A2 C 2 2916
Case 9:16-cv-80125-JIC Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2016 Page 1 of 35
UNITED STA TES DISTRICT CO URT SO UTHERN D ISTRICT O F FLOR IDA PALM BEACH D IVISION
FIIFD BY
Q,
CASE NO. 16-80125-ClV-COHN/SELTZER
,
@A2 C2 2916 STE VEN M, LAHIMQR: ctznx
ALAN AM RO N Pro se
s.
VS
tl: nl:' rc
aogitk -w,: .
Plaintiff,
AM ENDED CO M PLAINT DEM AND FO R TRIA L BY JURY
3*1 M INNESO TA M ININ G & M AN UFA CTER ING COM PANY AND ARTH UR FRY D efendants.
AM ENDED COM PLAINT JURISDICTIO N AND VENUE
PlaintiffAlan Amron (''plaintiff'<Wmron''),AmendedComplaintstatesasfollows: 1. Thisisan action broughtforthepurposeofdeterm ining an actualcontroversy offirstto
invcntinventorship (conccption date,putintocommercedate,firstto inventwasin 1973the USPTO rule56 (a)(b)undertheUnitedStatesPatentandTrademarkofficepatentrightsand copyrightsrules,regulations,lawsandstatues35U.S.C.Sections34,42and 102 (a)(b)(c),and forunfairreprescntation ofthe factsarising underthe Tradem ark A ctof1946,15 U .S.C.section
1051et.Asamended(hereinaftertitheLanham Act'')andtheShermanAntitnzstActl5U.S.C. Section 1-7 and theClayton Act15 U .S.C.section 1121,and Plaintiffis seeking a Declaratory Judgm entby thisCourtofthe Plaintiffs'inventorship rightsand to preventing the Defendants'
Case 9:16-cv-80125-JIC Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2016 Page 2 of 35
from claim ing theutility invcntion ofthesticky noteproductsthatthey tradem arked atfirstas Pressn'peelin 1977 and now the sam e productasPost-itnote since 1980.Venue in thisdistrict
isproperunder28U.S.C.Section 1391and 1400(b). Plaintiffs'livelihood and hispersonalinventorreputation isbeing Defam ed and thereby dam aged directly by the Defendants'on an on going and neverending basisby their daily false claim softhe Postitnotetradem arked stick'y noteinventions'inventorship.To m ake Plaintiffs'claim againstthe Defendantsin thiscase perlkctly clear,itisaççcontinuing Tort'' and Plaintiffs'causesofaction are ûtDefamation'' ttFraudulentM isrepresentation'' tiunclean Hands''and t&Negligence''in the continuing daily dam age perpetrated by the Defendants'to
Plaintiffs'reputation.(seeExhibitR attachedhereto AmendedComplaintshowingthisasa pattern by the Defendantsin stealing inventionsfrom tradeshow s,and theirinequitable conduct
atthe patentoffice by notproperly reporting invcntorship ofothers,thcsc arespecitk ally and
intentionally actsofunfaircompetition togainanunfairadvantagein themarketplace)3M Company m ustbe punished forstealing inventionsattrade show s,Defam ing the inventors, fraudulently m isrepresenting inventorship and unclean handsby w ay ofinequitable conductat thepatentofficesim ply to gain an unfairadvantage in them arketplace.
CURRENT LEGAL NOTE ON THE DEFENDANTS'INEOUATABLE CO NDUCT A S A R EG ULAR O CC URANCE IN THE PATENT O FFICE
3. 3M COM PANY W AS FOUND LIABLE FOR INEQUITABLE CONDUCT IN OBTA INING lTS PATENT AND IN STEALING TH E INVENTION FRO M A TM DE
SHOW (UNITED STA TESDISTM CT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEFIN No. 2:l0- CV-044l3)
OnFebruary 10,2016,justafew weeksago,354Company lostapatentcasein DistrictCourt
Case 9:16-cv-80125-JIC Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2016 Page 3 of 35
and itssubsequentAppealdueto obtaining itspatentthrough inequitableeonductand stealing
theinvention from a trade show ,and notproperly notifying thepatentoftk e, then subsequently soughtto enforce thepatent. TheFederalCircuitCourtofAppealsafflrm ed the districtcourt'sfinding that3M w asliable forantitnlstviolationsin that3M wasfound to have obtained itspatentthrough inequitable conductand subsequently sougbtto cnforcethe patent. As a resultof3M sbehaviorin both acquiring and enforcing thepatent, the appellate courtawarded
trebleattorneys'feeswhichcametoabout$26million.(TranswebLLC n 3M Innovative PropertiesCompanyxo 3M Company Appeal#2014-1646-secExhibitR attached here) TH IS IS NOT TH E FIRST TIM E THE 351CO M PANY HA S V IO LATED PATENT RULES AND STO LE INVENTIO NS FROM TM DE SH O W S AND VIO LA TED THE PUBLICS TRUST AN D CONFID ENCE
1(PlaintiffttAmron'')inventedsomethinglhad calledPress-onmemo in 1973and3M today callsitPost-itnote.lnventorship iswhatl've sued 3M overreccntly. Isued them overthatin 1997 and l'm now suing them again foralm ostbutnotexactly the sam ething because now it's
m ore aboutthcy're continually dam aging m e and my reputation asan inventorevery day they're saying thcy're the inventorofthe Post-itnotc when, in fact,they publicly claim to havcinvented
itin 1974 and lacm ally invented and proved itin 1973.
1hadjustgottenmarriedin1973andmywifewasn'thomeandIhadtoleaveamessageforher thatlw asrunning outto am eeting.W hatldid was ltook a piece of-we called itm em opaperin thosedays-and Iwrote on them em othat1w asgoing to am eetingthat1'd bebaek later. 1 wanted to postiton therefrigerator.Butwhathappened was Ilooked around the house for Scotch tape and lcouldn'tfind it. So whatldid waslsaw some gum on the counter. And while
my m ind w asworking while lwaslooking atthc gum and notbeing able to find the Scotch tape, ltook thegum ,puta piece in my m outh and started chewing. W hile Iwaschewing lwas
Case 9:16-cv-80125-JIC Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2016 Page 4 of 35
thinking aboutthe tackinessofthe gum .And ltook a littlepiece ofthc gum outofm y m outh and
lkneaded it.1mushed itaround.Igota littledustoffthe counter.lputitin thelittlepiece of gum and 1mushed itaround and squashed itrighton therefrigcrator.Then Iputthenoteon it and 1pulled italittlebitto see ifitheld and itheld and lleft.W hen lgothom emy wife was
very im pressed w ith the factthatllefthcranoteand thc factthatthe note wasstillon the refrigeratorand then cam e rightoffwithoutitleaving aresiduem esswhen shc took the note off.
She suggested and lagrced thatitw asa greatproductand lstarted to develop the adhesive forit. Theadhesivehad to be tacky enough to stick.repositionablcenough to position iton a surface or a paperorarefrigerator.W e didn'thavem agnetsin those daysand lcouldn'tuse ducttape because itwould havelefta residue on the refrigerator.So lwasworking on an adhesivcthat would be tacky enough to be puton theback ofa m em o pad orpiece ofpaper,thatyou could put itonto anothcrpiece ofpaperorto a refrigeratorora window oradoororsomething like that and reposition it. linvented abattery operated w atergun in thesam e 1973.And lhad two productsthatltook to an invention show .lhad the Press-on-M em o and Ihad the battery operated watergun.So lwent to thisinvention show and had a 10-by-l0 1700th atthe Sheraton Hotelin New York City.A san inventorlwasyoung and lwanted to getmy productsacrossto people,offeritforsale,putit into com m erce asthey callitand alocalncw schannelcam earound and coveredm y battery operated watergun butnotm y Press-on-M em o.They didn'tthink thatproductwasworthy of television.So afterthey covered my battery operated watergun,the attention atm y b00th drew overtwo m en in suitsfrom 351 with colorfulbusinesscardsthe 3N1.wasin color,they gavc m c theirbusinesscardsand said 'can wehave samplesofyourPress-on-M em o and a sam pleofyour spray adhesive thatyou used forthePress-on-M em o.W ewould liketo consideritat3M . 4
Case 9:16-cv-80125-JIC Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2016 Page 5 of 35
lw asvery excited.lthoughtthatwasitasan inventorata very young age,itwould have madc
m y life.So lgave thcm thc samples.1had thcircardsand lwasgoing to callthem ,orthey wcre going to callm e in the nextcouplc ofw eeks,and 1nevergotacallfrom thcm .
The firstcouplew ecksafterlm etthem Icalled them and said 1didn'thearfrom you and they said ''we checked itoutand allourdifferentdcpartm entsat3M and found outthatyou can't
really printglue''.''You can printink and you can clean the m achinesbutyou can'tprintglue because itwillgum up the m achinesand also it'stoo expensive''.''So w epass''.So lgotoffthe
phone and
UNITED STA TES DISTRICT CO URT SO UTHERN D ISTRICT O F FLOR IDA PALM BEACH D IVISION
FIIFD BY
Q,
CASE NO. 16-80125-ClV-COHN/SELTZER
,
@A2 C2 2916 STE VEN M, LAHIMQR: ctznx
ALAN AM RO N Pro se
s.
VS
tl: nl:' rc
aogitk -w,: .
Plaintiff,
AM ENDED CO M PLAINT DEM AND FO R TRIA L BY JURY
3*1 M INNESO TA M ININ G & M AN UFA CTER ING COM PANY AND ARTH UR FRY D efendants.
AM ENDED COM PLAINT JURISDICTIO N AND VENUE
PlaintiffAlan Amron (''plaintiff'<Wmron''),AmendedComplaintstatesasfollows: 1. Thisisan action broughtforthepurposeofdeterm ining an actualcontroversy offirstto
invcntinventorship (conccption date,putintocommercedate,firstto inventwasin 1973the USPTO rule56 (a)(b)undertheUnitedStatesPatentandTrademarkofficepatentrightsand copyrightsrules,regulations,lawsandstatues35U.S.C.Sections34,42and 102 (a)(b)(c),and forunfairreprescntation ofthe factsarising underthe Tradem ark A ctof1946,15 U .S.C.section
1051et.Asamended(hereinaftertitheLanham Act'')andtheShermanAntitnzstActl5U.S.C. Section 1-7 and theClayton Act15 U .S.C.section 1121,and Plaintiffis seeking a Declaratory Judgm entby thisCourtofthe Plaintiffs'inventorship rightsand to preventing the Defendants'
Case 9:16-cv-80125-JIC Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2016 Page 2 of 35
from claim ing theutility invcntion ofthesticky noteproductsthatthey tradem arked atfirstas Pressn'peelin 1977 and now the sam e productasPost-itnote since 1980.Venue in thisdistrict
isproperunder28U.S.C.Section 1391and 1400(b). Plaintiffs'livelihood and hispersonalinventorreputation isbeing Defam ed and thereby dam aged directly by the Defendants'on an on going and neverending basisby their daily false claim softhe Postitnotetradem arked stick'y noteinventions'inventorship.To m ake Plaintiffs'claim againstthe Defendantsin thiscase perlkctly clear,itisaççcontinuing Tort'' and Plaintiffs'causesofaction are ûtDefamation'' ttFraudulentM isrepresentation'' tiunclean Hands''and t&Negligence''in the continuing daily dam age perpetrated by the Defendants'to
Plaintiffs'reputation.(seeExhibitR attachedhereto AmendedComplaintshowingthisasa pattern by the Defendantsin stealing inventionsfrom tradeshow s,and theirinequitable conduct
atthe patentoffice by notproperly reporting invcntorship ofothers,thcsc arespecitk ally and
intentionally actsofunfaircompetition togainanunfairadvantagein themarketplace)3M Company m ustbe punished forstealing inventionsattrade show s,Defam ing the inventors, fraudulently m isrepresenting inventorship and unclean handsby w ay ofinequitable conductat thepatentofficesim ply to gain an unfairadvantage in them arketplace.
CURRENT LEGAL NOTE ON THE DEFENDANTS'INEOUATABLE CO NDUCT A S A R EG ULAR O CC URANCE IN THE PATENT O FFICE
3. 3M COM PANY W AS FOUND LIABLE FOR INEQUITABLE CONDUCT IN OBTA INING lTS PATENT AND IN STEALING TH E INVENTION FRO M A TM DE
SHOW (UNITED STA TESDISTM CT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEFIN No. 2:l0- CV-044l3)
OnFebruary 10,2016,justafew weeksago,354Company lostapatentcasein DistrictCourt
Case 9:16-cv-80125-JIC Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2016 Page 3 of 35
and itssubsequentAppealdueto obtaining itspatentthrough inequitableeonductand stealing
theinvention from a trade show ,and notproperly notifying thepatentoftk e, then subsequently soughtto enforce thepatent. TheFederalCircuitCourtofAppealsafflrm ed the districtcourt'sfinding that3M w asliable forantitnlstviolationsin that3M wasfound to have obtained itspatentthrough inequitable conductand subsequently sougbtto cnforcethe patent. As a resultof3M sbehaviorin both acquiring and enforcing thepatent, the appellate courtawarded
trebleattorneys'feeswhichcametoabout$26million.(TranswebLLC n 3M Innovative PropertiesCompanyxo 3M Company Appeal#2014-1646-secExhibitR attached here) TH IS IS NOT TH E FIRST TIM E THE 351CO M PANY HA S V IO LATED PATENT RULES AND STO LE INVENTIO NS FROM TM DE SH O W S AND VIO LA TED THE PUBLICS TRUST AN D CONFID ENCE
1(PlaintiffttAmron'')inventedsomethinglhad calledPress-onmemo in 1973and3M today callsitPost-itnote.lnventorship iswhatl've sued 3M overreccntly. Isued them overthatin 1997 and l'm now suing them again foralm ostbutnotexactly the sam ething because now it's
m ore aboutthcy're continually dam aging m e and my reputation asan inventorevery day they're saying thcy're the inventorofthe Post-itnotc when, in fact,they publicly claim to havcinvented
itin 1974 and lacm ally invented and proved itin 1973.
1hadjustgottenmarriedin1973andmywifewasn'thomeandIhadtoleaveamessageforher thatlw asrunning outto am eeting.W hatldid was ltook a piece of-we called itm em opaperin thosedays-and Iwrote on them em othat1w asgoing to am eetingthat1'd bebaek later. 1 wanted to postiton therefrigerator.Butwhathappened was Ilooked around the house for Scotch tape and lcouldn'tfind it. So whatldid waslsaw some gum on the counter. And while
my m ind w asworking while lwaslooking atthc gum and notbeing able to find the Scotch tape, ltook thegum ,puta piece in my m outh and started chewing. W hile Iwaschewing lwas
Case 9:16-cv-80125-JIC Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2016 Page 4 of 35
thinking aboutthe tackinessofthe gum .And ltook a littlepiece ofthc gum outofm y m outh and
lkneaded it.1mushed itaround.Igota littledustoffthe counter.lputitin thelittlepiece of gum and 1mushed itaround and squashed itrighton therefrigcrator.Then Iputthenoteon it and 1pulled italittlebitto see ifitheld and itheld and lleft.W hen lgothom emy wife was
very im pressed w ith the factthatllefthcranoteand thc factthatthe note wasstillon the refrigeratorand then cam e rightoffwithoutitleaving aresiduem esswhen shc took the note off.
She suggested and lagrced thatitw asa greatproductand lstarted to develop the adhesive forit. Theadhesivehad to be tacky enough to stick.repositionablcenough to position iton a surface or a paperorarefrigerator.W e didn'thavem agnetsin those daysand lcouldn'tuse ducttape because itwould havelefta residue on the refrigerator.So lwasworking on an adhesivcthat would be tacky enough to be puton theback ofa m em o pad orpiece ofpaper,thatyou could put itonto anothcrpiece ofpaperorto a refrigeratorora window oradoororsomething like that and reposition it. linvented abattery operated w atergun in thesam e 1973.And lhad two productsthatltook to an invention show .lhad the Press-on-M em o and Ihad the battery operated watergun.So lwent to thisinvention show and had a 10-by-l0 1700th atthe Sheraton Hotelin New York City.A san inventorlwasyoung and lwanted to getmy productsacrossto people,offeritforsale,putit into com m erce asthey callitand alocalncw schannelcam earound and coveredm y battery operated watergun butnotm y Press-on-M em o.They didn'tthink thatproductwasworthy of television.So afterthey covered my battery operated watergun,the attention atm y b00th drew overtwo m en in suitsfrom 351 with colorfulbusinesscardsthe 3N1.wasin color,they gavc m c theirbusinesscardsand said 'can wehave samplesofyourPress-on-M em o and a sam pleofyour spray adhesive thatyou used forthePress-on-M em o.W ewould liketo consideritat3M . 4
Case 9:16-cv-80125-JIC Document 18 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2016 Page 5 of 35
lw asvery excited.lthoughtthatwasitasan inventorata very young age,itwould have madc
m y life.So lgave thcm thc samples.1had thcircardsand lwasgoing to callthem ,orthey wcre going to callm e in the nextcouplc ofw eeks,and 1nevergotacallfrom thcm .
The firstcouplew ecksafterlm etthem Icalled them and said 1didn'thearfrom you and they said ''we checked itoutand allourdifferentdcpartm entsat3M and found outthatyou can't
really printglue''.''You can printink and you can clean the m achinesbutyou can'tprintglue because itwillgum up the m achinesand also it'stoo expensive''.''So w epass''.So lgotoffthe
phone and
