You are on page 1of 44

Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 1 of 26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
WACO DIVISION

MATCH GROUP, LLC §


§
§
Plaintiff, §
§ Civil Action No. 6:18-cv-00081
v. §
§
TANTAN LTD. § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
(A/K/A TANTAN CULTURE §
DEVELOPMENT (BEIJING) CO., LTD.) §
§
§
Defendant.

PLAINTIFF MATCH GROUP, LLC’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

I. INTRODUCTION
Match Group, Inc. is the worldwide leader in online dating, with multiple popular brands

of matchmaking services, including Match, Plenty of Fish, OkCupid, and more. Plaintiff Match

Group, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Match Group, Inc., owns Tinder and its related

intellectual property. Tinder is one of Match’s flagship brands. When released, it launched a

cultural revolution in social networking and online dating. Tinder is famously characterized by a

stack of swipeable cards containing photographs of potential matches nearby. If a user is

interested in the person shown, the user swipes right. If not, the user swipes left. If two users

swipe right on each other, a match has been made, and the users are permitted to communicate

with one another through the app. The app has become so well-known that an entire generation

is often described as the “Tinder generation.”

Match, through Tinder, has spent significant time and money advertising the Tinder

brand, including Tinder’s unique card-based swipe design. Match has also spent significant time

1
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 2 of 26

and money designing an attractive, artistic app, protected by both design patents and copyright.

As a result of all of these efforts, Match has significant intellectual property rights related to the

Tinder application and the Tinder brand. This is a case about infringement of that intellectual

property.

Tantan has copied Tinder’s world-changing, card-swipe-based, mutual opt-in premise.

Tantan, described as the “Chinese Tinder” or a “Tinder Clone,” has also copied Tinder’s general

look-and-feel in an attempt to trade off of Tinder’s name and brand and to meet user expectations

that Tinder itself and its brand created. These actions infringe upon Match’s valid and

enforceable intellectual property rights. Match brings this complaint to stop Tantan’s unlawful

infringement.

II. THE PARTIES

1. Plaintiff Match Group, LLC is a Delaware Corporation with a principal place of

business in Dallas, Texas at 8750 N. Central Expressway, Suite 1400.

2. Tantan Ltd. is a Chinese corporation with a principal place of business located in

Beijing, China. Tantan Ltd. has also been referred to and known as Tantan Culture Development

(Beijing) Co., Ltd.

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE


3. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Tantan, Ltd. consistent with the

requirements of the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution and the Texas Long

Arm Statute. Tantan conducts business and has committed acts of patent infringement and/or

has induced and/or has contributed to acts of patent infringement by others in the Western

District of Texas, the State of Texas, and elsewhere in the United States.

4. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over Match’s claims for patent

infringement pursuant to the Federal Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331

2
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 3 of 26

and 1338(a). The Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over Match’s Lanham Act claims

under 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq. The Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over Match’s

copyright claim under 17 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq. The Court also has supplemental jurisdiction

over the state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

5. Venue is proper in this District because Tantan Ltd. is a foreign corporation and

this lawsuit is thus outside the scope of the venue laws. Additionally, Tantan has committed acts

of infringement in the District by making, using, and selling the Tantan app in the District and is

subject to personal jurisdiction in the District.

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS


A. The Creation of Tinder
6. The Tinder app was first conceived at and created by “Hatch Labs,” a technology

incubator owned by Match’s ultimate parent company, InterActive Corp (“IAC”). Sean Rad,

Justin Mateen, Jonathan Badeen, Joe Munoz, Chris Gulczynski, Whitney Wolfe-Herd, and others

formed the early Tinder team that conceived, designed, developed, and conducted initial

marketing efforts for the Tinder app.

7. Released in September 2012 for iPhone devices, Tinder revolutionized online

dating services. From its earliest days, the premise of Tinder has been fundamentally the same.

Tinder users are shown other users (“potential match(es)”) based on certain parameters,

including age range and geographic location. The user is shown a card with a photo of a

potential match nearby. The user is then given a choice to indicate interest (or lack thereof) in

the potential match merely by swiping the card right (if interested) or left (if not). Although the

earliest iterations of Tinder did not include the ability to swipe left or right, once implemented,

swiping on Tinder became a cultural sensation.

8. Tinder is now one of the most popular apps in the world.

3
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 4 of 26

B. Match’s Tinder-Related Intellectual Property


9. Match has been awarded numerous design patents related to ornamental aspects

of the Tinder app.

10. One such design patent, United States Patent No. D798,314 (the “’314 Patent”),

entitled “Display Screen or Portion Thereof with a Graphical User Interface of a Mobile

Device,” issued September 26, 2017. The ’314 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

11. Another design patent, United States Patent No. D791,809 (the “’ 809 Patent”),

also entitled “Display Screen or Portion Thereof with a Graphical User Interface of a Mobile

Device,” issued July 11, 2017. The ’809 Patent is attached here as Exhibit B.

12. Match also has a federally registered trademark, Reg. No. 4,465,926, for “swipe”

in connection with computer application software for mobile devices, namely, software for social

introduction and dating services. Tinder first used this mark in commerce on or around March

28, 2013. The registration for Tinder’s “swipe” mark is attached as Exhibit C.

13. Match also has a federally registered trademark, Reg. No. 5,010,727, for “rewind”

in connection with downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for internet-

based dating and matchmaking. Match first used this mark in commerce on or around March 2,

2015. The registration for Tinder’s “rewind” mark is attached as Exhibit D.

14. Match is also currently seeking federal registration for “swipe left” and “swipe

right” in connection with mobile applications for social introduction and dating services.

15. Match also has common law trademark rights. For example, Match, through

Tinder, has used the marks “swipe left” and “swipe right” in connection with mobile applications

for social introduction and dating services nationwide. It first used these marks in commerce on

or around March 28, 2013.

16. “Swipe,” “swipe left,” and “swipe right” have become synonymous with the

4
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 5 of 26

Tinder app.

17. For example, the Telegraph listed “swipe” as a 2015 “word of the year,” writing

that its choice “reflect[ed] the popularity of the dating app Tinder, in which users can swipe their

finger across the screen to approve or dismiss would-be dates.”

18. The English Oxford Dictionary also specifically defines the terms “swipe right”

and “swipe left” in connection with the Tinder brand:

19. The English Oxford Dictionary also indicates that “swipe right (or left) of dating

app Tinder fame” was consistently one of the dictionary’s most “popular look-ups” in 2017.

20. Indeed, Tinder’s wordmarks have been famous since before Tantan even existed.

For example, in a February 2014 article in TIME Magazine, TIME described the swipe in Tinder

as “iconic.”

21. Similarly, in February 2015, a CIO.com article described Tinder’s “swipe right”

as a “trademark” of Tinder.

22. In fact, the Atlanta Hawks, in connection with Tinder, hosted a highly publicized

“Swipe Right Night” at an Atlanta Hawks game in January 2015, reflecting the then-existing

fame of the mark.

23. Match also has common law trademark rights in its “Super Like” mark.

24. Match has used the “Super Like” mark in connection with mobile applications for

social introduction and dating services nationwide, and in particular in connection with a feature

within that app referring to a positive preference over and above the default positive preference

5
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 6 of 26

in the social introduction or dating services mobile application.

25. Match has used the “Super Like” mark in commerce nationwide since at least

September 9, 2015.

26. Match’s “Super Like” mark is either inherently distinctive or has acquired

secondary meaning.

27. Match, through Tinder, also has legally protectable trade dress. For example, the

ornamental design claimed in US D798,314 is a non-functional design element with source-

identifying significance, either because it is inherently distinctive or has acquired secondary

meaning.

28. Match, through Tinder, regularly advertises this design, showing a user’s card

being swiped left or right.

29. Third-party Internet publications have recognized that this design is synonymous

with Tinder, describing the “Tinder swipeable cards interface” as “famous” and as taking “the

app store by storm.”

30. This card swipe interface has also been described as “iconic.”

6
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 7 of 26

31. Indeed, this interface is so well-known and iconic that, when other businesses use

similar interfaces in connection with non-social network, non-dating apps, third-party

publications describe such uses as making the app look like Tinder.

32. As reflected by the Patent Office’s decision to grant the ’314 Patent, this card-

swipe design is non-functional.

33. Similarly, Match has protectable trade dress in its “It’s a Match!” screen, shown

below:

34. As with the swipeable card interface, this screen has distinctive trade dress

source-identifying significance.

35. Match, through Tinder, also regularly uses this screen as a source-identifier in

various advertising materials, including in the Apple App store, the Google Play store, and on

YouTube.

36. Match has also delivered applications to the Copyright Office to register the

general appearance of its app over time as copyrighted material, including various iterations of

its card interface, its “It’s a match!” screen, and its match queue—as well as the entire flow and

7
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 8 of 26

look-and-feel of its app.

37. Match Group, LLC owns all rights to the intellectual property identified above.

C. Tantan Releases Tinder “Clone”

38. As third-party publications have repeatedly recognized, Tantan is plainly based on

Tinder.

39. For example, an article in “All China Tech” described Tantan as “a carbon copy

of Tinder” and stated that Tantan was a Tinder “clone.”

40. Other publications, such as one written by Larry Salibra, recognize that Tantan’s

look and feel “copies” Tinder’s.

41. In connection with Tantan’s recent acquisition by Momo, publications repeatedly

described Tantan as the “Chinese Tinder.”

42. Similarly, an article from Quartz described Tantan as a “pound-for-pound copy of

Tinder.”

43. Like Tinder, Tantan is a mobile dating app that relies on a blind mutual opt-in

premise before users communicate.

44. Like with Tinder, Tantan’s users interact with “cards” containing photos of other

users, as shown below.

8
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 9 of 26

45. Like Tinder, Tantan users swipe left and right on cards containing user photos to

indicate whether or not the user is interested in the person shown.

46. Like Tinder, swiping left indicates a user is not interested in the person shown

while swiping right indicates that the user is interested in the person.

47. Like Tinder, Tantan also allows a user to interact with buttons in lieu of the

swipes. In both apps, pressing the “X” button below the profile is equivalent to a left swipe.

Pressing the button showing a heart indicates the equivalent of a right swipe.

48. Like Tinder, two users cannot communicate over Tantan until they both indicate

9
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 10 of 26

interest in one another.

49. Like Tinder, if two users both indicate interest, a screen is shown indicating a

match.

50. Tantan’s match screen is nearly identical to Tinder’s. At the top of the screen is a

large exclamatory phrase set off in a font other than the app’s default font. Two circles, enclosed

in white borders, display the photographs of the matched users. Below that, both apps include

similarly sized and shaped buttons first presenting the option to either send a message and then,

below that, giving the option to return to the swipe screen. Both match screens are placed

against a dark background. These similarities are shown in the pictures below:

51. Tantan has also copied Tinder’s “rewind” and “Super Like features” in essentially

all respects.

52. Tinder’s “rewind” feature, which allows a user to undo a mistaken negative

preference, is used by pressing a button in the bottom left of the card interface that contains a

yellow line icon pointing in a counter clockwise direction.

53. Tantan uses an identical or nearly identical yellow line icon in the same bottom

left location and, despite Tinder’s federal trademark registration for “rewind,” Tantan also calls

10
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 11 of 26

this feature the “rewind”:

54. Tinder also has a feature known as a “Super Like.” In Tinder, the Super Like is a

way to notify a potential match that the user is particularly interested in matching.

55. When a “Super Like” is available to a Tinder user, the user uses a button in the

bottom of the screen. Currently in Tinder, the button appears in the bottom middle of the screen.

Historically, however, the button appeared in the bottom right of the screen, as shown below:

56. The button to “Super Like” a user has been characterized in Tinder by a blue star

11
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 12 of 26

button. A user may also perform a “Super Like” gesture by swiping up on the card photograph.

57. Again, Tantan’s app has a verbatim copy of this feature. Like Tinder, Tantan

describes the feature as a “Super Like.”

58. Like Tinder, the button to perform a “Super Like” is a blue star.

59. Like Tinder’s historical interface, that blue star is located in the bottom right hand

corner of the screen.

60. Like Tinder, a user may also swipe up on the card to perform a “Super Like”:

61. Compounding the confusion from the copycat looks of the Tantan app, Tantan

also makes extensive use of Tinder’s registered “swipe” mark as well as its “swipe left” and

“swipe right” word marks.

62. For example, Tantan’s website tells users to “swipe right to like, and swipe left to

forget.”

63. Tantan’s Twitter feed has also promoted its app by asking users to “Swipe, Date

and Make New Friends.”

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION: DESIGN PATENT INFRINGEMENT


64. Tantan’s app infringes Match’s Design Patent, D798,314.

12
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 13 of 26

65. U.S. Patent D798,314 claims an ornamental aspect of Tinder’s app design related

to swiping left or right on cards containing photographs.

66. The ’314 Patent claims the ornamental design shown in Figures 1 and 2 of that

patent:

67. As the patent makes clear, only the solid lines illustrate the ornamental design

claimed. The broken lines are for illustrative purposes only.

68. As discussed above, Tantan is a described Tinder “clone” and infringes on this

ornamental design at least by making the design in the United States by distributing the software

code that generates the design on a user device, by using the design in the United States in

promotional materials, and by using the design in the app to sell services related to the app.

69. Specifically, Tantan’s app includes an ornamental design where photographic

cards are swiped left or right, as shown below:

13
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 14 of 26

70. The resemblance between the two apps is such as to deceive an ordinary observer

into believing that Tantan’s design is the same as Match’s patented design.

71. Tantan’s app also infringes Match’s Design Patent, D798,809.

72. The ’809 Patent claims the ornamental design shown in Figure 1 of that patent:

73. Tantan infringes this design as well:

14
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 15 of 26

74. Specifically, Tantan infringes on this ornamental design at least by making the

design in the United States by distributing the software code that generates the design on a user

device, by using the design in the United States in promotional materials, and by using the design

in the app to sell services related to the app.

75. As with the ’314 Patent, the resemblance between the design claimed in the ’809

patent and the design of the Tantan app is such as to deceive an ordinary observer to believing

that Tantan’s design is the same as Match’s patented design.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION: TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT


UNDER 15 U.S.C. § 1114(a)

76. Match has received a federal registration for the mark “swipe” in connection with

computer application software for mobile devices—software for social introduction and dating

services.

77. Match, through Tinder, first used the mark “swipe” in commerce on or around

March 28, 2013 and continues to do so.

78. Tantan, by using Match’s “swipe” mark to compete with Tinder in the market for

software for social introduction and dating services, violated 15 U.S.C. § 1114. As discussed

above, Tantan is prominently using Match’s “swipe” mark throughout its app and promotional

15
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 16 of 26

activities. Tantan’s activities are causing, and unless enjoined, will continue to cause a likelihood

of confusion and deception of members of the public, and, additionally, injury to Match and

Tinder’s reputation and goodwill as reflected in the “swipe” mark. Tantan’s use of the swipe mark

will also actually deceive the public or is at least likely to deceive the public regarding the source,

sponsorship, and/or affiliation of Tantan’s app.

79. These actions have also materially damaged the value of Match’s registered “swipe”

mark.

80. As a proximate result of Tantan’s actions, Match has suffered damages, including

but not limited to, lost revenue and loss of goodwill associated with its Tinder app.

81. Because of Tantan’s competition with Tinder, and the circumstances indicating

Tantan’s general copying of the Tinder app, Tantan’s actions also demonstrate an intentional,

willful, and malicious intent to trade on goodwill associated with Match and Tinder’s “swipe”

mark.

82. Match has also received a federal registration for the mark “rewind” in connection

with downloaded software in the nature of a mobile application for internet-based dating and

matchmaking.

83. Match first used its “rewind” mark at least as early as March 2, 2015 and continues

to do so.

84. Tantan, by using Match’s “rewind” mark to compete with Tinder in the market for

software for social introduction and dating services, violated 15 U.S.C. § 1114. As discussed

above, Tantan is using Match’s “rewind” mark in its app and promotional activities to promote a

feature virtually identical to Match’s own “rewind” feature in Tinder. Tantan’s activities are

causing, and unless enjoined, will continue to cause a likelihood of confusion and deception of

16
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 17 of 26

members of the public, and, additionally, injury to Match and Tinder’s reputation and goodwill as

reflected in the “rewind” mark. Tantan’s use of the rewind mark, particularly in combination with

its use of Tinder’s swipe-related marks, will also actually deceive the public or is at least likely to

deceive the public regarding the source, sponsorship, and/or affiliation of Tantan’s app.

85. These actions have also materially damaged the value of Match’s registered

“rewind” mark.

86. As a proximate result of Tantan’s actions, Match has suffered damages, including,

but not limited to, lost revenue and loss of goodwill associated with its Tinder app.

87. Because of Tantan’s competition with Tinder, and particularly in light of the

circumstances indicating Tantan’s general copying of the Tinder app, Tantan’s actions also

demonstrate an intentional, willful, and malicious intent to trade on goodwill associated with

Match and Tinder’s “rewind” mark.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION: TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT


UNDER 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)

88. Match is the owner of word marks “swipe left” and “swipe right” in connection

with internet-based dating and matchmaking and similar services since at least on around March

28, 2013. Match has used and continues to use these marks throughout the United States.

89. These marks are inherently distinctive or have acquired secondary meaning.

90. These marks are valid and enforceable and in full force and effect.

91. As described above, Tantan uses Match’s “swipe left” and “swipe right” marks

prominently. Tantan’s doing so is likely to cause confusion or mistake and/or deceive the public

as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of the Tantan app.

92. Match also has common law trademark rights in its “Super Like” mark.

93. Match has used the “Super Like” mark in connection with mobile applications for

17
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 18 of 26

social introduction and dating services nationwide, and in particular in connection with a feature

within that app referring to a positive preference over and above the default positive preference

in the social introduction or dating services mobile application.

94. Match has used the “Super Like” mark in commerce nationwide since at least

September 9, 2015.

95. Match’s “Super Like” mark is either inherently distinctive or has acquired

secondary meaning.

96. As described above, Tantan uses Match’s “Super Like” mark prominently to

describe an identical functionality. Tantan’s doing so is likely to cause confusion or mistake

and/or deceive the public as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of the Tantan app and the

Super Like feature.

97. Because of Tantan’s competition with Tinder, and the general circumstances

suggesting that Tantan copied Tinder’s app, Tantan’s actions also demonstrate an intentional,

willful, and malicious intent to trade on goodwill associated with the “swipe right,” “swipe left,”

and “Super Like” word marks.

98. These actions have caused damages to Match, including lost Tinder revenue as well

as damages to Tinder’s brand and associated goodwill.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION: INFRINGEMENT OF TRADE DRESS


UNDER 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)

99. Match is also the owner of legally protectable trade dress. For example, the non-

functional, ornamental design claimed in the ’314 Patent is a design that is either inherently

distinctive or has acquired secondary meaning designating Match and Tinder as the source of the

product.

100. As described above, this card-based swipe interface has been described as

18
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 19 of 26

“famous” or “iconic” by multiple third-party publications.

101. This interface was first used in commerce some time before September 1, 2012.

102. By including this same non-functional ornamental design, Tantan’s app is likely

to cause confusion or mistake and/or deceive the public as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval

of the Tantan app.

103. Match is also the owner of trade dress related to Tinder’s “It’s a Match!” screen,

shown here:

104. The Tinder app has included this same or similar design since it was initially

released.

105. The “It’s a Match Screen!” was first used in commerce on August 2, 2012.

106. As described above, Tinder uses this screen in various advertising materials,

including on the App Store, Google Play Store, and on YouTube.

107. This overall design is non-functional.

108. By including this same non-functional design, Tantan’s app is likely to cause

confusion or mistake and/or deceive the public as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of the

19
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 20 of 26

Tantan app, particularly in combination with Tinder’s other trademarks.

109. As also discussed above, Tantan’s similar screen is virtually identical to Tinder’s.

110. By including this same non-functional design, Tantan’s app is likely to cause

confusion or mistake and/or deceive the public as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of the

Tantan app.

111. At least because of Tantan’s competition with Tinder, and particularly in light of

the circumstances indicating Tantan’s general copying of the Tinder app, Tantan’s actions also

demonstrate an intentional, willful, and malicious intent to trade on goodwill associated with

Match’s trade dress.

112. These actions have caused damages to Match in the form of lost Tinder revenue

as well as damages to Tinder’s brand and associated goodwill.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION: TRADEMARK DILUTION


113. Certain of Tantan’s actions also constitute trademark and trade dress dilution by

blurring under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c).

114. Match’s wordmark “swipe right” is famous to the general public.

115. As discussed above, the phrase “swipe right” is included in the Oxford English

dictionary, specifically associated with the Tinder app.

116. “Swipe right,” especially in connection with “swipe left,” is often described by

third parties as a famous “cultural phenomenon.”

117. These third parties describe the cultural phenomenon specifically in reference to

Tinder and the Tinder app.

118. In light of Tinder’s own extensive marketing as well as the descriptions of third-

parties, “swipe right” has become effectively a “household name” identifying the Tinder brand

and Tinder app.

20
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 21 of 26

119. After Tinder’s “swipe right” mark became famous, Tantan began using “swipe

right” in connection with its app. Tantan’s routine use of the mark “swipe right” in connection

with a direct competitor mobile dating service has caused and is likely to cause dilution by

blurring, diluting the distinctiveness of “swipe right” as a brand signifier for Tinder and/or

Match.

120. These actions have harmed the reputation and goodwill associated with Tinder.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION: TEXAS UNFAIR COMPETITION.


121. As discussed above, Match’s trademarks and trade dress are valid marks in full

force and effect.

122. Tantan knowingly and willfully used these marks and this trade dress in

commerce through the promotion of its app and in the app itself.

123. Tantan’s actions are likely to cause consumer confusion, cause consumer mistake,

and/or deceive ordinarily prudent consumers as to the affiliation, connection, association,

sponsorship, or approval of Match and/or Tinder products because Tantan’s actions suggest that

its own app originates form, is sponsored by, is authorized by, or is otherwise connected with

Tinder and/or Match.

124. These actions have materially damaged the value of Match’s Tinder marks and

trade dress.

125. As a result, Match has suffered damages, including lost Tinder revenue and

damage to goodwill associated with Tinder.

126. Tantan’s actions have caused injury to Match, and Match is entitled to damages

caused thereby, including punitive damages as a result of Tantan’s malicious and willful actions.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION: COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT


127. Tantan’s actions also infringe Match’s valid copyrights.

21
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 22 of 26

128. The various iterations of the Tinder app are original and creative expressive works

that constitute copyrightable subject matter under 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. Match owns all rights

in these works. Prior to filing this lawsuit, Match has delivered applications to register these

copyrights with the United States Registrar of Copyrights.

129. Tantan had access to these works because the app was disseminated throughout

the United States and the world.

130. Tantan copied substantial original, copyrightable elements of the Tinder app.

131. By its actions, Tantan has infringed and continues to do so by, without limitation,

copying, publicly displaying, and distributing the Tantan app without authorization from Match.

132. The similarities between the Tinder app and the Tantan app are not limited to only

the general idea of a mutual opt-in matchmaking app or to choices dictated by that idea or

functional considerations related to that idea. Tinder made original expressive choices in its app

design.

133. For example, Tinder’s card design is an ornamental expression not dictated by

functional considerations or the general idea behind a blind mutual opt-in matchmaking or social

networking app. As discussed above in connection with design patent infringement and trade

dress infringement, Tantan’s app includes a virtually identical, or at least substantially similar,

card-based design.

134. Similarly, Tinder’s “It’s a Match Screen!” includes original expressions and is not

dictated solely by functional choices, unoriginal designs dictated by OS design conventions, or

the general ideas behind the app. As discussed above, the current iteration of the Tantan app

includes a match screen that is virtually identical or at least substantially similar to Tinder’s

copyrighted screen.

22
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 23 of 26

135. Tantan’s app further copies various aspects of Tinder’s expressive choices

regarding the design and arrangement of the “rewind,” “Super Like,” and positive and negative

preference buttons.

136. For example, although the rewind “icon” in Tinder may be similar to other icons

reflecting similar “undo” style features in other apps, Tinder made an artistic expression in

selecting yellow for the color of the icon as well as arranging the button on the bottom left of the

interface screen. Tantan copied this expression.

137. Similarly, although Tinder was not the first to design a star or a blue star, Tinder

made the artistic choice to design a blue star button specifically to refer to a “Super Like” feature

in a dating app. Tantan copied this expressive choice.

138. Tinder also made expressive choices in arrangement of the buttons. In at least

some versions of its interface, Tinder made the choice to arrange all of those buttons beneath the

card showing a picture of the potential match, with the far left button providing a “rewind,” the

next button a negative preference shown by an “X” icon, the next button a positive preference

shown by a heart icon, and the next button a star, providing a “Super Like.” Tantan copied this

expression.

139. Further, Tinder made an original artistic expressive choice to have a hierarchy of

positive preferences wherein the lower positive preference, the regular like, is reflected by a

“heart” icon, and a higher positive preference, the “Super Like,” is reflected by a star or blue star

icon. Tantan copied this hierarchy, the use of the icons within that hierarchy, and the placement

of the icons within the hierarchy.

140. Tinder also made the original artistic expressive choice to surround each of these

circular buttons with a gray border, only slightly darker than the background on which the

23
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 24 of 26

buttons are placed. Tantan similarly copied this design.

141. As to all of these expressions, Tantan’s app is substantially similar, if not virtually

identical, to Tinder’s original, expressive designs.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the entry of a judgment from this Court:

1. Judgment in Plaintiff’s favor and against Defendant on all causes of action alleged

herein;

2. A preliminary and/or permanent injunction restraining Defendant, and its agents,

servants, employees, attorneys, successors and assigns, and all persons, firms, and corporations

acting in concert with them, from directly or indirectly violating Match’s design patent rights,

rights under the Lanham Act, rights under the Copyright Act, and common law trademark rights;

3. For damages in an amount to be further proven at trial, including:

a. Damages assessed against Defendant pursuant to the Lanham Act, including

compensatory damages, statutory damages, treble damages, restitution, including

disgorgement of profits;

b. Damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284, including enhancement and including

supplemental damages for any continuing post-verdict infringement up until entry

of final judgment, with an accounting, as needed;

c. Damages under 35 U.S.C. § 289, including Tantan’s total profit and revenue

realized and derived from its infringement of U.S. Patents D798,314 and

D798,809 in an amount not less than a reasonable royalty;

24
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 25 of 26

d. Damages under the Copyright Act, including all damages sustained by Match

and/or Tinder, all profits derived by Defendant from such conduct, and/or

statutory damages;

e. Damages for Defendant’s common law unfair competition, including punitive

damages;

4. For Plaintiff’s reasonable attorney’s fees;

5. For costs of suit incurred herein, including all disbursements;

6. For pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the damages awarded;

7. If an injunction is not granted, that Plaintiff be awarded an ongoing licensing fee;

and

8. For such other and further relief (including any and all equitable relief) as the

Court may deem to be just and proper.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff demands a trial by

jury on all issues triable of right by a jury.

25
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 26 of 26

DATED: March 19, 2018 Respectfully submitted,

CALDWELL CASSADY & CURRY

Bradley W. Caldwell (Admission Pending)


Texas State Bar No. 24040630
Email: bcaldwell@caldwellcc.com
John F. Summers
Texas State Bar No. 24079417
Email: jsummers@caldwellcc.com
Warren J. McCarty, III
Illinois State Bar No. 6313452
Email: wmccarty@caldwellcc.com
CALDWELL CASSADY CURRY P.C.
2101 Cedar Springs Road, Suite 1000
Dallas, Texas 75201
Telephone: (214) 888-4848
Facsimile: (214) 888-4849

/s/ John P. Palmer


John P. Palmer
State Bar. 15430600
Email: palmer@namanhowell.com
Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee, PLLC
400 Austin Avenue, 8th Floor
P.O. Box 1470
Waco, TX 76701
Telephone: (254) 755-4100
Facsimile: (254) 754-6331

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF


MATCH GROUP, LLC

26
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 1 of 5

Exhibit A
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 2 of 5
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 3 of 5
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 4 of 5
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-1 Filed 03/19/18 Page 5 of 5
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-2 Filed 03/19/18 Page 1 of 5

Exhibit B
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-2 Filed 03/19/18 Page 2 of 5
USOOD791809S

(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D791,809 S


Rad et al. (45) Date of Patent: Jul. 11, 2017
(54) DISPLAY SCREEN OR PORTION THEREOF D596,193 S * 7/2009 Shotel .......................... D14.f486
WITH A GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE OF D598,466 S * 8/2009 Hirsch ... D14.f485
A MOBILE DEVICE D598,928 S * 8/2009 Hirsch ... D14.f485
D608,365 S * 1/2010 Walsh .......................... D14,485
(71) Applicant: Tinder, Inc., West Hollywood, CA (US) (Continued)
FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
(72) Inventors: Sean Rad, Los Angeles, CA (US);
Jonathan Badeen, North Hollywood, EM OO11281.85-OOO6 6, 2009
CA (US); Christopher Paul EM OO11281.85-0014 6, 2009
Gulczynski, Los Angeles, CA (US) (Continued)
(73) Assignee: Tinder, Inc., West Hollywood, CA (US) OTHER PUBLICATIONS
(**) Term: 15 Years Chegg Blog, Chegg Product Updates, “Introducing the Chegg
Flashcards App'. http://blog.chegg.com/2012/02/03/introducing
(21) Appl. No.: 29/560,841 the-chegg-flashcards-app?, 10 pages, Feb. 3, 2012.
(22) Filed: Apr. 11, 2016 (Continued)
Related U.S. Application Data Primary Examiner — Eric Goodman
Assistant Examiner — Bao-Yen Nguyen
(63) Continuation of application No. 29/465,628, filed on (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Baker Botts L.L.P.
Aug. 29, 2013, now Pat. No. Des. 755,814.
(51) LOC (10) Cl. (57) CLAM
(52) U.S. C. The ornamental design for a display Screen or portion
USPC ......................................................... D14/486 thereof with a graphical user interface of a mobile device, as
(58) Field of Classification Search shown and described.
USPC ................................................. D14/485. 495
CPC ... G06F 3/048; G06F 3/0481; G06F 3/04812: DESCRIPTION
G06F 3/04815; G06F 3/04817: G06F
3/0482; G06F 3/0483; G06F 3/0484; FIG. 1 is a front view of a first embodiment of a display
G06F 3/044: G06F 3/0417 screen with a graphical user interface of a mobile device;
See application file for complete search history. and,
FIG. 2 is a front view of a second embodiment of a display
(56) References Cited screen with a graphical user interface of a mobile device.
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS The broken lines illustrate the display screen or portion
thereof and form no part of the claimed design. The broken
D555,663 S 11/2007 Nagata et al. lines illustrate portions of the graphical user interface and
7,370,284 B2* 5/2008 Andrea ................. G06F 3.0481 form no part of the claimed design.
715,788
D594,021 S * 6/2009 Ball . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D14.f486
1 Claim, 2 Drawing Sheets
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-2 Filed 03/19/18 Page 3 of 5

US D791,809 S
Page 2

(56) References Cited FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS


U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS EM OO11281.85-0015 6, 2009
EM OO 12272O1-0011 2, 2011
D611,052 S * 3/2010 Bamford ...................... D14,485 EM OO1289.748-0014 10, 2011
D611,486 S * 3/2010 Hirsch ......... D14,485 EM OO224.5928-0004 6, 2013
D615,549 S 5, 2010 Caine et al. EM OO 1379.895-0009 9, 2013
D628,210 S 11/2010 Luke et al. EM OO2354191-0019 12/2013
D633,525 S 3/2011 Trabona et al. EM OO13998.93-0007 6, 2014
D633,920 S * 3/2011 Luke ............................ D14.f486 EM OO24881 63-0007 6, 2014
D636,785 S 4/2011 Brinda EM OO24881 63-0008 6, 2014
D637,198 S * 5/2011 Furuya ......................... D14.f486 EM OO2464776-0003 T 2014
D647,534 S 10, 2011 Doll EM OO2464776-0004 T 2014
D688,678 S * 8/2013 Osborne D14.f486 EM OO2464776-0012 T 2014
D697,934 S. * 1/2014 Lee ....... ... D14.f486 EM OO14174.55-004.8 10/2014
D699.258 S * 2/2014 Jong ............................ D14.f486 EM OO2.774083-0003 10/2015
D701,520 S * 3/2014 Jung ............................ D14.f486
D702,721 S 4/2014 Abratowski et al.
D702,729 S * 4/2014 Steele .......... D14.f492 OTHER PUBLICATIONS
D704.204 S * 5/2014 Rydenhag ... D14.f486
D709,089 S * 7/2014 Eilam ... ... D14.f489 Internet Archive WayBackMachine, DesiCrush. http://www.
D711,397 S * 8/2014 Lawson ....................... D14.f486 desicrush.com/, 2 pages, Oct. 24, 2012.
D712.419 S * 9/2014 Song ................... GO6F 3,04817 Chegg Blog, Chegg Product Updates, “Grab Your Book & Its
ck D14.f486 Digital Mate—Introducing Chegg's Textbook Solutions App'. http://
D717,312 S 11/2014 Matas ................. Goori blog.chegg.com/2013/01/30/smarten-up-your-ios-device-with
cheggs- . . . , 7 pages, Jan. 30, 2013.
D725,125 S : 3/2015 Capela ......................... D14,485 David Zax. “Your After-Work LinkedIn Dates Just Got a Little Bit
D729,821 S 5/2015 Ryan ............................ D14,485 Hotter',s http://www.fastcompany.com/3035795/most-creative
D730,383 S 5, 2015 Brinda et al.
D732,073 S 6, 2015 Adams people? like-a-linkedin-powered-tinder-belinked-wants-you-to
D732,074 S 6, 2015 Adams hook-up-after-work, 7 pages, Sep. 16, 2014.
D736,790 S * 8/2015 Lim .................... GO6F 3,04817 “Odating Free Dating App'. Version 3.4. http://m.fsr, store.
D14,485 aptoide.com/app/market/com.onedate.android/22/494.01697, 1 page,
D737,280 S * 8/2015 Lee ..................... GO6F 3,04817 Nov. 11, 2014.
D14,485 PRWeb, "SkaDate New Android App. Mixing Tinder and Old
D737,297 S 8, 2015 Moon et al. School, http://www.prweb.com/releases/2015/02/prweb 12519835.
D738,903 S 9, 2015 Lee htm, 3 pages, Feb. 2015.
D741,878 S * 10/2015 Leyden ........................ D14,485 David John, “The Time Out London blog. your daily guide to city
D741,895 S ck 10/2015 Nguyen life, news and culture', "Three new dating apps hotter than
D743,414 S 11/2015 Shunock ...................... D14,485 Tinder'. http://now-here-this.timeout.com/2015/02/26/three-new
D746,861 S 1/2016 Park et al. dating-apps-hotter-than-Tinder, 7 pages, Posted Feb. 26, 2015.
D750,105 S * 2/2016 Leighton ...................... D14,485 &8 s s
D753,147 S ck 4/2016 Kim ......... ... D14.f485 8FACT Facts You Don't Know” by Under9 Limited, https://
D753,158 S * 4/2016 Mezzanotte . ... D14.f486 itunes.apple.com/us/app/8 fact-facts-you-dont-know/
D755,814 S * 5/2016 Rad .......... ... D14.f486 ido.43521388?mt=8, 2 pages, Mar. 5, 2015.
2007/0067738 A1* 3/2007 Flynt ............... HO4M 1/72522 Clover Dating App by Clover, Inc. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/
T15,810 clover-dating-app/id77 1990977?mt=8, 3 pages, Feb. 22, 2016.
2009,0265628 A1* 10, 2009 Bamford ............... G06F 3.0482
715/702 * cited by examiner
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-2 Filed 03/19/18 Page 4 of 5

U.S. Patent Jul. 11, 2017 Sheet 1 of 2 US D791,809 S

w is a was w r - w x \r - rs - so w a r - a - a w w is a r - w w w - a w v. W - a PY se w n w w w w w x - W - W - w w i s - W - rs - a raw a

ge: . E
w' . ." f : ".
ser,
fW v re
pers. . . . .. .. .. . . .
i
a. r u Y y w
it is
is . . . . . . . . $.
t a
. . . . . . . .

' ' ' ' ' ' ' 's w w w x . . . . . w ww w a w w * * *

. 5,
i. ssSt.
is::::::::: ; 3.
. . . . . . . . .. - - - - - - - - - - - w - - - - w w - - - - - - r - - - - - w is serve w w w a w
sr w r - w is m r - W - r row -- - - - --
sww.
t
3.
a ''
.. . . S. M . . . .
switt
a '''
Ya- :
. . .. ..
is s
88:
*- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -ww-- -- -
SSSSSSS
- - - - - - W - r n w r a w w w - - - w w raw ra
were-trix-a-re-re
Y Y X xw w w .. .
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-2 Filed 03/19/18 Page 5 of 5

U.S. Patent Jul. 11, 2017 Sheet 2 of 2 US D791,809 S

3.
s
f
w : &
: v
- - - - - - Yew . . . . . . ." 8k
s
& &

3. ; y :
s ''A NYS
4 : Y
3:28& s

W- - -- - - - - -w
- ----, W-w
; : w xS.- iW
- W - - - - - W - W - - - - Wr 'r
varss-corers-era-re-wa-no-ree-cross-ra-rrers stressert:
s
a
re-----------aa---
w
y s
s
t
X
& s
s
6 s
8
s

--------------------
:
s 8
s

- - - -- - - - -- - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - -- - -- -W - -- - - - - - -- -- -

8, 2
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-3 Filed 03/19/18 Page 1 of 3

Exhibit C
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-3 Filed 03/19/18 Page 2 of 3
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-3 Filed 03/19/18 Page 3 of 3
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-4 Filed 03/19/18 Page 1 of 3

Exhibit D
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-4 Filed 03/19/18 Page 2 of 3

Reg. No. 5,010,727 Tinder, Inc. (DELAWARE CORPORATION)


P.O. Box 25458
Registered Aug. 02, 2016 Dallas, TX 75225

CLASS 9: Downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for internet-based


Int. Cl.: 9 dating and matchmaking; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application in the
field of social media, namely, for sending status updates to subscribers of web feeds,
Trademark uploading and downloading electronic files to share with others

Principal Register FIRST USE 3-2-2015; IN COMMERCE 3-2-2015

THE MARK CONSISTS OF STANDARD CHARACTERS WITHOUT CLAIM TO ANY


PARTICULAR FONT STYLE, SIZE OR COLOR

SER. NO. 86-607,872, FILED 04-23-2015

DAVID C I, EXAMINING ATTORNEY


Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-4 Filed 03/19/18 Page 3 of 3

REQUIREMENTS TO MAINTAIN YOUR FEDERAL TRADEMARK REGISTRATION


WARNING: YOUR REGISTRATION WILL BE CANCELLED IF YOU DO NOT FILE THE
DOCUMENTS BELOW DURING THE SPECIFIED TIME PERIODS.

Requirements in the First Ten Years*


What and When to File:

First Filing Deadline: You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) between the 5th and 6th
years after the registration date. See 15 U.S.C. §§1058, 1141k. If the declaration is accepted, the
registration will continue in force for the remainder of the ten-year period, calculated from the registration
date, unless cancelled by an order of the Commissioner for Trademarks or a federal court.

Second Filing Deadline: You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) and an Application
for Renewal between the 9th and 10th years after the registration date.* See 15 U.S.C. §1059.

Requirements in Successive Ten-Year Periods*


What and When to File:

You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) and an Application for Renewal
between every 9th and 10th-year period, calculated from the registration date.*

Grace Period Filings*

The above documents will be accepted as timely if filed within six months after the deadlines listed above with
the payment of an additional fee.

*ATTENTION MADRID PROTOCOL REGISTRANTS: The holder of an international registration with an


extension of protection to the United States under the Madrid Protocol must timely file the Declarations of Use
(or Excusable Nonuse) referenced above directly with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
The time periods for filing are based on the U.S. registration date (not the international registration date). The
deadlines and grace periods for the Declarations of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) are identical to those for
nationally issued registrations. See 15 U.S.C. §§1058, 1141k. However, owners of international registrations
do not file renewal applications at the USPTO. Instead, the holder must file a renewal of the underlying
international registration at the International Bureau of the World Intellectual Property Organization, under
Article 7 of the Madrid Protocol, before the expiration of each ten-year term of protection, calculated from the
date of the international registration. See 15 U.S.C. §1141j. For more information and renewal forms for the
international registration, see http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/.

NOTE: Fees and requirements for maintaining registrations are subject to change. Please check the
USPTO website for further information. With the exception of renewal applications for registered
extensions of protection, you can file the registration maintenance documents referenced above online at h
ttp://www.uspto.gov.

NOTE: A courtesy e-mail reminder of USPTO maintenance filing deadlines will be sent to trademark
owners/holders who authorize e-mail communication and maintain a current e-mail address with the
USPTO. To ensure that e-mail is authorized and your address is current, please use the Trademark
Electronic Application System (TEAS) Correspondence Address and Change of Owner Address Forms
available at http://www.uspto.gov.

Page: 2 of 2 / RN # 5010727
Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-5 Filed 03/19/18 Page 1 of 2
JS 44 (Rev. 06/17) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS


Match Group, LLC Tantan Ltd. (a/k/a Tantan Culture Development (Beijing) Co., Ltd.)

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Dallas County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
John P. Palmer - Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee, PLLC, 400 Austin Ave.,
8th Floor, P.O. Box 1470, Waco, Texas 76701 (254) 755-4100

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
u 1 U.S. Government u 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State u 1 u 1 Incorporated or Principal Place u 4 u 4
of Business In This State

u 2 U.S. Government u 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State u 2 u 2 Incorporated and Principal Place u 5 u 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State

Citizen or Subject of a u 3 u 3 Foreign Nation u 6 u 6


Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
u 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY u 625 Drug Related Seizure u 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 u 375 False Claims Act
u 120 Marine u 310 Airplane u 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 u 423 Withdrawal u 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
u 130 Miller Act u 315 Airplane Product Product Liability u 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
u 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability u 367 Health Care/ u 400 State Reapportionment
u 150 Recovery of Overpayment u 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS u 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury u 820 Copyrights u 430 Banks and Banking
u 151 Medicare Act u 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability u 830 Patent u 450 Commerce
u 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability u 368 Asbestos Personal u 835 Patent - Abbreviated u 460 Deportation
Student Loans u 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application u 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) u 345 Marine Product Liability u 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
u 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY u 480 Consumer Credit
of Veteran’s Benefits u 350 Motor Vehicle u 370 Other Fraud u 710 Fair Labor Standards u 861 HIA (1395ff) u 490 Cable/Sat TV
u 160 Stockholders’ Suits u 355 Motor Vehicle u 371 Truth in Lending Act u 862 Black Lung (923) u 850 Securities/Commodities/
u 190 Other Contract Product Liability u 380 Other Personal u 720 Labor/Management u 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange
u 195 Contract Product Liability u 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations u 864 SSID Title XVI u 890 Other Statutory Actions
u 196 Franchise Injury u 385 Property Damage u 740 Railway Labor Act u 865 RSI (405(g)) u 891 Agricultural Acts
u 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability u 751 Family and Medical u 893 Environmental Matters
Medical Malpractice Leave Act u 895 Freedom of Information
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS u 790 Other Labor Litigation FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act
u 210 Land Condemnation u 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: u 791 Employee Retirement u 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff u 896 Arbitration
u 220 Foreclosure u 441 Voting u 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act or Defendant) u 899 Administrative Procedure
u 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment u 442 Employment u 510 Motions to Vacate u 871 IRS—Third Party Act/Review or Appeal of
u 240 Torts to Land u 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision
u 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations u 530 General u 950 Constitutionality of
u 290 All Other Real Property u 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - u 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION State Statutes
Employment Other: u 462 Naturalization Application
u 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - u 540 Mandamus & Other u 465 Other Immigration
Other u 550 Civil Rights Actions
u 448 Education u 555 Prison Condition
u 560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
u 1 Original u 2 Removed from u 3 Remanded from u 4 Reinstated or u 5 Transferred from u 6 Multidistrict u 8 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
35 U.S.C. § 271
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Patent Infringement, Trademark Infringement, Copyright Infringement
VII. REQUESTED IN u CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: u Yes u No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
03/19/2018 /s/ John P. Palmer
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE


JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 06/17) Case 6:18-cv-00081 Document 1-5 Filed 03/19/18 Page 2 of 2
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44
Authority For Civil Cover Sheet

The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:

I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and
then the official, giving both name and title.
(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land
condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)
(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section "(see attachment)".

II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes
precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
cases.)

III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
section for each principal party.

IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code
that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.

V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.


Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.
When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.
Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing
date.
Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or
multidistrict litigation transfers.
Multidistrict Litigation – Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C.
Section 1407.
Multidistrict Litigation – Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to
changes in statue.

VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service

VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.

VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket
numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.

Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.

You might also like