Action No. 14-cv-03521-VSB
)
)
Plaintiff, ) ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
) AND COUNTERCLAIMS
v. )
)
BLUE NILE, INC. and )
ATIT DIAMOND CORPORATION, )
)
)
Defendants. )

Defendant Blue Nile, Inc. (Blue Nile or defendant), hereby files this Answer to the
Complaint, and asserts counterclaims as follows:
PARTIES
1. In response to the allegations of paragraph 1, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
2. In response to the allegations of paragraph 2, admitted.
3. In response to the allegations of paragraph 3, admitted.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4. In response to the allegations of paragraph 4, defendant admits that the action
purports to be an action for patent infringement, trade dress infringement, and for violations of
statutory and common laws of New York, but denies any liability.
5. In response to the allegations of paragraph 5, admitted.
6. In response to the allegations of paragraph 6, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
1
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 1 of 20
7452-1002
7. In response to the allegations of paragraph 7, defendant admits that this Court has
personal jurisdiction over Blue Nile because it regularly conducts business with Atit Diamond
Corporation (Atit), and conducts a portion of its business in the judicial district, but denies the
remainder.
8. In response to the allegations of paragraph 8, admits that venue is proper in this
Court as to Blue Nile because Blue Nile conducts a substantial portion of its business in this
judicial district, but denies the remainder as to Blue Nile. As to the allegations against Atit,
defendant is without information sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and
accordingly denies same.
9. In response to the allegations of paragraph 9, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
10. In response to the allegations of paragraph 10, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
11. In response to the allegations of paragraph 11, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
12. In response to the allegations of paragraph 12, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
13. In response to the allegations of paragraph 13, admits that a copy of the patent is
attached to the Complaint as Exhibit A, but denies that the patent is valid, enforceable and duly
issued.
14. In response to the allegations of paragraph 14, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
15. In response to the allegations of paragraph 15, denied.
2
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 2 of 20
7452-1002
16. In response to the allegations of paragraph 16, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
17. In response to the allegations of paragraph 17, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
18. In response to the allegations of paragraph 18, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
19. In response to the allegations of paragraph 19, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
20. In response to the allegations of paragraph 20, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
21. In response to the allegations of paragraph 21, denied.
22. In response to the allegations of paragraph 22, denied.
23. In response to the allegations of paragraph 23, denied.
24. In response to the allegations of paragraph 24, denied.
25. In response to the allegations of paragraph 25, admits that Blue Nile is an online
retailer of diamonds and diamond jewelry, and sells and offers for sale in New York and
throughout the United States diamonds that have a hearts and arrows pattern, and are cushion-
shaped and generate an optical hearts and arrows in the presence of light, but deny the
remainder.
26. In response to the allegations of paragraph 26, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same.
27. In response to the allegations of paragraph 27, denied.
28. In response to the allegations of paragraph 28, denied.
3
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 3 of 20
7452-1002
29. In response to the allegations of paragraph 29, denied.
30. In response to the allegations of paragraph 30, denied.
31. In response to the allegations of paragraph 31, denied.
32. In response to the allegations of paragraph 32, denied.
33. In response to the allegations of paragraph 33, denied.
34. In response to the allegations of paragraph 34, denied.
35. In response to the allegations of paragraph 35, denied.
36. In response to the allegations of paragraph 36, denied.
37. In response to the allegations of paragraph 37, defendant is without information
sufficient to form a belief as to those allegations, and accordingly denies same. Defendant
specifically denies that any actions of plaintiff have resulted in a Hearts and Arrows Trade Dress
entitled to any protection.
38. In response to the allegations of paragraph 38, denied.
39. In response to the allegations of paragraph 39, denied.
40. In response to the allegations of paragraph 40, denied.
41. In response to the allegations of paragraph 41, denied.
42. In response to the allegations of paragraph 42, denied.
43. In response to the allegations of paragraph 43, denied.
44. In response to the allegations of paragraph 44, denied.
45. In response to the allegations of paragraph 45, denied.
COUNT ONE
46. In response to the allegations of paragraph 46, denied.
47. In response to the allegations of paragraph 47, denied.
4
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 4 of 20
7452-1002
48. In response to the allegations of paragraph 48, denied.
49. In response to the allegations of paragraph 49, denied.
50. In response to the allegations of paragraph 50, denied.
51. In response to the allegations of paragraph 51, denied.
52. In response to the allegations of paragraph 52, denied.
53. In response to the allegations of paragraph 53, denied.
COUNT TWO
54. In response to the allegations of paragraph 54, defendant incorporates by
reference its responses to paragraphs 1-53.
55. In response to the allegations of paragraph 55 denied.
56. In response to the allegations of paragraph 56, denied.
57. In response to the allegations of paragraph 57, denied.
58. In response to the allegations of paragraph 58, denied.
59. In response to the allegations of paragraph 59, denied.
60. In response to the allegations of paragraph 60, denied.
COUNT THREE
61. In response to the allegations of paragraph 61, defendant incorporates by
reference its responses to paragraphs 1-60.
62. In response to the allegations of paragraph 62, denied.
63. In response to the allegations of paragraph 64, denied.
64. In response to the allegations of paragraph 64, denied.
65. In response to the allegations of paragraph 65, denied.
66. In response to the allegations of paragraph 66, denied.
5
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 5 of 20
7452-1002
67. In response to the allegations of paragraph 67, denied.
68. In response to the allegations of paragraph 68, denied.
COUNT FOUR
69. In response to the allegations of paragraph 69, defendant incorporates by
reference its responses to paragraphs 1-68.
70. In response to the allegations of paragraph 70, denied.
71. In response to the allegations of paragraph 71, denied.
72. In response to the allegations of paragraph 72, denied.
73. In response to the allegations of paragraph 73, denied.
74. In response to the allegations of paragraph 74, denied.
75. In response to the allegations of paragraph 75, denied.
COUNT FIVE
76. In response to the allegations of paragraph 76, defendant incorporates by
reference its responses to paragraphs 1-75.
77. In response to the allegations of paragraph 77, denied.
78. In response to the allegations of paragraph 78, denied.
79. In response to the allegations of paragraph 79, denied.
80. In response to the allegations of paragraph 80, denied.
81. In response to the allegations of paragraph 81, denied.
82. In response to the allegations of paragraph 82, denied.
83. In response to the allegations of paragraph 83, denied.
84. In response to the allegations of paragraph 84, denied.

6
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 6 of 20
7452-1002
COUNT SIX
85. In response to the allegations of paragraph 85, defendant incorporates by
reference its responses to paragraphs 1-84.
86. In response to the allegations of paragraph 86, denied.
87. In response to the allegations of paragraph 87, denied.
88. In response to the allegations of paragraph 88, denied.
89. In response to the allegations of paragraph 89, denied.
90. In response to the allegations of paragraph 90, denied.
91. In response to the allegations of paragraph 91, denied.
92. In response to the allegations of paragraph 92, denied.
COUNT SEVEN
93. In response to the allegations of paragraph 93, defendant incorporates by
reference its responses to paragraphs 1-92.
94. In response to the allegations of paragraph 94, denied.
95. In response to the allegations of paragraph 95, denied.
96. In response to the allegations of paragraph 96, denied.
97. In response to the allegations of paragraph 97, denied.
98. In response to the allegations of paragraph 98, denied.
99. In response to the allegations of paragraph 99, denied.
100. Defendant denies any other allegations of the Complaint, including without
limitation, the allegations in the PRAYER FOR RELIEF.


7
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 7 of 20
7452-1002
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
101. In further response to the Complaint and as affirmative defenses, Blue Nile
alleges as follows:
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
102. Plaintiffs Complaint fails to state any claim upon which relief can be granted.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
103. U.S. Patent No. D688,970 (970 Patent) is invalid for failure to comply with 35
U.S.C. 102, 112, and/or 171.
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
104. Blue Nile has not infringed the 970 Patent either literally or under the doctrine of
equivalents, and has not contributed, or actively induced others, to infringe the 970 Patent.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
105. After receiving notice of the 970 Patent, Blue Nile has acted in good faith belief
that the 970 Patent is invalid, and not infringed.
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
106. Plaintiff is not the originator of a square or princess cut diamond specifically
structured to generate a hearts and arrows optical pattern previously found only in perfect round-
cut diamonds.
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
107. Plaintiff is not the only supplier of a square or princess cut diamond which generates
a hearts and arrows optical pattern.


8
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 8 of 20
7452-1002
SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
108. The feature of the hearts and arrows optical pattern is neither inherently distinctive,
nor has it acquired any secondary meaning.
EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
109. Plaintiff has not built up any secondary meaning in a square or princess cut diamond
which generates a hearts and arrows optical pattern.
NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
110. The relevant purchasing public views square diamonds which generate a hearts and
arrows optical pattern as different from cushion-cut diamonds which generate a hearts and
arrows optical pattern, such that any secondary meaning in a square diamond does not carry over to
a cushion-cut, and vice versa.
TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
111. The hearts and arrows feature is exclusively or primarily a functional feature of a
diamond in which no trade dress protection is or can be available.
ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
112. Defendant Blue Nile is selling its diamonds in a different channel of trade, and to
different consumers, with appropriate source of origin indicators, and to sophisticated customers
who know the source of diamonds they purchase, such that no likelihood of confusion would result
between Blue Niles diamonds and Plaintiffs diamonds.
TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
113. Defendant Blue Nile does not compete with Plaintiff in the same market for the
same customers.

9
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 9 of 20
7452-1002
THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
114. Defendant Blue Nile has not copied any of Plaintiffs diamond designs.
FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
115. Any trade dress protection available in Plaintiffs diamond designs has not been used
or appropriated in any of Blue Niles diamond designs.
FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
116. Defendant Blue Nile has not sought to trade on or profit from any of Plaintiffs
efforts, but instead has invested substantial efforts and resources in independently developing its
own diamond design using its own creative effort.
SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
117. Blue Niles accused diamonds do not have a trade dress confusingly similar to any
of Plaintiffs hearts and arrows trade dress.
SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
118. Plaintiff has not suffered any damage or irreparable harm due to any activity of Blue
Nile.
EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
119. None of Blue Niles activities misrepresent the nature, characteristics or qualities of
its goods, services and/or commercial activities.
NINETEEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
120. None of Blue Niles activities constitute unfair competition, false designation of
origin, trade dress infringement, false descriptions or representation, or unjust enrichment.


10
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 10 of 20
7452-1002
TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
121. None of Blue Niles activities as alleged by Plaintiff has resulted in any injury to
consumers, or have deceived any material segment of the public.
TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
122. None of Blue Niles activities as alleged by Plaintiff has caused a likelihood of harm
to Plaintiffs business reputation.
COUNTERCLAIMS
1. This is an action for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of U.S.
Patent No. D688,970 (970 Patent) pursuant to the Declaratory J udgment Act, 28 U.S.C. 2201-
2202, and the United States Patent Law, 35 U.S.C. 100 et seq. and for other declaratory relief.
THE PARTIES
2. Blue Nile, Inc. (Blue Nile) is a corporation organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business located at 411 First Avenue
South, Suite 700, Seattle, Washington 98104.
3. On information and belief, Defendant Worldwide Diamond Trademarks, Ltd.
(Worldwide Diamond) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of British
Columbia, Canada with its principal place of business located at Suite 2160, 1066 West Hastings
Street, Vancouver BC VGE 3X1, Canada.
4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this counterclaim pursuant to the
Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28, United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and Title 28
of the United States Code, Sections 1331 and 1338(a).
11
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 11 of 20
7452-1002
5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Plaintiff with respect to these
Counterclaims based on Plaintiffs filing of its Complaint in this Court, by which action Plaintiff
has submitted itself to the personal jurisdiction of this Court.
6. Venue for these Counterclaims lies in this J udicial District and under Title 28 of
United States Code, Sections 1391(b) and (c), on the grounds that Plaintiff has filed its
Complaint in this Court and thereby submitted itself to the personal jurisdiction and venue of this
Court.
7. Blue Nile realleges and incorporates herein the allegations of 1-122 of this
Answer.
8. Plaintiff claims to be the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the 970
Patent, and to have the right to sue and recover damages for infringement of the 970 Patent.
9. Plaintiff has asserted in Count One of its Complaint that Blue Nile has infringed,
and continues to infringe, the 970 Patent.
10. Blue Nile has not infringed, and is not infringing, the 970 Patent.
11. Therefore, there exists a case of actual controversy between the parties as to the
infringement of the 970 Patent, with respect to which Blue Nile requests a declaratory judgment
of non-infringement of the 970 Patent.
SECOND COUNTERCLAIM
12. Blue Nile re-alleges and incorporates herein the allegations of paragraphs 1-122
of this Answer and paragraphs 1 11 of these Counterclaims.
13. This Second Counterclaim arises under the Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28,
United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and under Title 28, United States Code, Section
1338(b). There is a case of actual controversy concerning the validity of Plaintiffs alleged trade
12
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 12 of 20
7452-1002
dress as set forth in the Complaint filed by Plaintiff in this action and in the above Answer to
which these Counterclaims are appended.
14. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this counterclaim pursuant to the
Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28, United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and Title 28
of the United States Code, Sections 1331 and 1338(a).
15. Plaintiff has asserted in Count Two of its Complaint that its hearts and arrows
trade dress is distinctive and that it has trademark rights in its hearts and arrows feature in non-
round diamonds, and has alleged false description of origin and unfair competition.
16. The hearts and arrows feature is not distinctive, and, has not acquired secondary
meaning sufficient to vest any proprietary rights in Plaintiff to the exclusion of others.
17. Therefore, there exists a case of actual controversy between the parties as to the
validity of the alleged trade dress, alleged false description of origin and unfair competition with
respect to which Blue Nile requests a declaratory judgment that the alleged trade dress is not a
valid trademark conferring any proprietary rights, and that Blue Nile has not caused any false
designation of origin or committed unfair competition.
THIRD COUNTERCLAIM
18. Blue Nile re-alleges and incorporates herein the allegations of paragraphs 1-122
of this Answer and paragraphs 1 17 of these Counterclaims.
19. This Third Counterclaim arises under the Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28,
United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and under Title 28, United States Code, Section
1338(b). There is a case of actual controversy concerning the allegations of Count Three of
Plaintiffs Complaint in this action and in the above Answer to which these Counterclaims are
appended.
13
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 13 of 20
7452-1002
20. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this counterclaim pursuant to the
Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28, United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and Title 28
of the United States Code, Sections 1331 and 1338(a).
21. Plaintiff has asserted in Count Three of its Complaint that defendant has
committed deceptive acts and practices under Section 349 of the New York General Business
Law.
22. Blue Nile has not committed any deceptive acts and practices under Section 349
of New York General Business Law.
23. Therefore, there exists a case of actual controversy between the parties as to
whether defendant has committed deceptive acts and practices under Section 349 of the New
York General Business Law, with respect to which Blue Nile requests a declaratory judgment
that defendant has not committed any such acts and practices.
FOURTH COUNTERCLAIM
24. Blue Nile re-alleges and incorporates herein the allegations of paragraphs 1-122
of this Answer and paragraphs 1 23 of these Counterclaims.
25. This Fourth Counterclaim arises under the Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28,
United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and under Title 28, United States Code, Section
1338(b). There is a case of actual controversy concerning the allegations of Count Four of
Plaintiffs Complaint in this action and in the above Answer to which these Counterclaims are
appended.
26. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this counterclaim pursuant to the
Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28, United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and Title 28
of the United States Code, Sections 1331 and 1338(a).
14
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 14 of 20
7452-1002
27. Plaintiff has asserted in Count Four of its Complaint that defendant has committed
a likelihood of injury to business reputation under Section 360-1 of the New York Business
General Business Law.
28. Blue Nile has not caused any likelihood of injury to business reputation under
Section 360-1 of New York General Business Law.
29. Therefore, there exists a case of actual controversy between the parties as to the
allegation in Count Four of the Complaint with respect to which Blue Nile requests a declaratory
judgment that defendant has not committed any such violation.
FIFTH COUNTERCLAIM
30. Blue Nile re-alleges and incorporates herein the allegations of paragraphs 1-122
of this Answer and paragraphs 1 29 of these Counterclaims.
31. This Fifth Counterclaim arises under the Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28,
United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and under Title 28, United States Code, Section
1338(b). There is a case of actual controversy concerning the allegations of Count Five of
Plaintiffs Complaint in this action and in the above Answer to which these Counterclaims are
appended.
32. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this counterclaim pursuant to the
Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28, United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and Title 28
of the United States Code, Sections 1331 and 1338(a).
33. Plaintiff has asserted in Count Five of its Complaint that defendant has committed
trade dress infringement under common law.
34. Blue Nile has not committed any trade dress infringement under common law.
15
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 15 of 20
7452-1002
35. Therefore, there exists a case of actual controversy between the parties as to
whether defendant has committed trade dress infringement under common law with respect to
which Blue Nile requests a declaratory judgment that it has not committed any such
infringement.
SIXTH COUNTERCLAIM
36. Blue Nile re-alleges and incorporates herein the allegations of paragraphs 1-122
of this Answer and paragraphs 1 35 of these Counterclaims.
37. This Sixth Counterclaim arises under the Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28,
United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and under Title 28, United States Code, Section
1338(b). There is a case of actual controversy concerning the allegations of Count Six of
Plaintiffs Complaint in this action and in the above Answer to which these Counterclaims are
appended.
38. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this counterclaim pursuant to the
Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28, United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and Title 28
of the United States Code, Sections 1331 and 1338(a).
39. Plaintiff has asserted in Count Six of its Complaint that defendant has committed
unfair competition under common law.
40. Blue Nile has not committed any unfair competition under common law.
41. Therefore, there exists a case of actual controversy between the parties as to the
allegation in Count Six of the Complaint with respect to which Blue Nile requests a declaratory
judgment that defendant has not committed any unfair competition under common law.


16
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 16 of 20
7452-1002
SEVENTH COUNTERCLAIM
42. Blue Nile re-alleges and incorporates herein the allegations of paragraphs 1-122
of this Answer and paragraphs 1 41 of these Counterclaims.
43. This Seventh Counterclaim arises under the Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28,
United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and under Title 28, United States Code, Section
1338(b). There is a case of actual controversy concerning the allegations of Count Seven of
Plaintiffs Complaint in this action and in the above Answer to which these Counterclaims are
appended.
44. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this counterclaim pursuant to the
Declaratory J udgment Act, Title 28, United States Code, Sections 2201(a) and 2202, and Title 28
of the United States Code, Sections 1331 and 1338(a).
45. Plaintiff has asserted in Count Seven of its Complaint that defendant has been
unjustly enriched under common law.
46. Blue Nile has not committed any unjust enrichment under common law.
47. Therefore, there exists a case of actual controversy between the parties as to
whether defendant has been unjustly enriched under common law with respect to which Blue
Nile requests a declaratory judgment that it has not been unjustly enriched.
EIGHTH COUNTERCLAIM
48. Blue Nile re-alleges and incorporates herein the allegations of paragraphs 1-122
of this Answer and paragraphs 1 47 of these Counterclaims.
49. This Eighth Counterclaim arises under Title 28, United States Code, Section
1338(b).
17
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 17 of 20
7452-1002
50. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this counterclaim pursuant to
Title 28 of the United States Code, Section 1338(b).
51. On information and belief, before commencing this action by filing the
Complaint, Plaintiff did not sufficiently investigate its alleged patent rights, its alleged trade
dress rights, and other alleged rights, so as to form a reasonable belief that Plaintiff has any such
rights, or that Blue Niles activities as alleged infringes any rights of Plaintiff.
52. Plaintiffs commencement of this action, without a good faith basis as to the
allegations, constitutes vexatious and bad faith litigation, and based on the foregoing, Blue Nile
requests a judgment that this is an exceptional case meriting an award of damages, attorneys
fees and costs to Blue Nile, in an amount to be determined at trial.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Blue Nile requests that this court:
a) Declare that the 970 Patent is invalid;
b) Declare that the 970 Patent is not infringed by Blue Nile;
c) Declare that Plaintiff does not have any trade dress rights in its hearts and
arrows feature;
d) Declare that the hearts and arrows feature is a functional feature not entitled to
any trade dress protection;
e) Declare that Blue Nile has not committed any false designations of origin, unfair
competition, trade dress infringement, deceptive acts or practices under Section 349 of N.Y. Gen.
Bus. Law, caused any injury to business reputation under Section 360-1 of N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law,
committed any trade dress in infringement under common law, committed any unfair
competition under common law, or caused any unjust enrichment under common law;
18
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 18 of 20
7452-1002
f) Enter judgment denying all relief sought by Plaintiff;
g) Enter judgment declaring that Plaintiff take nothing by its suit in this action;
h) Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint with prejudice;
i) Find that Plaintiff has committed an act of unfair competition by bringing this
action without a reasonable basis;
j) Award Blue Nile damages and its reasonable attorneys fees and costs in an
amount to be determined; and
k) For such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Blue Nile respectfully demands a trial by jury of any and all issues triable by a jury in this
action.
Dated: New York, New York
J une 23, 2014
Respectfully submitted,

LUCAS & MERCANTI, LLP



/Peter J . Phillips/
Peter J . Phillips
Barry Evans

30 Broad St., 21
st
floor
New York, New York 10004
Tel: 212-661-8000
Fax: 212-661-8002
pphillips@lmiplaw.com
bevans@lmiplaw.com

Attorneys for Defendant
Blue Nile, Inc.



19
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 19 of 20
7452-1002
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on J une 23, 2014, I caused service of the foregoing document to be
made by electronic filing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF System, which will send
a Notice of Electronic Filing to all parties with an e-mail address of record, who have appeared
and consent to electronic service in this action.

/Michael L. Scarpati/
Dated: J une 23, 2014

20
Case 1:14-cv-03521-VSB Document 11 Filed 06/23/14 Page 20 of 20