Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 11

FILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA


ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
PETER J. SNELLING Unit 114 Cocos Grove West Lakes SA 5021
AUSTRALIA

2013 FEB 22 P 2= 01
CLERK US DISTRICT COURT ALEXANDRIA. VIRGINIA

Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION
Docket No.

ROBERT B. LAWSON
aka Robert Lawson

500 FIFTH AV SOUTH, #522 NAPLES, FL 34102


USA

Defendant;
and

NEPTUNE-BENSON, LLC
6 JEFFERSON DRIVE COVENTRY RI 02816
USA

SERVE: CT CORPORATION SYSTEM


10 WEYBOSSET STREET PROVIDENCE RI 02903
USA Defendant.

COMPLAINT UNDER 28 USC 1331, 28 USC 1338(A) and 35 USC 256

Plaintiff Peter J. Snelling brings this action against defendants Robert B. Lawson and

Neptune-Benson, LLC pursuant to 35 USC 256,261 and 262 tocorrect an error in U.S. Patent
7,419,588 and an error in U.S. Patent 6,968,655 and designate Peter J. Snelling as the sole inventor of said inventions; and an action against defendant Robert B. Lawson for tort of
conversion. THE PARTIES

1. PlantiffPeterJ. Snelling is a citizen of Australia, residing in Australia.


1

2. Defendant Robert B. Lawson is a citizen ofthe United States, residing in Florida. He is an officer or director ofthe corporation formerly known as LAWSON AQUATICS, INC., and now doing business as RBL HOLDINGS, INC.. RBL HOLDINGS INC. currently operates at 500 Fifth Avenue, South # 522, Naples FL. 34012.

3. Neptune-Benson, LLC is a Rhode Island corporation with aprimary place ofbusiness 6


Jefferson Drive, Coventry, RI 02816. Neptune-Benson, LLC is a party-in-interest.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This court has jurisdiction over this action under 28 USC 1331 (arising under federal law), 28 USC 1338(a) ("district courts shall have original jurisdiction ofany civil
action arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents.").
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

5. Peter J. Snelling is an engineer who has designed certain products for the commercial and
semi-commercial swimming pool industry.

6. Robert B. Lawson was in the business of marketing and distributing products for the

swimming pool industry in the United States.

7. Peter J. Snelling and Robert B. Lawson entered into an agreement for Robert B. Lawson
to market, sell and / or distribute products based on Peter J. Snelling's designs in the
United States.

8. Under said agreement Robert B. Lawson and / or his business, LAWSON AQUATICS,
INC. (now operating under the name RBL HOLDINGS INC), would have exclusive

rights to market, sell and / ordistribute products based on Peter J. Snelling's designs in
the United States.

9. Also under said agreement neither Robert B. Lawson, nor his business, would acquire
any ownership rights in PeterJ. Snelling's designs.

10. As part of the effort to market, sell and / or distribute products based on Peter J.

Snelling's designs, Robert B. Lawson acted, or had others act on his behalf, to file at least
ten patent applications with the United States Patent and Trademark Office: a. U.S. Patent Application No. 09/867,243 (filed May 30, 2001), Publication No.
2002-01788660 (published Dec. 5, 2002)(Robert B. Lawson, applicant);

b. U.S. Patent Application No. 10/609,226 (filed Jun. 30,2003), Publication No. 2004-0003549 (published Jan. 8, 2004), issued as U.S. Patent 6,968,655 (issued
Nov. 29,2005)(Robert B. Lawson, applicant), expired;

c. U.S. Patent Application No. 11/207,153 (filed Aug. 19, 2005), Publication No. 2007-0039095 (published Feb. 22,2007)(Robert Lawson, applicant);
d. U.S. Patent Application No. 11/633,064 (filed Dec. 4,2006), Publication No. 2008-0128342 (published Jun. 5,2008), issued as U.S. Patent 7,419,588 (issued
Sep. 2,2008) (Robert B. Lawson, applicant);

e. U.S. Patent Application No. 11/636,198 (filed Dec. 11, 2006), Publication No. 2008-0134427 (published Jun. 12, 2008)(Robert B. Lawson, applicant);
f. U.S. Patent Application No. 11/650,594 (filed Jan. 8,2007), Publication No. 2008-0163415 (published Jul. 10,2008)(Robert B. Lawson, applicant);

g. U.S. Patent Application No. 11/825,696 (filed Jul. 10, 2007), Publication No.
2009-0014369 (published Jan. 15,2009)(Robert B. Lawson, applicant); h. U.S. Patent Application No. 12/156,414 (filed Jun. 2, 2008), Publication No.
2008-0229490 (published Sep. 25,2008)(Robert B. Lawson, applicant);

i. U.S. Patent Application No. 12/287,007 (filed Oct. 6,2008), Publication No.
2009-0061158 (published Mar. 5,2009)(Robert Lawson, applicant); and

j. U.S. Patent Application No. 13/317,013 (filed Oct. 7, 2011), Publication No.
2012-0144578 (published Jun. 14,2012)(Robert B. Lawson, applicant).

11. These ten patent applications shall hereinafter collectively be referred to as the LAWSON
PORTFOLIO.

12. The inventions disclosed and claimed in each of the patent applications in the Lawson

Portfolio are inventions disclosed by the designs communicated from PeterJ. Snelling to
Robert B. Lawson.

13. Peter J. Snelling is not identified as an inventor in any of the patent applications in the
Lawson Portfolio.

14. Robert B. Lawson, or Robert Lawson, is listed as the sole inventor in each of the patent applications in the Lawson Portfolio.

15. Upon information and belief, Robert B. Lawson did not contribute to the conception of
the inventions disclosed, and did not contribute to the inventions claimed, in any of the

patent applications and patents in the Lawson Portfolio.

16. U.S. Patent Application No. 12/156,414 is acontinuation-in-part application ofU.S.


Patent Application No. 11/633,064.

17. U.S. Patent Application No. 13/317,013 is acontinuation-in-part application ofU.S.


PatentApplication No. 12/156,414.

18. U.S. Patent Application No. 10/609,266 is acontinuation-in-part application ofU.S.


Patent Application No. 09/867,243.

19. Robert B. Lawson assigned his ownership in U.S. Patent Application No. 11/636,198, U.S. Patent Application No. 12/156,414, U.S. Patent Application No. 13/317,013, U.S.
Patent 6,968,655 and U.S. Patent 7,419,588 to Lawson Aquatics, Inc.

20. Lawson Aquatics, Inc. thereafter assigned its ownership ofU.S. Patent Application No. 11/636,198, U.S. Patent Application No. 12/156,414, U.S. Patent Application No. 13/317,013, U.S. Patent 6,968,655 and U.S. Patent 7,419,588 to Neptune-Benson, LLC.
21. The U.S. District Court is empowered under 35 USC 256 to order the Director of the
United States Patent and Trademark Office to correct inventorship of a patent on notice

and hearing of all parties concerned, and the Director of the United States Patent and
Trademark Office shall issue a certificate of correction accordingly.

22. The U.S. District Court is empowered to order a party to request correction of

inventorship of a patent application filed on behalf of that party; and the party may

proceed pursuant to 35 USC 116 and Rule 37 CFR 1.48 promulgated by the United
States Patent and Trademark Office to request the Director of the United States Patent
and Trademark Office to effect correction of inventorship.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION: CORRECTION OF INVENTORSHIP OF U.S. PATENT

7,419,588 PURSANT TO 35 U.S.C. 256, 261 and 262


23. Plaintiff reasserts the allegation contained in paragraphs 1-22.

24. The inventions disclosed in U.S. Patent Application No. 11/633,064, Publication No.

2008-0128342 (published Jun. 5,2008), issued as U.S. Patent 7,419,588 (issued Sep. 2, 2008) (Robert B. Lawson, applicant) (hereinafter referred to as U.S. Patent Application

11/633,064 or U.S. Patent 7,419,588) are only inventions disclosed by the designs by
Peter J. Snelling.

25. Robert B. Lawson did not contribute to the conception of any invention claimed in U.S.
Patent 7,419,588.

26. Robert B. Lawson had knowledge that PeterJ. Snelling was and remains the sole inventor
of the inventions claimed in U.S. Patent 7,419,588.

27. Peter J. Snelling is the true sole inventor of the inventions claimed in U.S. Patent
7,419,588.

28. Plaintiff is without sufficient knowledge to allege knowledge on the part of Robert B.

Lawson that it was inappropriate to file the U.S. Patent Application 11/633,064 without

naming Peter J. Snelling as an inventor. Plaintiff reserves the right to allege such
knowledge on the part Robert B. Lawson should evidence to support such allegation
arise.

29. Neptune-Benson, LLC had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S.
Patent Application 11/633,064.

30. Neptune-Benson, LLC had knowledge that PeterJ. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S.
Patent Application 12/156,414.

31. Neptune-Benson, LLC had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S.
Patent Application 13/317,013.

32. Neptune-Benson, LLC had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was the true inventorof U.S.
Patent 7,419,588.

33. Neptune-Benson, LLC had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S.
Patent Application 11/633,064 when Lawson Aquatics, Inc. assigned its ownership in
U.S. Patent Application 11/633,064 to Neptune-Benson, LLC.

34. Neptune-Benson, LLC had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S.
Patent Application 12/156,414 when Lawson Aquatics, Inc. assigned its ownership in
U.S. Patent Application 12/156,414 to Neptune-Benson, LLC.

35. Neptune-Benson, LLC had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S. Patent Application 13/317,013 when Lawson Aquatics, Inc. assigned its ownership in
U.S. Patent Application 13/317,013 to Neptune-Benson, LLC.

36. Neptune-Benson, LLC had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S.
Patent 7,419,588 when Lawson Aquatics, Inc. assigned its ownership in U.S. Patent
7,419,588 to Neptune-Benson, LLC.

37. Neptune-Benson, LLC was not a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of the
rights of Peter J. Snelling in U.S. Patent Application 11/633,064.

38. Neptune-Benson, LLC was not a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of the rights of PeterJ. Snelling in U.S. Patent Application 12/156,414.

39. Neptune-Benson, LLC was not a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of the
rights of Peter J. Snelling in U.S. Patent Application 13/317,013.

40. Neptune-Benson, LLC was not a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of the
rights of Peter J. Snelling in U.S. Patent Application 7,419,588.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF FOR FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

WHEREFORE Plaintiff Peter J. Snelling prays for judgment and an order directing the
Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office to issue a certificate of

correction identifying Peter J. Snelling as the sole inventor of U.S. Patent 7,419,588 and
other such relief that the Court deems just and proper;

WHEREFORE Plaintiff Peter J. Snelling prays for judgment and an order directing

Neptune-Benson, LLC and Robert B. Lawson to request that the Director of the United
States Patent and Trademark Office correct the inventorship of U.S. Application

11/633,064; U.S. Application 12/156,414; and U.S. Application 13/317,013 to list Peter J. Snelling as the sole inventor and other such relief that the Court deems just and proper;
and

WHEREFORE Plaintiff Peter J. Snelling prays for judgment and an order directing

Neptune-Benson LLC and Robert B. Lawson to execute an assignment of all their rights
in U.S. Application 11/633,064; U.S. Application 12/156,414; U.S. Application
13/317,013 and U.S. Patent 7,419,588 to Peter J. Snelling, and provide that assignment to Peter J. Snelling.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION: CORRECTION OF INVENTORSHIP OF U.S.

PATENT 6,968,655 PURSANT TO 35 U.S.C. 256, 261 and 262

41. Plaintiff reasserts the allegation contained in paragraphs 1-22.


6

42. The inventions disclosed in U.S. Patent Application No. 10/609,226, Publication No.

2004-0003549 (published Jan. 8,2004), issued as U.S. Patent 6,968,655 (issued Nov. 29,

2005)(Robert B. Lawson, applicant) (hereinafter referred to as U.S. Patent Application


No. 10/609,266 or U.S. Patent 6,968,655) are solely inventions of the designs by Peter J.
Snelling.

43. Robert B. Lawson did not contribute to the conception of any invention claimed in U.S.
Patent 6,968,655.

44. Robert B. Lawson had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was and remains the sole inventor
of the inventions claimed in U.S. Patent 6,968,655.

45. Peter J. Snelling is the true sole inventor of the inventions claimed U.S. Patent 6,968,655.
46. Plaintiff is without sufficient knowledge to allege knowledge on the part of Robert B.

Lawson that it was inappropriate to file the U.S. Patent Application 10/609,226 without

naming Peter J. Snelling as an inventor. Plaintiff reserves the right to allege such
knowledge on the part Robert B. Lawson should evidence to support such allegation
arise.

47. The invention disclosed in U.S. Patent Application No. 09/867,243, Publication No.

2002-01788660 (published Dec. 5,2002)(Robert B. Lawson, applicant) (hereinafter referred to as U.S. Patent Application 09/867,243) are solely inventions of the designs by
Peter J. Snelling. 48. Robert B. Lawson did not contribute to the conception of any invention taught in U.S.

Patent Application 09/867,243.


49. Robert B. Lawson had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was and remains the sole inventor
of the inventions claimed U.S. Patent Application 09/867,243.

50. Peter J. Snelling is the true sole inventor of the inventions claimed in U.S. Patent
Application 09/867,243. 51. Plaintiff is without sufficient knowledge to allege knowledge on the part of Robert B.
Lawson that it was inappropriate to file the U.S. Patent Application 09/867,243 without

naming Peter J. Snelling as an inventor. Plaintiff reserves the right to allege such knowledge on the part Robert B. Lawson should evidence to support such allegation
arise.

52. Neptune-Benson LLC had knowledge that PeterJ. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S.
Patent 6,968,655.

53. Neptune-Benson LLC had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S.
Patent Application 10/609,226.

54. Neptune-Benson LLC had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S.
Patent Application 09/867,243.

55. Neptune-Benson LLC had knowledge that PeterJ. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S.
Patent 6,968,655 when Lawson Aquatics, Inc. assigned its ownership in U.S. Patent
6,968,655 to Neptune-Benson, LLC.

56. Neptune-Benson LLC had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S. Patent Application 10/609,226 when Lawson Aquatics, Inc. assigned its ownership in
U.S. Application 10/609,226 to Neptune-Benson, LLC.

57. Neptune-Benson LLC had knowledge that Peter J. Snelling was the true inventor of U.S.
Patent Application 09/867,243 when Lawson Aquatics, Inc. assigned its ownership in
U.S. Application 09/867,243 to Neptune-Benson, LLC.

58. Neptune-Benson, LLC was not a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of the
rights of Peter J. Snelling in U.S. Patent Application 10/609,226.

59. Neptune-Benson, LLC was not a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of the
rights of Peter J. Snelling in U.S. Patent Application 9/867,243.

60. Neptune-Benson, LLC was not a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of the
rights of Peter J. Snelling in U.S. Patent Application 6,968,655.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF FOR SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

WHEREFORE Plaintiff Peter J. Snelling prays for judgment and an order directing the
Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office to issue a certificate of

correction identifying Peter J. Snelling as the sole inventor of U.S. Patent 6,968,655 and
other such relief that the Court deems just and proper;
WHEREFORE Plaintiff Peter J. Snelling prays for judgment and an order directing

Neptune-Benson, LLC and Robert B. Lawson to request that the Director of the United
States Patent and Trademark Office correct the inventorship of U.S. Application

09/867,243 and U.S. Application 10/609,226 to list Peter J. Snelling as the sole inventor
and other such relief that the Court deems just and proper; and.

WHEREFORE Plaintiff Peter J. Snelling prays for judgment and an order directing Neptune-Benson LLC and Robert B. Lawson to execute an assignment of all their rights in U.S. Application 9/867,243; U.S. Application 10/609,226; and U.S. Patent 6,968,655
to Peter J. Snelling, and provide that assignment to Peter J. Snelling.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION: CONVERSION OF THE LAWSON PORTFOLIO

61. Plaintiff reasserts the allegation contained in paragraphs 1-20.

62. Peter J. Snelling knew that Robert B. Lawson filed patent applications to protect Peter J.
Snelling's design. Peter J. Snelling instructed Robert B. Lawson to record ownership in

the Lawson Portfolio in the name of Peter J. Snelling's corporation Hydrotech, Pty. Ltd., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of South Australia. 63. The ownership of the patent or the application for the patent initially vests in the named
inventors of the invention of the patent. See Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior
Univ. v. Roche Molecular Systems. Inc.. 563 U.S. (2011); 35 USC 261 and 262. , , 131 S.Ct. 2188, 2192

64. The patent applications in the Lawson Portfolio as filed deprived Peter J. Snelling of ownership by failing to identify Peter J. Snelling as an inventor. See 35 USC 262. 65. By filing the patent applications, or causing others to file on his behalf, Robert B. Lawson deprived Peter J. Snelling of ownership in the Lawson Portfolio.

66. By filing the patent applications without identifying Peter J. Snelling as an inventor, or
causing others to file on his behalf, Robert B. Lawson claimed sole and exclusive
ownership in the Lawson Portfolio.

67. Plaintiff is without sufficient knowledge to allege knowledge on the part of Robert B. Lawson that it was inappropriate to file the patent applications in the Lawson Portfolio
without naming Peter J. Snelling as an inventor. Plaintiff reserves the right to allege such

knowledge on the part Robert B. Lawson should evidence to support such allegation
arise.

68. Robert B. Lawson did not file any assignment transferring ownership of the Lawson Portfolio to Peter J. Snelling.

69. Robert B. Lawson did not file any assignment transferring ownership of the Lawson
Portfolio to Hydrotech Pty. Ltd..

70. By failing to file any assignment transferring ownership of any of the patent application
on the Lawson Portfolio to Peter J. Snelling and / or Hydrotech Pty. Ltd., Robert B.

Lawson deprived Peter J. Snelling and / or Hydrotech Pty. Ltd of his / its ownership of
the Lawson Portfolio.

71. Upon information and belief, Robert B. Lawson purported to sell full ownership of the
Lawson Portfolio to Neptune-Benson, LLC.
72. The records of the United States Patent and Trademark Office show that there exists

assignments from Lawson Aquatics, Inc. and Robert Lawson, as assignors to assignee

"Neptune-Benson LLC" for the following applications and patents in the Lawson
Portfolio:

Assignment recorded at Reel/Frame: 027461/0685, execution date Dec. 30, 2011,


and recorded Dec. 30, 2011:

U.S. Patent 6,968,665 published as U.S. Publication No. 2004-0003549 filed as U.S. Patent Application 10/609,226; ii. U.S. Publication 2008-0229490 filed as U.S. Patent Application
12/156,414;

i.

iii. US Patent 7,419,588 published as US Publication No. 2008-0128342 filed as U.S. Patent Application 11/633,064; iv. US Publication 2012-0144578 filed as U.S. Patent Application
13/317,013; and

v. US Publication 2008-0134427 filed as U.S. Patent Application


11/636,198.

73. The estimated value of the Lawson Portfolio is four million, three hundred thousand

dollars ($4,300,000.00).
PRAYER FOR RELIEF FOR THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

WHEREFORE Plaintiff Peter J. Snelling prays for judgment and award actual damages

in the amount of four million, three hundred thousand dollars ($4,300,000.00) against
defendant Robert B. Lawson; pre-judgment interest from the date of transfer of funds
from Neptune-Benson, LLC to Robert B. Lawson or any legal entity controlled by Robert
10

B. Lawson in connection with the sale of the Lawson Portfolio to Neptune-Benson, LLC;
and other such relief that the Court deems just and proper.

Date:

%/xl/^O
DANIEL SACJJSTVA BAR NO.36397)
RICHARETNEIFELD (VA BAR NO. 37310)
NEIFELD IP LAW, PC
4813-b EISENHOWER AVENUE

ALEXANDRIA, VA 22304 703-415-0012 -telephone


703-415-0013-facsimile

DSACHS@NEIFELD.COM (email)

11

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi