Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 1 of 17 PageID 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

LEAD CREATION INC., Case No.: 8:23-cv-00049

Plaintiff,

v. VERIFIED COMPLAINT

THE PARTNERSHIPS and

UNINCORPORATED
ASSOCIATIONS
IDENTIFIED ON SCHEDULE “A”
Defendants.

________________________________________________________________
PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
________________________________________________________________

Michael A. Hurckes, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 1040918
MAH Advising PLLC
3030 N. Rocky Point Drive W.,
#150
Tampa, FL 33607
Tel.: (917) 791-0639
Attorneys for Plaintiff
 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 2 of 17 PageID 2

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Plaintiff Lead Creation Inc., by and through undersigned counsel, brings this

Complaint for patent infringement against the Partnerships and Unincorporated

Associations identified on Schedule-A attached hereto (collectively,

“Defendants”) and alleges as follows:

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This is an action for infringement of United States Patent No. 7530706 (the

Patent-in-suit) arising under the patent laws of the United States. This action

relates to an invention whereby when distance between the LED and the

convex lens is changed, beam angle is concurrently changed so that the

brightness for long distance is increased and illumination scope for short

distance is increased without using a reflective cone. This is achieved by using

a collar coaxially coupled to the main body; a convex lens coupled to the collar

and optically coupled to the light-emitting diode in coaxially displaceable

manner relative thereto, the convex lens defining a predetermined focal length,

said convex lens being selectively displaceable between various ranges.

PARTIES

2. Plaintiff Lead Creation Inc. is a corporation duly organised and existing under

the laws of the State of Delaware. Plaintiff's principal place of business is

located in Florida.
 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 3 of 17 PageID 3

3. Defendants are individuals and business entities of unknown makeup who

own and/or operate one or more of the e-commerce stores under at least the

Seller Aliases identified on Schedule A and/or other seller aliases not yet

known to Plaintiff. On information and belief, Defendants reside and/or

operate in the People’s Republic of China or other foreign jurisdictions with

lax intellectual property enforcement systems or redistribute products from the

same or similar sources in those locations. Defendants are foreign individuals

or corporations who have both incentive and capacity to hide their assets once

warned that their funds are at risk. Defendants are also not likely to submit to

the authority of this Court and to preserve sufficient funds to satisfy any

judgments that the Court may issue against them. Defendants have the

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

4. On information and belief, Defendants either individually or jointly, operate

one or more e-commerce stores under the Seller Aliases listed in Schedule-A

attached hereto. The tactics used by Defendants to conceal their identities and

the full scope of their operation make it virtually impossible for Plaintiff to

discover Defendants’ true identities and the exact interworking of their

network. If Defendants provide additional credible information regarding their

identities, Plaintiff will take appropriate steps to amend the Complaint.

5. Defendants have both incentive and capacity to secret, conceal, destroy, alter,

sell-off, transfer or otherwise dispose of or deal with infringing products or

 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 4 of 17 PageID 4

other goods that infringe the Patent-in-suit and records relating thereto that are

in their possession or under their control.

6. Defendants have both incentive and capacity to inform their suppliers and

manufacturers of infringing products with the result being that those suppliers

and manufacturers may also secret, conceal, sell-off or otherwise dispose of

infringing products infringing the Patent-in-suit. Defendants have both

incentive and capacity to secret and conceal the means of obtaining or

manufacturing such infringing products, and records relating thereto that are

in their possession or under their control.

7. Defendants have both incentive and capacity to secret, conceal, transfer or

otherwise dispose of their ill-gotten proceeds from their sales of infringing

products and records relating thereto that are in their possession or under their

control.

8. Defendants have both incentive and capacity to open new user accounts and

amazon merchant storefronts under new or different names and continue to

offer for sale and sell infringing products with little to no consequence.

9. This suit arises out of the same series of transactions or occurrences of

Defendants engaging in the sale of infringing products on amazon and there

are common questions of law and fact that will arise in the litigation. The sale

of infringing products on amazon by Defendants encapsulates a series of

occurrences that are connected by a logical relationship. Upon information

and belief, the infringing products sold by Defendants have similar parts and
 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 5 of 17 PageID 5

are likely sourced from the same manufacturer unknown to Plaintiff. The

concealment of identities and use of fake addresses by Defendants to avoid

detection follow similar methodologies and patterns of conduct. The addresses

provided by Defendants are unreliable and their actual addresses are unknown

to Plaintiff. Screenshots of Google Maps search of Defendants’ addresses are

attached hereto as Exhibit-2.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

10. This Court has Federal subject matter jurisdiction over this matter action

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 (federal question) and 1338(a) (patent

infringement). Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 and

§ 1400(b) in this district because a substantial part of the events or omissions

gives rise to the claims that occurred in this District.

11. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants since each of the

Defendants directly target business activities toward consumers in the United

States, including Florida, through at least the fully interactive, e-commerce

stores1 operating under the seller aliases identified in Schedule-A attached

hereto (the “Seller Aliases”). Specifically, Defendants have targeted sales to

Florida residents by setting up and operating e-commerce stores that target

United States consumers using one or more Seller Aliases, offer shipping to

the United States, including Florida, accept payment in U.S. dollars and, on

1
The e-commerce store URLs are listed on Schedule A hereto under the Online
Marketplaces.
 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 6 of 17 PageID 6

information and belief, have sold products incorporating Plaintiff’s invention

to residents of Florida. Each of the Defendants is committing tortious acts in

Florida, is engaging in interstate commerce, and have wrongfully caused

Plaintiff substantial injury in the State of Florida. Upon information and belief,

Defendants are subject to the personal jurisdiction of this Court because,

among other things, Defendant have purposefully availed themselves of the

benefits of doing business in this District by providing services to the residents

of this District and by selling products and services to businesses and

individuals located in this District.

COUNT ONE: PATENT INFRINGEMENT

12. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations of paragraphs

1.-11. above.

13. On May 12, 2009, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued the patent-in-

suit, entitled LED Lighting Apparatus with Fast Changing Focus. A true and

correct copy of the patent-in-suit is attached as Exhibit-1. The claims of the

patent-in-suit cover invention whereby when distance between the LED and

the convex lens is changed, beam angle is concurrently changed so that the

brightness for long distance is increased and illumination scope for short

distance is increased without using a reflective cone. This is achieved by using

a collar coaxially coupled to the main body; a convex lens coupled to the collar

and optically coupled to the light-emitting diode in coaxially displaceable

 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 7 of 17 PageID 7

manner relative thereto, the convex lens defining a predetermined focal length,

said convex lens being selectively displaceable between various ranges. The

claims of the patent-in-suit carry a presumption of validity under 35 U.S.C. §

282(a) and are enforceable.

14. Plaintiff is the owner of the entire right, title and interest in the patent-in-suit

by assignment, and possesses the right to sue for and obtain equitable relief

and damages for infringement of the patent-in-suit.

15. Defendants have directly infringed and continue to directly infringe the patent-

in-suit by making, using, selling, and offering for sale in the United States,

and/or importing into the United States lighting apparatus namely flashlights

the convex lens which when changed, the beam angle is concurrently changed

so that the brightness for long distance is increased and illumination scope for

short distance is increased without using a reflective cone, identified by the

designations as shown in Exhibit-3. (hereinafter “Accused Products”). These

Accused Products embody the invention defined by one or claims of the

Patent-in-suit, without authority or license from Plaintiff. More particularly,

upon information and belief, Defendants have infringed and continue to

infringe at least Claim 1 of the patent-in-suit because the Accused Products

include every limitation of Claim 1.

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

subject new sellers to verification and confirmation of their identities,

allowing infringers to “routinely use false or inaccurate names and addresses

 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 8 of 17 PageID 8

when registering with these e-commerce platforms.” Exhibit-4, 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 Exhibit-5 and finding that on “at least some e-

commerce platforms, little identifying information is necessary or [an

infringer] to begin selling” and recommending that “[s]ignificantly enhanced

vetting of third-party sellers” is necessary. Infringers hedge against the risk of

being caught and having their websites taken down from an e-commerce

platform by pre-emptively establishing multiple virtual store-fronts. Exhibit-

5 at p. 22. Since platforms generally do not require a seller on a third-party

marketplace to identify the underlying business entity, infringers can have

many different profiles that can appear unrelated even though they are

commonly owned and operated. Exhibit-5 at p. 39. Further, “E-commerce

platforms create bureaucratic or technical hurdles in helping brand owners to

locate or identify sources of [infringement].” Exhibit-4 at 186-187.

17. Claim 1 of the Patent-in-suit is asserted as below:

a) A light-emitting diode (LED) lighting apparatus, comprising:

b) a main body having a power source;

 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 9 of 17 PageID 9

c) a light-emitting diode electrically connected with the power source and

positioned at a front end of the main body, the light-emitting diode

emitting light beams;

d) a collar coaxially coupled to the main body;

e) a convex lens coupled to the collar and optically coupled to the light-

emitting diode in coaxially displaceable manner relative thereto, the

convex lens defining a predetermined focal length, said convex lens

being selectively displaced between a first range and a second range,

said first range being from the light-emitting diode to a first position

offset from the light-emitting diode by the predetermined focal length,

said second range being from the first position to a second position

offset from the light emitting diode by twice the predetermined focal

length; and

f) at least one of said main body and collar having a pair of annular

engagement portions axially offset from the other for releasably locking

said collar to the main body to locate the convex lens respectively in

said first range and second range;

g) whereby a brightness of the light is optimally maintained for a greater

range of illumination when the convex lens is in said second range than

in said first range.

18. The Accused Products include a light-emitting diode (LED) lighting

apparatus, a collar coaxially coupled to the main body; a convex lens coupled
 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 10 of 17 PageID 10

to the collar and optically coupled to the light-emitting diode in coaxially

displaceable manner relative thereto and convex lens being selectively

displaceable between a first range and a second range which corresponds to

the collar, convex lens placement and displacement mechanism as recited in

Claim 1.

19. Claim 2 of the Patent-in-suit recites: “The light-emitting diode (LED) lighting

apparatus as claimed in claim 2, wherein the convex lens is configured to

converge light beams from the LED.”

20. The Accused Products include a convex lens configured to converge light

beams, which corresponds to convex lens configured to converge light beams

from the LED as recited in claim 2.

21. Claim 4 of the Patent-in-suit recites: “The light-emitting diode (LED) lighting

apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the main body has a fast thread

formed thereon for retentive engagement by a housing displaceably coupled

to the main body, the housing having the convex lens coupled thereto.”

22. The Accused Products include retentive engaging by a housing coupled with

a convex lens, which corresponds to claims as recited in claim 4.

23. Claim 5 of the Patent-in-suit recites: The light-emitting diode (LED) lighting

apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the distance between the LED and

the convex lens is adjustable with an approximate range of 0 mm to 32 mm.

 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 11 of 17 PageID 11

24. The Accused Products include “zoom” function adjustable housing, which

corresponds to the distance between the LED and the convex lens is adjustable

with an approximate range of 0mm to 32mm as recited in claim 5.

25. Claim 8 of the patent-in-suit recites: “The light-emitting diode (LED) lighting

apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein said collar and main body are

coupled to be linearly displaceable one relative to the other without rotation

between said engagement portions.”

26. The Accused Products include a collar and main body that are linearly

displaceable without rotation, which corresponds to claims recited in claim 8.

27. A claim chart comparison with details of limitation matching to show

infringement and Expert Opinion of Ms. Brenitra Mosley, MBA., senior

consulting engineer, registered patent practitioner, electrical engineer and

cybersecurity engineer is attached hereto as Exhibit-6.

28. Plaintiff has suffered injury, including irreparable injury, as a result of

Defendants’ infringement. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to preliminary and

permanent injunctive relief restraining and enjoining Defendants from

infringing the Patent-in-suit.

29. Defendants have infringed Plaintiff’s patent through the aforesaid acts and

will continue to do so unless enjoined by this Court. Defendants’ wrongful

conduct has caused Plaintiff to suffer irreparable harm resulting from the loss

of its lawful patent rights to exclude others from making, using, selling,
 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 12 of 17 PageID 12

offering for sale, and importing the patented invention. Plaintiff is entitled to

injunctive relief pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283.

30. Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for the

infringement, including Defendants’ profits pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 289.

Plaintiff is entitled to recover any other damages as appropriate pursuant to 35

U.S.C. § 284.

31. By reason of Defendants’ infringement, Plaintiff is suffering and will

continue to suffer substantial damages in an amount to be determined at trial.

COUNT TWO: DECEPTIVE AND UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES

32. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1-32.

33. Defendants’ wilful direct infringement of the Patent-in-suit to conduct sales

of its counterfeit and inferior quality products are likely to deceive, mislead,

betray, and defraud consumers who are customers of Plaintiff.

34. Defendants have unfairly competed with and injured and will continue to

injure Plaintiffs by soliciting sales of their counterfeit inferior quality products

by infringement of the Patent-in-suit. Defendants’ infringement has and will

cause irreparable injury to Plaintiffs’ goodwill and reputation associated with

the value of Plaintiff’s patent.

35. Defendants’ acts and practices of operating multiple stores that infringe on the

Patent-in-suit to avoid detection and patent enforcement constitute acts of

 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 13 of 17 PageID 13

unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business acts and practices within the meaning

of Fla Stat 501.204.

COUNT THREE: UNJUST ENRICHMENT

36. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1-35.

37. Plaintiff’s Patent-in-suit have conferred the benefit of sales of products

incorporating Plaintiff’s invention on Defendants. Defendants have

knowledge of the benefit they derive from making, using, selling, and offering

for sale of the products infringing on the patent-in-suit. Defendants have

accepted the benefit of infringement of the Patent-in-suit. It would be

inequitable for Defendants to retain the benefits derived from the Patent-in-

suit without paying fair value for it.

38. By virtue of the wilful infringement of the Patent-in-suit, Defendants have

been unjustly enriched in an amount to be proven at trial. Defendants’

retention of monies gained through its deceptive business practices,

infringements, acts of confusing consumers and otherwise have unjustly

enriched Defendants.

39. Defendants' ill-gotten gains obtained from sales of its Accused Products,

includes the monies that should have been paid to Plaintiff as licensing fees or

otherwise, if Defendants complied with their legal obligations.

COUNT FOUR: UNFAIR COMPETITION

40. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege every allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1-39.
 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 14 of 17 PageID 14

41. Defendants have gained the advantage of soliciting Accused Product sales by

infringing the Patent-in-suit. Defendants are aware of the advantage they gain

from highlighting the inventions claimed in the patent-in-suit. By from

making, using, selling, and offering for sale of the Accused Products,

Defendants have consented to receive the benefits of the Patent-in-suit. It

would be unfair for Defendants to keep using the patent-in-suit without paying

fair market value for it.

42. Defendants have been unfairly profited in an amount that will be proven at

trial as a result of the deliberate direct infringement of the patent-in-suit. The

retention of funds obtained by the defendants' dishonest business practices,

violations, actions that confused consumers, and other illegal means has

unfairly enriched the defendants.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court grant the following relief:

A. A judgment that Defendants have infringed one or more claims of the Patent-

in-suit;

B. That Defendants, their affiliates, 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:

 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 15 of 17 PageID 15

i. making, using, offering for sale, selling, and/or importing into the

United States for subsequent sale or use any products not authorized by

Plaintiff and that include any reproduction, copy or imitation of the

invention claimed in the Patent-in-suit;

ii. aiding, abetting, contributing to, or otherwise assisting anyone in

infringing upon the Plaintiff’s Patent; and

iii. 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 (i) and

(ii)

C. Entry of an Order that, upon Plaintiff’s request, those with notice of the

injunction, including, without limitation, any online marketplace platforms

such as eBay, AliExpress, Alibaba and Amazon, (collectively, the “Third

Party Providers”) shall disable and cease displaying any advertisements used

by or associated with Defendants in connection with the sale of goods that

infringe the claims of the Patent-in-suit;

D. That Plaintiff be awarded such damages as it shall prove at trial against

Defendants that are adequate to compensate Plaintiff for Defendants’

infringement of the Patent-in-suit, but in no event less than a reasonable

royalty for the use made of the invention by the Defendants, together with

interest and costs, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;

 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 16 of 17 PageID 16

E. That the amount of damages awarded to Plaintiff to compensate Plaintiff for

infringement of Patent-in-suit be increased by three times the amount thereof,

as provided by 35 U.S.C. § 284;

F. In the alternative, that Plaintiff be awarded all profits realized by Defendants

from Defendants’ infringement of the Patent-in-suit, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §

289;

G. Costs and reasonable attorneys' fees relating to this action pursuant to 35

U.S.C. § 285; and

H. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff respectfully demands trial by jury on all claims so triable.

Dated: January 6th, 2023

Florida
Respectfully submitted,
By:
Michael A. Hurckes, Esq.
Florida Bar No. 1040918
MAH Advising PLLC
3030 N. Rocky Point Drive W.,
#150
Tampa, FL 33607
Tel.: (917) 791-0639
Attorneys for Plaintiff
 Case 8:23-cv-00049 Document 1 Filed 01/06/23 Page 17 of 17 PageID 17

VERIFICATION
Michael A. Hurckes, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

I am the Director of Lead Creation Inc. in the above-entitled action. I

have read the foregoing complaint and personally know the contents thereof.

The same are true to my knowledge, except as to matters therein stated to be

alleged on information and belief and as to those matters, I believe them to be

true.

MICHAEL A. HURCKES
Director, Lead Creation Inc.

6th day of January, 2022