Cequent Trailer Prods., Inc. v. Intradin (Shanghai) Mach. Co.

Cequent Trailer Prods., Inc. v. Intradin (Shanghai) Mach. Co.

Opinion

JUDGMENT ENTRY AND OPINION INCLUDING FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS [*2]  OF LAW

JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:

The Court conducted a bench trial in this matter solely on the issue of damages. The parties presented evidence on December 1, 2006 and January 8 and 9, 2007. During the course of the trial, the Court received testimony, documentary evidence, stipulations, and physical exhibits. The Court now issues its findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. These findings of fact and conclusions of law represent the Court's conclusions after consideration of all of the evidence in light of the pertinent law, the Court's observation of the witnesses, and its evaluation of their demeanor, qualifications, and credibility.

I. Background

Plaintiff filed the complaint in this patent infringement action on November 1, 2005. [Doc. 1.] The Court has jurisdiction in this case pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 and 281 and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). Id.

Plaintiff Cequent Trailer Products, Inc. ("Plaintiff" or "Cequent") is a Delaware corporation with its principal [*3]  place of business in Wisconsin. Id. Cequent designs, manufactures, and markets trailer products and accessories. Id. Among its products, Cequent sells trailer couplers, jacks, and locks. Id.

Defendant Intradin (Shanghai) Machinery Co., Ltd. ("Defendant" or "Intradin") is a Chinese company with its principal place of business in Shanghai, China. Id. Intradin operates under the trade name "Towking" and advertises in the United States that it "manufactures the most complete line of quality towing accessories in China." [Docs. 94-10, 94-25.] Intradin sells, offers for sale, or imports its products to Ohio and solicits business in Ohio. [Doc. 15.] Intradin derives some revenue from goods sold in Ohio. Id.

This Court enjoys jurisdiction over Intradin under Ohio's long-arm statute found at Section 2307.382(A)(1) of the Ohio Revised Code: "(A) A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a person who acts directly or by an agent, as to a cause of action arising from the person's . . . [t]ransacting any business in this state". OHIO REV. C. ANN. § 2307.382(A)(1) (2006).

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.