Fortune Brands Inc. Subsidiary, Master Lock Company, Is Sued For Patent Infringement by Lawman Armor Corporation.

Business Editors

PHILADELPHIA--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 6, 2002

Lawman Armor Corporation ("Lawman") filed a lawsuit against Master Lock Company, a subsidiary of Fortune Brands, Inc., ("Defendant") on August 5, 2002, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleging infringement of its US Patent D357,621 entitled, "Sliding Hook Portion of a Vehicle Steering Wheel Lock Assembly. The Civil Action - Case Docket number is 02-6605.

In a prior patent lawsuit, Lawman prevailed in its Preliminary Injunction Motion against Winner International, LLC (makers of "The Club" steering wheel lock) and its "The Club - Auto Brake Lock." In summary, on January 22, 2002, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ruled that Winner, together with its agents, and those acting on its behalf, are "HEREBY PRELIMINARILY ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED" from selling, offering for sale, licensing, using, or otherwise distributing in the United States any Winner "Auto Brake Lock" and any other Winner products that compete directly against Lawman's "Unbrakeable AutoLock" brake/clutch lock and infringe claims of Lawman's patent.

Lawman markets the #1 rated "Unbreakable AutoLock" -- an automotive anti-theft device, and other security patented products for your car, home, and boat. For more product information, please visit "UNBREAKABLE.com".

If you have questions concerning the lawsuit, please direct them to Scott Fields, attorney of the firm Obermayer, Rebmann, Maxwell & Hippel, LLP. Mr. Fields phone number is 215-665-3214.

A copy of the lawsuit is attached.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DOCKET NO. 02-6605

LAWMAN ARMOR CORPORATION, Plaintiff,

v.

MASTER LOCK COMPANY, Defendant.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-6605

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, Lawman Armor Corporation, a Pennsylvania Corporation, ("Lawman" or "Plaintiff") brings this action against Defendant, Master Lock Company ("Master Lock" or "Defendant") for patent infringement, and alleges as follows:

THE PARTIES

1. Plaintiff is a business with a mailing address of 1434 Sugartown Road, Berwyn, Pennsylvania 19312.

2. Upon information and belief, Master Lock is a Delaware Corporation with a principal business address at 2600 North 32nd Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53210. Master Lock does business in this district and elsewhere. Master Lock is a related subsidiary of Fortune Brands Inc., a publicly traded company with a NYSE ticker symbol "FO".

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3. The cause of action in this case arises under the United States Patent Laws, 35 U.S.C. 101 et -- seq.

4. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331.

5. Venue in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and 1400. Master Lock has sold the device which is the subject of this action in this District and elsewhere.

PATENT INFRINGEMENT

6. In about April 1995, Paul Yang ("Yang"), was granted a United States Patent with the Number D357,621 for his invention entitled, "sliding hook portion of a vehicle steering wheel lock assembly ("621").

7. In about November 1998, at the Automotive Parts Accessories Association ("APAA") Show held in Las Vegas Nevada, Yang and Paul Moreton, Yang's business associate ("Moreton"), met with Master Lock representatives to discuss licensing opportunities for the `621 patent and manufacturing the `621 product for Master Lock.

8. In about January 1999, Master Lock representatives traveled to Taiwan, where Yang and Moreton reside, and met with them to negotiate an agreement for the `621 patent and manufacturing the `621 product for Master Lock.

9. In about March 1999, Master Lock representatives requested that Yang send `621 product samples to them. In good faith, Yang complied with their request and sent to Master Lock the `621 product samples.

10. In about August 1999, Yang and Moreton were invited by Master Lock representatives to a meeting at their Milwaukee headquarters to continue negotiating an agreement for the `621 patent and manufacturing the `621 product for Master Lock.

11. In about November 1999, at the APAA Show, the Master Lock representatives informed Yang and Moreton that there was no progress made on an agreement. Subsequently, Master Lock discontinued negotiations with Yang.

12. In about November 2000, at the APAA Show, Moreton visited the Master Lock booth. Moreton saw that Master Lock had displayed and offered for sale a new type of steering wheel security lock product that feature an ornamental design for a two-pronged sliding hook which engages the rim of the vehicle steering wheel, as depicted in the Yang `621 patent and in the product samples that were sent to Master Lock.

13. Moreton stated to the Master Lock representative that their new steering wheel security lock product looked like a copy of the `621 product samples that Yang sent to Master Lock. The Master Lock representative responded by stating that his company's legal team had spent a great deal of time and effort to get as close as possible to Yang `621 design without infringing the `621 patent.

14. In July 2002, LAWMAN secured the exclusive license (including the right to sue for past infringements) for the United States Design Patent No. D357,621 (the "621 Patent") pertaining to the field of automobile steering wheel anti-theft devices. A copy of the `621 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit "A."

15. The `621 Patent is directed to the sliding hook portion of a vehicle steering wheel locking device, and features an ornamental design for a two-pronged sliding hook which engages the rim of the vehicle steering wheel.

16. Master Lock makes, offers for sale and sells vehicle steering wheel locking devices under the designation "Steering Wheel Lock" with model number 252DAT, and on belief other infringing models (the "Infringing Devices").

17. Defendant's Infringing Devices feature an ornamental design for a two-pronged sliding hook which engages the rim of the vehicle steering wheel.

18. Defendant without authority offers to sell, and sells the Infringing Devices which employ Plaintiff's patented invention within the United States and imports such devices which employ Plaintiff's patented invention into the United States, thereby infringing Plaintiff's patent.

19. Defendant's Infringing Devices apply the Plaintiff's patented design or a colorable imitation thereof to articles of manufacture for the purpose of sale, and Defendant sells and exposes to sale articles of manufacture to which such design or colorable imitation have been applied.

20. In the eyes of the ordinary observer, giving such attention as a purchaser usually gives, the Plaintiff's design as shown in the `621 patent and Defendant's design as shown in the Infringing Devices which are the subject of this action are substantially the same.

21. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant has had full knowledge of the `621 Patent, and Defendant's manufacture, offer for sale and sale of the Infringing Devices constitutes willful, deliberate infringing activity.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court:

(a) enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant for infringement of the `621 Patent,

(b) enjoin Defendant, its agents, servants, affiliates, employees and all in concert with Defendant from infringing the `621 Patent.

(c) order the infringing goods be recalled and/or gathered by Master Lock from all retail or wholesale outlets to which Master Lock has sold or delivered the goods;

(d) order the infringing goods be impounded and subsequently be destroyed;

(e) enter an order directing Defendant to deliver to Plaintiff for destruction all advertisements, circulars, brochures or other promotional or advertising items or materials for its infringing automobile steering wheel anti-theft devices;

(f) award enhanced damages to Plaintiff adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by the Defendant, together with interest and costs as fixed by the court;

(g) additionally, award damages to the Plaintiff for infringement of Plaintiff's design patent equaling the total extent of Defendant's profits;

(h) award Plaintiff attorneys' fees and costs incurred in connection with bringing this action and further declaring the case to be exception under 35 U.S.C.ss.285;

(i) award Plaintiff such other and further relief as this Court deems just and equitable.

Jury Trial Demanded

Plaintiff demands trial by Jury.

SCOTT J. FIELDS OBERMAYER REDMAN MAXWELL & HIPPEL, LLP One Penn Center - 19th Floor 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard Philadelphia, PA 19103-1895 [phone]

Attorneys for Plaintiff Lawman Armor Corporation

Date: Aug. 5, 2002