Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7 Filed 03/13/17 Page 1 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

)
MICROTECH KINVES, INC. and )
ANTHONY L MARFIONE )
)
Plaintiffs, )
) Civil Action No. 1: 17-CV-00046
)
)
v. )
)
)
)
ANTHONY F. SCULIMBRENE, )
)
Defendant, )

AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs Microtech Knives, Inc. and Anthony L. Marfione through

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This court has jurisdiction regarding this civil action removed from the Court of

Common Pleas for McKean County PA pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1441. This

Court has personal jurisdiction over the defendant by reason of 42 PA C.S.A.

Section 5322 and in particular subsection (a) (4) in that the defendant has caused

harm and tortious injury in this Commonwealth by acts outside the Commonwealth.

The exercise of jurisdiction over the defendant is in accordance with controlling

Precedent in that defendants acts with respect to a Pennsylvania based entity

were not fortuitous or incidental, but rather as described herein, were intentional and

deliberate. The defendant is also subject to personal jurisdiction in Pennsylvania

1
 Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7 Filed 03/13/17 Page 2 of 9

in that he has transacted business in this Commonwealth within the ambit of 42

PA C.S.A. Section 5322.

1. Plaintiff Microtech Knives, Inc. (Microtech) is a closely held corporation organized and

existing under the law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Microtech has its

principal place of business at 300 Chestnut Street Extension, Bradford, Pennsylvania

16701.

2. Microteh is engaged in the design, manufacturing and sale of various knives.

3. Plaintiff Anthonly L. Marfione (Marfione), the President of Microtech, is an adult who

resides in Henderson County North Carolina. Plaintiff Marfione is engaged in the

business of knife design and knife making.

4. Defendant Anthony F. Sculimbrene (Sculimbrene) is an adult individual who resides at

53 Hancock Street, Fitchurg Massachusetts 01420. Defendant Sculimbrene is engaged

in the practice of law in New Hampshire and has a regular place of business at 39 East

Pearl Street, Nashua New Hampshire 03060.

5. At the times material hereto, Defendant Sculimbrene has utilized a site on the internet

to publish articles and commentary regarding knives and other consumer goods in a

category described by Defendant as gear.

6. The site utilized by Defendant is operated under the name Everyday Commentary.

7. The Everyday Commentary website is intended to be is, in fact, available and accessible

to persons within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

2
 Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7 Filed 03/13/17 Page 3 of 9

8. Defendant Sculimbrene holds himself out as an authority, evaluator and advisor on the

subject of knives and other products to the consumers thereof, including persons within

the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

9. Defendant Sculimbrene solicits commercial sponsors for the Everyday Commentary

website from outside his state of residence.

10. The Everyday Commentary website receives commercial sponsorship revenue from

entities based outside of Defendants state of residence.

11. The Everyday Commentary website identifies and promotes commercial sponsors who

engage in commerce throughout the United States including the Commonwealth of

Pennsylvania. The names of said commercial sponsors appear on Exhibit A hereto.

12. Defendant has previously published articles and commentaries about knives produced

in Pennsylvania by Microtech and by other Pennsylvania based knife makers to include:

a. Microtech UTX-70 Review

February 12, 2016

b. Case Lockback Review

February 3, 2017 concerning a product of W. R. Case &Sons Cutlery Company, 50

Owens Way, Bradford (McKean County) Pennsylvania 16701.

c. Queen Cutlery Copperhead Review

July 26, 2014 concerning a product of Queen Cutlery Company, 507 Chestnut

Street, Titusville (Crawford County) Pennsylvania 16354.

COUNT I

3
 Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7 Filed 03/13/17 Page 4 of 9

13. On January 20, 2017 Defendant purposefully directed statements of purported fact

concerning Microtech by publishing an article in the Everyday commentary website under

the title The Story Behind the Greatest Knife of All Time. A true and correct copy of said

article with additional false and defamatory statements subsequently made by

Sculimbrene and others, as existed on January 27, 2017 at approximately 8:44 a.m.

Eastern Standard Time, is attached hereto as Exhibit (A).

14. Publication of the aforesaid article (Exhibit A) was a purposeful attack on Microtech, a

Pennsylvania corporation by the Defendant.

15. Publication of the aforesaid article by the Defendant caused false and disparaging

statements to be circulated to an audience that includes wholesale and retail buyers of

Microtech products.

16. False and disparaging statements published, made and offered by Defendant on January

20, 2017 and in subsequent comment in connection with the above described article

include:

a. That Microtech ripped off a competitor, meaning Microtech cheated or stolen

from a competitor.

b. That Microtech did real harm to the knife business meaning the knife industry.

c. That Microtech has a history of theft from other knife makers and designers.

d. That Microtech has committed theft of intellectual property protected by the U.S.

Patent and Trademark laws.

e. That Microtech has wrongfully used a knife design.

4
 Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7 Filed 03/13/17 Page 5 of 9

17. Sculibrene made the above false statements, with the intention of causing financial harm

to Microtech.

18. Sculimbrene made the above false statements in support of a competitive knife maker

namely KAI U.S.A., LTD ,an Oregon corporation with a market that includes Pennsylvania,

with the intent of causing Microtech to experience comeuppance meaning a deserved

punishment. (Exhibit A page 2 of 8).

19. Sculimbrene intentionally engaged himself in a battle against Microtech by making the

above false statements. And so I am going to buy my Natrix, not because I am all that

interested in the knife, but because I want to show support for KAI USA in their battle

against lesser craftsmen that act like thieves. (Exhibit A page 2 of 8).

20. Sculimbrene deliberately undertook an effort to influence the national market for knives

in which Plaintiff Microtech, and the above mentioned KAI U.S.A., LTD operate.

21. Defendant Sculimbrene intended to, and has in fact, caused harm and tortious injury to

Microtech, a Pennsylvania business entity, by purposefully directed acts targeted at

Plaintiff Microtech.

22. Defendant Sculimbrene intended to cause, and has in fact caused, Microtech to

experience loss of sales and damage to its goodwill and reputation.

23. Microtech has experienced and will continue to experience financial harm, loss, and

tortious injury as a direct and proximate result of Sculimbrenes false statements.

Wherefore, Microtech requests judgements in its favor and against Sculimbrene in an

amount greater than $75,000.00 to include punitive damages, and further seeks an

additional award of interests and costs as appropriate.

5
 Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7 Filed 03/13/17 Page 6 of 9

COUNT II

24. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 through 23 inclusive as set forth above.

25. On January 20, 2017 Defendant purposefully directed statements of purported fact

toward Marfione by publishing an article on the Everyday Commentary website under

the title The Story Behind the Greatest Knife of All Time. A true and correct copy of said

article with additional comments subsequently made by Sculimbrene and others as

existed on January 27, 2017 at approximately 8:44 a.m. Eastern Standard Time is

attached hereto as Exhibit (A).

26. Sculimbrene has uttered and distributed defamatory statements as to Plaintiff

Marfione. In particular, Sculimbrene has stated inter alia as to Marfione:

a. That Marfione has stolen designs and committed theft of intellectual property.

b. That Marfione is lazy and greedy.

c. That is Marfiones nature to steal.

d. That Marfione is a snake-in-the-grass meaning that he is a deceitful and

treacherous person.

e. That Marfione has been adjudicated as having infringed intellectual property

rights of others.

f. That Marfiones actions are comparable to those of a notorious convicted

murderer namely Jared Lee Loughner.

g. That Marfione declined an express invitation by Sculimbrene to comment on the

statements contained by Exhibit A.

6
 Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7 Filed 03/13/17 Page 7 of 9

h. That Sculimbrenes statements about Marfione have the imprimatur of official

action.

27. The above statements by Defendant Sculimbrene are false.

28. The above statements by Defendant Sculimbrene were made recklessly and in conscious

disregard for the harm to Plaintiffs. Defendant Sculimbrene admits in Exhibit A that he

did not need input from other sources including Plaintiffs:

Just because I dont need input from Microtech doesnt mean its anecdotal.
People mistake the need to hear from both sides as being the same as fair
reporting. I dont need to the opinion of a self-proclaimed mass murderer like
Jared Lee Loughner to know what he did was wrong. (Exhibit A page 8).

29. Defendant Sculimbrene willfully and wrongfully implied the existence of case law

supporting is statements and his superior knowledge and insight as a lawyer in making

the above statements. Sculimbrene stated:

First, as a lawyer I can review intellectual property law myself and taking
information from case law regarding intellectual property law is not anecdotal.
(Exhibit A page 4).

30. Defendant Sculimbrene willfully and wrongfully stated that knife design allegedly stolen
by Marfione could not have been proven protected by a U.S. Design Patent.

This is complicated, but generally design patents are not available to things like
knives because of the legal requirement of design distinct from function.
(Exhibit A page 1).

31. Defendant Sculimbrene intended to harm Marfione by encouraging others, through the

Everyday Commentary website, to give Marfione his comeuppance.

32. The above statements by Defendant Sculimbrene were made without privilege.

7
 Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7 Filed 03/13/17 Page 8 of 9

33. The above statements by Defendant Sculimbrene were made with a conscious disregard

for the truth thereof and the likely harm to the Plaintiffs such that punitive damages are

warranted.

34. The above statements by Defendant Sculimbrene have exposed Plaintiff Marfione to

ridicule and contempt; stated that he is dishonest; have injured him in his business and

trade of knife making and knife design; and injured his reputation.

35. The above statements by Sculimbrene were made with a malicious intent to cause harm

to the reputation of Marfione or a reckless indifference to such likely harm such that

punitive damages as warranted.

Wherefore, Marfione requests judgements in his favor and against Sculinbrene in an

amount greater than $75,000.00 to include punitive damages, and further seeks an

additional award of interests and costs as appropriate

COUNT III

Marfione and Microtech v. Sculimbrene (Equitable Relief)

36. Marfione and Microtech believe, and therefore aver that Sculimbrene has, and will

continue to defame and disparage them, unless enjoined from doing so.

Wherefore Plaintiffs seek an order requiring defendant Sculimbrene to remove the

above described defamatory and disparaging statements from the Everyday

Commentary website and other such relief as is appropriate.

Respectfully submitted, March 10, 2017

8
 Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7 Filed 03/13/17 Page 9 of 9

By s/ Daniel C Lawson
15A National Avenue
Fletcher, NC 28732
[email protected]
412 952 6975

9
Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7-1 Filed 03/13/17 Page 1 of 8
Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7-1 Filed 03/13/17 Page 2 of 8
Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7-1 Filed 03/13/17 Page 3 of 8
Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7-1 Filed 03/13/17 Page 4 of 8
Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7-1 Filed 03/13/17 Page 5 of 8
Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7-1 Filed 03/13/17 Page 6 of 8
Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7-1 Filed 03/13/17 Page 7 of 8
Case 1:17-cv-00046-BR Document 7-1 Filed 03/13/17 Page 8 of 8