IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION Z-Man Fishing Products,

Inc. and Holding One, Inc., Plaintiffs, vs. Joseph F. Renosky and Renosky Lure, Inc. Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 2:12-cv-02906-DCN

COMPLAINT

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Plaintiffs Z-Man Fishing Products, Inc. and Holding One, Inc., for their Complaint against the Defendants, allege: GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 1. Each of the Plaintiffs is a South Carolina corporation, doing business in

Charleston County, South Carolina. 2. Defendant Joseph F. Renosky (Renosky) is an individual residing at

2120 Route 422 West, Indiana, Pennsylvania. 3. Defendant Renosky Lure, Inc. (Renosky Lure) is a corporation organized

and existing under the laws of the State of Pennsylvania with a principal place of business located at 90 Christy Park Drive, Indiana, Pennsylvania. 4. 5. Renosky is the President of Renosky Lure. Renosky Lure is the exclusive agent for Renoskys marketing and sales of

products covered by U.S. Patent No. 7,104,004, which patent is described more fully in the allegations below.

6.

The action alleged herein arises under the Patent Laws of the United

States, 35 U.S.C. 1 297, and includes actions for declaratory judgment of patent noninfringement and invalidity under 28 U.S.C. 2201 and 2202. 7. The Court has jurisdiction over this action under at least 28 U.S.C.

1338, 1367 and/or 2201. 8. 9. Venue is proper at least pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400. This Court has in personam jurisdiction over Defendants as they have

continually done substantial business in the State of South Carolina and in this judicial district, and have done and regularly do business in the State of South Carolina and in this judicial district, wherefore they have purposefully availed themselves of the privilege of doing business in the State of South Carolina. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Declaratory Judgment of Noninfringement 10. The preceding allegations are incorporated by reference herein as fully as

if repeated verbatim. 11. Renosky claims to be the owner of U.S. Patent No. 7,104,004 (the 004

patent). A copy of the 004 patent is attached as Exhibit A. 12. Defendants contend that Plaintiffs have

infringed and do infringe the 004 patent by commercializing in the United States certain fishing lures, including Plaintiffs FlashBack lure an image of which is depicted to the right.

13. 14.

Neither Plaintiff has infringed or infringes any claims of the 004 patent. A definite and concrete, real, actual, and substantial justiciable case and

controversy exists between Plaintiffs and Defendants regarding noninfringement of claims of the 004 patent, which is of sufficient immediacy and reality to warrant the issuance of a declaratory judgment. 15. No product made, sold, offered for sale, sold, or imported by either Plaintiff

infringes any valid claim of any of the 004 patent. 16. Plaintiffs are entitled to the decree and declaration of the Court that

neither has infringed, nor infringes, any valid claim of any of the 004 patent. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION Declaratory Judgment of Patent Claim Invalidity 17. The preceding allegations are incorporated by reference herein as fully as

if repeated verbatim. 18. An actual case or controversy exists between Plaintiffs and Renosky,

individually and as agent of Renosky Lure, and between Plaintiffs and Renosky Lure, regarding validity of the 004 patent claims. 19. reasons: a. failure to comply with the statutory requirements of novelty as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 102; b. failure to comply with the statutory requirement of nonobviousness as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 103; and/or The claims of the 004 patent are invalid for one or more of the following

c.

failure to comply with the statutory requirements set forth in 35 U.S.C. 111; and/or

d.

failure to comply with the requirements and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 112.

20.

Plaintiffs are entitled to the decree and declaration of the Court that the

claims of the 004 patent are invalid. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as follows: a. That the Court order and decree that no product made, sold, offered for sale, or imported by either Plaintiff infringes U.S. Patent No. 7,104,004; b. That the Court order and decree that the claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,104,004 are invalid; c. That the Court enter an injunction prohibiting Defendants, and each of them and their respective agents, successors, and assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with any of them, from alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,104,004 against either Plaintiff and their respective agents and purchasers; d. That this case be found to be exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 285; e. That the Court award to Plaintiffs their reasonable attorneys fees and costs in connection with this action; f. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem appropriate.

Respectfully submitted, TURNER, PADGET, GRAHAM & LANEY P.A. October 10, 2012 s/ Timothy D. St.Clair Timothy D. St. Clair (Fed. ID # 4270) 200 East Broad Street, Suite 250 Greenville, South Carolina 29602 (864) 552-4642 Email: tstclair@turnerpadget.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS