Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 1 of 36

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA OCT 8 2024

AIRIGAN SOLUTIONS, LLC,

Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 2:24-cv-1407

v.

MORNING CHEF, BEI JING ZHI FU KE JI,

JZEQBXXYL, KUNMINGWUHUASS,
FILED UNDER SEAL
LALAXIAOHUMAOYI, LINLINGLIU,
RONGXIANG TRADING, SONGSIQING
TRADING, XINYAHANZHUANGSHI,
XULIZHIXINGKEJI, ZHIJIANSHANGMAO,
YIWU BAOWO TRADING CO., LTD.,
YUHUAN AOBO PLASTIC INDUSTRY CO.,
LTD., ALI-YY120 STORE, ALI-ZYAG-1
STORE, ALI-ZYAR-1 STORE, CHANSUNRUN
YAYA STORE, GOOD SHAPE-KEEP STORE,
HOEADEN WARM COZY HOME STORE,
IMAGINATION321 STORE, MAGIC666
STORE, MY CHILDHOOD WORLD STORE,
SAVOR STORE, SHOP1102675024 STORE,
SHOP1103257141 STORE, SHOP1103580739
STORE, SHOP1103620766 STORE,
SHOP1103652096 STORE, SHOP1103847354
STORE, SUMORY STORE, YCYC0124 STORE,
IMAGINARY VISIONS ECOMMERCE LLC,
OSCARLETT COMPANY LLC, OL16 LLC,
MARKETING FOREVER VISUET LLC, and
DQSTORE,
Defendants.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Plaintiff Airigan Solutions, LLC (“Airigan” or “Plaintiff”) hereby sues Defendants, the

Individuals, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations identified in the Caption, which are

set forth in Schedule “A” hereto (collectively “Defendants”). All of the Defendants are (i)
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 2 of 36

promoting, selling, offering for sale and distributing goods bearing and/or using counterfeits

and/or confusingly similar imitations of Plaintiff’s registered copyrighted works, and (ii)

promoting, selling, offering for sale and distributing goods infringing Plaintiff’s patent

(collectively, the “Infringing Products”), thus unfairly competing within this district through at

least one of the Amazon.com, eBay.com, Alibaba.com, AliExpress.com, Temu.com, TikTok,

Walmart.com, or Wish.com online marketplaces operating under the seller identities as set forth

on Schedule “A” hereto (the “Seller IDs”). In support of its claims, Plaintiff alleges as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. Airigan Solutions, LLC, was founded in 2015 and is in the business of producing,

marketing and selling the patented NEGG® brand egg peeler, which was launched in 2015.

2. The genuine NEGG ® brand egg peeler (Fig. 1, below) is designed so that by placing a

standard chicken egg inside with a capful of water, tightly fastening the opposing lids, and

shaking the egg peeler, the shell is punctured and cracked so that it simply peels off in one

continuous motion (“Plaintiff’s Product”) (Fig. 2, below):

Fig. 1 Fig. 2

The distinctive photograph of the NEGG ® brand egg peeler found on all the packaging

and on-line sales materials was posed with parsley leaves underneath the right facing side of the

egg peeler.

-2-
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 3 of 36

3. Defendants’ sale, distribution, and advertising of their goods are highly likely to cause

consumers to believe that Defendants are offering genuine versions of Plaintiff’s Product when

in fact they are not. To illustrate, below are several examples which vividly show that the way

Defendants’ goods are marketed is designed to confuse and mislead consumers into believing

that they are purchasing Plaintiff’s Product or that the Defendants’ goods are otherwise approved

by or sourced from Plaintiff:

Plaintiff’s Patented Egg Peeler Defendant Morning Chef Listing

Plaintiff’s Patented Egg Peeler Defendant linlingliu Listing

-3-
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 4 of 36

Plaintiff’s Copyrighted Product Image Defendant Yuhan Aobo Plastic Industry

Col., Ltd. Store Listing

Plaintiff’s Patented Egg Peeler Defendant DQstore Listing

4. Defendants’ goods are often cheaply produced and substantially inferior to Plaintiff’s

genuine products. Plaintiff’s genuine products are made from food grade plastic; it is unknown

what Defendants’ goods are made from. As poorly manufactured products, Defendants’ goods

create risks since they are intended for use with food, namely hard-boiled eggs.

5. Defendants’ goods threaten to destroy the reputation of high quality that Plaintiff’s

Products have earned. Defendants’ goods create risks as they do not appear to be of the same

-4-
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 5 of 36

quality as the genuine goods. Plaintiff has received numerous complaints about Defendants’

goods.

6. Defendants’ actions have resulted in actual confusion in the marketplace between

Defendants’ goods and genuine Plaintiff’s Products. Numerous purchasers of Defendants’ goods

have written online reviews to complain about the quality of the Defendants’ goods believing

same to be genuine versions of Plaintiff’s Product.

7. Plaintiff is also the owner of various published photographs, videos, artwork, creative

text and product instructions appearing on its web site https://neggmaker.com/. Screenshots of

Plaintiff’s Website and Amazon Store are attached to the Complaint as “Exhibit 4” (“Plaintiff’s

Work”). The combined distinct features of Plaintiff’s Product and Plaintiff’s Mark function as a

trade dress so that consumers are certain that Plaintiff is the source of the Negg® brand egg

peeler.

8. Plaintiff is the owner of source identifying trademarks, including NEGG® (Reg. No.

5,142,630 attached as Exhibit 1) and trade dress shown in Exhibit 2 that Plaintiff uses to

distinguish its unique product (“Plaintiff’s Marks”). Plaintiff owns the overall combination and

arrangement of all non-functional design elements of Plaintiff’s product and packaging,

including its product insert, which are inherently distinctive and/or have acquired secondary

meaning in the mind of the purchasing public. The Plaintiff’s packaging is the subject of U.S.

Copyright Registration No. U.S. Copyright VA0002237199, a copy of which is included in

Exhibit 2. Additionally, Plaintiff owns a United States patent for its unique NEGG® product,

including U.S. Patent No. 9,968,211 for PERSONAL EGG PEELER (attached as Exhibit 3).

-5-
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 6 of 36

9. Plaintiff’s Work, Marks, and Patent make it unlawful for competitors to infringe

Plaintiff’s rights.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

10. This is an action for patent infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271, federal

copyright infringement; federal unfair competition; and common law unfair competition.

Accordingly, this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§

1114, 1116, 1125(a), and 1125(d); and patent infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271 and The

All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a). Accordingly, this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over

this action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1121 and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338. This Court has

supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 over Plaintiff’s state law claims because

those claims are so related to the federal claims that they form part of the same case or

controversy.

11. This Court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a non-resident of the State in

which the Court sits to the extent authorized by the state's laws. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e).

Pennsylvania authorizes personal jurisdiction over the Defendant pursuant to 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. §

5322 (a) which provides in pertinent part: “A tribunal of this Commonwealth may exercise

personal jurisdiction over a person ... as to a cause of action or other matter arising from such

person: (1) Transacting any business in this Commonwealth. Without excluding other acts

which may constitute transacting business for the purpose of this paragraph: (ii) The doing of a

single act in this Commonwealth for the purpose of thereby realizing pecuniary benefit ... (3)

Causing harm or tortious injury by an act or omission in this Commonwealth. (4) Causing harm

or tortious injury by an act or omission outside this Commonwealth ... (10) Committing any

violation within the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of any statute, home rule charter, local

-6-
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 7 of 36

ordinance or resolution, or rule or regulation promulgated thereunder by any government unit or

of any order of court or other government unit.” In the alternative, Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 4(k) confers personal jurisdiction over the Defendant because, upon information and

belief, Defendants regularly conduct, transact and/or solicit business in Pennsylvania and in this

judicial district, and/or derive substantial revenue from their business transactions in

Pennsylvania and in this judicial district and/or otherwise avail themselves of the privileges and

protections of the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania such that this Court's assertion of

jurisdiction over Defendants does not offend traditional notions of fair play and due process,

and/or Defendants’ illegal counterfeiting and infringing actions caused injury to Plaintiff in

Pennsylvania and in this judicial district such that Defendants should reasonably expect such

actions to have consequences in Pennsylvania and in this judicial district, for example:

a. Upon information and belief, Defendants were and/or are systematically

directing and/or targeting their business activities at consumers in the United States,

including Pennsylvania, through on-line platforms with Merchant Storefronts (as defined

infra), via at least one of the Amazon.com, eBay.com, Alibaba.com, AliExpress.com,

Walmart.com, or Wish.com online marketplaces, under the Seller IDs, as well as any and

all as yet undiscovered accounts with Merchant Storefronts held by or associated with

Defendants, their respective officers, employees, agents, servants and all persons in

active concert or participation with any of them (“User Accounts”), through which

consumers in the United States, including Pennsylvania, can view the one or more of

Defendants’ Merchant Storefronts that each Defendant operates, uses to communicate

with Defendants regarding their listings for Counterfeit Products and to place orders for,

receive invoices for and purchase Counterfeit Products for delivery in the U.S., including

-7-
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 8 of 36

Pennsylvania, as a means for establishing regular business with the U.S., including

Pennsylvania.

b. Upon information and belief, certain Defendants are sophisticated sellers, each

operating one or more commercial businesses using their respective User Accounts

through which Defendants, their respective officers, employees, agents, servants and all

persons in active concert of participation with any of them, operate storefronts to

manufacture, import, export, advertise, market, promote, distribute, offer for sale and/or

otherwise deal in products, including the Counterfeit Products, which are held by or

associated with Defendants, their respective officers, employees, agents, servants and all

persons in active concert or participation with any of them (“Merchant Storefront(s)”) in

wholesale quantities at significantly below-market prices to consumers worldwide,

including to those in the U.S., and specifically Pennsylvania.

c. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ Merchant Storefronts reflect multiple

sales to consumers all over the world, including repeat sales to consumers in the U.S. and

into this judicial district.

d. Upon information and belief, all Defendants accept payment in U.S. Dollars

and offer shipping to the U.S., including to Pennsylvania and specifically to the

Pennsylvania Address (as defined infra).

e. Upon information and belief, Defendants have transacted business with

consumers located in the U.S., including Pennsylvania, for the sale and shipment of

Counterfeit Products (as defined infra).

-8-
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 9 of 36

f. Upon information and belief, Defendants are employing and benefiting from

substantially similar paid advertising and marketing and advertising strategies in order to

make their Merchant Storefronts selling illegal goods appear more relevant and attractive

to search result software across an array of search words, including but not limited to

“NEGG”, “EGG PEELER”, and “EGG CRACKER”, and “BOILED EGG PEELER”. By

their actions, Defendants are causing concurrent and indivisible harm to Plaintiff and the

consuming public by (i) depriving Plaintiff of its right to fairly compete for space within

the various on-line marketplace search results and reducing the visibility of the Plaintiff’s

Product on various on-line marketplaces and/or diluting and driving down the retail

market price for Plaintiff’s Product; (ii) causing an overall degradation of the value of the

goodwill associated with Plaintiff’s marks and goods; and (iii) increasing Plaintiff’s

overall cost to market its goods and educate consumers about brands.

g. Upon information and belief, Defendants have cooperated, communicated their

plans with one another, shared information, and coordinated their efforts, all in order to

create an illegal marketplace operating in parallel to the legitimate marketplace of

Plaintiff’s and the legally authorized resellers of Plaintiff’s genuine goods.

h. Upon information and belief, Defendants are concurrently targeting their

counterfeiting and infringing activities toward consumers and causing harm in Allegheny

County, Pennsylvania.

i. Upon information and belief, Defendants likely reside and/or operate in or,

though not foreign, operate out of or from foreign jurisdictions with lax trademark and

patent enforcement systems and are cooperating by creating an illegal stream of

infringing and counterfeit goods.

-9-
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 10 of 36

j. Upon information and belief, Defendants are aware of Plaintiff’s Product, and

are aware that their illegal infringing actions alleged herein are likely to cause injury to

Plaintiff in the United States, in Pennsylvania and in this judicial district specifically, as

Plaintiff conducts substantial business in Pennsylvania.

k. Plaintiff is suffering irreparable and indivisible injury and suffered substantial

damages as a result of Defendants’ unauthorized and wrongful sale of counterfeit and

infringing goods.

3. Venue is proper, inter alia, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 and 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b)

because, for example:

a. Upon information and belief, Defendants conduct, transact, and/or solicit business

in this judicial district.

b. Upon information and belief, Defendants or their agent(s) may be found in this

district because personal jurisdiction is proper in this district.

c. Upon information and belief, this is a judicial district in which a substantial part of

the events or omissions giving rise to the infringement claims occurred, or a substantial part

of the property that is the subject of the action is situated.

d. Defendants not resident in the United States may be sued in this judicial district

because personal jurisdiction is proper in this district.

THE PLAINTIFF

12. Plaintiff is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the

State of Connecticut, having its principal place of business at 107 John Street, Suite 1-C,

Southport, Connecticut 06890.

- 10 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 11 of 36

13. Plaintiff sells a unique and revolutionary patented product under the federally

registered trademark NEGG® that quickly and easily peels hard boiled eggs.

14. Plaintiff has spent substantial time, money and effort in building up and developing

consumer recognition, awareness and goodwill in its NEGG® mark and NEGG® product.

15. The success of the NEGG® product is due in part to Plaintiff’s marketing and

promotional efforts. These efforts include advertising and promotion through television, retailer

websites and other internet-based advertising, print, participation in trade shows, among other

efforts, including Pennsylvania.

16. Plaintiff’s NEGG® product has been featured on television (“The Today Show,”

Home Shopping Network), newspapers (New York Times, USA Today) and numerous videos on

YouTube, Facebook and other social media sites. Numerous videos featuring Plaintiff’s NEGG®

product have been collectively viewed hundreds of thousands of times, if not millions of times.

17. Plaintiff’s NEGG® product is proudly manufactured in the United States using the

highest quality materials and processes.

18. Plaintiff owns trademark rights, trade dress, and patent rights regarding its NEGG®

product.

THE DEFENDANTS

19. The Defendants are individuals and/or business entities of unknown makeup, each of

whom, upon information and belief, either reside or operate in foreign jurisdictions, or (though

- 11 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 12 of 36

not foreign)1 redistribute products from the same or similar sources in those locations.

Defendants have the capacity to be sued pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(b).

Defendants target their business activities toward consumers throughout the United States,

including within this district, and conduct pervasive business through the operation of at least

one of the Internet based online marketplaces Amazon.com, eBay.com, Alibaba.com, Temu,

TikTok, AliExpress.com, Walmart.com and Wish.com under the Seller IDs.

20. Defendants use aliases in conjunction with the operation of their businesses, including

but not limited to those as set forth in Schedule “A” hereto.

21. Defendants are the past and present controlling forces behind the sale of products

bearing and/or using infringements of at least one of the Plaintiff’s Patent and Work, and/or a

substantially similar copy of Plaintiff’s Work as described herein using at least the Seller IDs.

22. Upon information and belief, Defendants directly engage in unfair competition with

Plaintiff and its authorized sellers by advertising, offering for sale and selling goods bearing

and/or using counterfeits and infringements of Plaintiff’s Work and Patent to consumers within

the United States and this district through several fully interactive, commercial Internet websites

and Internet based e-commerce stores operating under, at least, the storefronts, the Seller IDs,

and any additional domain names, websites and corresponding website URLs or seller

identifications and store URL aliases not yet known to Plaintiff. Defendants have purposefully

1
Prior to filing this lawsuit, Plaintiffs viewed a public seller profile that is published by certain Defendant’s
storefronts that purports to identify the name and address of the Defendant. Solely based upon their
representation on their storefronts, the following defendants have identified themselves as US-based and are not
at this time alleged to be foreign sellers: Morning Chef, Imaginary Visions Ecommerce LLC, OSCARLETT
COMPANY LLC, OL16 LLC, and MARKETING FOREVER VISUET LLC.

- 12 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 13 of 36

directed some portion of their illegal activities towards consumers in the Commonwealth of

Pennsylvania through the advertisement, offer to sell, sale, and/or shipment of counterfeit and

infringing goods into the Commonwealth.

23. Defendants have registered, established or purchased, and maintained the online

marketplace website storefronts and Seller IDs. Upon information and belief, Defendants have

engaged in fraudulent conduct with respect to the registration of the storefronts and Seller IDs by

providing false and/or misleading information to the Internet based e-commerce platforms where

they offer for sale and/or sell, during the registration or maintenance process related to their

respective Seller ID. Upon information and belief, Defendants have anonymously registered and

maintained some of the Seller IDs for the sole purpose of engaging in illegal infringing activities.

24. Upon information and belief, Defendants will continue to register or acquire new

seller identification aliases for the purpose of selling and offering for sale goods bearing and/or

advertised using confusingly similar imitations of Plaintiff’s Work and infringing Plaintiff’s

patent unless preliminarily and permanently enjoined.

25. Defendants’ Internet-based businesses amount to nothing more than illegal operations

established and operated in order to infringe the intellectual property rights of Plaintiff.

26. Defendants’ business names, i.e., the Seller IDs, associated payment accounts, and

any other alias seller identification names used in connection with the sale of infringing goods

bearing and/or using Plaintiff’s Work and Patent are essential components of Defendants’ online

activities and are the means by which Defendants further their infringement scheme and cause

harm to Plaintiff. Moreover, Defendants are using Plaintiff’s Work to drive Internet consumer

traffic to their e-commerce stores operating under the Seller IDs, thereby creating and increasing

- 13 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 14 of 36

the value of the Seller IDs and decreasing the size and value of Plaintiff’s legitimate consumer

marketplace at Plaintiff’s expense.

COMMON FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

Plaintiff’s Business, Photographs, Trademark, Trade Dress, and Patent Rights

27. Plaintiff is the owner of source identifying trademarks, including NEGG® (Reg. No.

5,142,630 attached as Exhibit 1) and trade dress shown in Exhibit 2 that Plaintiff uses to

distinguish its unique product (“Plaintiff’s Marks”). Plaintiff owns the overall combination and

arrangement of all non-functional design elements of Plaintiff’s product and packaging,

including its product insert, which are inherently distinctive and/or have acquired secondary

meaning in the mind of the purchasing public.

28. Plaintiff owns a United States patent for its unique NEGG® product, including U.S.

Patent No. 9,968,211 for PERSONAL EGG PEELER (attached as Exhibit 3).

29. Plaintiff also owns copyrights for its packaging, including its product insert.

30. Plaintiff’s trademark, trade dress, patent, and copyright rights make it unlawful for

competitors to infringe Plaintiff’s rights.

a. Because of Plaintiff’s NEGG® registered trademark, no competitor can

lawfully use Plaintiff’s NEGG® registered trademark in a manner that could cause

confusion as to source.

b. Because of Plaintiff’s copyrights for its packaging and trade dress rights, no

competitor can lawfully copy Plaintiff’s copyrighted expression or use packaging that

could cause a likelihood of confusion as to the source of the competing product.

- 14 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 15 of 36

c. Because of Plaintiff’s patent on its NEGG® product, no competitor can

lawfully make, use, offer for sale, or sell a competing product that infringes Plaintiff’s

patent.

31. Like many other rights owners, Plaintiff suffers ongoing daily and sustained

violations of its copyright, trademark, trade dress, and patent rights at the hands of counterfeiters

and infringers, such as Defendants herein. Plaintiff is harmed, the consuming public is duped and

confused, and the Defendants earn substantial profits in connection with the infringing conduct.

32. In order to combat the harm caused by the combined actions of Defendants and others

engaging in similar infringing conduct, Plaintiff has expended significant resources in connection

with its intellectual property enforcement efforts. The recent explosion of infringement over the

Internet has created an environment that requires companies to expend significant time and

money across a wide spectrum of efforts in order to protect both consumers and itself from

infringement of its copyrights, trademark rights and patent rights.

33. Upon information and belief, at all times relevant hereto, Defendants in this action

had full knowledge of Plaintiff’s copyrights, trademark rights, trade dress, and/or patent rights,

including Plaintiff’s exclusive right to use and license such intellectual property and the goodwill

associated therewith. Plaintiff has complied with Section 29 of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. §

1111) and has provided actual notice of its trademark registration for NEGG®. See Plaintiff’s

product insert (Exhibit 2).

The Online Marketplace Platform and Defendants’ User Accounts

34. Online marketplace platforms (also referred to as “Third Party Service Provider”),

including but not limited to Amazon.com, eBay.com, Alibaba.com, AliExpress.com, Temu,

- 15 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 16 of 36

TikTok, Walmart.com, and Wish.com, allow manufacturers, wholesalers and other third party

merchants, like Defendants, to advertise, distribute, offer for sale, sell and ship their wholesale

and retail products originating from China directly to consumers worldwide and specifically to

consumers residing in the United States, including Pennsylvania.

35. Defendants are individuals and/or businesses, who, upon information and belief, are

located in China and other foreign countries but conduct business in the United States and other

countries by means of their User Accounts and on their Merchant Storefronts on Amazon.com as

well as potentially yet undiscovered additional online marketplace platforms.

36. Through their Merchant Storefronts, Defendants offer for sale and/or sell consumer

products, including Counterfeit Products, and target and ship such products to customers located

in the United States, including Pennsylvania, and throughout the world.

DEFENDANTS’ UNLAWFUL CONDUCT

37. Defendants are promoting and advertising, distributing, selling and/or offering for

sale copies of Plaintiff’s NEGG® product in interstate commerce that infringes Plaintiff’s

trademark rights, trade dress rights, and patent rights (collectively referred to as, “Infringing

Product(s)” or “Counterfeit Product(s)”), through the fully interactive Internet based e-commerce

stores operating under the Seller IDs:

a. The packaging for Defendants’ competing goods uses identical copies of

Plaintiff’s Mark for different quality goods.

b. The packaging for Defendants’ competing goods copies large amounts of

Plaintiff’s claimed copyrighted expression for its packaging, and the similar trade dress

creates a likelihood of confusion as to source.

- 16 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 17 of 36

c. Defendants’ competing goods look nearly identical, which creates a likelihood

of confusion as to source, as Defendants’ competing goods are confusing similar

imitations of Plaintiff’s product.

d. Defendants make, use, offer for sale, or sell competing products that infringe

Plaintiff’s patent.

e. Some Defendants in related cases have used Plaintiff’s NEGG® trademark on

packaging or in advertisements to drive sales.

f. Defendants’ competing goods are of a quality substantially and materially

different than that of Plaintiff’s genuine goods.

g. Defendants sell or offer the infringing goods for a retail price below the usual

retail price of Plaintiff’s genuine patented product.

38. E-commerce sales, including through e-commerce stores like those of Defendants,

have resulted in a sharp increase in the shipment of unauthorized products into the United States.

Ference Dec2., Exhibit 1, Excerpts from Fiscal Year 2021 U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(“CBP”) Intellectual Property Seizure Statistics Report. Over 89% of all CBP intellectual

property seizures were smaller international mail and express shipments (as opposed to large

shipping containers). Id. More than half (51%) of CBP seizures originated from mainland China

and Hong Kong. Id. Counterfeit and pirated products account for billions in economic losses,

2 Referring to Declaration of Stanley D. Ference III in Support of Temporary Restraining Order, filed herewith.

- 17 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 18 of 36

resulting in tens of thousands of lost jobs for legitimate businesses and broader economic losses,

including lost tax revenue.

39. Third party service providers like those used by Defendants do not adequately

subject new sellers to verification and confirmation of their identities, allowing counterfeiters to

“routinely use false or inaccurate names and addresses when registering with these e-commerce

platforms.” Ference Dec., Exhibit 2, Daniel C.K. Chow, Alibaba, Amazon, and Counterfeiting

in the Age of the Internet, 40 NW. J. INT’L L. & BUS. 157, 186 (2020); see also, report on

“Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods” prepared by the U.S. Department of

Homeland Security’s Office of Strategy, Policy, and Plans (Jan. 24, 2020), attached as Ference

Dec., Exhibit 3 and finding that on “at least some e-commerce platforms, little identifying

information is necessary for a counterfeiter to begin selling” and recommending that

“[s]ignificantly enhanced vetting of third-party sellers” is necessary. Counterfeiters hedge

against the risk of being caught and having their websites taken down from an e-commerce

platform by preemptively establishing multiple virtual store-fronts. Ference Dec., Exhibit 3, at p.

22. Since platforms generally do not require a seller on a third-party marketplace to identify the

underlying business entity, counterfeiters can have many different profiles that can appear

unrelated even though they are commonly owned and operated. Ference Dec., Exhibit 3 at p. 39.

Further, “E-commerce platforms create bureaucratic or technical hurdles in helping brand owners

to locate or identify sources of counterfeits and counterfeiters.” Ference Dec., Exhibit 2 at 186-

187.

40. Defendants target their business activities towards consumers throughout the United

States, including within Pennsylvania, and this district in Allegheny County, and conduct

pervasive business through the operation of, at least, one fully interactive commercial Internet

- 18 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 19 of 36

based e-commerce store via, at least, one of the Amazon.com, eBay.com, Alibaba.com,

AliExpress.com, Temu.com, TikTok, Walmart.com, or Wish.com online marketplaces under

various Seller IDs, including the Seller IDs in Schedule “A”.

41. Defendants have purposefully directed some portion of their illegal activities towards

consumers in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through the advertisement, offer to sell, sale,

and/or shipment of infringing goods into the State.

42. Defendants are the past and present controlling forces behind the sale of products that

infringe Plaintiff’s intellectual property as described herein using at least the Seller IDs in

Schedule “A” and the Seller IDs associated with the infringing product ASIN numbers.

Defendants have registered, established or purchased, and maintained their Seller IDs.

43. Upon information and belief, some Defendants have anonymously registered and

maintained some of the Seller IDs for the sole purpose of engaging in illegal counterfeiting or

infringement activities. On Amazon.com after notice that a particular Seller Name has sold an

infringing product with a particular ASIN number, a new Seller Name will be used (e.g. a new

“Just Launched Seller”) to sell the same infringing product under a new ASIN number associated

with the new Seller Name. The result can be a never ending “Whack–A-Mole” situation where

new infringers keep popping up.

44. Upon information and belief, Defendants will continue to register or acquire new

Seller ID aliases for the purpose of selling and offering for sale goods that infringe Plaintiff’s

trademark rights, trade dress rights, and patent rights unless preliminarily and permanently

enjoined.

- 19 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 20 of 36

45. Defendants’ business names, i.e., Seller IDs, associated payment accounts, and any

other alias seller identification names used in connection with the sale of infringing goods are

essential components of Defendants’ online activities and are one of the means by which

Defendants further their infringing scheme and cause harm to Plaintiff. Moreover, Defendants

are using without permission Plaintiff’s claimed copyrightable materials, trademarks, trade dress

and patents to drive Internet consumer traffic to their e-commerce stores operating under their

Seller IDs, thereby increasing the value of the Seller IDs and decreasing the size and value of

Plaintiff’s legitimate marketplace and intellectual property rights at Plaintiff’s expense.

46. Upon information and belief, Defendants are concurrently targeting their infringing

activities toward consumers and causing harm within this district and elsewhere throughout the

United States. As a result, Defendants are harming Plaintiff and the consuming public for

Defendants’ own benefit.

47. By their actions, Defendants have created an illegal marketplace operating in parallel

to the legitimate marketplace for Plaintiff's genuine goods. Defendants are causing concurrent

and indivisible harm to Plaintiff and the consuming public by (i) depriving Plaintiff and other

third parties of their right to fairly compete for space within search engine results and reducing

the visibility of Plaintiff’s genuine goods on the World Wide Web and internet, including on

Amazon.com, (ii) causing an overall degradation of the value of the goodwill associated with

Plaintiff’s trademark rights, and (iii) increasing Plaintiff’s overall cost to market its goods and

educate consumers about its brand via the Internet.

48. Plaintiff is suffering irreparable and indivisible injury and has suffered substantial

damages as a result of Defendants’ unauthorized and wrongful use of Plaintiff’s intellectual

property. The natural and intended byproduct of Defendants’ actions is the erosion and

- 20 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 21 of 36

destruction of the goodwill associated with Plaintiff’s name and associated trademarks and the

destruction of the legitimate market sector in which it operates.

49. Defendants’ infringing products compete directly against Plaintiff’s products.

Defendants’ infringement was a cause in Plaintiff’s unit sales decreasing during the last

several months over the same time period the previous year. Plaintiff has thus lost profits.

50. Plaintiff has suffered and will suffer irreparable injury as a result of Defendants’

continued sale of infringing products, and monetary damages are inadequate to compensate

Plaintiff for Defendants’ continued sale of infringing products.

a. Defendants sell cheaper and inferior competing egg peeler products that

infringe upon Plaintiff’s claimed copyrightable materials, trademarks, trade dress, and

patents. Defendants’ sale of infringing products has caused Plaintiff loss of market share,

reputational harm, lost profits and/or jeopardy to Plaintiff’s competitive position.

b. Plaintiff cannot effectively exercise its rights under copyright, trademark, trade

dress, and patent which also damages Plaintiff’s relationship with its actual and/or

potential re-sellers.

c. Defendants have infringed in the past and threaten to infringe in the future.

51. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ payment and financial accounts are being

used by Defendants to accept, receive, and deposit profits from Defendants’ trademark

counterfeiting and infringing and unfairly competitive activities connected to their Seller IDs and

any other alias domain names or seller identification names being used and/or controlled by

them.

- 21 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 22 of 36

52. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law. Upon information and belief, Defendants

are likely to transfer or secret their assets to avoid payment of any monetary judgment awarded

to Plaintiff.

53. Defendants would suffer no cognizable harm from ceasing infringing conduct.

a. Defendants have no right to sell products that infringe Plaintiff’s copyrights,

trademark rights, trade dress rights, and patent rights.

b. Defendants sell other products, so they would suffer little harm if they stopped

selling the infringing products at issue in this lawsuit.

c. Plaintiff will suffer great harm to its competitive position and business if

Defendants sell products that infringe Plaintiff’s rights.

54. The public interest will be served when it protects Plaintiff from infringement of its

copyright, trademark and/or patent rights.

55. Defendants are engaging in the above-described illegal counterfeiting and infringing

activities knowingly and intentionally or with reckless disregard or willful blindness to Plaintiff’s

rights. If Defendants’ infringing activities are not preliminarily and permanently enjoined by this

Court, Plaintiff and the consuming public will continue to be harmed.

56. The harm and damages sustained by Plaintiff have been directly and proximately

caused by Defendants’ wrongful reproduction, use, advertisement, promotion, offers to sell,

and sale of their Infringing Products.

- 22 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 23 of 36

Scope of Defendants’ Unlawful Activities

57. Upon information and belief, each Defendant did not obtain an opinion from United

States Counsel about the legality of offering for sale its Infringing Products.

58. Upon information and belief, each Defendant operates more than one merchant

storefront.

59. Upon information and belief, each Defendant operates merchant storefronts across

multiple e-commerce marketplaces.

60. Upon information and belief, each Defendant has sold more than 150,000 units of the

Infringing Product with at least $10.00 profit per unit.

61. Upon information and belief, each Defendant’s profits from the sale of the Infringing

Products totals more than $100,000.

62. Upon information and belief, each Defendant’s profits from the sale of the Infringing

Products totals more than $300,000.

63. Upon information and belief, each Defendant’s profits from the sale of the Infringing

Products totals more than $2,000,000.

COUNT I – PATENT INFRINGEMENT (35 U.S.C. § 271(a))

64. Plaintiff hereby adopts and re-allege the allegations set forth in the preceding

paragraphs as if set forth herein.

65. Plaintiff is the owner of U.S. Patent No. 9,968,211 (“the ‘211 patent”), issued May

15, 2018, for “PERSONAL EGG PEELER” and which covers Plaintiff’s NEGG® product. A

true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit 3.

- 23 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 24 of 36

66. Defendants have infringed and continue to infringe the ‘211 patent either directly or

indirectly through acts of contributory infringement or inducement in violation of 35 U.S.C. §

271, by making, using, selling, importing and/or offering to sell infringing products, namely the

personal egg peelers that are nearly identical to Plaintiff’s NEGG® product. Ference Dec.,

Exhibit 4.

67. Defendants’ infringement, contributory infringement and/or inducement to infringe

has injured Plaintiff and it, therefore, is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate it

for such infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty.

68. Defendants’ infringement, contributory infringement and/or inducement to infringe

has been willful and deliberate because Defendants have notice of or knew of the ‘211 patent and

have nonetheless injured and will continue to injure Plaintiff, unless and until this Court enters

an injunction, which prohibits further infringement and specifically enjoins further manufacture,

use, sale, importation and/or offer for sale of products or services that come within the scope of

the ‘211 patent.

69. Based on Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief as

well as monetary damages and other remedies as provided by the Patent Act, including damages

that Plaintiff has sustained and will sustain as a result of Defendants’ illegal and infringing

actions as alleged herein, enhanced discretionary damages and reasonable attorneys’ fees and

costs.

COUNT II – FEDERAL COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT (17 U.S.C. § 501(a))

70. All the above paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference.

71. Plaintiff is the exclusive owner and licensee of Plaintiff’s Works.

- 24 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 25 of 36

72. Defendants had actual notice of Plaintiff’s exclusive rights in and to the Plaintiff’s

Works.

73. Defendants did not attempt and therefore inherently failed to obtain Plaintiff’s

consent or authorization to use, manufacture, reproduce, copy, display, prepare derivative works

of, distribute, sell, transfer, rent, perform and/or market Plaintiff’s Works.

74. Defendants’ unlawful actions have caused and are continuing to cause unquantifiable

damages to Plaintiff and are unjustly enriching Defendants with profits at Plaintiff’s expense.

75. Without permission, Defendants knowingly and intentionally reproduced, copied, and

displayed the Plaintiff’s Works by manufacturing, importing, exporting, advertising, marketing,

promoting, distributing, displaying, offering for sale and/or selling products that utilize features

that are, at a minimum, substantially similar to the Plaintiff’s Works. Defendants’ unlawful and

willful action as alleged herein constitute infringement of the Plaintiff’s Works, including

plaintiff’s exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute and/or sell such Works in violation of 17

U.S.C. § 501(a).

76. Defendants’ knowing and intentional copyright infringement, as alleged herein, has

caused substantial and irreparable harm to Plaintiff in an amount as yet unknown but to be

proven at trial, for which Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law, and unless enjoined,

Defendants will continue to cause substantial and irreparable harm to Plaintiff. Plaintiff is

entitled to injunctive relief, Plaintiff’s actual damages and Defendants’ profits in an amount to be

proven at trial, enhanced discretionary damages for willful copyright infringement, and

reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.

- 25 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 26 of 36

COUNT III - FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN, PASSING OFF & UNFAIR

COMPETITION PURSUANT TO § 43(a) OF THE LANHAM ACT (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))

77. Plaintiff hereby adopts and re-allege the allegations set forth in the preceding

paragraphs as if set forth herein.

78. The Defendants have made and sold in interstate commerce Infringing Goods that

embody Plaintiff’s Trade Dress, including, using Plaintiff’s Works and/or Trade Dress as a

means to attract, divert and take sales from Plaintiff, thus unfairly competing.

79. As result of the Defendants’ conduct as set forth herein, consumers could be confused

and induced to purchase the Defendants’ Infringing Goods, mistakenly believing them to be

Plaintiff’s Product, thus depriving Plaintiff of the profits for sale.

80. Defendants’ Infringing Goods using, offered for sale, and sold under copies of

Plaintiff’s Mark are virtually identical in appearance to Plaintiff’s respective, genuine goods.

However, Defendants’ Infringing Goods are different and likely inferior in quality. Accordingly,

Defendants’ activities are likely to cause confusion in the trade and among the general public as

to at least the origin or sponsorship of their Infringing Goods.

81. Defendants, upon information and belief, have used in connection with their

advertisement, offers for sale, and sale of the Infringing Goods, false designations of origin and

false descriptions and representations, including words or other symbols and trade dress which

tend to falsely describe or represent such goods and have caused such goods to enter into

commerce with full knowledge of the falsity of such designations of origin and such descriptions

and representations, all to Plaintiff’s detriment.

- 26 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 27 of 36

82. Defendants have authorized infringing uses of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress in Defendants’

advertisement and promotion of their Infringing and infringing branded goods. Defendants have

also misrepresented to members of the consuming public that the Infringing Goods being

advertised and sold by them are genuine, non-infringing goods.

83. Defendants knowingly and willfully used in commerce products and/or packaging

designs that are identical or confusingly similar to, and constitute reproductions of Plaintiff’s

Works and Trade Dress and affixed, applied and used false designations of origin and false and

misleading descriptions and representations on or in connection with the manufacturing,

importing, exporting, advertising, marketing, promoting, distributing, displaying, offering for

sale and/or sale of Infringing Products with the intent to cause confusion, to cause mistake and to

deceive the purchasing public into believing, in error, that Defendants’ substandard Infringing

Goods are Plaintiff’s or related products, and/or that Defendants’ Infringing Goods are

authorized, sponsored, approved, endorsed or licensed by Plaintiff and/or that Defendants are

affiliated, connected or associated with Plaintiff, thereby creating a likelihood of confusion by

consumers as to the source of such Infringing Goods, and allowing Defendants to capitalize on

the goodwill associated with, and the consumer recognition of, the Plaintiff’s Trade Dress and

products, to Defendants’ substantial profit in blatant disregard of Plaintiff’s rights.

84. Additionally, Defendants are using infringements of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress in order

to unfairly compete with Plaintiff and others for space within search engine organic results,

thereby jointly depriving Plaintiff of a valuable marketing and educational tool which would

otherwise be available to Plaintiff and reducing the visibility of Plaintiff’s genuine goods on the

World Wide Web.

- 27 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 28 of 36

85. Defendants’ above-described actions are in violation of Section 43(a) of the Lanham

Act, 15 U.S.C. §1125(a).

86. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law, and has sustained indivisible injury and

damage caused by Defendants’ concurrent conduct. Absent an entry of an injunction by this

Court, Defendants will continue to wrongfully reap profits and Plaintiff will continue to suffer

irreparable injury to its respective goodwill and business reputations, as well as monetary

damages.

87. Based on Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief as

well as monetary damages and other remedies as provided by the Lanham Act, including

damages that Plaintiff has sustained and will sustain as a result of Defendants’ illegal and

infringing actions as alleged herein, and all gains, profits and advantages obtained by Defendants

as a result thereof, enhanced discretionary damages and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.

COUNT IV - COMMON LAW UNFAIR COMPETITION

88. Plaintiff hereby adopts and re-allege the allegations set forth in the preceding

paragraphs as if set forth herein.

89. This is an action against Defendants based on their promotion, advertisement,

distribution, sale, and/or offering for sale of goods bearing and/or using marks that are virtually

identical, both visually and phonetically, to Plaintiff’s Trade Dress in violation of Pennsylvania’s

common law of unfair competition.

90. Specifically, Defendants are promoting and otherwise advertising, selling, offering

for sale, and distributing goods bearing and/or using infringements of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress.

Defendants are also using infringements of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress to unfairly compete on online

- 28 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 29 of 36

marketplaces with Plaintiff and others for space in marketplace search results across an array of

search terms, including but not limited to Plaintiff’s Mark.

91. Defendants’ infringing activities are likely to cause and actually are causing

confusion, mistake, and deception among members of the trade and the general consuming

public as to the origin and quality of Defendants’ products by their use of Plaintiff’s Trade Dress.

92. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law and are suffering irreparable injury and

damages as a result of Defendants’ actions.

93. As a result of Defendants’ actions alleged herein, Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive

relief, an order granting Plaintiff’s damages and Defendants’ profits stemming from their

infringing activities, and exemplary or punitive damages for Defendants’ intentional misconduct.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment on all Counts of this Complaint and an

award of equitable relief and monetary relief against Defendants as follows:

a. Entry of temporary, preliminary and permanent injunctions pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §

1116, 35 U.S.C. § 283, and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 enjoining Defendants, their

agents, representatives, servants, employees, and all those acting in concert or participation

therewith, from manufacturing or causing to be manufactured, importing, advertising or

promoting, distributing, selling or offering to sell their Infringing Goods that infringe on

Plaintiff’s Patent; from infringing, or diluting Plaintiff’s Trade Dress; from using Plaintiff’s

Mark, or any mark or trade dress similar thereto; from using Plaintiff’s Works or substantially

similar copies of Plaintiff’s Works, in connection with the sale of any unauthorized goods; from

using any logo, trade name or trademark or trade dress that may be calculated to falsely advertise

- 29 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 30 of 36

the services or goods of Defendants as being sponsored by, authorized by, endorsed by, or in any

way associated with Plaintiff; from falsely representing themselves as being connected with

Plaintiff, through sponsorship or association, or engaging in any act that is likely to falsely cause

members of the trade and/or of the purchasing public to believe any goods or services of

Defendants are in any way endorsed by, approved by, and/or associated with Plaintiff; from

using any reproduction, Infringing, infringement, copy, or colorable imitation of Plaintiff’s Mark

or Works in connection with the publicity, promotion, sale, or advertising of any goods sold by

Defendants; from affixing, applying, annexing or using in connection with the sale of any goods,

a false description or representation, including words or other symbols tending to falsely describe

or represent Defendants’ goods as being those of Plaintiff, or in any way endorsed by Plaintiff

and from offering such goods in commerce; from engaging in search engine optimization

strategies using colorable imitations of Plaintiff’s name or trademark; from further infringement,

inducement and contributory infringement of the patent-in-suit; and from otherwise unfairly

competing with Plaintiff.

c. Entry of an Order that, upon Plaintiff’s request, any Internet marketplace website

operators and/or administrators that are provided with notice of the injunction, including but not

limited to Amazon.com, eBay.com, Alibaba.com, AliExpress.com, Temu.com, TikTok,

Walmart.com and Wish.com, identify any e-mail address known to be associated with

Defendants’ respective Seller ID, and cease facilitating access to any or all e-commerce stores

through which Defendants engage in the promotion, offering for sale, and/or sale of goods

bearing and/or using infringements of Plaintiff’s Works or Marks.

d. Entry of an Order that, upon Plaintiff’s request, any Internet marketplace website

operators and/or administrators who are provided with notice of the injunction, including but not

- 30 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 31 of 36

limited to Amazon.com, eBay.com, Alibaba.com, AliExpress.com, Temu.com, TikTok,

Walmart.com, and Wish.com, permanently remove any and all listings and associated images of

Infringing Goods that infringe on Plaintiff’s Patent; from infringing, or diluting Plaintiff’s Trade

Dress; from using Plaintiff’s Mark, or any mark or trade dress similar thereto; from using

Plaintiff’s Works or substantially similar copies of Plaintiff’s Works, via the e-commerce stores

operating under the Seller IDs, including any and all listings and images of goods bearing and/or

using infringements of Plaintiff’s Mark or Works, or copies of that are substantially similar,

linked to the same seller or linked to any other alias seller identification name being used and/or

controlled by Defendants to promote, offer for sale and/or sell goods bearing and/or using

infringements of Plaintiff’s Marks or Works.

e. Entry of an Order that, upon Plaintiff’s request, any Internet marketplace website

operators and/or administrators who are provided with notice of the injunction, including but not

limited to Amazon.com, eBay.com, Alibaba.com, AliExpress.com, Temu.com, TikTok,

Walmart.com, and Wish.com, immediately cease fulfillment of and sequester all Infringing

Goods that infringe on Plaintiff’s Patent; from infringing, or diluting Plaintiff’s Trade Dress;

from using Plaintiff’s Mark, or any mark or trade dress similar thereto; from using Plaintiff’s

Works or substantially similar copies of Plaintiff’s Works, in its inventory, possession, custody,

or control, and surrender those goods to Plaintiff.

f. Entry of an order requiring Defendants to account to and pay Plaintiff for all profits and

damages resulting from Defendants’ infringing and unfairly competitive activities and that the

award to Plaintiff be trebled, as provided for under 15 U.S.C. §1117.

g. Entry of an award pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117 (a) and (b) of Plaintiff’s costs and

reasonable attorneys’ fees and investigative fees associated with bringing this action.

- 31 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 32 of 36

h. For an award of Plaintiff’s actual damages and Defendants’ profits, pursuant to 17

U.S.C. § 504(b), in an amount to be proven at trial for willful copyright infringement of the

Plaintiff’s Works under § 501(a).

i. In the alternative to Plaintiff’s actual damages and Defendants’ profits for copyright

infringement of the Plaintiff’s Works pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504 (b), for statutory damages of

$150,000.00 per infringement pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504 (c) for willful copyright infringement,

which Plaintiff may elect prior to the rendering of a final judgment, together with Plaintiff’s

costs and reasonable attorney’s fees and investigative fees associated with bringing this action.

j. Entry of an Order awarding Plaintiff damages adequate to compensate for the

infringement of its patent, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the

invention by the Defendants, together with interest and costs as fixed by the Court pursuant to 35

U.S.C. § 284 and/or 35 U.S. Code § 289, and that the award be trebled as provided for under 35

U.S.C. § 284.

k. Entry of an Order finding that this case is exceptional and an award to Plaintiff of its

attorney fees and costs as provided by for under 35 U.S.C. § 285.

l. Entry of an Order that, upon Plaintiff’s request, any financial institutions, payment

processors, banks, escrow services, money transmitters, or marketplace platforms, and their

related companies and affiliates, identify and restrain all funds, up to and including the total

amount of judgment, in all financial accounts and/or sub-accounts used in connection with the

Seller IDs or other domain names, alias seller identification names, or e-commerce store names

or store URLs used by Defendants presently or in the future, as well as any other related

accounts of the same customer(s) and any other accounts which transfer funds into the same

- 32 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 33 of 36

financial institution account(s), to be surrendered to Plaintiff in partial satisfaction of the

monetary judgment entered herein.

m. Entry of an award of pre-judgment interest on the judgment amount.

n. Entry of an order for any further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff respectfully demands a trial by jury on all claims.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: October 8, 2024 /s/ Stanley D. Ference III

Stanley D. Ference III
Pa. ID No. 59899
[email protected]

Brian Samuel Malkin

Pa. ID No. 70448
[email protected]

FERENCE & ASSOCIATES LLC

409 Broad Street
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15143
(412) 741-8400 - Telephone
(412) 741-9292 - Facsimile

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Airigan Solutions, LLC

- 33 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 34 of 36

SCHEDULE “A”
DEFENDANTS BY STORE NAME AND SELLER ID

Defendant Store/Seller Name Seller ID

Number
1 Morning Chef 102513028
2 bei jing zhi fu ke ji 102566552
3 JZEQBXXYL 102499924
4 KunMingWuHuass 101695096
5 lalaxiaohumaoyi 102580542
6 linlingliu 101593770
7 Rongxiang Trading 102485970
8 Songsiqing Trading 102503653
9 xinyahanzhuangshi 102566983
10 xulizhixingkeji 102579631
11 zhijianshangmao 101670105
12 Yiwu Baowo Trading Co., Ltd. 1601210777582
13 Yuhuan Aobo Plastic Industry Co., Ltd. 1601213377034
14 Ali-YY120 Store 1103742500
15 Ali-ZYAG-1 Store 1103741818
16 Ali-ZYAR-1 Store 1103843185
17 CHANSUNRUN YAYA Store 1101328979
18 Good Shape-Keep Store 1103317977
19 Hoeaden Warm Cozy Home Store 1101936438
20 Imagination321 Store 1101651283
21 Magic666 Store 1103582030
22 My Childhood World Store 1103339289
23 Savor Store 1101850244
24 Shop1102675024 Store 1102669977
25 Shop1103257141 Store 1103258139
26 Shop1103580739 Store 1103572716
27 Shop1103620766 Store 1103618843
28 Shop1103652096 Store 1103667077
29 Shop1103847354 Store 1103846356
30 Sumory Store 1101293646
31 Ycyc0124 Store 1103788191
32 Imaginary Visions Ecommerce LLC A3N4WI1LTOXGM7

- 34 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 35 of 36

Defendant Store/Seller Name Seller ID

Number
33 OSCARLETT COMPANY LLC A1MF3QLGIBNRG5
34 OL16 LLC A14FLN1FOIUMMU
35 MARKETING FOREVER VISUET LLC A3HB6FW8URIS6W
36 DQstore 58ea0f6340fc1e15a3671b10

- 35 -
Case 2:24-cv-01407-WSS Document 3 Filed 10/08/24 Page 36 of 36

LISTING OF EXHIBITS

Exhibit 1 …………………… U.S. Trademark Reg. No. 5,142,630 (NEGG®)

Exhibit 2 …………………… U.S. Copyright VA0002237199 and excerpt of deposit copy from
same (yellow), and product insert
Exhibit 3 …………………… U.S. Patent No. 9,968,211 for PERSONAL EGG PEELER
Exhibit 4 ……………………. Screenshots of Plaintiff’s Website and Amazon Store

- 36 -