UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

VAUGHAN COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No.:____________________ 1:12-CV-1292(DNH/RFT) GLOBAL BIO-FUELS TECHNOLOGY, LLC and RICHARD BEHNKE, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants.

COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Vaughan Company (Vaughan Company), by its attorneys, as and for its Complaint against Defendants Global Bio-Fuels Technology, LLC and Richard Behnke (together Defendants), alleges as follows: Nature of Action 1. This case involves the actions of Vaughan Companys former employee, Richard

Behnke, and his current limited liability company/employer, Global Bio-Fuels Technology, LLC, using for their own benefit confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information belonging to Vaughan Company. Behnkes actions in this regard constitute patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United States Code, conversion of Vaughan Companys property under the common law and a breach of his fiduciary duty with Vaughan Company under New York law. Moreover, the actions of Defendants constitute unfair

competition, deceptive trade practices, and tortious interference with Vaughan Company.

-16265832.3

The Parties 2. Plaintiff Vaughan Company, having its principal place of business at 364 Monte-

Elma Road, Montesano, WA was established in the 1960s and is a World leader in the design and manufacture of chopper pumps used in the fields of, just to name a few, commercial and municipal wastewater treatment. 3. Defendant Richard Behnke (Behnke) is an individual, and on information and

belief, domiciled in the State of Minnesota. 4. On information and belief, Behnke is currently the owner, officer, member,

shareholder, president and/or employee of Defendant Global Bio-Fuels Technology, LLC (GBFT). Behnke was employed and paid a salary by Vaughan Company from about January 1, 2000 through about November 10, 2011. Behnke was employed as the Director of Mixing Technology of Vaughan Company, and, in that capacity, performed significant managerial and officer functions on behalf of Vaughan. 5. On information and belief, Behnke is: (a) the founder of GBFT, (b) the central

figure in the limited liability company, and (c) actively involved in the direction of virtually all aspects of GBFTs business. 6. On information and belief, while employed by Vaughan Company, Behnke

surreptitiously established a competing business, GBFT, to compete with Vaughan Company in the design and manufacture of pump mixing systems for use in agricultural, municipal wastewater treatment plants, and industrial processing applications. 7. According to the records of the Secretary of State of Minnesota, GBFT is a

limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of Minnesota, with its registered office located at 1160 Vierling Drive, #300, Shakopee, MN 55379.

-26265832.3

8.

On information and belief, GBFT was created on or about June 14, 2010. At that

time, Behnke was employed with Vaughan Company. 9. On information and belief, GBFT competes with Vaughan Company in the design

and manufacture of pump mixing system products and services. 10. On information and belief, GBFT advertises through its website,

www.globalbiofuelstech.com. 11. The website, www.gobalbiofuelstech.com was registered by Behnke on or around

November 19, 2011. Jurisdiction and Venue 12. This Court has exclusive jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case under 28

U.S.C. 1331 (federal question); 1338(a) (patent infringement); and 28 U.S.C. 1332 (a) and (c) (a suit between citizens of different states, and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs). 13. This Court also has supplemental jurisdiction over all other claims asserted herein

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367. 14. This Court has personal jurisdiction over GBFT. On information and belief,

GBFT markets, distributes, sells, and/or installs bio-fuels mixing system for use in agricultural, municipal wastewater treatment plants, and industrial processing applications throughout the United States, including to customers within this judicial district, usually through the submission of bids. 15. On information and belief, GBFT conducts commercial activities within

Rensselaer County, New York, and this judicial district.

-36265832.3

16.

This Court has personal jurisdiction over Behnke at least because, on information

and belief, Behnke has substantial contacts in the State of New York related to the claims in this action and Behnke engaged in the wrongful acts alleged herein in the State of New York. 17. 1400. PERTINENT FACTS 18. Vaughan Company is a World leader in the design and manufacture of chopper Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391 and/or

pumps used in the fields of commercial and municipal wastewater treatment. In this regard, Vaughan has expended considerable amounts of time and capital, and human resources to continually develop confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information concerning new products, processes, procedures, techniques, facilities, equipment, devices, research and development activities, business plans and methods, financial data, bid and proposal information, confidential company memos including, but not limited to, computational fluid dynamics analysis (CFD analysis), pricing methods and models, marketing strategies, and particularized solutions for customers requirements, among other things, in association with an in-tank mixing system utilizing dual-nozzle assemblies for mixing viscous waste liquid. Behnkes Employment with Vaughan Company and His Access to Vaughan Companys Confidential, Proprietary Information and Trade Secrets 19. Manager. 20. As Regional Sales Manager, Behnke was responsible for making sales Behnke was hired by Vaughan on or about January 1, 2000 as a Regional Sales

presentations to customers and potential customers on the Vaughan ROTAMIX product.

-46265832.3

21.

In that capacity, Behnke possessed, had access to, and had knowledge of, each of

Vaughan Companys products, proprietary trade practices, know-how, manufacturing techniques, key employee lists, financial information, customer lists, marketing strategies, product specifications, confidential company memos about Vaughan Company products, including, among other things, the ROTAMIX product. 22. Behnke was later given the title of "Director of Mixing Technology" at Vaughan

Company, a position for which there was no predecessor or successor. 23. Behnke was intimately and thoroughly familiar with Vaughan Company and

learned about what was involved in formulating Vaughan Companys unique solutions to the peculiar needs of particular customers in his role as the Regional Sales Manager and subsequently as the Director of Mixing Technology. 24. Behnke was also privy to Vaughan Companys project proposals, including bid

and proposal information which included unique product designs, manufacturing processes, research and development testing information, and solutions to the peculiar needs of particular customers. At no time, did Vaughan Company authorize Behnke to disclose and/or utilize such information except for the benefit of Vaughan Company. 25. As a direct result of his position with Vaughan Company, Behnke had extensive

contact with many Vaughan Company customers and potential customers. 26. During his employment at Vaughan Company, Behnke was found by company

executives to be undermining Vaughan Company to customers and potential customers. By way of example only, Behnke, on information and belief, told consulting engineers that Vaughan Company was doing things wrong in how it implemented its mixing systems, specifically the ROTAMIX product.

-56265832.3

27.

As a direct result of Behnkes actions, Vaughan Company employees had to

spend a great deal of time trying to defend Vaughan Company from attacks by consulting engineers with distorted information provided by, on information and belief, Behnke. Behnkes Resignation and Vaughan Companys Subsequent Discovery of Behnkes Wrongdoing 28. Behnkes association with Vaughan Company ended on or about November 10,

2011. As an employee of Vaughan Company, Behnke was bound by certain obligations to Vaughan Company. Moreover, he was expected to return all documents, records, and writings relating to Vaughan Companys confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information. 29. In addition to other Vaughan Company property, Behnke was issued a laptop

computer (Dell Inspiron 17R) by Vaughan Company around February 16, 2011, with the understanding that such computer was the property of Vaughan Company and was to be returned upon termination of his employment. 30. To date, Behnke has refused to return the Vaughan Company laptop computer,

which contains Vaughan Companys confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information. 31. Unbeknownst to Vaughan Company until recently, Behnke had formed GBFT on

or around June 14, 2010. 32. Behnke never disclosed his simultaneous employment with GBFT to Vaughan

Company, nor sought approval from Vaughan Company for his simultaneous employment with GBFT. 33. On information and belief, Behnke solicited and made GBFT equipment sales to

Vaughan Company U.S. customers while working for Vaughan Company. By way of example only, in or about August 2011 during a business trip to California at Vaughan Company expense,

-66265832.3

Behnke sold light weight nozzles of his own design for a Vaughan Company mixing system to an existing Vaughan Company customer, University of California, Davis, in direct competition with Vaughan Company. 34. On information and belief, Behnke solicited existing Vaughan Company

European customers while working for Vaughan Company. By way of example only, in April 2011, Behnke corresponded with Franco Turbessi, a Vaughan Company representative in Italy about GBFT supplying mixing system for European biogas projects. 35. On information and belief, GBFT was formed by Behnke for the purpose of

directly competing with Vaughan Company in the field of pump mixing systems. 36. On information and belief, Behnke caused the unlawful diversion of Vaughan

Companys proprietary and confidential information by taking with him at least Vaughan Companys project proposals and pricing to help him kick start his GBFT business. 37. In or about May 2012, Defendants submitted a bid to a contractor for a sludge

tank mixing system project in Portland, IN (Portland). 38. On information and belief, Behnke improperly used Vaughan Companys contact

lists, including business plans and methods, financial data, bid and proposal information, confidential company memos, including computational fluid dynamics analysis (CFD analysis), pricing methods and models to acquire the sludge tank mixing system project previously considered by Portland. 39. In fact, on information and belief, Behnke improperly used Vaughan Companys

pricing methods to compete with Vaughan Company on the Portland project. The Defendants bid caused Vaughan Company to discount its bid to win the project.

-76265832.3

40.

On or about August 10, 2012, Vaughan Company became aware that Defendants

had submitted a bid for a digester mixing systems project at Rensselaer County in New York (Rensselaer). The Defendants bid was considerably less than that submitted by Vaughan Company, causing Vaughan Company to discount its bid. 41. As a requirement, the Rensselaer project specification, under section 2.03 (A)

titled "Casing and Back Pull-Out Adapter Plate," calls for a backplate which "include[s] a replaceable Rockwell C 60 steel cutter adjustable for 0.005-0.015 clearance to cut against the rotating impeller pumpout vanes for removing fiber and debris." 42. On information and belief, the "backplate" feature of the Rensselaer project is

covered by U.S. Patent No. 8,105,017 issued January 31, 2012, titled Centrifugal Chopper Pump with Impeller Assembly and assigned to Vaughan Company (the 017 patent). A copy of the 017 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 43. Vaughan Company owns all right, title, and interest in, and has standing to sue for

the infringement of the '017 patent. 44. As a requirement, the Rensselaer project specification, under section 2.03 (C)

titled "Cutter Bar Plate," calls for a plate "recessed into the pump bowl and shall contain at least 2 shear bars extending diametrically across the intake opening to within 0.010-0.020 of the rotating cutter nut tooth, for the purpose of preventing intake opening blockage and wrapping of debris at the shaft area." 45. On information and belief, the "cutter bar plate" feature of the Rensselaer project

is covered by U.S. Patent Nos. 5,460,483 issued October 24, 1995, titled Multistage Centrifugal Chopper Pump (the '483 patent) and 7,841,550 issued November 30, 2010, titled "Cutter Nut and Cutter Bar Assembly" (the '550 patent), both of which are assigned to Vaughan Company.

-86265832.3

A copy of each the '483 patent and the 550 patent are attached hereto as Exhibits B and C, respectively. 46. As a requirement, the Rensselaer project specification, under section 2.03 (E)

titled Cutter Nut, calls for an impeller to be secured by a cutter nut, designed to cut stringy materials and prevent binding. 47. On information and belief, the cutter nut feature of the Rensselaer project is

covered by the '483 patent (Exhibit B) and the '550 patent (Exhibit C). 48. Vaughan Company owns all right, title, and interest in, and has standing to sue for

the infringement of both the '483 patent and the 550 patent. 49. As a requirement, the Rensselaer project specification, under section 2.03(F) titled

Upper Cutter, calls for an upper cutter threaded into the back pull-out adapter plate above the impeller, designed to cut against the pump-out vanes and the impeller hub, reducing and removing stringy materials from the mechanical seal area. 50. On information and belief, the upper cutter feature of the Rensselaer project is

covered by U.S. Patent No. 5,460,482, issued October 24, 1995, titled Centrifugal Chopper Pump with Internal Cutter and assigned to Vaughan Company (the 482 patent). A copy of the 482 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit D. 51. Vaughan Company owns all right, title, and interest in, and has standing to sue

for, the infringement of the 482 patent. 52. On information and belief, Behnke, through his former capacity with Vaughan

Company, had knowledge of Vaughan Companys relationship with Rensselaer. 53. On information and belief, Behnke is improperly using Vaughan Companys

contact lists, including business plans and methods, financial data, bid and proposal information,

-96265832.3

confidential company memos, pricing methods and models to acquire the pump mixing systems project now being considered by Rensselaer. 54. On information and belief, Behnke is improperly using Vaughan Companys

pricing methods and models and the confidential company memos to underbid Vaughan Company and to secure the Rensselaer project. 55. Vaughan Company also recently became aware that Defendants are preparing to

submit additional bids for similar pump mixing system projects at Cooperstown, NY and Toledo, OH. 56. Vaughan Company believes that Behnke is improperly using Vaughan

Companys relationship with both Cooperstown and Toledo to acquire the pump mixing system projects in the respective municipalities. 57. On information and belief, Defendants have been approved for bidding on two

projects in Brookings, SD under RQ4538C and RQ4424 and may be permitted to bid on known future projects utilizing the Vaughan Company ROTAMIX System in Sioux Falls, SD and Brookings, SD. 58. As with other confidential information, Vaughan Companys project proposals

include highly confidential and extremely valuable information such as its unique product designs, confidential company memos, and customer requirements. Indeed, this information gives Vaughan Company a business advantage over its competitors. 59. On information and belief, by copying and misappropriating Vaughan Companys

confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information, Behnke has a blueprint of Vaughan Companys product development plans, detailed drawings, and methodology, without any of the

- 10 6265832.3

investment of time and money Vaughan Company has devoted to the development of its trade secrets. 60. On information and belief, it is inevitable that competitors will improperly acquire

Vaughan Companys confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information due to Behnkes disclosure or inevitable disclosure to competitors as a result of their affiliations with him. 61. Based on the aforementioned, Vaughan Company asserts that Defendants can

inflict and has inflicted irreparable harm upon Vaughan Company, and engaged in unfair competition in an number of ways, including: undercutting Vaughan Companys prices; anticipating and thwarting Vaughan Companys existing or future marketing strategies with respect to specific customers or industries; and/or avoiding the time and expenses associated with developing particularized project proposals, which include unique designs, processes, methods, specifications, and research data, etc. 62. By virtue of Defendants unlawful conduct described above, Vaughan Company

has already suffered serious and extensive economic and business injury, and if such conduct is not enjoined, Vaughan Company faces further injury which is immediate and irreparable. The harm to Vaughan Company includes, but is not limited to, the conversion, misappropriation, misuse, and disclosure of Vaughan Companys trade secrets and confidential information, and the impairment of, and interference with, Vaughan Companys contractual relations with their customers.

- 11 6265832.3

Behnkes Misappropriation of Vaughans Unpublished Works 63. Behnke travelled back and forth to Europe several times for Vaughan Company in

an effort to develop sales of the ROTAMIX product in mixing applications for anaerobic digestion projectsi.e., generating electricity from biogas (mostly methane), a by-product of the digestion process. 64. During a sales trip to Italy in or around May 14, 2008, Behnke, on information

and belief, took or had taken photos to be used in Vaughan Company marketing, including photos of customer facilities where Vaughan Company had equipment installations. One such photo, titled "Chopped material" is attached hereto as Exhibit E. 65. During a trip to Europe on or around February 27, 2010, Behnke, on information

and belief, took or had taken several photos to be used in Vaughan Company marketing, including photos of customer facilities where Vaughan Company had equipment installations. Two photos, titled "100_1385" and "IMG_0806", respectively, are attached hereto as Exhibit F. 66. During a trip to Italy on or around March 14, 2011, Vaughan Company employee,

Arne Swenson took or had taken several photos to be used in Vaughan Company marketing, including photos of customer facilities where Vaughan Company had equipment installations. A photo titled "100_1712" is attached hereto as Exhibit G. 67. During a trip to Italy on or around July 18, 2011, Vaughan Company employee,

Arne Swenson took or had taken several photos to be used in Vaughan Company marketing, including photos of customer facilities where Vaughan Company had equipment installations. Two photos, titled "IMG_2558" and "IMG_2532" are attached hereto as Exhibit H and Exhibit I, respectively.

- 12 6265832.3

68.

A product marketing brochure for GBFT's "Hydraulix Process Mixing System,"

attached hereto as Exhibit J and available at http://www.slideshare.net/rbehnke/hydraulixhandout-final, includes the Vaughan Company photos titled "Chopped material" (see Exhibit E) and "IMG_2558" (Exhibit H) as well as a derivative work of the photo titled "100_1712" (Exhibit G). 69. Use of the photos in Exhibits E, G and H by Behnke was done without the

knowledge or consent of Vaughan Company. 70. On or about August 8, 2011, Behnke, through GBFT, applied for U.S. trademark

protection on the mark Hydraulix Process Systems, which was assigned Application No. 85391974 (the '974 application) by the U.S. Trademark Office. 71. The class of goods for the mark in the '974 application is listed as Waste water

and biowaste treatment systems, namely hydraulic pumps and automatic nozzles, sold as a unit. 72. In response to an Official Action by the U.S. Trademark Office requesting

information about the goods/services to which the mark in the '974 application would be used, Behnke supplied photos including the above-referenced photos titled "100_1385" and "IMG_0806" (see Exhibit F). 73. Use of the photos of Exhibit F by Behnke was done without the knowledge or

consent of Vaughan Company. 74. Defendants, on information and belief, constructed or had constructed a web site

having the address http://www.globalbiofuelstech.com/ for the purpose of soliciting business in competition with Vaughan Company. The website includes two of the above-referenced photos titled "IMG_2532" (Exhibit I) and "Chopped material" (Exhibit E).

- 13 6265832.3

75.

Use of photos of Exhibit E and I by Defendants was done without the knowledge

or consent of Vaughan Company. 76. The above-referenced photos of Exhibits E, F, G, H and I are the subject of now

pending copyright applications filed on August 14, 2012 in the name of Vaughan Company. 77. Defendants are using and have used, the copyrighted photos without the

permission of Vaughan Company. COUNT I INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,460,482 78. Complaint. 79. On information and belief, Defendants have infringed and continue to infringe the Vaughan Company incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 77 of its

482 patent. The infringing acts include, but are not limited to, the manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer for sale of products and services, including submitting a bid for a digester mixing systems project at Rensselaer County in New York, in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271. 80. As a result of Defendants acts of infringement, Vaughan Company has sustained

and will continue irreparable harm and damages. Vaughan Company is entitled to recover its damages from Defendants pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284. 81. On information and belief, Defendants have actual knowledge of the 482 patent

prior to submitting the bid at Rensselaer County in New York, and elected to willfully and deliberately disregard Vaughan Companys rights, rendering this case exceptional, entitling Vaughan Company to recover treble damages and attorneys fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284 and 285.

- 14 6265832.3

COUNT II INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,460,483 82. Complaint. 83. On information and belief, Defendants have infringed and continue to infringe the Vaughan Company incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 81 of its

483 patent. The infringing acts include, but are not limited to, the manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer for sale of products and services, including submitting a bid for a digester mixing systems project at Rensselaer County in New York, in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271. 84. As a result of Defendants acts of infringement, Vaughan Company has sustained

and will continue to sustain irreparable harm and damages. Vaughan Company is entitled to recover its damages from Defendants pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284. 85. On information and belief, Defendants have actual knowledge of the 483 patent

prior to submitting the bid at Rensselaer County in New York, and elected to willfully and deliberately disregard Vaughan Companys rights, rendering this case exceptional, entitling Vaughan Company to recover treble damages and attorneys fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284 and 285. COUNT III INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,841,550 86. Complaint. 87. On information and belief, Defendants have infringed and continue to infringe the Vaughan Company incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 85 of its

550 patent. The infringing acts include, but are not limited to, the manufacture, use, sale,

- 15 6265832.3

importation, and/or offer for sale of products and services, including submitting a bid for a digester mixing systems project at Rensselaer County in New York, in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271. 88. As a result of Defendants acts of infringement, Vaughan Company has sustained

and will continue to sustain irreparable harm and damages. Vaughan Company is entitled to recover its damages from Defendants pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284. 89. On information and belief, Defendants have actual knowledge of the 550 patent

prior to submitting the bid at Rensselaer County in New York, and elected to willfully and deliberately disregard Vaughan Companys rights, rendering this case exceptional, entitling Vaughan Company to recover treble damages and attorneys fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284 and 285. COUNT IV INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,105,017 90. Complaint. 91. On information and belief, Defendants have infringed and continues to infringe Vaughan Company incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 89 of its

the 017 patent. The infringing acts include, but are not limited to, the manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer for sale of products and services, including submitting a bid for a digester mixing systems project at Rensselaer County in New York, in violation of 35 U.S.C. 271. 92. As a result of Defendants acts of infringement, Vaughan Company has sustained

and will continue to sustain irreparable harm and damages. Vaughan Company is entitled to recover its damages from Defendants pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284.

- 16 6265832.3

93.

On information and belief, Defendants have actual knowledge of the 017 patent

prior to submitting the bid at Rensselaer County in New York, and elected to willfully and deliberately disregard Vaughan Companys rights, rendering this case exceptional, entitling Vaughan Company to recover treble damages and attorneys fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284 and 285. COUNT V MISAPPROPRIATION OF TRADE SECRETS 94. Complaint. 95. Defendants, by the conduct described above, have engaged in actual or threatened Vaughan Company incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 93 of its

misappropriation of Vaughan Companys confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information, and are thus unfairly competing with Vaughan Company in violation of the common law and the New York Uniform Trade Secret Acts in that: (a) Vaughan Company has devoted substantial resources to the development of its confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars over many years; (b) Behnke possesses this confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information belonging to Vaughan Company that will afford his GBFT a competitive advantage; (c) Behnke, a former senior staff member of Vaughan Company, owes a fiduciary duty not to disclose this information; (d) Behnke facilitates deals and provides business strategies to Vaughan Companys competitors, which he will inevitably divulge, disseminate, or share Vaughan Companys confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information; and (e) such disclosure would be unfair and unjust to Vaughan Company and would cause Vaughan Company to suffer irreparable harm.

- 17 6265832.3

96.

Vaughan Companys confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information,

individually and collectively, derives independent economic value from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use. 97. Vaughan Company takes appropriate and reasonable measures to guard the

secrecy of its confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information. 98. Vaughan Company has no adequate remedy at law and would suffer substantial

and immediate irreparable harm unless Behnke and GBFT are enjoined as requested below. 99. Greater injury will be inflicted on Vaughan Company by the denial of this relief

than will be inflicted on Behnke and GBFT by the granting of this relief. 100. The public interest favors the issuance of an order enjoining Defendants from

obtaining or utilizing Vaughan Companys confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information. Consumers benefit from fair competition between Vaughan Company and

Defendants and should not be deprived of that competition by Defendants unlawful utilization of Vaughan Companys confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information. COUNT VI UNFAIR COMPETITION 101. Complaint. 102. By taking, possessing and/or using Vaughan Companys confidential, proprietary, Vaughan Company incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 100 of its

and trade secret business information, without any right to it, Defendants are competing unfairly against Vaughan Company by offering products and services to customers based on misappropriated information. Such conduct is likely to deceive a substantial portion of

- 18 6265832.3

customers and potential customers, and likely to influence the purchasing decisions of potential customers, to the harm and detriment of Vaughan Company. 103. Defendants actions were intentional, willful, outrageous and malicious, and

justify the imposition of punitive damages. COUNT VII TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS 104. Complaint. 105. Valuable business relationships currently exist and have existed for a long time Vaughan Company incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 103 of its

between Vaughan Company and its customers and potential customers, including Rensselaer County in New York. 106. Defendants have knowledge of Vaughan Companys existing and prospective

business relationships, including Rensselaer County in New York. 107. On information and belief, notwithstanding this knowledge, Defendants have

jointly exploited the relationships and confidential information which Behnke developed and acquired while employed and otherwise affiliated with Vaughan Company to their benefit. 108. On information and belief, this improper conduct is interfering with Vaughan

Companys business and its existing and prospective contractual relationships with third parties, thus causing injury to Vaughan Company. 109. This interference by Behnke, through the use of, and in concert with, GBFT, is

without privilege and justification and their conduct is willful, wanton, and malicious.

- 19 6265832.3

110.

Defendants wrongful, improper, intentional, and unprivileged interference with

Vaughan Companys contractual rights is continuing up to the present time and will continue into the future. 111. By reason of the foregoing acts and conducts of Defendants, Vaughan Company

will, unless an injunction is issued by this Court, suffer irreparable harm in the nature of a loss of goodwill, business relationships, and confidential information, which cannot be adequately compensated by damages. 112. Unless preliminarily and permanently enjoined, Defendants will continue to

engage in such activities, directly or indirectly, in violation of their obligations under common law. 113. necessary. 114. Alternatively, Defendants are causing injury to Vaughan Company, and it seeks Vaughan Company has no adequate remedy at law and injunctive relief is

compensatory and punitive damages by reason of Defendants intentional and malicious conduct. COUNT VIII CONVERSION 115. Complaint. 116. Vaughan Company is the true and rightful owner of Vaughan Companys Vaughan Company incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 114 of its

confidential, proprietary, and trade secret rights and interests in the project proposals. 117. By improperly utilizing this information for its own benefit, and by physically

taking this information for its own benefit, Behnke has deprived Vaughan Company of its exclusive, confidential, proprietary, and trade secret rights and interests in the project proposals.

- 20 6265832.3

118.

Vaughan Company has not authorized Behnke to improperly use this information,

nor did it authorize Behnke to physically retain this information. 119. As a consequence of the foregoing, Vaughan Company has suffered and will

continue to suffer irreparable injury and damages. 120. As a result of Behnkes conversion, which was perpetrated with actual malice,

Vaughan Company is entitled to punitive damages. COUNT IX BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY 121. Complaint. 122. By reason of Behnkes position and status with Vaughan Company, Behnke owes Vaughan Company incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 120 of its

and continues to owe to Vaughan Company the utmost in loyalty and fair dealing. 123. The aforesaid acts by Behnke constitute clear and blatant examples of a breach of

fiduciary duty and a breach of loyalty and trust. 124. Vaughan Company has been injured by this breach and is entitled to

compensatory and punitive damages by reasons thereof. WHEREFORE, Vaughan Company respectfully requests the following relief: a. The entry of judgment in favor of Vaughan Company on the claim of infringement of the '482 patent. b. The entry of judgment in favor of Vaughan Company on the claim of infringement of the '483 patent. c. The entry of judgment in favor of Vaughan Company on the claim of infringement of the 550 patent.

- 21 6265832.3

d.

The entry of judgment in favor of Vaughan Company on the claim of infringement of the 017 patent.

e.

An award of damages adequate to compensate Vaughan Company for the infringement that has occurred (together with prejudgment interest from the date the infringement began), but in no event less than a reasonable royalty as permitted by 35 U.S.C. 284;

f.

A preliminary and/or permanent injunction against further infringement of the '482, '483, 550 and 017 patents.

g.

A finding that Defendants acts of infringement Patent have been willful and an award of enhanced damages to Vaughan Company of up to three times the amount of actual damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 284;

h.

A finding that this case is exceptional and an award to Vaughan Company of all relief provided by 35 U.S.C. 285;

i.

A temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunction against Defendants from disclosing to anyone, including but not limited to, officers, employees, agents, representatives, contractors, customers and prospective customers, Vaughan Companys confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information;

j.

A temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunction against Behnke from participating or assisting GBFT in any way, in the development, manufacture or production of pump mixing systems associated with use in agricultural, municipal wastewater treatment plants, and industrial processing applications.

k.

A temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunction against GBFT from aiding or assisting Behnke in any way, in the development, manufacture or production of

- 22 6265832.3

pump mixing systems associated with use in agricultural, municipal wastewater treatment plants, and industrial processing applications. l. A temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunction against Defendants, and all other persons or entities acting in concert with them or their behalf, from directly or indirectly using, disclosing or retaining any confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information of Vaughan Company. m. A temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunction against Defendants, and all other persons or entities acting in concert with them or their behalf, from directly or indirectly soliciting, inducing, recruiting, encouraging, assisting, advising, or directing any individual who possesses or has access to Vaughan Companys confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information to work for GBFT. n. An order that Defendants, and all other persons or entities acting in concert with them or on their behalf, deliver and destroy any confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information of Vaughan Company to Vaughan Company. o. A judgment in Vaughan Companys favor and against Defendants for monetary damages, including, but not limited to, all amounts necessary to compensate Vaughan Company for Defendants wrongful activities including reasonable attorneys fees and costs. p. A judgment in Vaughan Companys favor and against Defendants for punitive and/or exemplary damages for their willful and malicious conduct. q. r. An award of interest on any judgment rendered in this action; An award of its attorneys fees and costs in this action; and

- 23 6265832.3

s.

Such other and further relief that Vaughan Company is entitled to under law, and any additional relief that this Court or a jury may deem just and proper. JURY DEMAND

Vaughan Company demands a trial by jury on all issues presented in this Complaint. Date: August 16, 2012 HISCOCK & BARCLAY, LLP

By:

s/ John D. Cook John D. Cook (511491)

Office and Post Office Address One Park Place 300 South State Street Syracuse, New York 13202 Telephone: (315) 425-2885 Facsimile: (315) 703-7353 Email: jcook@hblaw.com -andBISHOP & DIEHL LTD. Edward L. Bishop (pro hace vice to be submitted) Office and Post Office Address 1750 East Golf Road, Suite 390 Schaumburg, IL 60173 Telephone: (847) 969-9123 Facsimile: (847) 969-9124 Email: ebishop@bishoppatents.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Vaughan Company

- 24 6265832.3