Helen of Troy Limited v. IKEA - Complaint

Case 6:21-cv-00468 Document 1 Filed 05/05/21 Page 1 of 40
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
WACO DIVISION
HELEN OF TROY LIMITED, §

§
Plaintiff, §
§
§
v. § Civil Action No. 6:21-cv-00468
§
IKEA US RETAIL LLC and §
IKEA NORTH AMERICA SERVICES, LLC, § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
§
Defendants. §
COMPLAINT
Helen of Troy Limited (“Helen of Troy” or “Plaintiff”) files this Complaint for an
injunction and damages against IKEA US Retail LLC and IKEA North America Services, LLC
(collectively, “Defendants”). In support of its Complaint, Helen of Troy alleges as follows:
THE PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Helen of Troy is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
Barbados. Helen of Troy is part of a larger group of “Helen of Troy” companies that was originally
founded in El Paso, Texas in 1968. The group of Helen of Troy companies maintains a U.S.
headquarters at 1 Helen of Troy Plaza, El Paso, Texas 79912. Helen of Troy owns the patents and
trade dress rights that are at issue here. Helen of Troy uses its patented technology and its trade
dress in its own avocado slicer product (the “OXO Avocado Slicer”) under the “OXO Good
Grips®” and “OXO Softworks®” brands.
2. Upon information and belief, IKEA US Retail LLC is a limited liability company
organized and existing under the laws of Virginia with a principal place of business in
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania. Upon information and belief, IKEA US Retail LLC owns and/or
1
operates physical retail store locations in Texas, including in this judicial district, where it offers
for sale and sells household products, including avocado slicers.
3. Upon information and belief, IKEA North America Services, LLC is a limited
liability company organized and existing under the laws of Virginia with a principal place of
business in Conshohocken, Pennsylvania. Upon information and belief, IKEA North America
Services, LLC owns and/or operates the website www.ikea.com/us/en, through which household
products, including avocado slicers, are offered for sale and sold across the United States and in
this judicial district.
4. Upon information and belief, IKEA US Retail LLC and IKEA North America
Services, LLC are wholly-owned by a common parent company. Upon information and belief,
both IKEA US Retail LLC and IKEA North America Services, LLC hold themselves out as
“IKEA.”
NATURE OF THE ACTION
5. This is a civil action for patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trade dress
dilution, unfair competition, and unjust enrichment. This action arises under the Patent Act, 35
U.S.C. § 271 et seq., the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125 et seq., the Texas Business and Commerce
Code § 16 et seq., and common law.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
6. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over the federal law claims under
35 U.S.C. § 271 et. seq. and 15 U.S.C. § 1125 et seq. pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §§
1331 and 1338. This Court has jurisdiction over the state statutory and common law claims in this
action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) because the state statutory and common 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.
2
7. This Court has personal jurisdiction over IKEA US Retail LLC because it has
minimum contacts with Texas and this judicial district, it has purposely directed activities toward
Texas and this judicial district that give rise to the causes of action herein, and it has purposefully
availed itself of the privileges of conducting business in Texas and this judicial district. For
example, upon information and belief, IKEA US Retail LLC operates multiple store locations in
Texas, including in this district, where it has sold and continues to offer for sale the
“LÄTTSKALAD” avocado slicers giving rise to the causes of action herein. Moreover, IKEA US
Retail LLC’s tortious acts with respect to the LÄTTSKALAD have foreseeably caused direct harm
to Helen of Troy in Texas and this district, as Defendants and Helen of Troy compete for the same
customers in Texas and this district. Additionally, IKEA US Retail LLC is registered to do business
in the State of Texas, regularly does or solicits business in Texas, and derives substantial revenue
from goods and services provided to customers in Texas. The exercise of jurisdiction over the
defendant would thus be fair and reasonable and would not offend traditional notions of fair play
and substantial justice.
8. This Court has personal jurisdiction over IKEA North America Services, LLC
because it has minimum contacts with Texas and this judicial district, it has purposely directed
activities toward Texas and this judicial district that give rise to the causes of action herein, and it
has purposefully availed itself of the privileges of conducting business in Texas and this judicial
district. For example, upon information and belief, IKEA North America Services, LLC operates
the interactive website www.ikea.com/us/en/, and associated websites, through which it has sold
and continues to sell the LÄTTSKALAD avocado slicers giving rise to the causes of action herein.
Upon information and belief, customers in this district have actually purchased the
LÄTTSKALAD through www.ikea.com/us/en. Moreover, IKEA North America Services, LLC’s
3
tortious acts with respect to the LÄTTSKALAD have foreseeably caused direct harm to Helen of
Troy in Texas and this district, as Defendants and Helen of Troy compete for the same customers
in Texas and this district. Additionally, IKEA North America Services, LLC is registered to do
business in the State of Texas, regularly does or solicits business in Texas, and derives substantial
revenue from goods and services provided to customers in Texas. The exercise of jurisdiction over
the defendant would thus be fair and reasonable and would not offend traditional notions of fair
play and substantial justice.
9. Venue is proper against IKEA US Retail LLC under at least 28 U.S.C. § 1400
because it has committed acts of patent infringement in this district and has a regular and
established place of business in this district, including at 1 Ikea Way, Round Rock, Texas 78665
and at 1000 IKEA RBFCU Parkway, Live Oak, Texas 78233. Venue is also proper against IKEA
US Retail LLC under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a substantial part of the events giving rise
to the claims occurred in this district. Additionally, venue is proper against IKEA US Retail LLC
under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) because it is subject to the Court’s personal jurisdiction in this
judicial district.
10. Venue is proper against IKEA North America Services, LLC under at least 28
U.S.C. § 1400 because it has committed acts of patent infringement in this district and has a regular
and established place of business in this district, including at 1 Ikea Way, Round Rock, Texas
78665 and at 1000 IKEA RBFCU Parkway, Live Oak, Texas 78233. For example, IKEA North
America Services, LLC operates the website www.ikea.com/us/en, through which customers can
order and pay for products and choose to pick them up at IKEA stores in this district, such as the
IKEA store located at 1000 IKEA RBFCU Parkway, Live Oak, Texas 78233. Moreover, upon
information and belief, the owner of the IKEA stores in this district is an affiliate of IKEA North
4
America Services, LLC that also holds itself out as “IKEA.” The Terms and Conditions on IKEA
North America Services, LLC’s website likewise refers to the various IKEA entities collectively
as “IKEA.” https://www.ikea.com/us/en/customer-service/terms-conditions/ (“The Services are
owned and operated by IKEA North America Services and its parents, affiliates, and/or franchisors
(collectively, ‘IKEA,’ ‘we,’ ‘our,’ or ‘us’).”) (accessed April 27, 2021). Further, upon information
and belief, both IKEA North America Services, LLC and IKEA US Retail LLC share a common
business address. Venue is also proper against IKEA North America Services, LLC under 28
U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in
this district. Additionally, venue is proper against IKEA North America Services, LLC under 28
U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) because it is subject to the Court’s personal jurisdiction in this judicial district.
11. Moreover, this is a convenient venue because documents related to, and persons
with knowledge of, the allegations described herein are located in this district. For example,
documents related to, and persons with knowledge of, Helen of Troy’s patents and trade dress are
located in El Paso, Texas.
12. To the extent venue is not deemed proper for any particular claim standing alone,
pendent venue is proper for any such claim because all claims alleged herein arise out of a common
nucleus of operative facts.
13. Both Defendants may be served by serving their registered agent:
CT Corporation System
1999 Bryan St., Ste. 900
Dallas, TX 75201-3136
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Helen of Troy’s Avocado-Slicing Technology and OXO Product
14. Helen of Troy is a leading and highly regarded distributor of a wide range of
household and personal care products, including products that it markets and sells under its “OXO”
5
brand. For years, Helen of Troy has been engaged in the design, development, and sale of a unique,
distinctive, and innovative hand-held avocado-slicing product known as the “OXO Avocado
Slicer” that is designed to be used to (1) cut open an avocado, (2) remove the seed (or “pit”) of the
avocado, and (3) slice the avocado into pieces. The OXO Avocado Slicer is and has been marketed
and sold under Helen of Troy’s “OXO Good Grips®” and “OXO SoftWorks®” brands.
15. Helen of Troy is and has been marketing and selling the OXO Avocado Slicer in
Texas and throughout the United States in interstate commerce continuously since 2012. For
example, Helen of Troy’s OXO Avocado Slicer is sold at brick-and-mortar locations in Texas and
across the Unites States, such as at Bed Bath & Beyond, Kohl’s, Macy’s, Target, Ace Hardware,
Sur La Table, and The Container Store, as well as other well-known brick-and-mortar locations.
Helen of Troy also markets and sells the OXO Avocado Slicer across the United States and Texas
through online marketplaces, such as OXO.com, Amazon.com, Walmart.com, BakeDeco.com,
WebstaurantStore.com, and Boxed.com.
16. Helen of Troy’s OXO Avocado Slicer and its operation are shown below in
Illustration 1:
6
17. As explained in the description of the OXO Avocado Slicer on OXO.com, “[t]he
plastic blade smoothly cuts through avocado skin and fruit, yet isn’t sharp to the touch. The pitting
tool quickly removes pits with a simple twist. The fan blade cuts fruit into perfect slices and scoops
them out for serving.” https://www.oxo.com/3-in-1-avocado-slicer-901.html (accessed April 8,
2021).
18. Helen of Troy has extensively and continuously promoted and used its OXO
Avocado Slicer design for years in the United States and in Texas, and, as explained in more detail
below, has acquired patent and trade dress rights in its design.
7
Helen of Troy’s ʼ799 Patent
19. Helen of Troy owns the entire right, title, and interest in U.S. Patent No. 8,726,799
(“the ʼ799 Patent”), which is titled “Avocado Pitting Device” and names Mark Prommel, Todd
Brunner, and Kevin O’Leary as inventors. The application that issued as the ʼ799 Patent was filed
on August 23, 2011, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued the ʼ799 Patent
on May 20, 2014. A true and correct copy of the ’799 Patent is attached as Exhibit 1.
20. Figures 3 and 4 of the ʼ799 Patent are shown below in Illustration 2:
21. As further shown by Illustration 1 above, Helen of Troy’s OXO Avocado Slicer is
encompassed by at least claim 16 of the ʼ799 Patent because the OXO Avocado Slicer is “[a]n
avocado pitting device” that includes “a handle having a first end portion and an opposite second
8
end portion,” “a first blade member coupled to the first end section of the handle, the first blade
member configured to cut open the avocado to expose a pit of an avocado,” “a second blade
member coupled to the second end portion of the handle, the second blade member configured to
slice the avocado,” and “at least two spaced apart engagement members interposed between the
first and second blade members, the engagement members projecting outwardly from the handle
and toward each other such that the engagement members define a space for receiving the avocado
pit, the engagement members being configured to pierce the avocado pit and retain the avocado
pit against the handle allowing the pit to be removed from the avocado.”
Helen of Troy’s ʼ488 Patent
22. Helen of Troy also owns the entire right, title, and interest in U.S. Design Patent
No. D675,488 (“the ʼ488 Patent”), which is titled “Fruit Preparation Tool” and names Mark
Prommel, Todd Brunner, and Kevin O’Leary as inventors. The application that issued as the ʼ488
Patent was filed on November 30, 2011, and the USPTO issued the ʼ488 Patent on February 5,
2013. A true and correct copy of the ’488 Patent is attached as Exhibit 2.
23. Figure 2 (right) and Figure 7 (left) of the ʼ488 Patent depict the patented design and
are shown below in Illustration 3:
9
24. As shown by Illustration 1 and Illustration 3, and further by Exhibit 2, Helen of
Troy’s OXO Avocado Slicer is encompassed by the claim of the ʼ488 Patent.
Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress
25. Helen of Troy has acquired trade dress rights under the Lanham Act, as well as
under state statutory and common law, in the overall look, design, arrangement, and appearance of
the OXO Avocado Slicer, shown for example in Illustration 1 above (such rights referred to
collectively herein as “Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress”). Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress includes the
appearance and placement of the curves, tapers, and lines in the OXO Avocado Slicer product; the
appearance of the profile of the product; the appearance of the handle and grip of the product; the
appearance of the blade of the product; the appearance of the slicing mechanism of the product;
the appearance of the seed/pit-removal mechanism of the product; and the overall ornamental
design of the combination of these features. Such non-functional design elements are not essential
to the use or purpose of the products, do not affect its cost or quality, and are not the reason the
10
product works. Moreover, the ornamental aspects of the arrangement and combinations of the
features are arbitrary and non-functional.
26. For years, Helen of Troy has invested significant resources in the design,
development, advertising, and marketing of the OXO Avocado Slicer, which has occurred in Texas
and throughout the United States, including in in-store displays and on the Internet. Furthermore,
Helen of Troy has sold substantial quantities of the OXO Avocado Slicer product in Texas and
throughout the United States.
27. In connection with marketing and selling its OXO Avocado Slicer, Helen of Troy
has extensively used, displayed, and advertised the non-functional features of the design of the
OXO Avocado Slicer that comprise Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress. These features are distinctive
and identify to consumers that the origin of the OXO Avocado Slicer is Helen of Troy. In the
minds of the public, the primary significance of these non-functional and distinctive features is to
identify the source of the product, and Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has acquired secondary
meaning. The distinctive and non-functional features further identify that the product is reliable
and of the high quality associated with Helen of Troy.
28. Additionally, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has become famous and a well-known
indicator of the origin and quality of Helen of Troy’s OXO Avocado Slicer. As explained above,
Helen of Troy has used, promoted, marketed, and made significant sales of its OXO Avocado
Slicer. Moreover, the OXO Avocado Slicer has specifically been sold and offered for sale
throughout the United States in many well-known brick-and-mortar stores, such as Target, and
online outlets, such as Amazon.com. Helen of Troy’s OXO Avocado Slicer has also garnered
unsolicited media praise. For example, a review of the product by Business Insider states that
“[t]he design is simply ingenious.” https://www.businessinsider.com/oxo-avocado-slicer-pitter-
11
kitchen-tool-review (published Feb. 7, 2020; accessed April 13, 2021). It was also named the “top
pick” for “Best Avocado Slicers” by technobuffalo. https://www.technobuffalo.com/best-
avocado-slicers (published Dec. 7, 2020; accessed April 13, 2021). See also
https://www.eonline.com/news/1181097/this-s10-avocado-slicer-has-3-417-5-star-amazon-
reviews (published Feb. 18, 2021; accessed April 13, 2021) (noting that the OXO Avocado slicer
has “16,000+ 5-Star Amazon Reviews”); https://www.foodandwine.com/cooking-techniques/best-
avocado-tool-expert-test (published Dec. 16, 2019; accessed April 13, 2021);
https://www.cranberryislandkitchen.com/best-avocado-slicer-and-pitter/ (updated April 5, 2021;
accessed April 13, 2021); https://www.today.com/food/oxo-amazon-avocado-tool-review-t127247
(published April 18, 2018; accessed April 13, 2021). Upon information and belief, Helen of Troy’s
Trade Dress is recognized by consumers across the United States as exclusively identified with
Helen of Troy.
29. As a result of Helen of Troy’s exclusive, continuous, and substantial use, as well as
its extensive advertising, sales, and promotion of its Trade Dress and the publicity, praise, and
attention that has been paid to the OXO Avocado Slicer bearing Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress, the
Trade Dress has acquired valuable goodwill, substantial secondary meaning, and has become
famous in the United States and Texas. Accordingly, Helen of Troy owns common law and
statutory trade dress rights in the ornamental design and appearance of the OXO Avocado Slicer.
Defendants’ Wrongful Conduct
30. The Defendants have purposefully offered for sale, sold, distributed, imported,
advertised, marketed, and/or promoted, and continue to offer for sale, sell, distribute, import,
advertise, market, and/or promote a household product known as the “LÄTTSKALAD” avocado
slicer (“the Accused Product”) that is confusingly similar to, and dilutes, Helen of Troy’s Trade
Dress and practices inventions claimed in the ʼ799 and ʼ499 Patents. The LÄTTSKALAD
12
competes directly with, and, upon information and belief, is of lower quality than, Helen of Troy’s
OXO Avocado Slicer product.
31. The LÄTTSKALAD and its operation are shown below in Illustration 4:
https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/laettskalad-avocado-slicer-green-50464610/ (accessed April 8,
2021); https://www.amazon.co.uk/IKEA-504-646-10-Lattskalad-Avocado-
Slicer/dp/B085HZNPFL (accessed April 9, 2021).
32. According to Ikea.com, the LÄTTSKALAD is designed to “divide avocados,
remove the seed, slice and scoop out the contents.” https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/laettskalad-
13
avocado-slicer-green-50464610/ (accessed April 8, 2021). The same website further explains that
“[a] quick twist of the stainless steel pitter is all that is needed to remove the avocado seed.” Id.
33. The confusing similarity between the LÄTTSKALAD Avocado Slicer (left) and
Helen of Troy’s OXO Avocado Slicer (right) is demonstrated, for example, in Illustration 5 below:
34. Upon information and belief, Defendants or their affiliates import the
LÄTTSKALAD into the United States and distribute it to retail stores across the country, including
to stores in the Western District of Texas that are operated by Defendant IKEA US Retail LLC. At
such stores, the LÄTTSKALAD is advertised, promoted, offered for sale, and sold. Upon
information and belief, customers have actually purchased the LÄTTSKALAD from one or more
IKEA stores operated by IKEA US Retail LLC in this judicial district.
35. Moreover, the LÄTTSKALAD is advertised, promoted, offered for sale, sold, and
transported to customers across the United States, including throughout the Western District of
Texas, through the website www.ikea.com/us/en that is operated by Defendant IKEA North
America Services, LLC. Upon information and belief, Defendant IKEA North America Services,
LLC has actually done business with customers in, and with residents of, this judicial district
through its website. For example, upon information and belief, customers in this judicial district
14
have actually purchased the LÄTTSKALAD from www.ikea.com/us/en and have had the
LÄTTSKALAD shipped to this judicial district. Furthermore, www.ikea.com/us/en is highly
interactive. For instance, the website allows online customers to create and store an online profile,
purchase products (e.g., the LÄTTSKALAD), input personal information (e.g., name, address, and
phone number), input credit card information to pay for products, and chat with the “IKEA
Customer Support Center.” Further, under the authority of Defendants, the LÄTTSKALAD is
advertised, promoted, offered for sale, sold, and transported to customers across the United States,
including throughout the Western District of Texas, through third-party websites such as
www.amazon.com, which is also an interactive website.
36. As discussed below, through these activities related to the LÄTTSKALAD avocado
slicer, the Defendants infringe Helen of Troy’s patents, violate Helen of Troy’s trade dress rights,
engage in unfair competition against Helen of Troy, are unjustly enriched at Helen of Troy’s
expense, and engage in misappropriation.
COUNT I
(Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,726,799)
37. All of the above paragraphs are incorporated by reference as if fully restated herein.
38. Upon information and belief, Defendants have infringed and will continue to
infringe the ʼ799 Patent either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
§ 271 et seq. at least by selling, offering to sell, and/or importing the Accused Product, which is
covered by at least one claim of the ’799 Patent owned by Helen of Troy. Defendants are also
liable for contributory infringement or by inducing infringement. With regard to such indirect
infringement, the direct infringers include, but are not limited to, Defendants’ affiliates,
employees, and/or customers who make, use, sell, offer to sell, and/or import the Accused Product.
15
39. For example, Defendants infringe at least claim 16 of the ’799 Patent, literally or
equivalently.
40. Claim 16 recites:
An avocado pitting device comprising:
a handle having a first end portion and an opposite second end portion;
a first blade member coupled to the first end section of the handle, the first
blade member configured to cut open the avocado to expose a pit of an
avocado;
a second blade member coupled to the second end portion of the handle, the
second blade member configured to slice the avocado; and
at least two spaced apart engagement members interposed between the first
and second blade members, the engagement members projecting
outwardly from the handle and toward each other such that the
engagement members define a space for receiving the avocado pit, the
engagement members being configured to pierce the avocado pit and
retain the avocado pit against the handle allowing the pit to be removed
from the avocado.
41. The LÄTTSKALAD is “an avocado pitting device.” For example, upon clicking
the “Product details” link at the Ikea.com webpage for the LÄTTSKALAD, the webpage describes
the Accused Product as designed to “remove the seed” (a.k.a. the “pit”) of an avocado.
2021). Moreover, according to the same webpage, “[a] quick twist of the stainless steel pitter is
all that is needed to remove the avocado seed.” Id. The webpage further shows the
LÄTTSKALAD being used to “pit” an avocado:
16
42. Furthermore, the LÄTTSKALAD includes “a handle having a first end portion and
an opposite second end portion,” as shown below in the image taken from the same website:
17
2021).
43. As further shown in the image above, the LÄTTSKALAD has “a first blade
member coupled to the first end section of the handle, the first blade member configured to cut
open the avocado to expose a pit of an avocado.” Moreover, upon clicking the “Product details”
link, the Ikea.com webpage for the LÄTTSKALAD product describes it as designed to “divide
avocados” before removing the seed. https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/laettskalad-avocado-slicer-
green-50464610/ (accessed April 8, 2021).
44. An image of a LÄTTSKALAD product further shows a blade with a pointed end
for cutting:
45. The back of the packaging for the LÄTTSKALAD product from Amazon.com
further shows the first blade being used to cut open an avocado:
18
https://www.amazon.co.uk/IKEA-504-646-10-Lattskalad-Avocado-Slicer/dp/B085HZNPFL
(accessed April 9, 2021) (images rotated 180 degrees for clarity).
46. The LÄTTSKALAD also has “a second blade member coupled to the second end
portion of the handle, the second blade member configured to slice the avocado.” As shown in the
images of the LÄTTSKALAD above, the LÄTTSKALAD has a component with five blades,
which is configured to slice the avocado. The back of the packaging displayed on Amazon.com
shows the fives blades being used to slice the avocado:
19
(accessed April 9, 2021) (image rotated 180 degrees for clarity).
47. The LÄTTSKALAD also has “at least two spaced apart engagement members
interposed between the first and second blade members, the engagement members projecting
outwardly from the handle and toward each other such that the engagement members define a
space for receiving the avocado pit, the engagement members being configured to pierce the
avocado pit and retain the avocado pit against the handle allowing the pit to be removed from the
avocado.” In particular, the LÄTTSKALAD has four spaced apart engagement members between
the first and second blade members that are used to pierce and remove the pit from the avocado,
as shown on the back of the packaging from Amazon.com:
20
(accessed April 9, 2021) (image rotated 180 degrees for clarity).
48. Ikea.com similarly shows the four engagement members of the LÄTTSKALAD
interposed between the first and second blade members, with the engagement members projecting
outwardly from the handle and toward each other and being used to receive, pierce, retain, and
remove the avocado pit as claimed in the ʼ799 Patent:
21
2021) (image rotated 180 degrees for clarity). According to the website, “[a] quick twist of the
stainless steel pitter is all that is needed to remove the avocado seed.” Id.
49. Defendants’ acts of infringement have been without express or implied license by
Helen of Troy, are in violation of Helen of Troy’s rights, and will continue unless enjoined by this
Court.
50. On information and belief, Defendants’ infringement has been, and continues to be,
deliberate, intentional, and willful.
51. On information and belief, this is an exceptional case in view of, inter alia,
Defendants’ unlawful activities, including Defendants’ deliberate, intentional and willful
infringement.
52. Helen of Troy has been, is being, and will continue to be injured by Defendants’
conduct, and thus Helen of Troy is entitled to relief under at least 35 U.S.C. §§ 281, 284, and 285.
53. Defendants also have caused, are causing, and will continue to cause irreparable
harm to Helen of Troy for which there is no adequate remedy at law and for which Helen of Troy
is entitled to injunctive relief under at least 35 U.S.C. § 283.
COUNT II
(Infringement of U.S. Design Patent No. D675,488)
55. The Defendants have infringed and upon information and belief will continue to
infringe the ʼ488 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271 et seq. at least by selling, offering to sell, and/or
importing the LÄTTSKALAD product, which is covered by the claim of the ’488 patent owned
by Helen of Troy. Defendants are also liable for contributory infringement or by inducing
infringement. With regard to such indirect infringement, the direct infringers include, but are not
22
limited to, Defendants’ affiliates, employees, and/or customers who make, use, sell, offer to sell,
and/or import the Accused Product. Moreover, Defendants apply the patented design of the ʼ488
Patent, or a colorable imitation thereof, to an article of manufacture, namely the LÄTTSKALAD,
for the purpose of sale and also, upon information and belief, actually sell and expose for sale the
LÄTTSKALAD.
56. As shown below, the designs of the LÄTTSKALAD and the ʼ488 Patent are
substantially the same such that an ordinary observer, familiar with the prior art, would be deceived
into believing that the LÄTTSKALAD (below, left) is the same as the patented design (below,
right):
57. Defendants’ acts of infringement have been without express or implied license by
Helen of Troy, are in violation of Helen of Troy’s rights, and will continue unless enjoined by this
Court.
23
58. On information and belief, Defendants’ infringement has been, and continues to be,
deliberate, intentional, and willful.
59. On information and belief, this is an exceptional case in view of, inter alia,
Defendants’ unlawful activities, including Defendants’ deliberate, intentional and willful
infringement.
60. Helen of Troy has been, is being, and will continue to be injured by Defendants’
conduct, and thus Helen of Troy is entitled to relief under at least 35 U.S.C. §§ 281, 284, 285, and
289.
61. Defendants also have caused, are causing, and will continue to cause irreparable
harm to Helen of Troy for which there is no adequate remedy at law and for which Helen of Troy
is entitled to injunctive relief under at least 35 U.S.C. § 283.
COUNT III
(Trade Dress Infringement Under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))
63. Defendants’ advertisements, promotions, offers to sell, sales, distribution,
manufacture, and/or importing of the Accused Product violate § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15
U.S.C. § 1125(a) by infringing Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress. The trade dress of the Accused
Product is confusingly similar to Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress. Defendants’ use of Helen of Troy’s
Trade Dress in the Accused Product is likely to cause confusion as to the affiliation, connection,
and/or association of Defendants with Helen of Troy and as to the origin, sponsorship, and/or
approval of the Accused Product, at least by creating the false and misleading impression that the
Accused Product is manufactured by, authorized by, or otherwise associated with Helen of Troy.
64. Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress is entitled to protection under the Lanham Act. Helen
of Troy’s Trade Dress includes unique, distinctive, and non-functional designs. Helen of Troy has
24
extensively and continuously promoted and used its Trade Dress in the United States. Through
that extensive and continuous use, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has become a well-known indicator
of the origin and quality of Helen of Troy’s products, and Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has acquired
substantial secondary meaning in the marketplace.
65. Moreover, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress acquired this secondary meaning before
Defendants commenced their unlawful use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress in connection with the
Accused Product. Helen of Troy used its Trade Dress extensively and continuously before
Defendants began advertising, promoting, selling, offering to sell, distributing, and/or importing
the LÄTTSKALAD. And Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress acquired secondary meaning in the United
States, in Texas generally, and in the Western District of Texas before Defendants commenced
unlawful use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress.
66. Defendants’ use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has caused and, unless enjoined,
will continue to cause substantial and irreparable injury to Helen of Troy for which Helen of Troy
has no adequate remedy at law, including at least substantial and irreparable injury to the goodwill
and reputation for quality associated with Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress, with Helen of Troy, and
Helen of Troy’s products. Additionally, Defendants’ use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has caused
injury to Helen of Troy in the form of lost sales because some customers that would have bought
Helen of Troy’s OXO Avocado Slicer have bought and will buy Defendants’ Accused Product
instead.
67. On information and belief, Defendants’ use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has been
intentional, willful, and malicious. Defendants’ bad faith is evidenced at least by the similarity of
the Accused Product to Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress, as demonstrated in, for example Illustration
5 above, and by Defendants’ continuing disregard for Helen of Troy’s rights.
25
68. Helen of Troy is entitled to injunctive relief, and Helen of Troy is entitled to recover
at least Defendants’ profits, Helen of Troy’s actual damages, enhanced damages, costs, and
reasonable attorney fees under at least 15 U.S.C. §§ 1125(a), 1116, and 1117.
COUNT IV
(Common Law Trade Dress Infringement)
70. Defendants’ advertisements, marketing, promotions, offers to sell, sales,
distribution, manufacture, and/or importing of the Accused Product, in direct competition with
Helen of Troy, constitute common law trade dress infringement, at least because Defendants’ use
of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress is likely to cause consumer confusion as to the origin and/or
sponsorship/affiliation of the Accused Product, at least by creating the false and misleading
impression that the Accused Product is manufactured by, authorized by, or otherwise associated
with Helen of Troy.
71. Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress is entitled to protection under the common law. Helen
extensively and continuously promoted and used its Trade Dress in the United States and Texas.
Through that extensive and continuous use, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has become a well-known
indicator of the origin and quality of Helen of Troy’s products, and Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress
has acquired substantial secondary meaning in the marketplace. Moreover, Helen of Troy’s Trade
Dress acquired this secondary meaning before Defendants commenced their unlawful use of Helen
of Troy’s Trade Dress in connection with the Accused Product.
26
instead.
the Accused Product to Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress, as demonstrated in, for example, Illustration
74. Helen of Troy is entitled to injunctive relief, and Helen of Troy is also entitled to
recover at least Helen of Troy’s damages, Defendants’ profits, punitive damages, costs, and
reasonable attorney fees.
COUNT V
(Trade Dress Dilution under § 43(c) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c))
76. Based on the activities described above, including, for example, Defendants’
advertising, marketing, promoting, offering for sale, selling, distributing, manufacturing, and/or
importing the Accused Product, Defendants have diluted, are diluting, and will likely continue to
dilute Helen of Troy’s famous trade dress in violation of § 43(c) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §
1125(c). Defendants’ use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress, including through counterfeits,
reproductions, copies, and/or colorable imitations thereof, is likely to cause, and has caused,
dilution of Helen of Troy’s famous trade dress, at least by eroding the public’s exclusive
identification of Helen of Troy’s famous trade dress with Helen of Troy and Helen of Troy’s
products, by lessening the capacity of Helen of Troy’s famous trade dress to identify and
27
distinguish Helen of Troy’s products, by associating Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress with products of
inferior quality, and by impairing the distinctiveness of Helen of Troy’s famous trade dress.
77. Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress is famous and is entitled to protection under the
Lanham Act. Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress includes unique, distinctive, and non-functional
designs. Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has acquired distinctiveness through Helen of Troy’s
extensive and continuous promotion and use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress in the United States.
Through that extensive and continuous use, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has become a famous
well-known indicator of the origin and quality of Helen of Troy’s products throughout the United
States, and is widely recognized by the general consuming public as a designation of the source of
Helen of Troy and Helen of Troy’s products. Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has also acquired
substantial secondary meaning in the marketplace. Moreover, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress became
famous and acquired this secondary meaning before Defendants commenced its unlawful use of
Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress in connection with the Accused Product.
78. Defendants’ use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress, including through counterfeits,
reproductions, copies, and/or colorable imitations thereof, has caused, and, unless enjoined, will
continue to cause, substantial and irreparable injury to Helen of Troy for which Helen of Troy has
no adequate remedy at law, including at least substantial and irreparable injury to the goodwill and
reputation for quality associated with Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress, with Helen of Troy, and with
Helen of Troy’s OXO Avocado Slicer.
79. On information and belief, Defendants’ use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress,
including through counterfeits, reproductions, copies, and/or colorable imitations thereof, has been
28
recover at least Defendants’ profits, actual damages, enhanced profits and damages, costs, and
reasonable attorney fees under at least 15 U.S.C. §§ 1125(c), 1116, and 1117.
COUNT VI
(Trade Dress Dilution Under Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 16.103)
82. Based on the activities described above, including, for example, Defendants’
advertising, promoting, offering to sell, selling, distributing, manufacturing, and/or importing the
Accused Product, Defendants have diluted, are diluting, and will likely continue to dilute Helen of
Troy’s Trade Dress in violation of § 16.103 of the Texas Business & Commerce Code. Defendants’
use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress, including through counterfeits, reproductions, copies, and/or
colorable imitations thereof, is likely to cause, and has caused, dilution of Helen of Troy’s famous
trade dress at least by eroding the public’s exclusive identification of Helen of Troy’s famous trade
dress with Helen of Troy, by lessening the capacity of Helen of Troy’s famous trade dress to
identify and distinguish Helen of Troy’s products, by associating Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress with
products of inferior quality, and by impairing the distinctiveness of Helen of Troy’s famous trade
dress.
83. Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress is famous and is entitled to protection under Texas law.
Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress includes unique, distinctive, and non-functional designs. Helen of
Troy has extensively and continuously promoted and used its trade dress in the United States and
in the State of Texas. Through that extensive and continuous use, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has
become a famous and well-known indicator of the origin and quality of Helen of Troy’s products
29
in the United States and in the State of Texas generally and in geographic areas in Texas, and Helen
of Troy’s Trade Dress is widely recognized by the public throughout Texas and in geographic areas
in Texas as a designation of the source of Helen of Troy and Helen of Troy’s products. Helen of
Troy’s Trade Dress also has acquired substantial secondary meaning in the marketplace, including
in Texas and in geographic areas in Texas. Moreover, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress became famous
and acquired this secondary meaning before Defendants commenced its unlawful use of Helen of
Troy’s Trade Dress in connection with the Accused Product.
reproductions, copies, and/or colorable imitations thereof, has caused, and, unless enjoined, will
continue to cause, substantial and irreparable injury to Helen of Troy for which Helen of Troy has
no adequate remedy at law, including at least substantial and irreparable injury to the goodwill and
reputation for quality associated with Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress, with Helen of Troy, and with
Helen of Troy’s OXO Avocado Slicer.
85. On information and belief, Defendants’ use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress,
including through counterfeits, reproductions, copies, and/or colorable imitations thereof has been
recover at least Defendants’ profits, actual damages, enhanced profits and damages, and reasonable
attorney fees under at least Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 16.104.
COUNT VII
(Unfair Competition under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a))
30
Helen of Troy, violate § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) and constitute unfair
competition at least because Defendants have obtained an unfair advantage as compared to Helen
of Troy through Defendants’ use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress and because such uses are likely
to cause consumer confusion as to the origin and/or sponsorship and/or affiliation of Defendants’
Accused Product, at least by creating the false and misleading impression that the Accused Product
is manufactured by, authorized by, or otherwise associated with Helen of Troy. Defendants’
tortious activities have interfered with Helen of Troy’s ability to conduct its business.
89. Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress is entitled to protection under the Lanham Act. Helen
extensively and continuously promoted and used its Trade Dress in the United States. Through
that extensive and continuous use, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has become a well-known indicator
of the origin and quality of Helen of Troy’s products, and Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has acquired
substantial secondary meaning in the marketplace. Moreover, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress
acquired this secondary meaning before Defendants commenced their unlawful use of Helen of
Troy’s Trade Dress in connection with the Accused Product.
31
instead.
recover at least Defendants’ profits, Helen of Troy’s actual damages, enhanced damages, costs,
and reasonable attorney fees under at least 15 U.S.C. §§ 1125(a), 1116, and 1117.
COUNT VIII
(Common Law Unfair Competition)
Helen of Troy, constitute common law unfair competition, at least by palming off/passing off of
Defendants’ goods, by simulating Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress in an intentional and calculated
manner that is likely to cause consumer confusion as to origin and/or sponsorship/affiliation of the
Accused Product, at least by creating the false and misleading impression that the Accused Product
is manufactured by, authorized by, or otherwise associated with Helen of Troy. Defendants’
tortious activities have interfered with Helen of Troy’s ability to conduct its business.
of Troy’s Trade Dress includes unique, distinctive, and non-functional designs and is inherently
distinctive. Helen of Troy has extensively and continuously promoted and used Helen of Troy’s
Trade Dress for years in the United States and Texas. Through that extensive and continuous use,
32
Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has become a well-known indicator of the origin and quality of Helen
of Troy’s products, and Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has acquired substantial secondary meaning
in the marketplace. Moreover, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress acquired this secondary meaning
before Defendants commenced their unlawful use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress in connection
with the Accused Product.
96. On information and belief, Defendants’ use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has
caused and, unless enjoined, will continue to cause substantial and irreparable injury to Helen of
Troy for which Helen of Troy has no adequate remedy at law, including at least substantial and
irreparable injury to the goodwill and reputation for quality associated with Helen of Troy’s Trade
Dress, with Helen of Troy, and Helen of Troy’s products. Additionally, Defendants’ use of Helen
of Troy’s Trade Dress has caused injury to Helen of Troy in the form of lost sales because some
customers that would have bought Helen of Troy’s OXO Avocado Slicer have bought and will buy
Defendants’ Accused Product instead.
COUNT IX
(Unjust Enrichment)
33
Helen of Troy, constitute unjust enrichment, at least because Defendants have wrongfully obtained
benefits at Helen of Troy’s expense. Defendants have also, inter alia, operated with an undue
advantage.
101. Helen of Troy created the products covered by Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress through
extensive time, labor, effort, skill, and money. Defendants have wrongfully used and is wrongfully
using Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress in competition with Helen of Troy, and has gained and is gaining
a wrongful benefit by undue advantage through such use. Defendants have not been burdened
with the expenses incurred by Helen of Troy, yet Defendants are obtaining the resulting benefits
for its own business and products.
extensively and continuously promoted and used its Trade Dress for years in the United States and
Texas. Through that extensive and continuous use, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has become a
well-known indicator of the origin and quality of Helen of Troy’s products, and Helen of Troy’s
Trade Dress has acquired substantial secondary meaning in the marketplace. Moreover, Helen of
Troy’s Trade Dress acquired this secondary meaning before Defendants commenced their unlawful
use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress and colorable imitations thereof in connection with the Accused
Product.
will continue to cause substantial and irreparable commercial injury to Helen of Troy for which
Helen of Troy has no adequate remedy at law, including at least substantial and irreparable injury
34
to the goodwill and reputation for quality associated with Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress with Helen
of Troy and Helen of Troy’s products. Helen of Troy accumulated this goodwill and reputation
through extensive time, labor, effort, skill, and investment. Defendants have wrongfully obtained
and are wrongfully obtaining a benefit at Helen of Troy’s expense by taking undue advantage and
free-riding on Helen of Troy’s efforts and investments, and enjoying the benefits of Helen of Troy’s
hard-earned goodwill and reputation. Additionally, Defendants’ use of Helen of Troy’s Trade
Dress has unjustly taken sales from Helen of Troy because some customers that would have bought
Helen of Troy’s OXO Avocado Slicer have bought Defendants’ Accused Product instead.
104. On information and belief, Defendants’ unjust enrichment at Helen of Troy’s
expense has been intentional, willful, and malicious. Defendants’ bad faith is evidenced at least
by the similarity of the Accused Product to Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress, as demonstrated in, for
example, Illustration 5 above, and by Defendants’ continuing disregard for Helen of Troy’s rights.
recover at least Defendants’ profits.
COUNT X
(Common Law Misappropriation)
Helen of Troy, constitute common law misappropriation.
108. Helen of Troy created the OXO Avocado Slicer product covered by Helen of Troy’s
Trade Dress through extensive time, labor, effort, skill, and money. Defendants’ have wrongfully
used Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress, including through counterfeits, reproductions, copies, and/or
colorable imitations thereof, in competition with Helen of Troy, and gained a special advantage
35
because Defendants were not burdened with the expenses incurred by Helen of Troy. Defendants
have commercially damaged Helen of Troy, at least by causing consumer confusion as to origin
and/or sponsorship/affiliation of the Accused Product by creating the false and misleading
impression that the Accused Product is manufactured by, authorized by, or otherwise associated
with Helen of Troy, and by taking away sales that Helen of Troy would have made.
extensively and continuously promoted and used Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress for years in the
United States and Texas. Through that extensive and continuous use, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress
has become a well-known indicator of the origin and quality of Helen of Troy’s OXO Avocado
Slicer product. Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress has also acquired substantial secondary meaning in
the marketplace. Moreover, Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress acquired this secondary meaning before
Defendants commenced their unlawful use of Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress in connection with the
Accused Product.
reproductions, copies, and/or colorable imitations thereof, has caused and, unless enjoined, will
continue to cause substantial and irreparable commercial injury to Helen of Troy for which Helen
of Troy has no adequate remedy at law, including at least substantial and irreparable injury to the
goodwill and reputation for quality associated with Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress with Helen of
Troy and Helen of Troy’s products. Moreover, as a result of their misappropriation, Defendants
have profited and, unless such conduct is enjoined by this Court, will continue to profit by
misappropriating the time, effort, and money that Helen of Troy invested in establishing the
36
reputation and goodwill associated with Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress with Helen of Troy and Helen
of Troy’s products.
111. On information and belief, Defendants’ misappropriation of Helen of Troy’s Trade
Dress, including through counterfeits, reproductions, copies, and/or colorable imitations thereof,
has been intentional, willful, and malicious. Defendants’ bad faith is evidenced at least by the
similarity of the Accused Product to Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress, as demonstrated in, for example
Illustration 5 above, and by Defendants’ continuing disregard for Helen of Troy’s rights.
JURY DEMAND
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Plaintiff demands a jury trial.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Helen of Troy prays for judgment and seeks relief against Defendants as
follows:
(a) Judgment that Defendants have (i) infringed the ʼ799 Patent in violation of § 271
of Title 35 in the United States Code; (ii) infringed the ʼ488 Patent in violation of
§ 271 of Title 35 in the United States Code; (iii) infringed Helen of Troy’s Trade
Dress in violation of § 1125(a) of Title 15 in the United States Code; (iv) violated
Helen of Troy’s common law rights in its Trade Dress; (v) diluted Helen of Troy’s
Trade Dress in violation of § 1125(c) of Title 15 of the United States Code; (vi)
diluted Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress in violation of Tex. Bus. & Com. Code §
16.103; (vii) engaged in unfair competition in violation of § 1125(a) of Title 15 in
the United States Code; (viii) engaged in common law unfair competition; (ix) has
37
been unjustly enriched at Helen of Troy’s expense; and (x) engaged in common law
misappropriation;
(b) Judgment that these wrongful activities by Defendants were willful;
(c) A permanent injunction against Defendants, and each of their agents, employees,
servants, attorneys, successors and assigns, and all others in privity or acting in
concert with any of them, from committing further infringement of Helen of Troy’s
Trade Dress, further infringement of the ʼ799 and ʼ488 Patents, further acts of unfair
competition, and further acts of unjust enrichment, including enjoining Defendants
at least from selling, offering to sell, distributing, importing, or advertising the
Accused Product (or any other products that use a copy, reproduction, or colorable
imitation of the ʼ799 and ʼ488 Patents or Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress), pursuant to
at least 15 U.S.C. § 1116, 35 U.S.C. § 283, and Tex. Bus. Com. Code § 16.104;
(d) An Order that Defendants pay Helen of Troy for all profits and damages resulting
from Defendants’ wrongful activities;
(e) An Order barring importation of the Accused Product and/or colorable imitations
thereof into the United States, and barring entry of the Accused Product and/or
colorable imitations thereof into any customhouse of the United States, pursuant to
at least 15 U.S.C. § 1125(b);
(f) An award of Defendants’ profits, Helen of Troy’s actual damages, enhanced
damages, exemplary damages, costs, prejudgment and post judgment interest, and
reasonable attorney fees pursuant to at least 15 U.S.C. §§ 1125(a), 1116, and 1117,
common law, and Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 16.104;
38
(g) An accounting and award of all recoverable damages sustained by Helen of Troy
as the result of the acts of patent infringement by Defendant, but not less than a
reasonable royalty under 35 U.S.C. § 284;
(h) An award of enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;
(i) An award of attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285, or as otherwise
permitted by law;
(j) A determination of an ongoing royalty rate for future infringement of the Asserted
Patents in the event that Defendants are not enjoined from continuing to use the
Asserted Patents; and
(k) For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
39
Dated May 5, 2021 AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP
/s/ Daniel L. Moffett

DANIEL L. MOFFETT
State Bar No. 24051068
dmoffett@akingump.com
GEORGE A. L. ROSBROOK
arosbrook@akingump.com
112 East Pecan Street, Suite 1010
San Antonio, Texas 78205-3732
Telephone: (210) 281-7000
Fax: (210) 224-2035
THOMAS W. LANDERS, IV
Admission to District Pending
twlanders@akingump.com
HANNAH D. PRICE
Admission to District Pending
hprice@akingump.com
1111 Louisiana Street, 44th Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
Telephone: (713) 220-5800
Fax: (713) 236-0822
ATTORNEYS FOR HELEN OF TROY

LIMITED
40
Case 6:21-cv-00468 Document 1-1 Filed 05/05/21 Page 1 of 13
EXHIBIT
1
USOO8726799B2
(12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 8,726,799 B2

Pr0mmel et al. (45) Date of Patent: May 20, 2014
(54) AVOCADO PITTING DEVICE D394.372 S * 5/1998 Chang ............................ D7/693

7,055,247 B2 6/2006 Kaposi et al.
7,080,454 B2 7/2006 Holcomb et al.
(75) Inventors: E.Ely NY (S), 7,086,155 B2 * 8/2006 Chan et al. ...................... 30,114
oatinner, tooklyn, (US); 7,114.258 B2 * 10/2006 Miller ............ . . 30.113.2
Kevin O'Leary, Brooklyn, NY (US) 7,421,786 B2 * 9/2008 Dorion et al. ................... 30,114
D682,632 S * 5/2013 Krus .............................. D7/693
(73) Assignee: Helen of Troy Limited, Belleville, St. 2008/0047149 A1 2/2008 Webb
Michael (BB) 2009,0249965 A1 10, 2009 Hauser
- OTHER PUBLICATIONS
(*) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this
patent is extended or adjusted under 35 Internet web page http://www.amazon.com/Progressive-Interna
U.S.C. 154(b) by 139 days. tional-GT-3654-Avocado-Slicer/dp/B0000DD . . . printed on Aug.
23, 2011.
(21) Appl. No.: 13/215,807 Internet web page http://www.chefn.com/Product.aspx?id=54
printed on Aug. 23, 2011.
(22) Filed: Aug. 23, 2011 Internet web page http://www.foodnetworkstore.com/p-472138
Avocado-Slicer-and-Pitter.aspx printed on Aug. 23, 2011.
(65) Prior Publication Data Internet web page http://www.amazon.com/Norpro-Stainless-Steel
Avocado-Slicer/dp/B000SSX28G printed on Aug. 23, 2011.
US 2013/OO47865A1 Feb. 28, 2013 Internet web page http://www.amazon.com/Tovolo-90/3268
STANDZ-Avocado-Slicer/dp/B0036DD9RO printed on Aug. 23,
(51) Int. Cl. 2011.
A47. 23/00 (2006.01) Internet web page http://www.chefsresource.com/amco-guacamole
A23N 7/08 (2006.01) masher.html printed on Aug. 23, 2011.
B26B 3/00 (2006.01) Internet web page http://www.walmart.com/ip/Pyrex-Avocado
(52) U.S. Cl Slicer/150650 13 printed on Aug. 23, 2011.
USPC .................................. 99/538; 99/542:30/303 (Continued)
(58) Field of Classification Search
USPC .............. 99/542, 551,552, 547:30/114,302, Primary Examiner — Dana Ross
30/303,316, 113.1-113.3; 83/856, 857, Assistant Examiner — Renee L Miller
83/569 (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Rankin, Hill & Clark LLP
See application file for complete search history.
(57) ABSTRACT
(56) References Cited
An avocado pitting device comprises a housing having an
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS inner Surface defining a recess. The recess is configured to
receive a pit of an avocado. An engagement member projects
1,629,131 A 5, 1927 Sullivan inwardly from the housing inner Surface. The engagement
2,505,917 A * 5/1950 Schumacher ................ 30, 113.3 member is configured to engage the pit and retain the pit
4,197,611 A 4, 1980 Bell et al.
4,629,629 A * 12/1986 David ........................... 426,482 within the recess such that the pit is removable with the
5,115,565 A * 5/1992 Narlocket al. .. 30,123.6 housing from the avocado.
5,557,998 A * 9/1996 Schwartz et al. ... 83,875
5,613,431 A * 3/1997 Tateno ............................ 99.541 19 Claims, 5 Drawing Sheets
US 8,726,799 B2
Page 2
(56) References Cited Internet web page http://www.shopinthekitchen.com/store/product?

10484/TRUDEAU%26%230153%3b-AV . . . printed on Aug. 23,
OTHER PUBLICATIONS 2011.
Internet web page http://www.Sears.com/jokari-healthy-steps-avo International Search Report filed in PCT/US2012/047946.
cado-pro?p-SPM3443664701P printed on Aug. 23, 2011. International Search Report mailed Oct. 10, 2012, filed in PCT/
US2012/047946.
Internet web page http://www.Zylissusa.com/cgi-bin/v1/index.
cgi?main+987654323&sub1=539000013C . . . printed on Aug. 23,
2011. * cited by examiner
U.S. Patent May 20, 2014 Sheet 1 of 5 US 8,726,799 B2





US 8,726,799 B2
1. 2
AVOCADO PITTING DEVICE FIG. 4 is a bottom view of the avocado pitting device of
FIG. 3.
BACKGROUND FIG. 5 is a side view of the avocado pitting device of FIG.
3.
The preparation of an avocado for consumption typically 5 FIG. 6 is an end view of the avocado pitting device of FIG.
begins with cutting the avocado substantially in half which 3 rotated 90° clockwise.
leaves the pit exposed. The pit typically remains attached to FIGS. 7 and 8 schematically depict the avocado pitting
one of the separated avocado halves. The avocado pit is device of FIG. 3 cutting an avocado in half.
removed. Next, the skin is removed and the fruit is then sliced FIGS. 9-11 schematically depict the avocado pitting device
for preparation and/or consumption. A sharp knife can be 10 of FIG.3 removing a pit from the avocado.
used to perform these tasks. FIG. 12 schematically depicts the avocado pitting device of
Another device currently used in avocado preparation FIG.3 removing the fruit from the avocado skin and slicing
includes a handle with lasso-like blade at one end that carves the fruit.
the pit from the fruit and a fan-like slicer attached to the other 15 DETAILED DESCRIPTION
end of the handle. The slicer includes spaced apart blades for
longitudinally slicing the fruit while also removing the fruit
from the skin. This device is bulky. The lasso-like blade does It should, of course, be understood that the description and
not accommodate pits of different sizes and shapes, and dur drawings herein are merely illustrative and that various modi
ing slicing, avocado residue, such as the fruit fiber, may fications and changes can be made in the structures disclosed
become trapped in the spaces of the slicer. Cleaning the fiber without departing from the scope of the appended claims. It
out of these spaces can be difficult since cleaning devices may will also be appreciated that the various identified compo
be too large to get in between the blades to remove the fibrous nents of the exemplary avocado pitting device disclosed
fruit. herein are merely terms of art that may vary from one manu
facturer to another and should not be deemed to limit the
BRIEF DESCRIPTION 25 present disclosure.
Referring now to the drawings, wherein like numerals refer
An avocado pitting device includes a housing having an to like parts throughout the several views, FIGS. 1 and 2
inner Surface defining a recess. The recess is configured to illustrate an avocado pitting device 100 according to one
receive a pit of an avocado. An engagement member projects exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure. The device
inwardly from the housing inner Surface. The engagement 30 100 is dimensioned to be grasped by an average-sized adult
member is configured to engage the pit and retain the pit humans hand. The avocado pitting device 100 generally
within the recess such that the pit is removable with the comprises a housing 110 having an inner surface 112 which
housing from the avocado. defines a recess 114. The recess 114 is configured to at least
Another example of an avocado pitting device includes a partially receive a pit of an avocado. As will be discussed in
handle having a protuberance configured to at least partially 35 greater detail below, at least one engagement member 120 is
receive a pit of an avocado. The handle has at least two spaced secured to and projects from the housing inner Surface 112.
apart engagement members secured to and projecting from an The engagement member 120 is configured to engage an
inner Surface of the protuberance. The engagement members exterior Surface of the avocado pit and retain the avocado pit
are configured to engage the pit and retain the pit at least at least partially within the recess 114 such that the pit is
partially within the protuberance. A blade member is con 40 removable with the housing 110 from the avocado. In other
nected to the handle. words, when the housing 110 is moved away from the avo
Yet another example of an avocado pitting device includes cado, the pit is retained by the engagement member(s) 120 at
a handle having a first end portion and an opposite second end least partially within the recess 114.
portion. A first blade member is coupled to the first end As shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, the housing 110 includes a
section of the handle. The first blade member is configured to 45 bottom wall 130 having an opening 132 in communication
cut open the avocado to expose a pit of an avocado. A second with the recess 114. The opening 132 is sized to allow an
blade member is coupled to the second end portion of the avocado pit to pass therethrough and into the recess. As
handle. The second blade member is configured to slice the depicted, the opening 132 is circular in shape; although, this
avocado. At least two spaced apart engagement members are is not required. For example, the opening 132 can be polygo
interposed between the first and second blade members. The 50 nal in shape; the only requirement being that the overall
engagement members project outwardly from the handle and dimensions of the opening allows avocado pits of varying
toward each other Such that the engagement members define sizes to pass therethrough. The housing 110 can further
a space for receiving the avocado pit. The engagement mem include a finger insert 140 in communication with the recess
bers are configured to pierce the avocado pit and retain the 114 and the opening 132. The finger insert 140 is positioned
avocado pit against the handle allowing the pit to be removed 55 at a location on the housing above the at least one engagement
from the avocado. member 120 located on the inner surface 112. This provides
access to the exterior Surface of the avocado pit and allows a
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS user to remove the avocado pit from the recess 114 with
minimal force exerted on the pit. In the depicted embodiment,
FIG. 1 is a bottom perspective view of an avocado pitting 60 the finger insert 140 is defined by an opening 142 provided on
device according to one embodiment of the present disclo a top wall 144 of the housing 110. The top wall opening 142
SUC. is in communication with the recess 114 and can be smaller in
FIG. 2 is a top perspective view of the avocado pitting size compared to the bottom wall opening 132. In the illus
device of FIG. 1. trated embodiment, and similar to the bottom wall opening
FIG. 3 is a top perspective view of an avocado pitting 65 132, the top wall opening is circular in shape and has a
device according to another embodiment of the present dis diameter less than a diameter of the bottom wall opening.
closure. However, alternative shapes and sizes for the top wall opening
US 8,726,799 B2
3 4
142, and, in turn, the finger insert 140 are contemplated. In the The avocado pitting device 100 can include a separate
illustrated embodiment, the top wall opening 142 is coaxial gripping member 160 which is secured to and substantially
with the bottom wall opening 132 which allows a user to surrounds or encloses the housing 110. For example, the
firmly hold the pitting device 100 as the avocado pit is gripping member 160 can be connected to the housing 110 by
removed via the finger insert 140. It should also be appreci overmolding, ultrasonic welding, by an adhesive, or by other
ated that with a top wall opening 142, the pitting device 100 known manners for attachment. The gripping member 160 is
can be a dual-sided pitting device allowing a user to engage softer and more resilient than the housing 110 and, therefore,
the avocado pit via insertion of the pit through the bottom wall is configured to allow a user to easily handle the pitting device
opening 132 or through the top wall opening 142. 100. The gripping member includes a first aperture 162
As indicated previously, the pitting device 100 includes the 10 aligned with the top wall opening 142 Such that the aperture at
at least one engagement member 120 configured to engage least partially defines the finger insert 140 and is in commu
the avocado pit and retain the pit at least partially within the nication with the recess 114. The gripping member also
recess 114 of the housing 110. For example, and according to includes a second aperture 164 aligned with the bottom wall
opening 132. In the illustrated embodiment, the gripping
one aspect, the engagement member 120 can be a barb 15 member 160 is substantially dome-shaped; although, this is
adapted to penetrate the exterior surface of the avocado pit not required. Additionally, the inner surface 112 of the hous
and attach the pit to the housing 110. In the depicted embodi ing 110, and thus the recess 114, can be substantially dome
ment, the pitting device 100 includes at least two engagement shaped which allows that housing to accommodate avocado
members 120 angularly spaced on the housing inner Surface pits of varying dimensions. As illustrated, the inner Surface
112 relative to a generally central axis CA defined by the 112 defines a surface of revolution with respect to the central
recess 114. More particularly, the pitting device 100 includes axis CA; however, this is not required. Alternatively, the inner
at least three engagement members 120 which are equally surface 112 can have a profile, taken parallel with the central
angularly spaced from one another on the inner Surface 112 axis CA, which is polygonal in configuration.
relative to the central axis CA of the recess 114 and are It should be appreciated that the components of the avo
aligned substantially parallel to the central axis. Thus, it 25 cado pitting device 100 (e.g. the housing 110, engagement
should be appreciated that the present disclosure contem members 120 and gripping member 160) can be manufac
plates a pitting device 100 having a plurality of engagement tured from FDA-approved food contact materials. For
members to dig into or pierce the exterior surface of the example, the housing 110 and engagement members 120 can
avocado pit and retain the pit to the pitting device 100. How be formed from stainless Steel, hardened plastic, ceramic or
ever, it should also be appreciated that the number or size of 30 the like. The gripping member, which as indicated above is
engagement members 112 projecting into the recess 114 more resilient than the housing 110, can be formed from
should not restrict access to the recess 114. In other words, the plastic and can have a surface finish adapted for improved
number of engagement members 120 is such that the avocado traction, particularly in wet food preparation environments.
pit easily enters the recess 114 while simultaneously being In use, the avocado is first cut substantially in half with a
engaged by the engagement members 120. 35 knife or other sharp implement. The pit typically remains
As best depicted in FIG. 1, the engagement members 120 attached to one of the separated avocado halves. The pitting
are positioned adjacent the bottom wall opening 132 and device 100 is positioned over the avocado pit such that the
project toward a central axis defined by the opening, which is bottom wall opening 132 is aligned with the pit. The pitting
coaxial with the central axis CA. Each engagement member device 100 is then pressed onto the pit, which, in turn, forces
includes a pointed end 122 for piercing the avocado pit as the 40 the pit through the opening 132 and at least partially into the
pit extends through the bottom wall opening 132 and enters recess 114. As the pit enters the recess 114, the engagement
the recess 114. Preferably, the pointed ends 122 of the members 120, which are at least partially located in the recess
engagement members do not extend downward below the 114, engage the avocado pit by penetrating the exterior Sur
bottom wall 130. The engagement members can have con face of the pit. Once engaged, the engagement members 120
forming shapes and sizes, or different shapes and sizes. In the 45 retain the pit within the recess 114 such that the pit is removed
illustrated embodiment, the engagement members 120 have with the pitting device 100 without mangling the fruit during
similar Substantially triangular shapes, each engagement removal. The skin is then removed and the fruit is then sliced
member including a bottom surface 150, a side surface 152 for preparation and/or consumption.
and a top surface 154. The side surface 152 is secured to or in With reference now to FIGS. 3-6, an avocado pitting device
contact with the inner surface 112 of the housing 110. The top 50 200 according to another exemplary embodiment comprises a
surface 154 slopes from the side surface 152 toward an end of handle 202 having a housing or protuberance 210 connected
the bottom surface 150, and an uppermost edge of each thereto and configured to at least partially receive a pit of an
engagement member 120 is spaced from the top wall opening avocado. The handle 202 has at least two spaced apart engage
142. The bottom surface 150 is substantially contiguous with ment members 220 secured to and projecting from an inner
the bottom wall 130 of the housing 110. With this arrange 55 surface 212 of the protuberance 210. Similar to the device
ment, the engagement members 120 project toward each 100, the engagement members 220 are configured to engage
other such that the engagement members 120 together define the avocado pit and retain the pit at least partially within the
a space for receiving the avocado pit. According to one aspect protuberance 210. A resilient gripping member 260 is secured
of the present disclosure, the engagement members 120 are to and Substantially Surrounds or encloses a portion of the
integrally formed with the housing 110; although, this is not 60 handle 202. The gripping member 260 allows a user to easily
required. It should also be appreciated that the shape or profile handle the pitting device 200. As will be discussed below, a
of the engagement members 120 is not limited to the depicted blade member is connected to the handle 202 and configured
triangular shape and that alternative shapes, sizes and con to cut and/or slice the avocado.
figurations are contemplated, the only requirement being that The handle 202 includes a bottom wall 230 having an
the shape of the engagement members allows for piercing of 65 opening 232 in communication with an interior or recess 214
the avocado pit and retention of the pit to the pitting device defined by the protuberance 210. The opening 232 is sized
1OO. and shaped to allow avocado pits of varying sizes to pass
US 8,726,799 B2
5 6
therethrough and into the recess 214. As depicted, the open the skin from the avocado. The sharpened edge 320 and the
ing 232 is circular in shape; although, this is not required. As overall shape of the frame 300 facilitate positioning and
shown, the recess 214 is substantially dome-shaped which movement of the frame 300 between the peel, or skin, and the
allows for at least partial accommodation of avocado pits of fruit of the avocado, thus cutting the fibrous matter that holds
varying sizes. The handle 202 further includes a finger insert 5 the peel to the fruit.
240 in communication with the recess 214. This provides The slicing elements 302 are generally evenly spaced apart
access to the exterior Surface of the avocado pit retained from one another such that each slicing element 302 is sub
within the protuberance 210 and allows a user to remove the stantially parallel to an adjacent slicing element 302. Even
avocado pit from the device 200 with minimal force exerted spacing of the slicing elements prevents build up of fruit
on the pit. In the depicted embodiment, the finger insert 240 is 10
residue and fiber at the proximal end 304 of the fan blade 284
defined by an opening 242 provided on a top wall 244 of the and improves the ability to fully clean the fan blade. In the
handle 202. The opening 142 is coaxial with the bottom wall illustrated embodiment, the slicing elements 302 are formed
opening 232 which allows a user to firmly hold the handle 202
and remove the avocado pit via the finger insert 240 with a by narrow ribbons that stretch across the frame 300. In the
single hand. 15 depicted embodiment, six slicing elements 302 are shown,
As indicated previously, the pitting device 200 can include although in other embodiments fewer or more slicing ele
at least two engagement members 220 circumferentially ments may be used. The slicing elements 302 can also be
spaced on the inner Surface 212. Again, as indicated above, formed from a continuous wire which is strung back and forth
more or less than two engagement members 220 are contem across the frame 300, between the proximal end 304 and the
plated. More particularly, the pitting device 200 includes distal end 306. Alternatively, the slicing elements 302 can be
three engagement members 220 which are circumferentially formed by a series of individual wires.
spaced equally from one another on the inner Surface 212. As Similar to pitting device 100, the components of the avo
best depicted in FIG. 4, the engagement members 220 are cado pitting device 200 (e.g. the handle 202, housing 210,
positioned adjacent the bottom wall opening 232 and project engagement members 220, gripping member 260, and first
toward a central axis defined by the opening 232. Similar to 25 and second blade members 280.282) can be manufactured
engagement members 120 of the pitting device 100, each from FDA-approved food contact materials. For example, the
engagement member 220 can be substantially triangular handle 202, engagement members 220 and first and second
shaped having a bottom surface 250 that is substantially con blade members 280,282 can be formed from stainless steel,
tiguous with the bottom wall 230 of the handle 202; although, hardened plastic, ceramic or the like. The gripping member
this is not required. 30
260 can be formed form a resilient plastic and can have a
With particular reference to FIGS. 3 and 4, the handle 202 surface finish adapted for wet food preparation environments.
has a first end portion 270 and an opposite second end portion The frame 46 can be formed from stainless steel, hardened
272, the protuberance 210 together with the engagement plastic or the like. As shown, the components of the pitting
members 220 being interposed between the first and second device 200 are integrally formed to define a unitary avocado
end portions. At least one of the first and second end portions 35
270,272 has a blade member connected thereto. In the processing tool. However, it should be appreciated that the
depicted exemplary embodiment, the blade member includes first and second blade members 280.282 can be separate
a first blade member or knife 280 and a second blade member members attached to the respective first and second end por
or fan blade 282. The knife 280 is connected to and extends tions 270,272 of the handle 202.
from the first end portion 270 of the handle 202. The knife is 40 In use, and with reference to FIGS. 7-12, the avocado A is
generally triangular in shape and includes a Substantially first cut substantially in half with the first blade member 280.
planar body 290 having a first, relatively straight edge 292 The pit P typically remains attached to one of the separated
and a second curved edge 294, the first and second edges avocado halves H. The pitting device 200 is positioned over
converging to a pointed tip portion 296. The first edge 292 is the avocado pit P such that the bottom wall opening 232 of the
configured to cut open the avocado to expose the pit, and in 45 protuberance 210 is aligned with the pit P. The pitting device
the depicted embodiment, the first edge 292 is at least par 200 is then pressed onto the pit, which, in turn, forces the pit
tially serrated to provide a cutting surface suitable for break through the opening 232 and at least partially into the recess
ing the skin of the avocado. The second edge 294 can be 214. As the pit enters the recess 214, the engagement mem
beveled or tapered to create an additional means for cutting bers 220 engage the avocado pit P by penetrating the exterior
for the avocado; although, this is not required. For example, 50 Surface of the pit. Once engaged, the engagement members
the second edge 294 can be a dull edge of the knife 280. The 220 retain the pit against the handle 202 within the recess 214
tip portion 296 can be slightly curved to reduce the risk of such that the pit is removed with the pitting device 200 with
cutting through the avocado skin while slicing the fruit out mangling the fruit during removal. The skin is then
therein. removed and the fruit is then sliced for preparation and/or
The fan blade 284 is connected to and extends from the 55 consumption. To slice the avocado A, the sharpened edge 320
second end portion 272 of the handle 202. In the depicted of the second blade member 384 is positioned between the
embodiment, the fan blade 284 is configured to slice the avocado skin Sand the fruit F. The second blade member 284
avocado in Substantially equal dimensions. Particularly, the is pulled in an arc along the skin S such that the fruit F of the
fan blade 284 includes a frame 300 and slicing elements 302 avocado A is sliced by the slicing elements 302 and the skin is
extending from a proximal end 304 of the frame 300 to a distal 60 cut away from the fruit by the sharpened edge 320 of the
end 306 of the frame. The frame 300 of the fan blade 284 is frame 300. The sliced fruit is pulled out of the skin by the
used to peel the skin from the avocado while the slicing slicing elements 302 and the skin falls away.
elements 302 simultaneously slice the fruit. In the illustrated It will be appreciated that various of the above-disclosed
embodiment, the frame 300 is formed by a band 310 having a and other features and functions, or alternatives thereof, may
generally oval shape such that the frame takes the form of the 65 be desirably combined into many other different systems or
avocado. At least one edge of the band 300 is beveled or applications. Also that various presently unforeseen or unan
tapered to create a sharpened edge 320 to facilitate peeling of ticipated alternatives, modifications, variations or improve
US 8,726,799 B2
7 8
ments therein may be subsequently made by those skilled in engagement members configured to engage the pit and
the art which are also intended to be encompassed by the retain the pit at least partially within the protuberance:
following claims. the handle further includes a bottom wall having a bottom
What is claimed is: wall opening in communication with the recess, and a
1. An avocado pitting device comprising: finger insert defined by an opening in communication
a housing having a Substantially dome-shaped inner Sur with the recess which allows a user to remove the avo
face defining a recess, the inner Surface extending con cado pit from the recess, the finger insert opening being
tinuously without interruption about a generally central coaxial with the bottom wall opening;
axis of the recess, the recess configured to receive a pit of a blade member connected to the handle; and
an avocado, and an engagement member projecting 10
a resilient gripping member connected to the handle, the
inwardly from the inner Surface, the engagement mem gripping member enclosing an outer Surface of the pro
ber configured to engage the pit and retain the pit within tuberance.
the recess such that the pit is removable with the housing 12. The avocado pitting device of claim 11, wherein the
from the avocado, and further including a separate grip finger insert is provided on the protuberance and the finger
ping member secured to and Substantially enclosing an 15
outer Surface of the housing and configured for grasping insert opening is sized Smaller than the opening of the bottom
by a human hand. wall.
2. The avocado pitting device of claim 1, wherein pitting 13. The avocado pitting device of claim 11, wherein the at
device includes at least two engagement members angularly least two engagement members includes a plurality of
spaced on the inner surface relative to the central axis of the engagement members positioned adjacent the bottom wall
CSS. opening Such that the at least two engagement members
3. The avocado pitting device of claim 2, wherein the pierce the avocado pit as the pit extends through the bottom
pitting device includes at least three engagement members, wall opening and enters the recess, each engagement member
the engagement members being angularly spaced from one including an end which projects toward a central axis defined
another on the inner surface relative to the central axis of the 25 by the opening.
CSS. 14. The avocado pitting device of claim 13, wherein each
4. The avocado pitting device of claim 3, wherein the engagement member is substantially triangular shaped, and
engagement members point toward the central axis of the generally aligned with a central axis of the bottom wall open
recess, the engagement members being equally angularly 1ng.
spaced and aligned substantially parallel to the central axis. 30 15. The avocado pitting device of claim 11, wherein the
5. The avocado pitting device of claim 1, wherein the handle includes a first end portion and an opposite second end
housing includes a bottom wall having a bottom wall opening portion, the first end portion including a first blade member
in communication with the recess and sized to allow an avo configured to cut open the avocado to expose the pit and the
cado pit the pass therethrough, and a finger insert in commu second end portion including a second blade member config
nication with the recess for allowing a user to remove the 35 ured to slice the avocado.
avocado pit from the recess. 16. An avocado pitting device comprising:
6. The avocado pitting device of claim 5, wherein the a handle having a first end portion and an opposite second
housing includes a top wall having a top wall opening in end portion;
communication with the recess, the top wall opening defining a first blade member coupled to the first end section of the
the finger insert and having a diameter less than a diameter of 40 handle, the first blade member configured to cut open the
the bottom wall opening. avocado to expose a pit of an avocado;
7. The avocado pitting device of claim 5, wherein the a second blade member coupled to the second end portion
engagement member includes a bottom surface Substantially of the handle, the second blade member configured to
contiguous with the housing bottom wall and projecting into slice the avocado; and
the opening. 45 at least two spaced apart engagement members interposed
8. The avocado pitting device of claim 1, wherein the between the first and second blade members, the engage
gripping member is disposed over the recess and including an ment members projecting outwardly from the handle
aperture in communication with the recess, the gripping and toward each other such that the engagement mem
member being softer and more resilient than the housing. bers define a space for receiving the avocado pit, the
9. The avocado pitting device of claim 1, further including 50 engagement members being configured to pierce the
a handle having a first end portion and an opposite second end avocado pit and retain the avocado pit against the handle
portion, at least one of the first and second end portions allowing the pit to be removed from the avocado.
including a blade member connected thereto, the housing 17. The avocado pitting device of claim 16, wherein the
being secured to the handle and interposed between the first handle defines a Substantially dome-shaped recess sized to at
and second end portions. 55 least partially receive the avocado pit, the at least two engage
10. The avocado pitting device of claim 9, wherein the ment members being positioned within the recess.
blade member includes a knife connected to and extending 18. The avocado pitting device of claim 17, wherein the
from the first end portion of the handle and configured to cut handle includes a finger insert in communication with the
open the avocado to expose the pit, and a fan blade connected recess for allowing a user to remove the avocado pit from the
to and extending from the second end portion of the handle 60 CCCSS.
and configured to slice the avocado. 19. An avocado pitting device comprising:
11. An avocado pitting device comprising: a handle having an inner Surface defining a recess config
a handle having a protuberance defining a substantially ured to at least partially receive a pit of an avocado, the
dome-shaped recess configured to at least partially handle having at least two spaced apart engagement
receive a pit of an avocado, the handlehaving at least two 65 members secured to and projecting from the inner Sur
spaced apart engagement members secured to and pro face, the engagement members configured to engage the
jecting from an inner Surface of the protuberance, the pit and retain the pit at least partially within the recess;
US 8,726,799 B2
9 10
the handle further includes a bottom wall having a bottom
wall opening in communication with the recess, and a
top wall configured to at least partially cover the recess;
and
a fingerinsert located on the top wall, the fingerinsert being 5
in communication with the recess which allows a user to
remove the avocado pit from the recess.
k k k k k
EXHIBIT
2
USOOD675488S
(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent No.: US D675.488 S

Pr0mmel et al. (45) Date of Patent: Feb. 5, 2013
(54) FRUIT PREPARATION TOOL (56) References Cited

U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
(75) Inventors: Mark Prommel, Brooklyn, NY (US); 4,383,367 A * 5/1983 Mielnicki ....................... 30,114
Todd Brunner, Brooklyn, NY (US); 5,533,442 A * 7/1996 Tateno ............................ 99.541
AY 5,613,431 A * 3/1997 Tateno ............................ 99.541
Kevin O'Leary, Brooklyn, NY (US) D488,360 S * 4/2004 Young ... D7/693
D488,361 S * 4/2004 Bertulis . D7/693
(73) Assignee: Helen of Troy Limited, St. Michael 6,796.032 B2 * 9/2004 Horng............................. 30,114
D507,726 S * 7/2005 Holcomb et al. ............. D7/693
(BB) 7,080,454 B2 * 7/2006 Holcomb et al. ............... 30,114
D528,379 S * 9/2006 Dorion et al. ... D7/693
(**) Term: 14 Years 7,421,786 B2 * 9/2008 Dorion et al. ................... 30,114
* cited by examiner
(21) Appl. No. 29/407,610
Primary Examiner — Terry Wallace
(22) Filed: Nov.30, 2011 (57) CLAM
The ornamental design for a fruit preparation tool, as shown,
(51) LOC (9) Cl. 07-04 and described.
(52) U.S. Cl. ........................................................ D7/693 DESCRIPTION
(58) Field of Classification Search ................... D7/693, FIG. 1 is a top view of the fruit preparation tool;
D7/672,368, 669, 673, 649–651; 99/537-545; FIG. 2 is a bottom view of the fruit preparation tool;
FIG. 3 is a right side view of the fruit preparation tool;
30/114, 117, 123.5, 302–305, 280, 113.1-113.3, FIG. 4 is a left side view of the fruit preparation tool;
30/279.4, 299; 241/272, 169, 168, 169.1, FIG. 5 is a front view of the fruit preparation tool;
241/273.1-273.4, 162, 164, 285.1, 285.2, FIG. 6 is a rear view of the fruit preparation tool; and,
241/100, 159, 270, 92,93, 95 FIG. 7 is a perspective view of the fruit preparation tool.
See application file for complete search history. 1 Claim, 7 Drawing Sheets
U.S. Patent Feb. 5, 2013 Sheet 1 of 7 US D675.488 S
Figure
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
U.S. Patent Feb. 5, 2013 Sheet 5 Of 7 US D675.488 S
Figure 5
Figure 6
U.S. Patent Feb. 5, 2013 Sheet 7 Of 7 US D675.488 S
Figure 7
/s/ Daniel L. Moffett


Helen of Troy Limited v. IKEA - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Helen of Troy Limited v. IKEA - 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

Helen of Troy Limited v. IKEA - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 6:21-cv-00468 Document 1 Filed 05/05/21 Page 1 of 40

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

HELEN OF TROY LIMITED, §

(collectively, “Defendants”). In support of its Complaint, Helen of Troy alleges as follows:

Grips®” and “OXO Softworks®” brands.

for sale and sells household products, including avocado slicers.

this judicial district.

NATURE OF THE ACTION

Code § 16 et seq., and common law.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

common nucleus of operative facts.

and substantial justice.

LÄTTSKALAD through www.ikea.com/us/en. Moreover, IKEA North America Services, LLC’s

play and substantial justice.

as “IKEA.” https://www.ikea.com/us/en/customer-service/terms-conditions/ (“The Services are

located in El Paso, Texas.

nucleus of operative facts.

13. Both Defendants may be served by serving their registered agent:

Helen of Troy’s Avocado-Slicing Technology and OXO Product

through online marketplaces, such as OXO.com, Amazon.com, Walmart.com, BakeDeco.com,

WebstaurantStore.com, and Boxed.com.

them out for serving.” https://www.oxo.com/3-in-1-avocado-slicer-901.html (accessed April 8,

Helen of Troy’s ʼ799 Patent

Helen of Troy’s ʼ488 Patent

are shown below in Illustration 3:

24. As shown by Illustration 1 and Illustration 3, and further by Exhibit 2, Helen of

Helen of Troy’s Trade Dress

features are arbitrary and non-functional.

throughout the United States.

and of the high quality associated with Helen of Troy.

“[t]he design is simply ingenious.” https://www.businessinsider.com/oxo-avocado-slicer-pitter-

pick” for “Best Avocado Slicers” by technobuffalo. https://www.technobuffalo.com/best-

has “16,000+ 5-Star Amazon Reviews”); https://www.foodandwine.com/cooking-techniques/best-

avocado-tool-expert-test (published Dec. 16, 2019; accessed April 13, 2021);

https://www.cranberryislandkitchen.com/best-avocado-slicer-and-pitter/ (updated April 5, 2021;

accessed April 13, 2021); https://www.today.com/food/oxo-amazon-avocado-tool-review-t127247

Defendants’ Wrongful Conduct

OXO Avocado Slicer product.

https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/laettskalad-avocado-slicer-green-50464610/ (accessed April 8,

Slicer/dp/B085HZNPFL (accessed April 9, 2021).

32. According to Ikea.com, the LÄTTSKALAD is designed to “divide avocados,

IKEA stores operated by IKEA US Retail LLC in this judicial district.

LÄTTSKALAD shipped to this judicial district. Furthermore, www.ikea.com/us/en is highly

www.amazon.com, which is also an interactive website.

expense, and engage in misappropriation.

40. Claim 16 recites:

An avocado pitting device comprising:

https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/laettskalad-avocado-slicer-green-50464610/ (accessed April 8,

LÄTTSKALAD being used to “pit” an avocado:

https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/laettskalad-avocado-slicer-green-50464610/ (accessed April 8,

avocados” before removing the seed. https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/laettskalad-avocado-slicer-

green-50464610/ (accessed April 8, 2021).

(accessed April 9, 2021) (images rotated 180 degrees for clarity).

shows the fives blades being used to slice the avocado:

(accessed April 9, 2021) (image rotated 180 degrees for clarity).

as shown on the back of the packaging from Amazon.com:

(accessed April 9, 2021) (image rotated 180 degrees for clarity).

remove the avocado pit as claimed in the ʼ799 Patent: