1 Jeffrey D.

Wexler (SBN132256)
PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
2 725 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2800
Los Angeles, CA 90017-5406
3 Telephone: 213.488.7129
Facsimile: 213.608.1946
4 jeffrey.wexler@pillsburylaw.com
5 Andrew M. Ollis (pro hac vice application pending)
Frank J. West (pro hac vice application pending)
6 OBLON MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, LLP
1940 Duke Street
7 Arlington, VA 22031
Telephone: 703-413-3000
8 Facsimile: 703-413-2220
aollis@oblon.com
9 fwest@oblon.com
10 Attorneys for Plaintiff Buyer’s Direct, Inc.
11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
14
15 BUYER’S DIRECT, INC., a North Case No.
Carolina corporation,
16 COMPLAINT FOR: (1) PATENT
Plaintiff, INFRINGEMENT; (2) TRADE
17 DRESS INFRINGEMENT; (3)
vs. INTENTIONAL
18 INTERFERENCE WITH
JY DESIGNS AND CREATIONS, CONTRACTUAL RELATIONS;
19 INC., a California corporation; and (4) INTENTIONAL
CALIFORNIA MARKETING INTERFERENCE WITH
20 ASSOCIATES, INC., a California PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC
corporation, ADVANTAGE; (5) STATUTORY
21 UNFAIR COMPETITION (Cal.
Defendants. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 et seq.);
22 AND (6) UNJUST ENRICHMENT
23 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
24
25
26
27
28
1
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 Plaintiff Buyer’s Direct, Inc. (“BDI”) brings this Complaint against
2 Defendants JY Designs and Creations, Inc. (“JY”) and California Marketing
3 Associates, Inc. (“CMA”) as follows:
4 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5 1. This is a civil action seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief
6 under federal and California law based upon: (i) design patent infringement; (ii)
7 federal trade dress infringement; (iii) intentional interference with business
8 relations; (iv) intentional interference with prospective economic advantage; (v)
9 unfair competition under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 et seq.; and (vi) unjust
10 enrichment. The Court has federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331
11 and 1338(a) over BDI’s First, Second and Third Claims for Relief for direct design
12 patent infringement and inducement of design patent infringement, which claims
13 arise under the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq. The Court has federal question
14 jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. § 1121 and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) over
15 BDI’s Fourth Claim for Relief for federal trade dress infringement, which claim
16 arises under the Trademark Act of 1946 (as amended), namely, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051
17 et seq. The Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1338(b) over BDI’s Seventh
18 Claim for Relief for statutory unfair competition pursuant to Cal. Bus. & Prof.
19 Code §§ 17200 et seq. because such claim is joined with a substantial and related
20 claim under the patent and trademark laws, and the Court also has supplemental
21 jurisdiction over that claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) because such claim is so
22 related to the federal claims asserted in BDI’s First through Fourth Claims for
23 Relief that it forms part of the same case and controversy. The Court has
24 supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) over BDI’s Fifth, Sixth, and
25 Eighth Claims for Relief for intentional interference with business relations,
26 intentional interference with prospective business relations, and unjust enrichment
27 under the common law of the State of California because such claims are so related
28
2
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 to the federal claims asserted in the First through Fourth Claims for Relief that they
2 form part of the same case or controversy.
3 2. In the alternative, the Court has subject matter and original
4 jurisdiction over all claims for relief asserted herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
5 1332(a) because complete diversity of citizenship exists between BDI, on the one
6 hand, and JY and CMA, on the other hand, and the amount in controversy exceeds
7 $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
8 3. The Court has personal jurisdiction over JY and CMA because JY and
9 CMA each have a place of business in this judicial district, and both JY and CMA
10 solicit business within the State of California (including this judicial district),
11 including, but not limited to, the use, importation, advertising, marketing,
12 promoting, distribution, offering for sale, and/or sale of products in California that
13 infringe BDI’s trade dress and patents.
14 4. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
15 1391(b) and (c) and 1400, because (a) the claims alleged in the Complaint arose, in
16 part, in this District, (b) JY and CMA have their principal places of business in this
17 District, (c) JY and CMA have engaged in infringing activities in this District, and
18 (d) this Court has personal jurisdiction over JY and CMA in this District.
19 THE PARTIES
20 5. BDI is a North Carolina corporation, having a principal place of
21 business at 5001 Pebble Beach Circle, Wilson, North Carolina 27896.
22 6. Upon information and belief, JY is a California corporation, having a
23 registered place of business at 20635 Valley Boulevard, Suite A, Walnut,
24 California 91789. Ms. Junxia Yao, a Chinese national, is identified as the Chief
25 Executive Officer, Secretary, Chief Financial Officer and agent for service of
26 process for JY. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated by reference is a
27 true and correct copy of the most recent Statement of Information for JY Designs
28 and Creations, Inc. filed with the California Secretary of State on February 9, 2018.
3
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 7. Upon information and belief, CMA is a California corporation, having
2 a registered place of business at 110 East 9th Street, Suite C-1300, Los Angeles,
3 California 90079.
4 BACKGROUND
5 8. In a February 20, 2018, letter, a true and correct copy of which is
6 attached as Exhibit 5 hereto and is incorporated by reference, JY claimed to have
7 “immediately ceased the sale of the Disputed Slippers” that BDI had pointed out as
8 infringing its U.S. Design Patent No. D598,183 patent and trade dress.
9 9. JY has not only failed to stop selling its infringing foot coverings as
10 promised, but together with CMA, has instead gone on a crusade to substitute
11 BDI’s foot coverings with JY’s infringing foot coverings. As discussed in more
12 detail herein, these actions have given rise to the instant Complaint.
13 A. The Patent-in-Suit
14 10. On August 18, 2009, U.S. Design Patent No. D598,183 (“the ’183
15 Patent”) was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent & Trademark
16 Office (the “USPTO”). A true and correct copy of the ’183 Patent is attached
17 hereto as Exhibit 2 and is incorporated by reference.
18 11. On December 22, 2009, Marshall P. Bank, the sole inventor of
19 the ’183 Patent, assigned all rights in the ’183 Patent to BDI. Since that date, BDI
20 has been and still is the owner of the ’183 Patent. Representative Figures 1 and 3
21 from the ’183 patent are shown below.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 12. On September 24, 2014, the USPTO issued an Ex Parte
2 Reexamination Certificate confirming the patentability of the ’183 design after
3 reviewing prior art raised in co-pending litigations. A true and correct copy of the
4 Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate is included in Exhibit 2 attached hereto and is
5 incorporated by reference.
6 13. BDI has retained the exclusive right to manufacture all commercial
7 embodiments of the ’183 patent in the United States retail market.
8 B. The Trade-Dress-in-Suit
9 14. BDI is a supplier of retail products that has designed, marketed, and
10 sold its unique SNOOZIES!® foot coverings since 2008. Exemplary SNOOZIES!®
11 foot coverings are shown below.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21 15. In some collections, SNOOZIES!® foot coverings share a common
22 theme (e.g., animals, beverages, patterns, etc.), as illustrated below, which further
23 lends to their appeal:
24
25
26
27
28
5
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 16. BDI’s SNOOZIES!® foot coverings have a distinctive, immediately
11 recognizable and non-functional overall look and feel that constitutes protectable
12 trade dress that distinguishes BDI’s foot coverings from those of competitors. The
13 foot coverings, which are presented outside of packaging, are made of a soft,
14 malleable material on both the top and bottom portions of the foot covering, the
15 soft, malleable top portion is formed into a wide, rounded covering over the top of
16 the foot that extends over the toes, and a protrusion of fleece material extends out
17 from and floats above the foot entry of the foot covering. An annotated image of
18 BDI’s SNOOZIES!® foot coverings highlighting the above-described features is
19 shown below:
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 17. BDI has invested significant time, money, and effort in developing
13 SNOOZIES!® foot coverings, which has resulted in significant commercial success
14 and public recognition of its distinctive design, appearance, and trade dress. For
15 example, SNOOZIES!® foot coverings have been featured on NBC’s Today Show.
16 18. As a result of BDI’s advertising and promotion of SNOOZIES!® foot
17 coverings, the trade and purchasing public have come to associate the distinctive
18 trade dress of SNOOZIES!® foot coverings with a single producer or source --
19 BDI. The SNOOZIES!® foot coverings product and associated distinctive trade
20 dress have been so successful that the product has been copied by several
21 competitors (whom BDI has pursued for acts of infringement). The advertising
22 and promotion of genuine SNOOZIES!® foot coverings products, and the copying
23 of its trade dress by others, is evidence that the SNOOZIES!® foot coverings trade
24 dress has acquired secondary meaning in the marketplace as to the origin of the
25 product.
26 19. The distinctive trade dress features of SNOOZIES!® foot coverings as
27 described above are non-functional and ornamental, do not impact the use, cost, or
28 quality of the foot coverings, and function together to comprise a design that
7
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 identifies SNOOZIES!® foot coverings as originating from a single source. The
2 particular design, appearance, and arrangement of these elements as a whole are
3 also separate from the utilitarian requirements to create a foot covering.
4 C. JY
5 20. Upon information and belief, JY is a competitor of BDI that has made,
6 used, offered for sale, sold in the United States, and imported into the United
7 States, foot coverings that are covered by the claims of the ’183 Patent and BDI’s
8 trade dress (“JY’s foot coverings”).
9 21. Upon information and belief, JY advertises and, directly or
10 indirectly, markets, offers to sell, sells, or has sold, its foot coverings under the
11 OOOH GEEZ!® trademark. This trademark was registered in December 2017 and
12 bears a curious parallel to the SNOOZIES!® trademark when spoken, particularly
13 when used to market products that are “the same” as SNOOZIES!® foot coverings,
14 as discussed herein. Upon information and belief, Junxia Yao is the owner of the
15 OOOH GEEZ!® trademark, as shown in TEAS Plus Application Serial Number:
16 87727320, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 3 and is
17 incorporated by reference. The address provided on the registration for Ms. Yao is
18 the same as the address provided for JY in its 2018 Statement of Information, a
19 true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and is incorporated
20 by reference.
21 D. CMA
22 22. CMA was a sales agency for SNOOZIES!® foot coverings until
23 December 2017, when it was terminated for underperformance.
24 23. Upon information and belief, CMA subsequently became a sales
25 agency for JY’s foot coverings.
26 24. CMA had a booth at the Las Vegas Market trade shows in January
27 2018 and July/August 2018 at which JY’s foot coverings were displayed.
28
8
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 E. Chronology of Infringing Acts and Correspondence
2 25. In its booth at the Las Vegas Market trade show in January 2018,
3 CMA advertised numerous foot coverings that infringed BDI’s trade dress and
4 the ’183 patent as illustrated in the photograph of the booth below:
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 (The circle and arrow were added by BDI’s counsel for purposes of drawing JY’s
19 attention to a specific pair of JY’s foot coverings that further copied specific
20 pattern concepts from BDI.)
21 26. On February 1, 2018, counsel for BDI wrote CMA, informing CMA
22 that the JY foot coverings displayed and advertised at CMA’s booth at the January
23 2018 Las Vegas Market trade show infringed BDI’s trade dress and the ’183 Patent
24 and demanded that CMA “cease and desist marketing, distributing, selling, and
25 offering to sell” all infringing products. The letter was sent by overnight courier
26 and delivered to CMA on February 2, 2018. A true and correct copy of the
27 February 1, 2018, letter to CMA from counsel for BDI is attached hereto as Exhibit
28 7 and is incorporated by reference.
9
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 27. As of the date of this Complaint, CMA has not responded to the
2 February 1, 2018 letter.
3 28. On February 6, 2018, counsel for BDI also wrote JY a letter informing
4 them that certain JY foot coverings displayed in the CMA booth at the Las Vegas
5 Market trade show infringed BDI’s trade dress and ’183 Patent. The letter
6 demanded that JY cease and desist infringement. A true and correct copy of the
7 February 6, 2018, letter to JY from counsel for BDI is attached hereto as Exhibit 4
8 and is incorporated by reference.
9 29. On February 20, 2018, counsel for JY responded, in part, stating:
10 Please be advised that our Client, JY Designs and Creations, Inc.
(“Client”), respects the intellectual property rights of others. As such,
11 without admitting to any liability relating to the above referenced
matter, our Client has agreed to cease all sales of products with
12 registered U.S. Patent No.: D598,183 (“Disputed Slippers”).
13 Our Client was not previously aware of your client’s registered patent,
and upon receipt of your letter dated February 6, 2018, immediately
14 ceased the sale of the Disputed Slippers. We believe this addresses the
concerns of Buyer’s Direct, Inc.
15
16 A true and correct copy of the February 20, 2018, letter from counsel for JY to
17 counsel for BDI is attached hereto as Exhibit 5 and is incorporated by reference.
18 30. JY has had notice of the ’183 Patent and BDI’s trade dress, and its
19 infringement of BDI’s intellectual property, since at least February 7, 2018, the
20 date that BDI’s counsel’s letter dated February 6, 2018 was delivered to JY via
21 overnight courier.
22 31. CMA has had notice of the ’183 Patent and BDI’s trade dress, and its
23 infringement of BDI’s intellectual property, since at least February 2, 2018, the
24 date that BDI’s counsel’s letter dated February 2, 2018, was delivered to CMA via
25 overnight courier.
26 32. CMA has had actual notice of the ’183 Patent and BDI’s trade dress
27 for years as a result of its prior role as a sales agent for SNOOZIES!® foot
28 coverings.
10
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 33. JY and CMA have also had constructive notice of the ’183 Patent
2 since at least 2010, when BDI began continuously marking its SNOOZIES!® foot
3 coverings with the ’183 Patent number pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 287(a).
4 34. Notwithstanding the representation from JY’s counsel in its February
5 20, 2018, letter, at the July 2018 Atlanta Gift trade show, JY advertised various
6 products including its infringing foot coverings, as illustrated in the upper left of
7 the photograph below of elevator doors on the 13th floor of Americasmart,
8 building no. 2, taken at the July 2018 Atlanta Gift Trade Show:
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25 35. Upon information and belief, JY also secured the services of Gib
26 Carson Associates (“Gib Carson”) to market its infringing foot coverings. Gib
27 Carson had a show room at the July 2018 Atlanta Gift Show.
28
11
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 36. A visitor to the Gib Carson show room at the Atlanta Gift Show in
2 July 2018 commented that she couldn’t help but notice how similar the JY slippers
3 on display were to SNOOZIES!® foot coverings. In response, a representative in
4 the Gib Carson booth (believed to be from JY) advised the visitor that JY’s foot
5 coverings were “the same” but that “we have better deals.”
6 37. JY also issued a Fall Winter 2018 catalog that, despite its promises
7 in its February 20, 2018, letter, again advertises its foot coverings. The Fall Winter
8 2018 catalog was made available at the Atlanta Gift Show. A true and correct
9 copy of excerpts from JY’s Fall Winter 2018 catalog is attached hereto as Exhibit 6
10 and is incorporated by reference. The JY Fall Winter 2018 catalog indicates that
11 JY is taking orders for the delivery of JY’s foot coverings to be shipped starting in
12 August. See Exhibit 6, pp. 2, 22, 23. JY made its Fall Winter 2018 catalog
13 available in the Diverse Marketing show room at the Atlanta Gift Show.
14 38. Representative infringing JY slippers from the JY Fall Winter 2018
15 catalog are shown below:
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26 Exhibit 6, cover, pp. 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 17, 18.
27 39. BDI representatives have also been informed that JY has recently
28 contacted sales agencies in the marketplace who currently sell SNOOZIES!® foot
12
4825-6144-2671.v1
1 coverings to retailers. JY has reportedly advised these sales agencies that if their
2 retail customers stock JY’s foot coverings instead of SNOOZIES!® foot coverings,
3 JY will either purchase the retailers’ existing orders of SNOOZIES!® foot
4 coverings or offer the retailers a credit for JY’s foot coverings.
5 40. BDI has further learned that in the summer 2018 Las Vegas Market
6 show, despite JY’s promises in its February 20, 2018, letter, CMA was again
7 displaying JY’s foot coverings. A photograph from the CMA booth taken August
8 1, 2018, again showing JY’s foot coverings, is shown below.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
13
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 41. BDI is informed that in July 2018 one of its sales agency
2 representatives called one of its accounts and was told that the account would no
3 longer be purchasing SNOOZIES!® foot coverings and instead would be
4 purchasing the CMA brand, i.e., JY’s foot coverings.
5 42. On July 24, 2018, counsel for BDI again wrote CMA and reminded it
6 of its obligations to respect BDI’s intellectual property rights. A true and correct
7 copy of the July 24, 2018, letter to CMA is attached as Exhibit 8 and is
8 incorporated by reference.
9 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
10 (Direct Infringement of the ’183 Design Patent)
11 (Against JY)
12 43. Paragraphs 1 through 42 of this Complaint are incorporated as if set
13 forth in their entirety here.
14 44. Upon information and belief, JY has directly infringed and is
15 continuing to infringe the ’183 Patent by manufacturing, using, selling and/or
16 offering for sale in the United States, or importing into the United States, JY’s foot
17 coverings, and/or other footwear that embodies the subject matter claimed in
18 the ’183 Patent.
19 45. Upon information and belief, the infringing products include certain
20 JY foot coverings identified in its Fall Winter 2018 Catalog (Exhibit 6) including,
21 but not limited to, the slipper collections identified as Snug Aquatic (p. 7), Flip
22 Sequins (p. 8), OGZ Patterns (p. 10), Fluffy Animal Sherpa (p. 11), Glitter and
23 Stars (p. 13), and Wild Life (p. 18), and any and all products having the same or
24 similar construction.
25 46. Similarly, for example, JY’s infringing foot coverings include at least
26 the three slipper pairs in the first row on the far right, the animal faced slippers on
27 the second row, the entire third row, the 10 pairs of slippers starting from the right
28 on the fourth row, those slippers visible on the fifth row, and likely others
14
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 displayed on the wall with the “OOH GEEZ! SLIPPERS” sign from the CMA
2 booth at the February 2018 Las Vegas Market Trade Show, as shown in the
3 photograph below:
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 47. The following exemplary comparison of JY’s foot coverings with
19 Fig. 1 from the ’183 patent demonstrates infringement:
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
15
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 48. Upon information and belief, JY’s infringement of the ’183 Patent is
2 knowing and willful.
3 49. BDI provided actual notice of the ’183 Patent on February 6, 2018,
4 and has also complied with the statutory requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 287(a) and,
5 therefore, gave JY notice of the ’183 Patent prior to February 7, 2018.
6 50. As a result of the acts of JY as complained of herein, BDI has suffered
7 monetary damage, in an amount according to proof.
8 51. BDI has no adequate remedy at law.
9 52. This is an exceptional case within the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 285
10 and, accordingly, BDI is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees.
11 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
12 (Inducement of Infringement of the ’183 Design Patent)
13 (Against JY)
14 53. Paragraphs 1 through 52 of this Complaint are incorporated as if set
15 forth in their entirety here.
16 54. JY was aware of the ’183 Patent at least as of the date, February 7,
17 2018, that it received the letter from BDI’s counsel notifying JY of the ’183 Patent
18 and its infringement by JY. As of February 7, 2018, JY was thus also aware that
19 JY’s foot coverings infringed BDI’s ’183 Patent.
20 55. BDI has also complied with the statutory requirement of 35 U.S.C. §
21 287(a) and, therefore, gave JY notice of the ’183 Patent prior to February 7, 2018.
22 56. Despite knowledge of the ’183 Patent and its infringement, JY has
23 continued to market and sell JY’s foot coverings in catalogs, at trade shows, and
24 through direct communications with sales agencies, with the knowledge that such
25 acts would constitute direct infringement of the ’183 Patent.
26 57. Further, JY’s advertising depicts people wearing JY’s foot coverings
27 as they are designed to be worn, thus directly or indirectly inducing consumers to
28 directly infringe the ’183 Patent.
16
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 58. As a result of the acts of JY as complained of herein, BDI has suffered
2 monetary damage, in an amount according to proof.
3 59. BDI has no adequate remedy at law.
4 60. This is an exceptional case within the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 285
5 and, accordingly, BDI is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees.
6 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
7 (Direct Infringement of the ’183 Design Patent)
8 (Against CMA)
9 61. Paragraphs 1 through 60 of this Complaint are incorporated as if set
10 forth in their entirety here.
11 62. Upon information and belief, CMA has directly infringed and is
12 continuing to infringe the ’183 Patent by marketing, offering for sale and/or selling
13 in the United States, JY’s foot coverings, and/or other footwear that embodies the
14 subject matter claimed in the ’183 Patent.
15 63. Upon information and belief, CMA is marketing JY’s infringing foot
16 coverings at its booths and exhibitions at industry trade shows, including at least
17 the February 2018 and July 2018 Las Vegas Market Trade Shows, as detailed
18 above.
19 64. Upon information and belief, CMA representatives, or others with
20 CMA’s knowledge and permission, offer to sell and/or sell JY’s infringing foot
21 coverings at CMA’s booths and exhibitions at industry trade shows, and through
22 direct communications with retailers, as detailed above.
23 65. Upon information and belief, CMA’s infringement of the ’183 Patent
24 is knowing and willful.
25 66. BDI provided actual notice of the ’183 Patent at least as early as
26 February 1, 2018, and has also complied with the statutory requirement of 35
27 U.S.C. § 287(a) and, therefore, gave CMA notice of the ’183 Patent prior to
28 February 1, 2018.
17
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 67. As a result of the acts of JY as complained of herein, BDI has suffered
2 monetary damage in an amount according to proof.
3 68. BDI has no adequate remedy at law.
4 69. This is an exceptional case within the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 285
5 and, accordingly, BDI is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees.
6 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
7 (Trade Dress Infringement)
8 (Against JY and CMA)
9 70. Paragraphs 1 through 69 of this Complaint are incorporated as if set
10 forth in their entirety here.
11 71. JY’s foot coverings copy the SNOOZIES!® trade dress,
12 misappropriating the distinctive, non-functional, source-identifying features of
13 BDI’s product described in paragraphs 14-19 above.
14 72. JY’s manufacture, importation, use, offers to sell, and sale and
15 CMA’s marketing, offers to sell, and sale of JY’s confusingly similar foot
16 coverings, which copy the distinctive and non-functional features of BDI’s
17 SNOOZIES!® foot coverings, is likely to cause confusion or deception of, or
18 mistakes made by, the purchasing public as to the source or origin of JY’s foot
19 coverings in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). In addition, both BDI’s
20 SNOOZIES!® foot coverings and JY’s foot coverings are sold in overlapping and
21 directly competing trade channels, further exacerbating the likelihood of confusion
22 between BDI’s foot coverings and JY’s foot coverings.
23
24
25
26
27
28
18
4825-6144-2671.v1
1 73. The confusion caused between SNOOZIES!® foot coverings and JY’s
2 foot coverings is shown, for example, in the comparisons below:
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 SNOOZIES!® foot coverings JY’s foot coverings (Ex. 6, p. 13)
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 SNOOZIES!® foot coverings JY’s foot coverings (Ex. 6, p. 18)
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 SNOOZIES!® foot coverings JY’s foot coverings (Ex. 6, p. 7)
19
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 SNOOZIES!® foot coverings JY’s foot coverings (Ex. 6, p. 17)
10 74. JY and CMA have engaged in such wrongful conduct with the
11 willful purpose of misleading, deceiving, or confusing customers and the public as
12 to the origin and authority of JY’s foot coverings, thereby trading on BDI’s
13 goodwill, reputation, and creative designs.
14 75. The conduct of JY constitutes willful infringement of BDI’s
15 protectable trade dress, making this an exceptional case within the meaning of 15
16 U.S.C. § 1117.
17 76. The infringing activity of JY has caused BDI irreparable injury and
18 monetary damages, in an amount according to proof.
19 77. If the infringement by JY is not permanently enjoined, BDI will
20 continue to suffer irreparable injury and monetary damages.
21 78. BDI has no adequate remedy at law.
22 FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
23 (Intentional Interference with Contractual Relations)
24 (Against JY)
25 79. Paragraphs 1 through 78 of this Complaint are incorporated as if set
26 forth in their entirety here.
27 80. BDI has numerous agreements with sales agencies who market
28 SNOOZIES!® foot coverings.
20
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 81. Representation agreements with sales agencies are standard practice
2 in the gift industry where representatives agree to market and sell products to
3 retailers from a particular supplier.
4 82. Upon information and belief, JY is aware of the identity of many of
5 the sales agencies who currently market SNOOZIES!® foot coverings.
6 83. Upon information and belief, JY has intentionally interfered with
7 BDI’s contractual relations with its sales agencies by contacting those agencies
8 currently marketing SNOOZIES!® foot coverings, to encourage BDI’s sales
9 agencies to replace SNOOZIES!® foot coverings with JY’s infringing foot
10 coverings.
11 84. Upon information and belief, JY further misrepresented that its
12 products were non-infringing.
13 85. JY’s interference was intended to disrupt the performance of BDI’s
14 sales agency agreements to its advantage.
15 86. BDI’s relations with its sales agencies have been harmed, or at least
16 potentially harmed, by JY’s interference.
17 87. JY’s interference was a substantial factor in causing BDI’s harm.
18 88. JY’s conduct has caused BDI monetary damages, in an amount
19 according to proof.
20 89. The actions of JY described herein were taken with substantial
21 certainty that such acts would cause harm to BDI, in conscious disregard for the
22 rights of BDI, and by conduct that was done with malice and ill-will and intent to
23 harm BDI, such as to constitute oppression, fraud, malice, and despicable conduct
24 under Cal. Civ. Code § 3294, entitling BDI to exemplary damages in an amount
25 appropriate to punish and set an example of JY.
26
27
28
21
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
2 (Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage)
3 (Against JY)
4 90. Paragraphs 1 through 89 of this Complaint are incorporated as if set
5 forth in their entirety here.
6 91. Because of BDI’s ’183 Patent and trade dress, SNOOZIES!® foot
7 coverings and products of like design are only properly available through BDI, a
8 BDI representative, an authorized agent, or an authorized retailer.
9 92. Any representative wishing to sell SNOOZIES!® foot coverings or
10 products of like design, therefore, must obtain such products through BDI or risk
11 infringement. Because of the popularity of SNOOZIES!® foot coverings and the
12 single source of such products, potential representatives frequently approach BDI
13 for prospective business agreements.
14 93. Due to SNOOZIES!® foot coverings’ popularity and intellectual
15 property protection, BDI and potential sales agencies shared a prospective
16 economic relationship that probably would have resulted in an economic benefit to
17 BDI, but for JY’s infringement and bad faith conduct.
18 94. As evidenced by JY’s misrepresentations regarding the infringing
19 status of its foot coverings, JY was aware of BDI’s prospective business relations
20 and has intentionally sought to displace BDI in those relationships and to disrupt
21 the formation of future retailer relationships.
22 95. As evidenced by CMA’s offers to sell JY’s infringing foot coverings,
23 BDI has been harmed by the improper competition and lost sales of SNOOZIES!®
24 foot coverings to JY’s infringing foot coverings.
25 96. JY’s intentional and bad faith conduct detailed above was a
26 substantial factor in causing BDI’s harm.
27 97. JY’s conduct has caused BDI monetary damages, in an amount
28 according to proof.
22
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 98. The actions of JY described herein were taken with substantial
2 certainty that such acts would cause harm to BDI, in conscious disregard for the
3 rights of BDI, and by conduct that was done with malice and ill-will and intent to
4 harm BDI, such as to constitute oppression, fraud, malice, and despicable conduct
5 under Cal. Civ. Code § 3294, entitling BDI to exemplary damages in an amount
6 appropriate to punish and set an example of JY.
7 SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
8 (Statutory Unfair Competition, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 et seq.)
9 (Against JY and CMA)
10 99. Paragraphs 1 through 98 of this Complaint are incorporated as if set
11 forth in their entirety here.
12 100. JY’s and CMA’s unfair and unlawful business practices complained
13 of herein, including but not limited to their misappropriation of BDI’s trade dress
14 with the intent to likely confuse and/or deceive members of the public regarding
15 the origin and/or infringing status of JY’s infringing foot coverings, constitute
16 statutory unfair competition in violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 et
17 seq.
18 101. JY’s and CMA’s unfair acts harmed BDI by depriving it of sales
19 agency and retail relationships and/or lost sales of SNOOZIES!® foot coverings to
20 JY’s infringing foot coverings.
21 102. As a direct and proximate result of JY’s wrongful conduct, BDI has
22 been injured in fact and has lost money and profits, and has suffered injury to its
23 reputation and goodwill. Such harm will continue unless JY’s acts are enjoined by
24 the Court. BDI has no adequate remedy at law. Accordingly, BDI is entitled to an
25 injunction prohibiting JY from continuing the practices described above.
26
27
28
23
4825-6144-2671.v1
 1 EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
2 (Unjust Enrichment)
3 (Against JY and CMA)
4 103. Paragraphs 1 through 102 of this Complaint are incorporated as if set
5 forth in their entirety here.
6 104. By misrepresenting the infringing status of JY’s foot coverings and
7 offering other incentives to switch from SNOOZIES!® foot coverings to JY’s foot
8 coverings, JY and CMA benefitted from the unfair and illegal sale of JY’s
9 infringing foot coverings and retained that benefit (i.e., profit and/or distributorship
10 relationships) at BDI’s expense.
11 105. JY’s conduct has caused BDI monetary damages, in an amount
12 according to proof.
13 106. BDI is entitled to the disgorgement of all profits from the unfair and
14 illegal sale of JY’s infringing foot coverings.
15 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
16 WHEREFORE, BDI prays for judgment in its favor, and against JY and
17 CMA, as follows:
18 A. For a judgment that, by the acts complained of above, JY
19 has directly infringed, and induced infringement of, the ’183 Patent in
20 violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a)-(b).
21 B. For a judgment that, by the acts complained of above,
22 CMA has directly infringed the ’183 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. §
23 271(a).
24 C. For a judgment that, by the acts complained of above, JY
25 and CMA have committed trade dress infringement in violation of 15
26 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
27
28
24
4825-6144-2671.v1
1 D. For a judgment that, by the acts complained of above, JY
2 intentionally interfered with BDI’s contractual relations with its sales
3 agents and retailers in violation of California common law.
4 E. For a judgment that, by the acts complained of above, JY
5 intentionally interfered with BDI’s prospective economic advantage
6 with potential sales agents and retailers in violation of California
7 common law.
8 F. For a judgment that, by the acts complained of above, JY
9 and CMA engaged in acts of unfair and deceptive business practices
10 in violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 et seq.
11 G. For a judgment that, by the acts complained of above, JY
12 and CMA were unjustly enriched at BDI’s expense.
13 H. For a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining JY
14 and CMA, and their officers, agents, servants, employees, successors,
15 assigns, subsidiaries, parents, related entities, and attorneys, and all
16 other persons, firms, associations, and entities who are in active
17 concert or participation with them, from:
18 (i) reproducing, distributing, importing, selling,
19 or offering for sale any foot-covering products that are
20 copies of, or are substantially similar to, BDI’s
21 SNOOZIES!® foot coverings, in whole or in part,
22 including but not limited to JY’s foot coverings;
23 (ii) using any designs which are similar, in
24 whole or in part, to any trade dress of BDI’s
25 SNOOZIES!® foot coverings;
26 (iii) committing any acts causing, or calculated
27 to cause, purchasers or the trade to mistakenly believe
28
25
4825-6144-2671.v1
1 that JY’s foot coverings are BDI’s SNOOZIES!® foot
2 coverings, or vice versa, in whole or in part;
3 (iv) infringing any patent of BDI, including but
4 not limited to the ’183 Patent; and
5 (v) otherwise competing unfairly with BDI.
6 I. For an order pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a) directing JY
7 to file with this Court and to serve upon BDI’s counsel, within thirty
8 (30) days after the entry and service on JY of an injunction, a report in
9 writing and under oath setting forth in detail the manner and form in
10 which JY has complied with the injunction.
11 J. For an order pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a) directing
12 CMA to file with this Court and to serve upon BDI’s counsel, within
13 thirty (30) days after the entry and service on CMA of an injunction, a
14 report in writing and under oath setting forth in detail the manner and
15 form in which CMA has complied with the injunction.
16 K. For an order pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a) compelling
17 JY to account to BDI for any and all profits derived from its unlawful
18 and infringing conduct.
19 L. For an order pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a) compelling
20 CMA to account to BDI for any and all profits derived from its
21 unlawful and infringing conduct
22 M. For an order awarding BDI damages as follows:
23 (i) all damages adequate to compensate BDI for
24 JY’s and CMA’s infringement of the ’183 Patent, and in
25 no event less than a reasonable royalty for JY’s and
26 CMA’s acts of infringement;
27
28
26
4825-6144-2671.v1
1 (ii) pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 284 and 289, all
2 damages, including treble damages, based on any
3 infringement of the ’183 Patent found to be willful; and
4 (iii) pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a) and the
5 judgment of unjust enrichment, BDI’s actual damages, as
6 well as all of JY’s and CMA’s profits or gains of any
7 kind from their acts of trade dress infringement,
8 including a trebling of those damages.
9 N. For an order that JY and CMA shall destroy any
10 inventory of infringing foot coverings in their physical possession or
11 over which they have title or other ownership interest, even though
12 not in their physical possession, and that JY and CMA shall provide
13 BDI a certification identifying the number of units and location(s) of
14 inventories of infringing foot coverings and the date of their
15 destruction.
16 O. For an order compelling JY to identify (i) past and
17 present customers of JY’s infringing foot coverings; (ii) customers
18 with pending, but unfilled orders, for JY’s infringing foot coverings;
19 (iii) past and present manufacturers of JY’s infringing foot coverings;
20 (iv) past and present sales agencies and/or sales representatives
21 representing JY with respect to its infringing foot coverings; and (v)
22 past and present importers of JY’s infringing foot coverings.
23 P. For and order compelling CMA to identify (i) past and
24 present customers of infringing foot coverings; (ii) customers with
25 pending, but unfilled orders, for infringing foot coverings; and (iii)
26 any source or supplier of infringing foot coverings, other than JY.
27
28
27
4825-6144-2671.v1
1 Q. For an order pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a) and 35
2 U.S.C. § 285, finding that this is an exceptional case and awarding
3 BDI its reasonable attorneys’ fees.
4 R. For an order awarding exemplary damages as authorized
5 by law;
6 S. For an order awarding BDI all of its costs, disbursements
7 and other expenses, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), 28 U.S.C. §
8 1920 and other applicable law.
9 T. For interest.
10 U. For such other relief as the circumstances may require
11 and that the Court may deem just and appropriate.
12
13
Dated: August 3, 2018 JEFFREY D. WEXLER
14 PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
15
ANDREW M. OLLIS (pro hac vice pending)
16 FRANK J. WEST (pro hac vice pending)
OBLON MCCLELLAND MAIER &
17
NEUSTADT, LLP
18
19
/s/ Jeffrey D. Wexler
20 Jeffrey D. Wexler
21 Attorneys for Plaintiff Buyer’s Direct, Inc.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
28
4825-6144-2671.v1
1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
2 Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule
3 38-1, Plaintiff Buyer’s Direct, Inc. hereby demands a trial by jury.
4
5 Dated: August 3, 2018 JEFFREY D. WEXLER
PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
6
7 ANDREW M. OLLIS (pro hac vice pending)
FRANK J. WEST (pro hac vice pending)
8
OBLON MCCLELLAND MAIER &
9 NEUSTADT, LLP
10
11 /s/ Jeffrey D. Wexler
Jeffrey D. Wexler
12
Attorneys for Plaintiff Buyer’s Direct, Inc.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
4825-6144-2671.v1
Exhibit 1
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 3
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.
PTO Form 1478 (Rev 09/2006)
OMB No. 0651-0009 (Exp 02/28/2018)

Trademark/Service Mark Application, Principal Register

TEAS Plus Application
Serial Number: 87727320
Filing Date: 12/19/2017

NOTE: Data fields with the * are mandatory under TEAS Plus. The wording "(if applicable)" appears where the field is only mandatory
under the facts of the particular application.

The table below presents the data as entered.

Input Field Entered

TEAS Plus YES
MARK INFORMATION
\\TICRS\EXPORT17\IMAGEOUT
*MARK
17\877\273\87727320\xml1\ FTK0002.JPG
*SPECIAL FORM YES
USPTO-GENERATED IMAGE NO
LITERAL ELEMENT Oooh Geez!
*COLOR MARK NO
*COLOR(S) CLAIMED
(If applicable)

*DESCRIPTION OF THE MARK The mark consists of the texts "Oooh Geez!" inside a blob-
(and Color Location, if applicable) shaped.
PIXEL COUNT ACCEPTABLE NO
PIXEL COUNT 4800 x 4800
REGISTER Principal
APPLICANT INFORMATION
*OWNER OF MARK Junxia Yao
*STREET 20635 Valley Blvd., Unit A
*CITY Walnut
*STATE
California
(Required for U.S. applicants)

*COUNTRY United States

*ZIP/POSTAL CODE
91789
(Required for U.S. and certain international addresses)

LEGAL ENTITY INFORMATION

*TYPE INDIVIDUAL
* COUNTRY OF CITIZENSHIP China
GOODS AND/OR SERVICES AND BASIS INFORMATION
* INTERNATIONAL CLASS 025
*IDENTIFICATION Slippers; Socks
*FILING BASIS SECTION 1(a)
FIRST USE ANYWHERE DATE At least as early as 12/01/2017
FIRST USE IN COMMERCE DATE At least as early as 12/01/2017

SPECIMEN \\TICRS\EXPORT17\IMAGEOUT
FILE NAME(S) 17\877\273\87727320\xml1\ FTK0003.JPG
\\TICRS\EXPORT17\IMAGEOUT
17\877\273\87727320\xml1\ FTK0004.JPG

\\TICRS\EXPORT17\IMAGEOUT
17\877\273\87727320\xml1\ FTK0005.JPG
\\TICRS\EXPORT17\IMAGEOUT
17\877\273\87727320\xml1\ FTK0006.JPG
SPECIMEN DESCRIPTION Products
ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS SECTION
*TRANSLATION
(if applicable)

*TRANSLITERATION
(if applicable)

*CLAIMED PRIOR REGISTRATION

(if applicable)

*CONSENT (NAME/LIKENESS)
(if applicable)

*CONCURRENT USE CLAIM

(if applicable)

ATTORNEY INFORMATION
NAME Tommy SF Wang
FIRM NAME Wang IP Law Group, P.C.
STREET 18645 E. Gale Ave. #205
CITY City of Industry
STATE California
COUNTRY United States
ZIP/POSTAL CODE 91748
PHONE 909-520-4381
FAX 888-827-8880
EMAIL ADDRESS twang@TheWangIPLaw.com
AUTHORIZED TO COMMUNICATE VIA EMAIL Yes
CORRESPONDENCE INFORMATION
*NAME Tommy SF Wang
FIRM NAME Wang IP Law Group, P.C.
*STREET 18645 E. Gale Ave. #205
*CITY City of Industry
*STATE
(Required for U.S. addresses)
California

*COUNTRY United States

*ZIP/POSTAL CODE 91748
PHONE 909-520-4381
FAX 888-827-8880
*EMAIL ADDRESS twang@TheWangIPLaw.com
*AUTHORIZED TO COMMUNICATE VIA EMAIL Yes
FEE INFORMATION
APPLICATION FILING OPTION TEAS Plus
NUMBER OF CLASSES 1
FEE PER CLASS 225
*TOTAL FEE PAID 225
SIGNATURE INFORMATION
* SIGNATURE /Tommy SF Wang/
* SIGNATORY'S NAME Tommy SF Wang
* SIGNATORY'S POSITION Attorney of record, California bar member
SIGNATORY'S PHONE NUMBER 909-520-4381
* DATE SIGNED 12/19/2017
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.
PTO Form 1478 (Rev 09/2006)
OMB No. 0651-0009 (Exp 02/28/2018)

Trademark/Service Mark Application, Principal Register

TEAS Plus Application

Serial Number: 87727320

Filing Date: 12/19/2017
To the Commissioner for Trademarks:
MARK: Oooh Geez! (stylized and/or with design, see mark)

The mark in your application is Oooh Geez!.

The applicant is not claiming color as a feature of the mark. The mark consists of the texts "Oooh Geez!" inside a blob-shaped.
The applicant, Junxia Yao, a citizen of China, having an address of
20635 Valley Blvd., Unit A
Walnut, California 91789
United States

requests registration of the trademark/service mark identified above in the United States Patent and Trademark Office on the Principal Register
established by the Act of July 5, 1946 (15 U.S.C. Section 1051 et seq.), as amended, for the following:

For specific filing basis information for each item, you must view the display within the Input Table.
International Class 025: Slippers; Socks

Use in Commerce: The applicant is using the mark in commerce on or in connection with the identified goods/services. The applicant attaches, or
will later submit, one specimen as a JPG/PDF image file showing the mark as used in commerce on or in connection with any item in the class of
listed goods/services, regardless of whether the mark itself is in the standard character format or is a stylized or design mark. The specimen image
file may be in color, and the image must be in color if color is being claimed as a feature of the mark.

In International Class 025, the mark was first used by the applicant or the applicant's related company or licensee predecessor in interest at least
as early as 12/01/2017, and first used in commerce at least as early as 12/01/2017, and is now in use in such commerce. The applicant is
submitting one(or more) specimen(s) showing the mark as used in commerce on or in connection with any item in the class of listed
goods/services, consisting of a(n) Products.
Specimen File1
Specimen File2
Specimen File3
Specimen File4

The applicant's current Attorney Information:

Tommy SF Wang of Wang IP Law Group, P.C. 18645 E. Gale Ave. #205
City of Industry, California 91748
United States
909-520-4381(phone)
888-827-8880(fax)
twang@TheWangIPLaw.com (authorized)

The applicant's current Correspondence Information:

Tommy SF Wang
Wang IP Law Group, P.C.
18645 E. Gale Ave. #205
City of Industry, California 91748
 909-520-4381(phone)
888-827-8880(fax)
twang@TheWangIPLaw.com (authorized)
E-mail Authorization: I authorize the USPTO to send e-mail correspondence concerning the application to the applicant or the applicant's
attorney, or the applicant's domestic representative at the e-mail address provided in this application. I understand that a valid e-mail address
must be maintained and that the applicant or the applicant's attorney must file the relevant subsequent application-related submissions via the
Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS). Failure to do so will result in the loss of TEAS Plus status and a requirement to submit an
additional processing fee of $125 per international class of goods/services.

A fee payment in the amount of $225 has been submitted with the application, representing payment for 1 class(es).

Declaration

Basis:
If the applicant is filing the application based on use in commerce under 15 U.S.C. § 1051(a):

The signatory believes that the applicant is the owner of the trademark/service mark sought to be registered;
The mark is in use in commerce on or in connection with the goods/services in the application;
The specimen(s) shows the mark as used on or in connection with the goods/services in the application; and
To the best of the signatory's knowledge and belief, the facts recited in the application are accurate.

AND/OR
If the applicant is filing the application based on an intent to use the mark in commerce under 15 U.S.C. § 1051(b), § 1126(d),
and/or § 1126(e):

The signatory believes that the applicant is entitled to use the mark in commerce;
The applicant has a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce on or in connection with the goods/services in the
application; and
To the best of the signatory's knowledge and belief, the facts recited in the application are accurate.
To the best of the signatory's knowledge and belief, no other persons, except, if applicable, concurrent users, have the right to use the
mark in commerce, either in the identical form or in such near resemblance as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the
goods/services of such other persons, to cause confusion or mistake, or to deceive.
To the best of the signatory's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, the
allegations and other factual contentions made above have evidentiary support.
The signatory being warned that willful false statements and the like are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under 18 U.S.C. §
1001, and that such willful false statements and the like may jeopardize the validity of the application or submission or any registration
resulting therefrom, declares that all statements made of his/her own knowledge are true and all statements made on information and
belief are believed to be true.
Declaration Signature

Signature: /Tommy SF Wang/ Date: 12/19/2017

Signatory's Name: Tommy SF Wang
Signatory's Position: Attorney of record, California bar member
Signatory's Phone Number: 909-520-4381
Payment Sale Number: 87727320
Payment Accounting Date: 12/20/2017

Serial Number: 87727320

Internet Transmission Date: Tue Dec 19 19:30:41 EST 2017
TEAS Stamp: USPTO/FTK-XXX.XXX.X.XX-20171219193041309
709-87727320-5102e61561514504de7aed15533
234fd101c286640c57b51421be921f465f84562-
CC-6944-20171219192442083866
Exhibit 4
Exhibit 5
 Attorneys and Counselors at Law

February 20, 2018

Andrew M. Ollis
Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, LLP
1940 Duke Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Email: aollis@oblon.com

SENT VIA E-MAIL

Re: U.S. Patent No.: D598,183

Confidential Settlement Discussion - Subject to Fed. Rule Evid. 408

Dear Mr. Ollis:

Please be advised that our Client, JY Designs and Creations, Inc. (“Client”), respects the
intellectual property rights of others. As such, without admitting to any liability relating to the
above referenced matter, our Client has agreed to cease all sales of products with registered U.S.
Patent No.: D598,183 (“Disputed Slippers”).

Our Client was not previously aware of your client’s registered patent, and upon receipt
of your letter dated February 6, 2018, immediately ceased the sale of the Disputed Slippers. We
believe this addresses the concerns of Buyer’s Direct, Inc.

We hope this matter may be resolved in a timely and amicable manner. In light of the de
minimus nature of the dispute raised in your letter, which is now resolved, we will consider this
matter closed.
Andrew M. Ollis | Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, LLP
February 20, 2018
Page 2

The foregoing is written for purposes of compromise and settlement and is covered under
the Federal and California Rules of Evidence. Additionally, nothing herein shall limit or be
constructed to limit any position, right, or claim that our Client may have, all of which are
expressly reserved.

Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please do not hesitate to contact me by
email at TWang@TheWangIPLaw.com or by telephone at (626) 269-6753.

Respectfully,

Attorney for JY Designs and Creations, Inc.

Exhibit 6
* All Slippers Ship August 2018 * All Socks Ship August 2018

2
 Snug Aquatic
Snug Aquatic Combo
G-GWP-8817-8820

Mermaid Gang
Love Bites

GWP8817-S GWP8818-S

GWP8817-M GWP8818-M

GWP8817-L GWP8818-L
Under The Sea

Octopus Time

GWP8819-S GWP8820-S

GWP8819-M GWP8820-M

GWP8819-L GWP8820-L

Snug Aquatic ~ 24 pair-case collection with 6 pair of each design

4 Aquatic Embellished sherpa slippers- non skid soles- machine washable
Style- Snug Aquatic MSRP USD Per Pair- $17.49 Available Date- August 2018
Cost per pair for combo- $6.99 Combo Cost/Box- $167.76 Reorder unit Cost/Soild Pack- $7.69
Size scale from -1 small (shoe size 5/6) - 3 medium (shoe size 7/8) - 2 large (shoe size 9/10)
7
 Flip Sequins
Flip Sequins Combo
G-GWP-8821-8824

Flip Sequins Rose Gld

Flip Sequins Blu

GWP8821-S GWP8822-S

GWP8821-M GWP8822-M

GWP8821-L GWP8822-L
Flip Sequins Grn

Flip Sequins Slv

GWP8823-S GWP8824-S

GWP8823-M GWP8824-M

GWP8823-L GWP8824-L

Flip Sequins ~ 24 pair-case collection with 6 pair of each design

4 Two Tone Sequins slippers- non skid soles- machine washable
Style- Flip Sequins MSRP USD Per Pair- $19.99 Available Date- August 2018
Cost per pair for combo- $8.49 Combo Cost/Box- $203.76 Reorder unit Cost/Soild Pack- $9.59
Size scale from -1 small (shoe size 5/6) - 3 medium (shoe size 7/8) - 2 large (shoe size 9/10)
8
 OGZ Patterns
OGZ Pattern Combo
G-GWP-8829-8834

Avocado Life

Duckies

Donuts!
GWP8829-S GWP8830-S GWP8831-S

GWP8829-M GWP8830-M GWP8831-M

GWP8829-L GWP8830-L GWP8831-L

Pineapple Dude

Happy Tree
Poop!

GWP8832-S GWP8833-S GWP8834-S

GWP8832-M GWP8833-M GWP8834-M

GWP8832-L GWP8833-L GWP8834-L

OGZ Pattern ~ 36 pair-case collection with 6 pair of each design

6 printed super soft slippers- non skid soles- machine washable
Style- OGZ Pattern MSRP USD Per Pair- $15.99 Available Date- August 2018
Cost per pair for combo- $6.49 Combo Cost/Box- $233.64 Reorder unit Cost/Soild Pack- $7.19
Size scale from -1 small (shoe size 5/6) - 3 medium (shoe size 7/8) - 2 large (shoe size 9/10)
10
 Fluffy Animal Sherpa Fluffy Animal Combo
G-GWP-8835-8838

Yorkie
Panda

GWP8835-S GWP8836-S

GWP8835-M GWP8836-M

GWP8835-L GWP8836-L

My Unicorn
Foxy

GWP8837-S GWP8838-S

GWP8837-M GWP8838-M

GWP8837-L GWP8838-L

Fluffy Animal Sherpa ~ 24 pair-case collection with 6 pair of each design

4 Animal Plush slippers- non skid soles- machine washable
Style- Fluffy Animal MSRP USD Per Pair- $17.49 Available Date- August 2018
Cost per pair for combo- $6.99 Combo Cost/Box- $167.76 Reorder unit Cost/Soild Pack- $7.69
Size scale from -1 small (shoe size 5/6) - 3 medium (shoe size 7/8) - 2 large (shoe size 9/10)
11
 Glitter and Stars
Glitter and Stars Combo
G-GWP-8843-8846

The Starz Purple

The Starz Blue

GWP8843-S GWP8844-S

GWP8843-M GWP8844-M

GWP8843-L GWP8844-L

The Starz Pink

The Starz Blk

GWP8845-S GWP8846-S

GWP8845-M GWP8846-M

GWP8845-L GWP8846-L

Glitter and Stars ~ 24 pair-case collection with 6 pair of each design

4 Shimmer Embroidery slippers- non skid soles- machine washable
Style- Glitter and Stars MSRP USD Per Pair- $19.99 Available Date- August 2018
Cost per pair for combo- $8.49 Combo Cost/Box- $203.76 Reorder unit Cost/Soild Pack- $9.59
Size scale from -1 small (shoe size 5/6) - 3 medium (shoe size 7/8) - 2 large (shoe size 9/10)
13
 Happy Hour
Happy Hour Combo
G-GWP-8857-8858

Bubbly Time
PinotTime

GWP8857-S GWP8858-S

GWP8857-M GWP8858-M

GWP8857-L GWP8858-L

Happy Hour ~ 12 pair-case collection with 6 pair of each design

2 Cocktail theme slippers- hard soles- machine washable
Style- Happy Hour MSRP USD Per Pair- $17.99 Available Date- August 2018
Cost per pair for combo- $7.09 Combo Cost/Box- $85.08 Reorder unit Cost/Soild Pack- $7.79
Size scale from -1 small (shoe size 5/6) - 3 medium (shoe size 7/8) - 2 large (shoe size 9/10)
17
 Wild Life
Wild Life Combo
G-GWP-8859-8862

Elephant
Zebra

GWP8859-S GWP8860-S

GWP8859-M GWP8860-M

GWP8859-L GWP8860-L
Tiger

Lion

GWP8861-S GWP8862-S

GWP8861-M GWP8862-M

GWP8861-L GWP8862-L

Wild Life ~ 24 pair-case collection with 6 pair of each design

4 Wild Animal slippers- hard soles- machine washable
Style- Wild Life MSRP USD Per Pair- $17.99 Available Date- August 2018
Cost per pair for combo- $7.09 Combo Cost/Box- $170.16 Reorder unit Cost/Soild Pack- $7.79
Size scale from -1 small (shoe size 5/6) - 3 medium (shoe size 7/8) - 2 large (shoe size 9/10)
18
 Solid Sherpa
Solid Sherpa Combo
G-GWP-8863-8866

Sherpa Tan

Sherpa Blk
GMP8863-M GMP8864-M

GMP8863-L GMP8864-L

Sherpa Olv
Sherpa Blu

GMP8865-M GMP8866-M

GMP8865-L GMP8866-L

Solid Sherpa ~ 24 pair-case collection with 6 pair of each design

4 Mens Tonal Sherpa slippers- hard soles- machine washable
Style- Solid Sherpa MSRP USD Per Pair- $19.99 Available Date- August 2018
Cost per pair for combo- $8.49 Combo Cost/Box- $203.76 Reorder unit Cost/Soild Pack- $9.59
Size scale from -3 medium (shoe size 9/10) - 3 large (shoe size 11/12)
20
22
23
Exhibit 7
February
y 1, 2018

CONFIDENTIA
AL

Ms. Jean
nne Vykydal ANDREW M. OLLIS
(7
703) 412-7023
Sales Maanager AOLLLIS@OBLON.COM

Californiia Marketing
g
Assocciates

Dear Ms. Vykydal:

half of Buyer’s Direct, In

I write on beh nc., owners oof the snoozzies!® tradem mark, trade ddress
and U.S. patent D598 8,183 (“Intelllectual Propperty”) whichh cover its eextremely suuccessful andd
widely reecognized brrand of fleecce slippers. Buyer’s
B Direect recently learned of yyour efforts to
market numerous cop pies of their protected prroducts at thhe Las Vegass Market tradde show.

During
D this week’s
w Las Vegas
V show, representativves visited yyour booth thhat includedd the
slipper diisplay shown n below:

oth at Las Vegas

CMA Boo V Markeet show Jan
nuary 29, 20018
OBLON, MCCLELLA AND, MAIER & NE EUSTADT, L.L.P.
1940 DUKE
U STREET  ALEXANDRIA
L , VIRGI NIA 22314  U.S
S.A.
TELEPHONE: 703
3-413-3000  FACSIMILE
A : 703-41 3-2220  WWW.O OBLON.COM
 CONFIDENTIA
AL
Page 2

As
A can be imm mediately seeen, every roow of the waall on the leftft side of the display conttains
slippers that
t appear to infringe Buyer’s
B Direcct Intellectuaal Property. In the third row (red arrrow),
for exam
mple, the slipppers appear to
t be exact replicas
r of thhe Buyer’s D
Direct slippers that, untill just
recently, you represeented as a salles representtative for Buuyer’s Directt. In fact, thee picture shoows
that even
n the unique Buyer’s Dirrect patterns such as the m martini glass and shakerr (red circle))
were metticulously, and
a unscrupu ulously, copiied.

Buyer’s
B Direcct understands that you didd not returrn all of the ssample slipppers providedd to
you by Buyer’s
B Direcct. From thee above display, Buyer’ss Direct can only conclude that you
asked forr exact repliccas of its slip
ppers to be made
m by anoother supplierr.

As
A a former sales
s represeentative for snoozies!®
s bbrand slipperrs, you shoulld already bee
keenly awware that Bu
uyer’s Directt Inc. takes itts Intellectuaal Property rrights very sseriously.
Buyer’s Direct
D has acctively enforrced its Intelllectual Propperty rights rrelated to its slipper prodducts
over the past seven years
y in Fedeeral Court, seettling its lonngest runninng litigation this year. Inn fact,
Buyer’s Direct
D entereed into a sev
ven-figure seettlement witth a U.S. retaailer based oon claims forr
infringem
ment of the ‘183 patent, trade
t dress in nfringementt, and unfair competitionn. During itss
enforcemment campaig gn, Buyer’s Direct
D has suuccessfully ddefeated num merous challlenges to thee
validity of
o the ‘183 patent
p in U.S
S. District Coourt and in thhe U.S. Couurt of Appealls for the Fedderal
Circuit an
nd has had thhe U.S. Pateent Office su uccessfully reeexamine thhe ‘183 patennt.

Buyer’s
B Direcct, Inc. will continue
c to vigorously
v eenforce its Inntellectual Prroperty rightts. It
should co
ome as no suurprise that the
t explicit copying
c of B
Buyer’s Direcct products eevidenced att the
Las Vegaas trade show
w is extremeely upsetting g to our cliennt.

Buyer’s
B Direcct therefore demands
d thaat you imme diately ceasee and desist marketing,
distributiing, selling, and offeringg for sale all infringing pproducts dispplayed at CM
MA’s booth iin the
Las Vegaas Market sh how. If you u fail to do soo, Buyer’s D
Direct will coonsider immeediate legal
action.

We
W look forw
ward to your prompt resp
ponse no lateer than Febrruary 15, 20018.

Very Truly Yours,

OBLON, M
McCLELLAN
ND,
MAIER & N
NEUSTADT
T, L.L.P.

Andrew M. Ollis

AMO/aw
w
Exhibit 8
July 24, 2018
2

CONFIDENTIA AL
SUBJECT TO F.R.E
E. 408
ANDREW M. OLLIS
nne Vykydal
Ms. Jean (7
703) 412-7023
AOLLLIS@OBLON.COM
Sales Maanager
Californiia Marketing
g
Assocciates

Dear Ms. Vykydal:

T letter folllows-up on my letter daated Februaryy 1, 2018, reegarding Oooh Geez braand
This
slippers displayed
d by
y CMA at thee Las Vegas trade show earlier this yyear.

Buyer’s
B Direcct, Inc., has become
b awaare that JY D
Designs and C Creations (JJY) has contiinued
to market Oooh Geezz and Oooh Yeah Y brand slippers thatt infringe BD
DI’s ‘183 deesign patent aand
trade dress associatedd with its SN NOOZIES!® brand foot ccoverings. B BDI will shoortly take
appropriaate legal meaasures in ressponse, and will
w considerr similar meeasures againnst anyone
selling orr displaying infringing products
p sold
d by JY.

Our
O client tru usts that CMAA is not marrketing JY prroducts that infringe BD
DI’s intellecttual
property at trade show ws, in catalo
ogs, or elsew
where. Howeever, given JJY’s recent aaggressive
activitiess in the mark
ketplace aimeed at underccutting BDI’ss business, th
this reminderr has becom
me
necessary y.

Shoulld you have any

a question
ns, please doo not hesitatee to let me knnow.

Very Truly Yours,

OBLON, M
McCLELLAN
ND,
MAIER & N
NEUSTADT
T, L.L.P.

Andrew M. Ollis

w
AMO/aw

OBLON, MCCLELLA AND, MAIER & NE EUSTADT, L.L.P.

1940 DUKE
U STREET  ALEXANDRIA
L , VIRGI NIA 22314  U.S
S.A.
TELEPHONE: 703
3-413-3000  FACSIMILE
A : 703-41 3-2220  WWW.O OBLON.COM