Oakley v. Shenzhen Globalegrow E-Commerce - Complaint

Case: 1:18-cv-05101 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/26/18 Page 1 of 63 PageID #:1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
OAKLEY, INC.,
Case No. 18-cv-05101
Plaintiff,
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
v.
SHENZHEN GLOBALEGROW E-
COMMERCE CO., LTD.,
Defendant.
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Oakley, Inc. (“Oakley” or “Plaintiff”) hereby brings the present action against
Defendant Shenzhen Globalegrow E-Commerce Co., Ltd. (“Defendant” or “Globalegrow”) and
alleges as follows:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. This action has been filed by Plaintiff to address Defendant’s selling and offering
for sale of sunglasses featuring Plaintiff’s patented designs, counterfeits of Plaintiff’s Oakley
trademarks, and infringements of Plaintiff’s Oakley trademarks (the “Infringing Products”)
through Defendant’s website at gearbest.com. Plaintiff seeks to address Defendant’s
counterfeiting and infringing of its registered trademarks, and its patented designs, as well as to
protect unknowing consumers from purchasing low-quality Infringing Products over the Internet
from China. Plaintiff has been and continues to be irreparably damaged through consumer
confusion, dilution, and tarnishment of its valuable trademarks and patented designs as a result of
Defendant’s actions and seeks injunctive and monetary relief.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over the claims in this action
pursuant to the provisions of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051, et seq., the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C.
§ 1, et seq., 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a) and (b), and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. This Court has jurisdiction over
the claims in this action that arise under the laws of the State of Illinois pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1367(a), because the state law claims are so related to the federal claims that they form part of the
same case or controversy and derive from a common nucleus of operative facts.
3. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391, and this Court may
properly exercise personal jurisdiction over Defendant by virtue of the following facts:
a) Defendant has directly targeted business activities toward consumers in Illinois and
caused harm to Plaintiff’s business within this Judicial District. Defendant has targeted
sales to Illinois residents by operating a fully interactive and commercial website at
gearbest.com that offers to sell and has sold Infringing Products to residents of Illinois
at gearbest.com. Defendant is committing tortious acts in Illinois, is engaging in
interstate commerce, and has wrongfully caused Plaintiff substantial injury in the State
of Illinois.
b) Defendant works with global couriers, such as DHL and FedEx, for international
deliveries to consumers in the United States, including Illinois.
c) Defendant’s online store at gearbest.com accepts payment in U.S. dollars.
d) On information and belief, thousands of web users from the United States (including
the State of Illinois) visit gearbest.com each month.

III. THE PARTIES
Plaintiff Oakley
4. Plaintiff Oakley is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State
of Washington, having its principal place of business at One Icon, Foothill Ranch, California
92610.
5. Plaintiff Oakley is an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Luxottica Group S.p.A.
6. Oakley is an internationally recognized manufacturer, distributor and retailer of
eyewear, apparel, footwear, outerwear, jackets, accessories and other merchandise, all of which
prominently display its famous, internationally-recognized and federally-registered Trademarks,
including OAKLEY and various Icon logos (collectively, the “Oakley Products”). Oakley
Products have become enormously popular and even iconic, driven by Oakley’s arduous quality
standards and innovative design. Among the purchasing public, genuine Oakley Products are
instantly recognizable as such. In the United States and around the world, the Oakley brand has
come to symbolize high quality, and Oakley Products are among the most recognizable eyewear,
headwear, footwear, outerwear, jackets and apparel in the world.
7. Oakley Products are distributed and sold to consumers through retailers throughout
the United States, including through authorized retailers in Illinois, the official Oakley.com
website which was launched in 1995, and Oakley “O” Stores, including one located at 835 N.
Michigan Avenue in Chicago, Illinois.
8. Oakley incorporates a variety of distinctive marks in the design of its various
Oakley Products. As a result of its long-standing use, Oakley owns common law trademark rights
in several Oakley trademarks. Oakley has also registered its trademarks with the United States
Patent and Trademark Office. Oakley Products typically include at least one of Oakley’s registered
trademarks. Oakley uses its trademarks in connection with the marketing of its Oakley Products,
including, but not limited to, the following marks, which are referred to herein as the “Oakley
Trademarks.”
Registration Goods and Services Date of Image

No. Registration
1,984,501 Protective and/or anti-glare eyewear, July 2, 1996
namely sunglasses, goggles, spectacles
and their parts and accessories, namely
replacement lenses, earstems, frames,
nose pieces and foam strips; cases
specially adapted for protective and/or
anti-glare eyewear and their parts and
accessories in class 9.
3,151,994 Protective eyewear, namely spectacles, October 03,
prescription eyewear, anti glare glasses 2006
and sunglasses and their parts and
accessories, namely replacement lenses,
frames, earstems, and nose pieces; cases
specially adapted for spectacles and
sunglasses and their parts and
accessories in class 9.
9. The above registrations for the Oakley Trademarks are valid, subsisting, in full
force and effect, and incontestable pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1065. The Oakley Trademarks have
been used exclusively and continuously by Oakley for many years and have never been abandoned.
Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 are true and correct copies of the United States Registration
Certificates for the Oakley Trademarks listed above. Incontestable status under 15 U.S.C. § 1065
provides that the registrations for the Oakley Trademarks are conclusive evidence of the validity
of the Oakley Trademarks and of the registration of the Oakley Trademarks, of Oakley’s ownership
of the Oakley Trademarks, and of Oakley’s exclusive right to use the Oakley Trademarks in
commerce. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1115(b), 1065.

10. The Oakley Trademarks are exclusive to Oakley, and are displayed extensively on
Oakley Products and in Oakley’s marketing and promotional materials. Oakley Products have
long been among the most popular eyewear in the world and have been extensively promoted and
advertised at great expense. In fact, Oakley has expended millions of dollars annually in
advertising, promoting and marketing featuring their trademarks, including the Oakley
Trademarks. Oakley Products have also been the subject of extensive unsolicited publicity
resulting from their high-quality, innovative designs and are renowned as desired luxury items.
Because of these and other factors, the Oakley name and the Oakley Trademarks have become
famous throughout the United States.
11. The Oakley Trademarks are distinctive when applied to the Oakley Products,
signifying to the purchaser that the products come from Oakley and are manufactured to Oakley’s
quality standards. Whether Oakley manufactures the products itself or licenses others to do so,
Oakley has ensured that products bearing the Oakley Trademarks are manufactured to the highest
quality standards. The Oakley Trademarks have achieved tremendous fame and recognition,
which has only added to the inherent distinctiveness of the mark. As such, the goodwill associated
with the Oakley Trademarks is of incalculable and inestimable value to Oakley.
12. Since at least as early as 1995, Oakley has operated a website where it promotes
and sells genuine Oakley Products at Oakley.com. Sales of Oakley Products via the Oakley.com
website represent a significant portion of Oakley’s business. The Oakley.com website features
proprietary content, images and designs exclusive to Oakley.
13. Oakley’s innovative marketing and product designs have enabled Oakley to achieve
widespread recognition and fame and have made the Oakley Trademarks some of the most well-
known marks in the eyewear and apparel industry. The widespread fame, outstanding reputation,
and significant goodwill associated with the Oakley brand have made the Oakley Trademarks a
valuable asset of Oakley.
14. Oakley has expended substantial time, money, and other resources in developing,
advertising and otherwise promoting the Oakley Trademarks. As a result, products bearing the
Oakley Trademarks are widely recognized and exclusively associated by consumers, the public,
and the trade as being high-quality products sourced from Oakley. Oakley is a multi-million dollar
operation, and Oakley Products have become among the most popular of their kind in the world.
15. In addition to their valuable trademarks, Oakley Products are further known for
their distinctive designs. Like the Oakley Trademarks, these designs are broadly recognized by
consumers. Sunglasses fashioned after these designs are associated with the quality and innovation
that the public has come to expect from Oakley Products. Oakley uses these designs in connection
with the marketing of its Oakley Products, including, but not limited to, the following designs,
herein referred to as the “Oakley Designs.”
Patent Number Claim Issue Date

D514,613 February 7, 2006
D523,461 June 20, 2006
D557,326 December 11,

2007
D568,917 May 13, 2008
D572,745 July 8, 2008
D573,621 July 22, 2008
D581,443 November 25,

2008
D581,444 November 25,

2008
D615,580 May 11, 2010
D622,304 August 24, 2010

D640,727 June 28, 2011
D646,708 October 11, 2011
D659,180 May 8, 2012
D661,339 June 5, 2012
D719,209 December 9, 2014
D725,695 March 31, 2015
D725,696 March 31, 2015
D728,002 April 28, 2015

D744,565 December 1, 2015

2015

2015

2015
D798,371 September 26,

2017
16. Oakley is the lawful assignee of all right, title and interest in and to the United
States Design Patent No. D514,613 (“the ‘613 Patent”). The ‘613 Patent was lawfully issued on
February 7, 2006 with named inventors James H. Jannard, Hans Karsten Moritz, and Lek Thixton.
June 20, 2006 with named inventors James H. Jannard, Hans Karsten Moritz, and Lek Thixton.
December 11, 2007 with named inventors James H. Jannard, Hans Karsten Moritz, and Colin
Baden.
May 13, 2008 with named inventor Peter Yee.
July 8, 2008 with a named inventor of Hans Karsten Moritz.
July 22, 2008 with a named inventor of Peter Yee.
November 25, 2008 with named inventors James H. Jannard, Lek Thixton, Colin Baden, and Peter
Yee.
November 25, 2008 with named inventors James H. Jannard, Lek Thixton, Colin Baden, and Peter
Yee.
May 11, 2010 with named inventors Colin Baden and Hans Karsten Moritz.
August 24, 2010 with named inventors Colin Baden and Hans Karsten Moritz.
June 28, 2011 with named inventors of Hans Karsten Moritz and Colin Baden.
October 11, 2011 with named inventors of Hans Karsten Moritz and Colin Baden.
May 8, 2012 with a named inventor of Hans Moritz.
June 5, 2012 with named inventors of Lek Thixton and Peter Yee.
December 9, 2014 with a named inventor of Nicolas Adolfo Garfias.
March 31, 2015 with a named inventor of Nicolas Adolfo Garfias.
March 31, 2015 with a named inventor of Nicholas Adolfo Garfias.

April 28, 2015 with a named inventor of Kyusik Uhm.
December 1, 2015 with named inventors Lek Haagen Thixton and Peter K. Yee.
December 22, 2015 with named inventors Lek Haagen Thixton and Peter K. Yee.
December 29, 2015 with a named inventor of Kyusik Uhm.
December 29, 2015 with a named inventor of Kyusik Uhm.
September 26, 2017 with named inventors Lek Haagen Thixton and Peter K. Yee.
39. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 are true and correct copies of the ‘613 Patent, the ‘461
Patent, the ‘326 Patent, the ‘917 Patent, the ‘745 Patent, the ‘621 Patent, the ‘443 Patent, the ‘444
Patent, the ‘355 Patent, the ‘368 Patent, and the ‘371 Patent.
40. Oakley has not granted a license or any other form of permission to Defendant with
respect to: the Oakley Trademarks; the design protected by the ‘613 Patent; the design protected
by the ‘461 Patent; the design protected by the ‘326 Patent; the design protected by the ‘917 Patent;
the design protected by the ‘745 Patent; the design protected by the ‘621 Patent; the design
protected by the ‘443 Patent; the design protected by the ‘444 Patent; the design protected by the
‘580 Patent; the design protected by the ‘304 Patent; the design protected by the ‘727 Patent; the
design protected by the ‘708 Patent; the design protected by the ‘180 Patent; the design protected
by the ‘339 Patent; the design protected by the ‘209 Patent; the design protected by the ‘695 Patent;
the design protected by the ‘696 Patent; the design protected by the ‘002 Patent; the design
protected by the ‘565 Patent; the design protected by the ‘921 Patent; the design protected by the
‘355 Patent; the design protected by the ‘368 Patent; or the design protected by the ‘371 Patent.
The Defendant
41. Upon information and belief, Shenzhen Globalegrow E-Commerce Co., Ltd.
(previously defined as “Globalegrow” or “Defendant”) is a corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the People’s Republic of China, and headquartered at Building 3, Yong Xinhui,
4078 Dongbin Road, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, China 518054.
42. Defendant conducts business throughout the United States, including within the
State of Illinois and this Judicial District, through the operation of its fully interactive, commercial
website at gearbest.com. Defendant targets the United States, including Illinois residents, and has
offered to sell, and has sold, Infringing Products to consumers within the State of Illinois through
the gearbest.com website.
IV. DEFENDANT’S UNLAWFUL CONDUCT
43. Defendant operates a fully interactive, commercial website located at gearbest.com.

44. Defendant is engaged in designing, manufacturing, advertising, promoting,
distributing, selling, and/or offering for sale products on its website at gearbest.com bearing at
least one logo, source-identifying indicia and design elements, that are studied imitations,
infringements, and/or counterfeits of the Oakley Trademarks (previously defined as the “Infringing
Products”).
45. Defendant is involved in the importation, offering for sale and/or sale of sunglasses
that infringe the ‘613, ‘461, ‘326, ‘917, ‘745, ‘621, ‘443, ‘444, ‘580, ‘304, ‘727, ‘708, ‘180, ‘339,
‘209, ‘695, ‘696, ‘002, ‘565, ‘921, ‘355, ‘368, and ‘371 Patents (previously defined as the
“Infringing Products”).
46. Plaintiff’s investigator visited the Defendant’s website at gearbest.com and
purchased Infringing Products.
47. The purchased Infringing Products were shipped to the State of Illinois.
48. The purchased Infringing Products were inspected and it was determined that the
purchased Infringing Products infringed the Oakley Trademarks and/or the Oakley Designs.
49. A comparison of the Oakley Trademarks to an Infringing Product offered for sale
on gearbest.com exemplifies Defendant’s infringement of U.S. Trademark Registration No.
1,984,501 for a stylized “O” design mark owned by Oakley.

As shown offered for sale on gearbest.com
Received product purchased from

gearbest.com
Plaintiff’s Trademark Defendant’s Infringing Product
50. A comparison of the Oakley Trademarks to another Infringing Product offered for
sale on gearbest.com exemplifies Defendant’s infringement of U.S. Trademark Registration No.


gearbest.com

51. A comparison of the Oakley Trademarks to another Infringing Product offered for
sale on gearbest.com exemplifies Defendant’s infringement of U.S. Trademark Registration No.

gearbest.com
52. Upon information and belief, Defendant is well aware of the extraordinary fame
and strength of Plaintiff’s Oakley Trademarks and the goodwill associated therewith.
53. Defendant, without any authorization, license, or other permission from Plaintiff,
has used Plaintiff’s Oakley Trademarks in connection with the advertisement, distribution, offering
for sale, and sale of the Infringing Products into the United States and Illinois over the Internet.
54. Defendant’s use of infringements and/or counterfeits of Plaintiff’s Oakley
Trademarks in the advertisement, distribution, offering for sale, and sale of the Infringing Products
was willful.
55. Defendant’s willful use of infringements and/or counterfeits of Plaintiff’s Oakley
Trademarks in connection with the advertisement, distribution, offering for sale, and sale of the
Infringing Products, including the sale of an Infringing Products into Illinois, is likely to cause and
has caused confusion, mistake, and deception by and among consumers and is irreparably harming
Plaintiff.
56. A comparison of Plaintiff’s claim in the ‘613 Patent with Infringing Products
offered for sale on gearbest.com exemplifies Defendant’s infringement of United States Design
Patent No. D514,613 owned by Oakley.

Plaintiff’s ‘613 Design Claim Defendant’s Infringing Products


58. A comparison of Plaintiff’s claim in the ‘326 Patent with an Infringing Product

gearbest.com
Plaintiff’s ‘326 Design Claim Defendant’s Infringing Product


gearbest.com
60. A comparison of Plaintiff’s claim in the ‘917 Patent with another Infringing Product


gearbest.com


gearbest.com



gearbest.com


gearbest.com

65. A comparison of Oakley’s claims in the ‘443 and ‘444 Patents with several
Infringing Products offered for sale on gearbest.com exemplifies Defendant’s infringement of
United States Design Patent Nos. D581,443, and D581,444 owned by Oakley
(‘443 Claim)
(‘444 Claim)
Oakley’s Design Claims Defendant’s Infringing Products

Oakley’s ‘580 Design Claim Defendant’s Infringing Product
Oakley’s ‘304 Design Claim Defendant’s Infringing Product





gearbest.com


gearbest.com


gearbest.com
75. A comparison of Oakley’s claims in the ‘209, ‘695, and ‘696 Patents with several
United States Design Patent Nos. D719,209, D725,695, and D725,696 owned by Oakley.
(‘209 Claim)
(‘695 Claim)
(‘696 Claim)


gearbest.com



gearbest.com

gearbest.com
81. A comparison of Oakley’s claims in the ‘002, ‘355, and ‘368 Patents with several
United States Design Patent Nos. D728,002, D746,355, and D746,368 owned by Oakley.
(‘002 Claim)
(‘355 Claim)
(‘368 Claim)

83. Upon information and belief, Defendant is well aware of the extraordinary fame of
Plaintiff’s Oakley Designs and the high-quality products associated therewith.
84. Defendant, without any authorization, license, or other permission from Plaintiff,
has used Plaintiff’s Oakley Designs in connection with the making, using, offering to sell, selling,
or importing of Infringing Products into the United States and Illinois over the Internet.
85. Defendant’s use of infringements of Plaintiff’s Oakley Designs in the making,
using, offering to sell, selling, or importing of the Infringing Products was willful.
86. Defendant’s willful use of infringements of Plaintiff’s Oakley Designs in
connection with the making, using, offering to sell, selling, or importing of Infringing Products,
including the sale of Infringing Products into Illinois, is irreparably harming Plaintiff.
COUNT I
TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT AND COUNTERFEITING (15 U.S.C. § 1114)
87. Plaintiff hereby re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in
the preceding paragraphs.

88. This is a trademark infringement action against Defendant based on Defendant’s
unauthorized use in commerce of a counterfeit imitation of Plaintiff’s federally registered Oakley
Trademarks in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, and/or advertising of an
infringing good. Plaintiff’s Oakley Trademarks are highly distinctive. Consumers have come to
expect the highest quality from Oakley Products sold or marketed under the Oakley Trademarks.
89. Defendant has sold, offered to sell, marketed, distributed and advertised, products
bearing infringements and/or counterfeits of Plaintiff’s Oakley Trademarks without Plaintiff’s
permission.
90. Plaintiff is the exclusive owner of the Oakley Trademarks. Plaintiff’s United States
Registrations for the Oakley Trademarks (Exhibit 1) are in full force and effect. Upon information
and belief, Defendant has knowledge of Plaintiff’s rights in the Oakley Trademarks and has
willfully infringed and intentionally used counterfeits and/or infringements of the Oakley
Trademarks. Defendant’s willful, intentional and unauthorized use of the Oakley Trademarks is
likely to cause and is causing confusion, mistake, and deception as to the origin and quality of the
Infringing Products among the general public.
91. Defendant’s activities constitute willful trademark infringement and counterfeiting
under Section 32 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114.
92. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law, and if Defendant’s actions are not enjoined,
Plaintiff will continue to suffer irreparable harm to its reputation and the goodwill of its well-
known Oakley Trademarks.
93. The injuries and damages sustained by Plaintiff have been directly and proximately
caused by Defendant’s wrongful reproduction, use, advertisement, promotion, offering to sell, and
sale of Infringing Products.

COUNT II
FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))
95. Defendant’s promotion, marketing, offering for sale, and sale of Infringing
Products has created and is creating a likelihood of confusion, mistake, and deception among the
general public as to the affiliation, connection, or association with Plaintiff or the origin,
sponsorship, or approval of Defendant’s Infringing Products by Plaintiff.
96. By using Plaintiff’s Oakley Trademarks on the Infringing Products, Defendant
created a false designation of origin and a misleading representation of fact as to the origin and
sponsorship of the Infringing Products.
97. Defendant’s false designation of origin and misrepresentation of fact as to the origin
and/or sponsorship of the Infringing Products to the general public involves the use of counterfeit
marks and is a willful violation of Section 43 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125.
98. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law and, if Defendant’s actions are not enjoined,
Plaintiff will continue to suffer irreparable harm to its reputation and the goodwill of the Oakley
brand.
COUNT III
VIOLATION OF ILLINOIS UNIFORM DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACT
(815 ILCS § 510, et seq.)
100. Defendant has engaged in acts violating Illinois law including, but not limited to,
passing off its Infringing Products as those of Plaintiff, causing a likelihood of confusion and/or
misunderstanding as to the source of its goods, causing a likelihood of confusion and/or

misunderstanding as to an affiliation, connection, or association with genuine Oakley Products,
representing that its products have Plaintiff’s approval when they do not, and engaging in other
conduct which creates a likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding among the public.
101. The foregoing Defendant’s acts constitute a willful violation of the Illinois Uniform
Deceptive Trade Practices Act, 815 ILCS § 510, et seq.
102. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law, and Defendant’s conduct has caused
Plaintiff to suffer damage to its reputation and goodwill associated therewith. Unless enjoined by
the Court, Plaintiff will suffer future irreparable harm as a direct result of Defendant’s unlawful
activities.
COUNT IV
INFRINGEMENT OF UNITED STATES DESIGN PATENT NO. D514,613
(35 U.S.C. § 271)
104. Defendant makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or imports into the United States
for subsequent sale or use products that infringe directly and/or indirectly the ornamental design
claimed in the ‘613 Patent.
105. Defendant has infringed the ‘613 Patent through the aforesaid acts, and will
continue to do so unless enjoined by this Court. Defendant’s wrongful conduct has caused Oakley
to suffer irreparable harm resulting from the loss of its lawful patent rights to exclude others from
making, using, selling, offering for sale and importing the patented inventions. Oakley is entitled
to injunctive relief pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283.

106. Oakley is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for the infringement,
including Defendant’s profits pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 289. Oakley is entitled to recover any other
damages as appropriate pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284.
COUNT V
(35 U.S.C. § 271)
COUNT VI
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT VII
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT VIII
(35 U.S.C. § 271)
COUNT IX
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT X
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT XI
(35 U.S.C. § 271)
COUNT XII
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT XIII
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

damages as appropriate pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284
COUNT XIV
(35 U.S.C. § 271)
COUNT XVI
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT XVII
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT XVIII
(35 U.S.C. § 271)
COUNT XIX
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT XX
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT XXI
(35 U.S.C. § 271)
COUNT XXII
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT XXIII
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT XXIV
(35 U.S.C. § 271)
COUNT XXV
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT XXVI
(35 U.S.C. § 271)

COUNT XXVII
(35 U.S.C. § 271)
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendant as follows:
1) That Defendant, its officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, confederates, and all
persons acting for, with, by, through, under or in active concert with them be temporarily,
preliminarily and permanently enjoined and restrained from:

a. using the Oakley Trademarks or any reproductions, counterfeit copies or colorable
imitations thereof in any manner in connection with the distribution, marketing,
advertising, offering for sale, or sale of any product that is not a genuine Oakley Product
or is not authorized by Plaintiff to be sold in connection with the Oakley Trademarks;
b. passing off, inducing, or enabling others to sell or pass off any product as a genuine
Oakley Product or any other product produced by Plaintiff, that is not Plaintiff’s or not
produced under the authorization, control or supervision of Plaintiff and approved by
Plaintiff for sale under the Oakley Trademarks;
c. committing any acts calculated to cause consumers to believe that Defendant’s products
are those sold under the authorization, control or supervision of Plaintiff, or are
sponsored by, approved by, or otherwise connected with Plaintiff;
d. further infringing the Oakley Trademarks and damaging Plaintiff’s goodwill;
e. importing, offering for sale, or selling any products not authorized by Oakley and that
include any reproduction, copy or colorable imitation of the designs claimed in any of
Oakley’s ‘613, ‘461, ‘326, ‘917, ‘745, ‘621, ‘443, ‘444, ‘580, ‘304, ‘727, ‘708, ‘180,
‘339, ‘209, ‘695, ‘696, ‘002, ‘565, ‘921, ‘355, ‘368, and ‘371 Patents;
f. manufacturing, shipping, delivering, holding for sale, transferring or otherwise moving,
storing, distributing, returning, or otherwise disposing of, in any manner, products or
inventory not manufactured by or for Oakley, nor authorized by Oakley to be sold or
offered for sale, and which bear any of Oakley’s trademarks, including the Oakley
Trademarks, or any reproductions, counterfeit copies or colorable imitations thereof;
g. aiding, abetting, contributing to or otherwise assisting anyone in infringing upon the
Oakley Trademarks, or any of Oakley’s ‘613, ‘461, ‘326, ‘917, ‘745, ‘621, ‘443, ‘444,
‘580, ‘304, ‘727, ‘708, ‘180, ‘339, ‘209, ‘695, ‘696, ‘002, ‘565, ‘921, ‘355, ‘368, and
‘371 Patents; and
h. effecting assignments or transfers, forming new entities or associations or utilizing any
other device for the purpose of circumventing or otherwise avoiding the prohibitions
set forth in Subparagraphs (a) through (g).
2) That Defendant, within fourteen (14) days after service of judgment with notice of entry thereof
upon it, be required to file with the Court and serve upon Plaintiff a written report under oath
setting forth in detail the manner in which Defendant has complied with paragraph 1, a through
h, supra;
3) That Defendant account for and pay to Plaintiff all profits realized by Defendant by reason of
Defendant’s unlawful acts herein alleged, and that the amount of damages for infringement of
Plaintiff’s Oakley Trademarks, be increased by a sum not exceeding three times the amount
thereof as provided by 15 U.S.C. § 1117;
4) Awarding Oakley such damages as it shall prove at trial against Defendant that are adequate
to compensate Oakley for infringement of Oakley’s ‘613, ‘461, ‘326, ‘917, ‘745, ‘621, ‘443,
‘444, ‘580, ‘304, ‘727, ‘708, ‘180, ‘339, ‘209, ‘695, ‘696, ‘002, ‘565, ‘921, ‘355, ‘368, and
‘371 Patents, and all of the profits realized by Defendant, or others acting in concert or
participation with it, from Defendant’s unauthorized use and infringement of Oakley’s ‘613,
‘461, ‘326, ‘917, ‘745, ‘621, ‘443, ‘444, ‘580, ‘304, ‘727, ‘708, ‘180, ‘339, ‘209, ‘695, ‘696,
‘002, ‘565, ‘921, ‘355, ‘368, and ‘371 Patents;
5) That Oakley be awarded from Defendant, as a result of Defendant’s use of the Oakley Designs,
three times Oakley’s damages therefrom and three times Defendant’s profits therefrom, after
an accounting, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;

6) That Plaintiff be awarded statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(c) of $2,000,000
(two million dollars) for each and every use of Plaintiff’s Oakley Trademarks;
7) That Plaintiff be awarded its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs; and
8) Award any and all other relief that this Court deems just and proper.
JURY DEMAND
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38, Oakley hereby demands a trial by jury as to all issues so triable.
Dated this 26th day of July 2018. Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Justin R. Gaudio

Amy C. Ziegler
Justin R. Gaudio
Allyson M. Martin
Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd.
300 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2500
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312.360.0080
312.360.9315 (facsimile)
aziegler@gbc.law
jgaudio@gbc.law
amartin@gbc.law
Counsel for Plaintiff Oakley, Inc.

Case: 1:18-cv-05101 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 07/26/18 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:64
Exhibit 1

([KLELW

Oakley v. Shenzhen Globalegrow E-Commerce - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Oakley v. Shenzhen Globalegrow E-Commerce - Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Oakley v. Shenzhen Globalegrow E-Commerce - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case: 1:18-cv-05101 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/26/18 Page 1 of 63 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Defendant Shenzhen Globalegrow E-Commerce Co., Ltd. (“Defendant” or “Globalegrow”) and

trademarks, and infringements of Plaintiff’s Oakley trademarks (the “Infringing Products”)

through Defendant’s website at gearbest.com. Plaintiff seeks to address Defendant’s

Defendant’s actions and seeks injunctive and monetary relief.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

sales to Illinois residents by operating a fully interactive and commercial website at

at gearbest.com. Defendant is committing tortious acts in Illinois, is engaging in

deliveries to consumers in the United States, including Illinois.

c) Defendant’s online store at gearbest.com accepts payment in U.S. dollars.

the State of Illinois) visit gearbest.com each month.

III. THE PARTIES

5. Plaintiff Oakley is an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Luxottica Group S.p.A.

6. Oakley is an internationally recognized manufacturer, distributor and retailer of

prominently display its famous, internationally-recognized and federally-registered Trademarks,

headwear, footwear, outerwear, jackets and apparel in the world.

Michigan Avenue in Chicago, Illinois.

8. Oakley incorporates a variety of distinctive marks in the design of its various

Registration Goods and Services Date of Image

commerce. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1115(b), 1065.

famous throughout the United States.

with the Oakley Trademarks is of incalculable and inestimable value to Oakley.

proprietary content, images and designs exclusive to Oakley.

valuable asset of Oakley.

herein referred to as the “Oakley Designs.”

Patent Number Claim Issue Date

D523,461 June 20, 2006

D557,326 December 11,

D568,917 May 13, 2008

D572,745 July 8, 2008

D573,621 July 22, 2008

D581,443 November 25,

D581,444 November 25,

D615,580 May 11, 2010

D622,304 August 24, 2010

D640,727 June 28, 2011

D646,708 October 11, 2011

D659,180 May 8, 2012

D661,339 June 5, 2012

D719,209 December 9, 2014

D725,695 March 31, 2015

D725,696 March 31, 2015

D728,002 April 28, 2015

D744,565 December 1, 2015

D745,921 December 22,

D746,355 December 29,

D746,368 December 29,

D798,371 September 26,

May 13, 2008 with named inventor Peter Yee.

July 8, 2008 with a named inventor of Hans Karsten Moritz.

July 22, 2008 with a named inventor of Peter Yee.

May 8, 2012 with a named inventor of Hans Moritz.

December 9, 2014 with a named inventor of Nicolas Adolfo Garfias.

March 31, 2015 with a named inventor of Nicolas Adolfo Garfias.

March 31, 2015 with a named inventor of Nicholas Adolfo Garfias.

April 28, 2015 with a named inventor of Kyusik Uhm.

December 29, 2015 with a named inventor of Kyusik Uhm.

December 29, 2015 with a named inventor of Kyusik Uhm.