Paws, Patents, and Proceedings: The case of Kennels & Kats v. Delomo

Plaintiff Excelencia Importing Pty Ltd. d/b/a Kennels & Kats (“K&K”) brought forth a complaint against Defendant Jinping Leng d/b/a Delomo (“Defendant”). The core allegation was that the Defendant, through inequitable conduct, obtained U.S. Patent No. D827,946 for a “Pet Grooming Glove,” a design that was allegedly already in circulation in the United States before the patent application. The complaint contended that the Defendant deliberately failed to disclose this information to the USPTO during the patent’s prosecution.

The legal action cPicture1-213x300laimed that the Defendant’s failure to disclose prior art during the patent prosecution process was intentional. K&K, an online retailer specializing in pet supply products, alleged that the Defendant was fully aware of the materiality of the omissions, which rendered the design in the Asserted Patent unpatentable. The complaint suggested that, had the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) been aware of this information, the patent would not have been granted.

The complaint further asserted that the Defendant, despite knowledge of the invalidity of the Asserted Patent, made false infringement claims to Amazon against K&K. This action resulted in the suspension of K&K’s Amazon listings, causing immediate harm to its business. The ramifications of such suspension on an online retailer’s revenue and reputation are substantial, especially given Amazon’s market dominance.

K&K contended that the Defendant’s actions extend beyond patent-related issues. The complaint included allegations of defamation and unfair competition under the Lanham Act. K&K argued that the Defendant’s false statements to Amazon were made with the intent to damage K&K’s reputation. Furthermore, K&K argued that the false allegations, as per the complaint, were not only damaging but also made in bad faith, intending to harm K&K’s standing and sales.

The legal action sought a judgment declaring the Asserted Patent was obtained through inequitable conduct and, therefore, unenforceable. K&K was also pursuing damages for the alleged harm caused by Defendant’s actions, including the suspension of its Amazon listings.

The case has been assigned to Judge Richard L. Young and Magistrate Judge Mario Garcia, in the U.S. District Court of Southern Indiana, and assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-1911.


Contact Information