IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA STATESVILLE DIVISION

VON DREHLE CORPORATION,

) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) AMERICAN SPECIALTIES, INC., ) ) Defendant. ) ___________________________________ )

Civil Action No. 5:14-cv-51 (Jury Trial Demanded)

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff, von Drehle Corporation (Plaintiff or von Drehle) brings this action against American Specialties, Inc. (Defendant or ASI), and for its causes of action alleges as follows: PARTIES 1. Plaintiff von Drehle is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the

State of North Carolina with its principal place of business in Hickory, North Carolina. 2. Upon information and belief, Defendant ASI is a corporation organized and

existing under the laws of the State of New York with a principal place of business in Yonkers, New York. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3. 4. This is an action for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. 271 and 281-285. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and

1338(a). Additionally, Plaintiff and Defendant are citizens of different states and the amount in controversy exceeds, exclusive of interest and costs, the sum specified by 28 U.S.C. 1332.

5.

Personal jurisdiction over ASI is proper pursuant to North Carolina General

Statute 1-75.4 and controlling principles of due process. Upon information and belief, ASI has transacted and solicited business in North Carolina and in this district relating to the infringing products alleged herein and has committed acts of infringement in this state and district by importing, offering to sell and/or selling products infringing one or more of the patents-in-suit, to one or more customers in this state and district, and/or by offering for sale and/or selling such infringing products to North Carolina residents. Further, ASIs infringement of the patents-insuit as alleged herein has caused Plaintiff to suffer harm and damages in North Carolina and this district, which is a result that was reasonably foreseeable to the Defendant when Defendant placed the infringing articles into the stream of commerce through an established channel of distribution. 6. Venue properly lies in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1400(b) because the

Defendant has committed acts of infringement in this district. Venue also properly lies in this district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2) and/or (3) because either a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the causes of action alleged herein or a substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is in this district, and this Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Plaintiffs Products 7. von Drehle provides quality paper towel and tissue products as well as innovative

dispensers for commercial and away-from-home markets throughout the country. von Drehle designs, develops, manufactures, and distributes paper towel and tissue dispensers, including but not limited to center pull paper towel dispensers.

Plaintiffs Patents 8. On July 18, 2000, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and

lawfully issued United States Patent No. 6,089,499 (the 499 Patent), entitled Dual Roll, Center Pull, Paper Toweling Dispenser. A true and correct copy of the 499 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Plaintiff, by assignment, is the lawful owner of the 499 Patent, including the right to sue for and recover for past, present, and future infringement thereof. 9. On April 11, 2006, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and

lawfully issued United States Patent No. 7,025,301 (the 301 Patent), entitled Dispenser. A true and correct copy of the 301 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Plaintiff, by assignment, is the lawful owner of the 301 Patent, including the right to sue for and recover for past, present, and future infringement thereof. 10. Plaintiff has spent considerable time, effort, and resources developing and

promoting its products embodying the inventions of the patents-in-suit. Defendants Products 11. von Drehle has become aware that ASI is making, using, offering for sale, selling

and/or importing products, namely Recessed Pull Core Towel Dispensers and Waste Receptacles (#04693, #04693-6, #04693-9, and #046934) (hereinafter Dispensers) that infringe one or more claims of the 499 and 301 patents as alleged herein below. 12. On October 7, 2013, von Drehle sent a letter to ASI giving notice to ASI of von

Drehles 499 and 301 patents in view of Dispensers sold by ASI. 13. On October 22, 2013, von Drehle sent a second letter to ASI regarding the 499

and 301 patents.

14.

On October 23, 2013, Charles La Barbera of ASI sent an email to Raymond von

Drehle acknowledging receipt of von Drehles letter of October 7th and stating that ASI would investigate and get back to von Drehle shortly. 15. On December 19, 2013, von Drehles counsel sent a letter to Mr. La Barbera of

ASI asking about the status of ASIs investigation. 16. On December 30, 2013, La Barbera sent an email to von Drehles attorney stating

that he (La Barbera) had referred this matter to our attorney at the Law Offices of Robert R. Strack and I anticipate he will respond shortly. 17. On December 31, 2013, von Drehles counsel sent a letter to Mr. Strack to advise

Mr. Strack of the prior correspondence between von Drehle and ASI and to ask Mr. Strack when von Drehle might receive a response. 18. As of April 15, 2014, von Drehle had not received a response from ASI or its

attorney. ASI has not communicated to von Drehle that it does not infringe the 499 or 301 patents. ASI has not communicated to von Drehle that the 499 patent and/or the 301 patent are invalid. COUNT I (Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,089,499) 19. Plaintiff hereby restates and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-18 as if fully

set forth herein. 20. Defendant has imported, made, used, offered for sale, and sold in the United

States Dispensers which infringe at least claim 10 of Plaintiffs 499 patent. 21. Defendant has had knowledge of Plaintiffs rights in the 499 patent at least as a

result of the prior correspondence between von Drehle and ASI as set forth in paragraphs 12-18 hereinabove. Upon information and belief, ASI continues to import, make, use, offer for sale

and/or sell in the United States the infringing Dispensers. Accordingly, Defendants infringement is willful and deliberate. COUNT II (Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,025,301) 22. Plaintiff hereby restates and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-18 as if fully

set forth herein. 23. Defendant has imported, made, used, offered for sale, and/or sold in the United

States Dispensers which infringe at least claims 1-4 and 6-8 of Plaintiffs 301 patent. 24. Defendant has had knowledge of Plaintiffs rights in the 301 patent at least as a

result of the prior correspondence between von Drehle and ASI as set forth in paragraphs 12-18 hereinabove. Upon information and belief, ASI continues to import, make, use, offer for sale and/or sell in the United States the infringing Dispensers. Accordingly, Defendants infringement is willful and deliberate. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff von Drehle respectfully requests that it be granted judgment against Defendant ASI: A. That ASI has infringed one or more claims of United States Patent No. 6,089,499; B. That ASI has infringed one or more claims of United States Patent No. 7,025,301; C. That ASI be preliminarily and permanently enjoined from infringing Plaintiffs patents; D. Awarding von Drehle damages in an amount adequate to compensate von Drehle for ASIs infringement of von Drehles patents, including lost profits or reasonable royalties, and costs, prejudgment and post-judgment interest;

E. Finding that ASIs infringement is and has been willful and deliberate and awarding von Drehle treble damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284; F. Finding that this is an exceptional case within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 285 and awarding von Drehle its reasonable attorneys fees; G. Awarding von Drehle such further and other relief as the Court deems just and equitable. JURY DEMAND Plaintiff requests a trial by jury with regard to all issues for which a trial by jury is allowed. Respectfully submitted this 16th day of April, 2014.

s/John P. Higgins John P. Higgins (N.C. State Bar No. 17442) Justin A. Jernigan (N.C. State Bar No. 38920) John C. Nipp (N.C. State Bar No. 23406) ADDITON, HIGGINS, PENDLETON & ASHE, P.A. 11610 N. Community House Rd. Charlotte, NC 28277-2199 Tel: (704)945-6704 Fax: (704)945-6735 Email: jhiggins@ahpapatent.com Attorneys for Plaintiff von Drehle Corporation