Old Friend Footwear files motion against Crocs in patent case
01 Aug '06
3 min read
Australia Unlimited contends that the continued maintenance of infringement claims based on the '858 patent caused the company unnecessary expense and damage to its reputation. Crocs is seeking the general exclusion of a wide array of moldable foam footwear, including foam footwear of a general look and style that was sold by others in this category well before Crocs entered the market.
In today's court filings Australia Unlimited claims:
-- That Crocs filed its complaint with the ITC accusing a shoe that Australia Unlimited no longer makes despite having knowledge of that fact;
-- That material information about the original design of Crocs' shoe, which includes activities in 2000 by an Italian designer, was not disclosed by Crocs during prosecution of its patents in the US;
-- That NOTHINZ has not infringed on any patents or trade dress claimed by Crocs, because, among other things, NOTHINZ are sold in distinctive packaging and NOTHINZ have a distinctively different ventilator pattern than Crocs.
The company's formal response to the Colorado litigation includes a Countersuit, seeking a Court order invalidating Crocs' patents and holding them unenforceable due to failure to disclose material information to the US Patent and Trademark office. Australia Unlimited also seeks its attorney's fees and damages for alleged patent misuse by Crocs.
Australia Unlimited's claims against Crocs must await a final ruling from the ITC on Crocs' pending investigation.
marketing@alchempro.com
