TULSA, Okla. -- Dayco Products has filed a lawsuit against Dorman Products Inc. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The lawsuit alleges claims for trade dress infringement, false advertising and unfair competition based on Dorman’s sale of certain aftermarket automatic belt tensioners that are similar in appearance to corresponding Dayco products. The complaint does not allege a claim of patent infringement because the inner workings of the tensioners, despite the similarity in the housings, are generally different from those of Dayco.

The law firm of Thompson Hine LLP will represent Dayco in this matter. Thompson Hine partner Tony Handal, a patent litigator who has tried more than 180 intellectual property cases, will serve as the lead counsel.

Dayco claims it was the first company to successfully introduce a line of automatic belt tensioners for sale in the automotive aftermarket in 1997. This line of tensioners complemented Dayco’s existing line of pulleys, which had been available since 1989. The aftermarket belt tensioners involved in the lawsuit, which are available for a wide variety of automobile types and models in automotive aftermarket outlets across the country, represent years of innovative research and development by Dayco, the company says. As a result, Dayco has been awarded numerous U.S. patents relating to automatic belt tensioners and pulleys for the original equipment and aftermarket industries.

The lawsuit highlights Dayco’s concerns that Dorman’s designs may mislead consumers due to the similarity in the external appearance of corresponding Dayco tensioners. Similarities include Dayco’s signature “Rosette” and “Triple Ray” designs. The differences between the products are not apparent, because the inner workings are hidden in look-alike housings, Dayco states.

Dayco is also concerned that Dorman, which Dayco believes imports its belt tensioners from China, is using marketing materials that may create the impression that competitors like Dayco are not manufacturers, when in truth Dayco produces the vast majority of its tensioners in its own manufacturing facility in Springdale, Ark.

Dayco’s complaint also expresses concern that confusion in the marketplace regarding the source of the Dorman products may adversely affect Dayco’s reputation as a provider of superior belt tensioner products. Dayco has requested a jury trial and seeks from the court a variety of remedies, including permanent injunctive relief, seizure and destruction of infringing goods, monetary damages, punitive damages, costs and attorneys’ fees.

Representatives from Dorman declined to comment on the matter as of press time.