Davison Design & Development, Inc.

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 03/30/2015. Customerconcerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard to troubleshoot them so communicationerrors are kept to a minimum. From...

the time of an initial contact, to the presentation of a client’sproduct idea, we try to maintain an open channel of communication. In his statement, Mr.[redacted] raises a concern over Davison’s use of his idea and the promptness of the services. Aswill be detailed, Davison has adhered, and continues to adhere, to its obligations ofconfidentiality. Further, all services have been provided in a professional, prompt manner andwith Mr. [redacted]’s express written approval.Mr. [redacted] first contacted Davison with his idea for a new product in February 2012. Aswith all clients, his idea was submitted pursuant to a Confidentiality Agreement. Davison hasmaintained, and continues to maintain, the confidentiality of his idea, as it does for all its clients’ideas. However, Davison can not account for similar, or the same, ideas that may be submittedby other clients, or that may be disclosed to the general public through other avenues. It is notuncommon for multiple people to conceive of the same, or similar, products independently.Because of this fact, Davison requires all clients to undergo the initial pre-development researchso that some level of knowledge may be secured as to what is in the prior art.On 04/22/2014, Mr. [redacted] entered a contract for the creation of a rendering of hisproduct idea and of presentation materials, in the form of an Executive Briefing. On 07/11/2014,he approved, in writing, the design of the rendering and completed a questionnaire about therendering, providing positive feedback. In reliance on his approval, the Executive Briefingmaterials were created. On 07/27/2014, Mr. [redacted] authorized the presentation of his productidea and completed a second questionnaire on the Executive Briefing, again providing positivefeedback. Copies of his signed documents are enclosed. (Note: the actual approved design hasbeen redacted for confidentiality purposes.)On 09/09/20 14, his product idea was presented to the designated corporation. Mr.[redacted] was provided with a status update call on 9/19/2014 and 10/28/2014. In addition, his fileindicates attempts to reach Mr. [redacted] on 12/02/20104, 12/03/2014, 12/30/2014, 01/12/2015 and01/30/2015. Mr. [redacted] was advised in a voice message Ofl 01/30/2015 that the designatedcorporation had decided to not pursue his product idea.As stated, all services have been performed with Mr. [redacted]’s express written approvaland authorization, and to his documented satisfaction. While it is unfortunate that the targetedcorporation chose not to pursue his product idea, that fact does not negate the services and doesnot provide a basis for a refund. The simple fact is; the product development process providesno guarantees of financial gain. While this is of little comfort to a client who has expendedconsiderable time, money, effort and emotion into a project, the fact that a particular project doesnot bring financial gain to the client does not invalidate the services that were provided. However,in the interest of customer satisfaction, Davison will offer two additional presentations at no costto Mr. [redacted]. If he chooses to accept this offer, he need only contact our Licensing Departmentwho will coordinate the necessary paperwork to authorize the presentations.Sincerej[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.Turning ideas into productsDavison • RIDC Park 595 Alpha Drive • Pittsburgh PA 15238 2911 • wvAv,Davison com• Tell 866.Dav son • Fax 1,800.540 5490 • International 412.S99.1234 Fe 12967 794Enclosures

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint, filed by Ms. [redacted],
against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 09/15/2014. Customer
concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard to troubleshoot them so communication
errors are kept to a...

minimum. From the time of an initial contact, to the presentation of a client’s
product sample, we tiy to maintain an open channel of communication and secure our client’s
approval throughout the process. Ms. [redacted] has been a valued client since first contacting us
in September 2012. The product development process provides no guarantees of financial gain
and often is pursued over a lengthy period of time. As a result, it is easy to lose track of the work
and effort that has been provided along the way, particularly in the unfortunate event that a
license is not secured. Her complaint provides numerous miseharacterizations. Davison has
provided its services with her express written approval and authorization, and in a professional
and prompt manner. A brief summary of events will aid in understanding the services that were
provided.
Ms. [redacted] contacted Davison in September of 2012. She was provided with, and
acknowledged that she received and read, two disclosures which outline our services and fees and
the risks of the new product development process. Following receipt of these disclosures, she
entered into a Pre-Development Agreement on 09/19/20 12 for the completion of research related
to her submitted idea. This research was completed and provided to her on 10/29/2012, within
six weeks of her contracting for the service. Following the completion of this initial service, she
entered into a custom agreement on 01/11/2013. Contrary to her complaint, this contract was not
for the development and marketing of her idea. It was for the design and construction of
packaging and presentation material. Ms. [redacted], as she correctly states in her complaint,
already had constructed a physical product sample. Davison submitted a design of the packaging
to Ms. [redacted] which she approved, in writing, on or about 04/01/2013 — less than three months
after entering the contract. A copy of her signature approval is attached; note the approved
design has been obscured for confidentiality purposes. At that time she also completed a
questionnaire in which she provided positive feedback about the proposed design. A copy of this
questionnaire is attached. In reliance upon her approval of the design, and within six weeks,
Davison constructed the package sample and created presentation materials. The Executive
Briefing contained an actual photograph of the constructed package sample. On or about
05/13/2013, she authorized the presentation of her product idea to the targeted corporation. At
that time, Ms. [redacted] also completed a second questionnaire in which she provided positive
feedback about the presentation materials. It is this questionnaire which she claims she provided a
“very dissatisfied” response. However in reviewing the questionnaire, it is apparent she confused
the notion that the presentation material “communicated thoroughly and quickly” with the time
the process took to create the presentation material. As outlined above, each step was performed
in a prompt manner. A copy of her authorization and the questionnaire are attached. The
presentation of her product idea was made to the corporation who, unfortunately, chose not to
pursue the idea. A copy of the e-mail exchange with targeted corporation is enclosed; note the
contact name and information relating to the product idea details have been redacted for
confidentiality.
Her concerns of her idea being stolen are baseless. When Ms. [redacted] submitted her
idea, she did so by entering a Confidentially Agreement. Under the express terms of the
Agreement; “Davison will not use, disclose, license or sell this idea with out my [Ms. [redacted]]
express written permission.” Davison takes the obligation of confidentiality seriously, and abides
by the terms of the Agreement. As such, her concern over the confidence of her idea is
unwarranted. Finally, she alleges that all six of her prototypes were not returned. This is false;
these items were returned on 06/20/2014 via USPS certified mail tracking #[redacted]
[redacted].
As stated earlier, the simple fact is; the product development process provides no
guarantees of financial gain. Our contracts and disclosures are explicit in this regard. While this
is of little comfort to a client who has expended considerable time, money, effort and emotion
into a project, the fact that a particular project does not bring financial gain to the client does not
invalidate the services that were provided. Davison has no obligation, legal or otherwise, to
refund any monies paid by Ms. [redacted] for services rendered to her documented satisfaction.

This letter is in response to the supplemental comments submitted regarding the abovereferenced complaint. We provided our initial response on December 16, 2014 and incorporatethat reply herein. In that response we provided a summary of the services completed, and copiesof Mr. [redacted]’s signed approval, authorizations, and completed questionnaires. We also provideda copy of the letter to Mr. [redacted] providing him with additional copies of the deliverablespursuant to the contracts he entered. We also provided to him the actual physical productsamples. A copy of this letter and the delivery confirmation receipt are enclosed.In his supplemental comments, he demands proof that the presentation of his product ideawere made. Two presentations have been made; the first to the [redacted] company on or about07/172012 and the second to [redacted], Inc. on or about 01/07/2013. Both presentations werespecifically authorized by Mr. [redacted]. Enclosed please find a copy of the USPS Priority Maillabels documenting these two presentations. (Note the actual contact name at each corporationhas been redacted.)Finally, as set forth in our initial response, we have offered to make two additionalpresentations at no cost to Mr. [redacted] He has not accepted this offer. Davison has not only metits contractual requirements by performing all services with Mr. [redacted]’s express writtenapproval and authorization. These services have been provided to his documented satisfaction.Davison has gone beyond its obligations by offering additional service at no cost to Mr. [redacted]While it is his prerogative to decline these services, his decision to not accept this offer does notnegate the fact that all services were properly provided.In light of the above matters, his complaint should be closed as “resolved”.Sincerely[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.EnclosuresTurning ideas

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] againstDavison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 12 14/2014. Customer concerns upseteveryone and our staff works very hard to troubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to aminimum. From...

the time of an initial contact, to the presentation of a client’s product sample, we try tomaintain an open channel of communication, disclosing our fees and services in advance. In her statement,Ms. [redacted] complains that she did not receive a “blueprint to show what my product would look like...”The implication being that the $695.00 fee for the Pre-Development research was sufficient to cover theexpense of the full development of her product sample. This is an unreasonable conclusion and is contraryto the numerous disclosures provided to Ms. [redacted] and contrary to the explicit terms of the PreDevelopment contract. As will be detailed below, she was provided a complete disclosure of the types ofservices offered, and their related fees, as well as an explicit statement that it is Davison’s normal practiceto seek more than one contract for a submitted idea BEFORE any contract was entered.On 08 14/20)4, Ms. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea through Davison’swebsite. The system Davison utilizes for electronic submissions makes it impossible for a person to submitan idea without first having two separate disclosures displayed in a printable and savable format, and theperson electronically acknowledging the disclosures. Ms. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronicsignature, that she received and read the two disclosure statements. It is important to note that thedisclosures are made BEFORE the Client makes any payment to Davison. Among the disclosures is thestatement that “It is Davison’s normal practice to seek more than one contract in connection with asubmitted idea.” The disclosure then provides a listing of the various services and related fees. Further,this information is freely available on Davison’s website. To allege she was not provided this informationis simply false.On 1006/2014, Ms. [redacted] entered into an agreement for Pre-Development services whichobligated Davison to compile research data related to her product idea. These services were completed andthe research material, comprising fifteen (15) U.S. Patent documents and information on thirteen (13)similar products currently on the market, was sent to Ms. [redacted]. She has acknowledged her receipt ofthese items. The purpose of the Pre-Development research is to collect information relevant to the furtherdevelopment of her product idea. To blindly assume that no individual has previously thought of a similarproduct idea is simply naive. To assert that this research is “pointless” is misguided.The Pre-Development Agreement contains the following provisions;“Section II B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaining a product sampleand relevant information about the product in a professional format for presentation to a Licensee,at Clients sole expense. Davison, at its option, will offer to provide further developmentservices, under a separate contract for a separate fee, to assist in obtaining or creating thesample and presentation material for the targeted Licensee. Client is aware that he or she is free toobtain such materials elsewhere or not to obtain them.”On 11/26/2014, after completion of the initial pre-development services, Ms. [redacted] was offered a contractfor additional services for an additional fee. This offer is consistent with the disclosures as well as theterms of the Pre-Development agreement. Ms. [redacted] has not engaged these additional services, which isher prerogative.In our last contact with Ms. [redacted], she stated that she contacted the corporation to whom Davisonhad intended to make a presentation of her product idea. When she secured Davison’s services, she signeda Confidentiality Agreement, in which she agreed to not contact any corporation that Davison discloses toher. Ms. [redacted] freely admits she violated this obligation. Corporations, in general, are hesitant toconfidentially receive new product ideas from the general public. The corporations that register withDavison agree to review projects in confidence and in exchange want to limit their communication to onlyDavison. The alternative is that the corporation gets swamped with update requests and projects arerejected summarily. That is the reason that every client of Davison agrees to not contact the corporationsthat are disclosed to them. There is no ulterior motive, only the attempt to ensure our clients’ projects aregiven a fair and thorough review. The potential harm in a client violating this Agreement is not limited tothat client’s particular project, but extends to all other client projects that are being reviewed, or may bereviewed in the future, by the specific corporation. The Confidentiality Agreement is explicitly clear; “I[the Client] agree that my violation of this agreement will result in the immediate termination of allcontracts between myself and Davison...”Finally, Ms. [redacted] has expressed concern over the confidentiality of her product idea and herright to pursue this idea. When she contacted Davison, she made contact by entering a ConfidentiallyAgreement. Under the express terms of the Agreement; “Davison will not use, disclose, license or sell thisidea with out my [Ms. [redacted]] express written permission.” Davison takes the obligation of confidentialityseriously, and abides by the terms of the Agreement. Also, the Pre-Development contract which sheentered explicitly states; “Nothing in this agreement changes legal title to the product or design.” Ms.[redacted] is free to pursue her product idea as she decides, with the limited exception of contacting thecorporation that was disclosed to her by Davison. As such, her concern over the confidence of her idea isunwarranted.As detailed above, Ms. [redacted] was informed of the additional services twice; the first disclosureoccurring BEFORE she entered any contract and the second disclosure occurring within the terms of thePre-Development Agreement. The allegation that she was not informed of these facts is unjustified. Theservices for which there existed a contract have been performed. No additional services have beencontracted and no additional payments have been made. There is no basis to warrant a refund for servicesrendered.Turning ideas into products[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]
against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 10 17/2014. Customer concerns
upset everyone and our staff works very hard to troubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to...

a
minimum. From the time of an initial contact, to the presentation of a client’s product sample, we try to
maintain an open channel of communication, disclosing our fees and services in advance. In his statement,
Mr. [redacted] alleges he was not informed of the additional fees associated with the offer of additional
services for his new product idea. He is simply incorrect. As will be detailed below, he was provided a
complete disclosure of the types of services offered, and their related fees, as well as an explicit statement
that it is Davison’s normal practice to seek more than one contract for a submitted idea BEFORE any
contract was entered.
On 07 10/20 14, Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea through Davison’s
website. The system Davison utilizes for electronic submissions makes it impossible for a person to submit
an idea without first having two separate disclosures displayed in a printable and savable format, and the
person electronically acknowledging the disclosures. Mr. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic
signature, that he received and read the two disclosure statements. It is important to note that the
disclosures are made BEFORE the Client makes any payment to Davison. Among the disclosures is the
statement that “It is Davison’s normal practice to seek more than one contract in connection with a
submitted idea.” The disclosure then provides a listing of the various services and related fees. A copy of
the disclosure, as provided to Mr. [redacted], is enclosed. Further, this information is freely available on
Davison’s website. To allege he was not provided this information is simply false.
On 07 17/20 14, Mr. [redacted] entered into an agreement for Pre-Development services which
obligated Davison to compile research data related to his product idea. These services were completed and
the research material sent to Mr. [redacted] on 09 11/2014. He completed a questionnaire about this
service, in which he provided positive feedback. A copy of his signed questionnaire is enclosed. The
agreement contains the following provisions;
“Section II B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaining a product sample
and relevant information about the product in a professional format for presentation to a Licensee,
at Client’s sole expense. Davison, at its option, will offer to provide further development
services, under a separate contract for a separate fee, to assist in obtaining or creating the
sample and presentation material for the targeted Licensee. Client is aware that he or she is free to
obtain such materials elsewhere or not to obtain them.”
On 09 25 2014, after completion of the initial pre-development services, Mr.
[redacted] was offered a contract for additional services for an additional fee. This offer is
consistent with the disclosures as well as the terms of the Pre-Development agreement. Mr.
[redacted] has not engaged these additional services, which is his prerogative.
As detailed above, Mr. [redacted] was informed of the additional services twice; the
first disclosure occurring BEFORE he entered any contract and the second disclosure occurring
within the terms of the Pre-Development Agreement. The allegation that he was not informed of
these facts is unjustified. The services for which there existed a contract have been performed.
No additional services have been contracted and no additional payments have been made. There
is no basis to warrant a refund for services rendered to his documented satisfaction.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Associate Counsel
Davison Design and Development, Inc.

Mr. [redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania[redacted]
[redacted]March 30, 2014Re: [redacted]Your ID#: [redacted]Dear Mr. [redacted];This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on...

or about03/20/2015. Customer concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard totroubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of aninitial contact, to the presentation of a client’s product sample, we try to maintain an openchannel of communication. In her statement, Ms. [redacted] makes inflammatoryallegations of conduct which are simply not supported by the facts. Davison hasperformed its services which were contractually due. Ms. [redacted] has not met herobligation of payment, thus any outstanding services are not yet due to be performed.At the outset, Ms. [redacted]’s allegation that Davison processed a charge withouther authorization is meritless. It is Davison’s policy to secure specific authorization fromits client for each specific charge. A review of her file indicates the last payment on herproject was in January 2013 and Davison was in contact with her on the date of thecharge. As will be detailed below, Davison has continued to be in contact with Ms.[redacted] over the past two years and there has been no prior claim of an unauthorizedcharge. To voice such a claim, more than two years after the charge, and after years ofcontinued contact with Davison, evidences a fabrication on her part.Ms. [redacted] has been a valued client since first contacting Davison in June 2012.She entered into two separate contracts for services. The first, the Pre-DevelopmentAgreement obligated Davison to compile research data relevant to her submitted idea.This service was completed and the research was sent to Ms. [redacted] in August 2012.Following the completion of the first contract, Ms. [redacted] entered into a second contract,the New Product Sample Agreement, for the design and construction of a product sample. This contractprovided a seven day revocation period which Ms. [redacted] did not invoke. She selected apayment option and has made a series of partial payments toward the fee, the last chargeoccurring on January 22, 2013. The contract provides that no services are due until fullpayment has been received. Davison continued to be in contact with Ms. [redacted] over thenext two years. Most recently, in January 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Davison via email, requesting a copy of the contract. There was no reference to a claimedunauthorized charge, or a stated termination of the contract. Davison is willing toproceed under the terms of the contract; however there is no basis for a refund if thecontract is cancelled after expiration of the revocation period.Despite having no contractual obligation to process a refbnd, Davison has nointerest in retaining fees for services that will not be performed. Davison will agree towaive its claim for the unpaid balance and refund 80% of the monies paid toward theNew Product Sample Agreement. There is no basis to refund any monies on the PreDevelopment Agreement as these services have been performed. If Ms. [redacted] desires toaccept this offer, she need simply contact me directly in our legal department and thepaper work will be forwarded to her attention.[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.Turning

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted]
[redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about
09/28/20 14. Customer concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard to
troubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a...

minimum. From the time of an
initial contact, to the presentation of a client’s product sample, we try to maintain an open
channel of communication. In her statement, Ms. [redacted] alleges she was not
informed of the additional fees associated with the offer of additional services. She is
simply incorrect. As will be detailed below, she was provided a complete disclosure of
the types of services offered, and their related fees, BEFORE any contract was entered.
Davison has performed its services which were contractually due. Ms. [redacted] has not
met her obligation of payment, thus any outstanding services are not yet due to be
performed.
On 12/03/2012, Ms. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea
through Davison’s website. The system Davison utilizes for electronic submissions
makes it impossible for a person to submit an idea without first having two separate
disclosures displayed in a printable and savable format, and the person electronically
acknowledging the disclosures. Ms. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic
signature, that she received and read the two disclosure statements. It is important to note
that the disclosures are made BEFORE the Client makes any payment to Davison.
Among the disclosures is the statement that “It is Davison’s normal practice to seek more
than one contract in connection with a submitted idea.” The disclosure then provides a
listing the various services and related fees. Further, this information is freely available
on Davison’s website. To allege she was not provided this information is simply false.
Ms. [redacted] entered into two separate contracts for services. The first, the Pre
Development Agreement was entered on 12/06/20 12 and obligated Davison to compile
research data relevant to her submitted idea. This service was completed and the research
was sent to Ms. [redacted] on or about 01/12/2013. Following the completion of the first
contract, on 02/01/2013, Ms. [redacted] entered into a second contract, the New Product
Sample Agreement, for the design and construction of a product sample. This contract
provided a seven day revocation period which Ms. [redacted] did not invoke. She
selected a payment option and has made a series of partial payments toward the fee. The
contract provides that no services are due until full payment has been received. Davison
is willing to proceed under the terms of the contract; however there is no basis for a
refund if the contract is cancelled after expiration of the revocation period.
Despite having no contractual obligation to process a refund, Davison has no
interest in retaining fees for services that will not be performed. Davison will agree to
waive its claim for the unpaid balance and refund SO°o of the monies paid toward the
New Product Sample Agreement. There is no basis to refund any monies on the Pre
Development Agreement as these services have been performed. If Ms. [redacted]
desires to accept this offer, she need simply contact me directly in our legal department
and the paper work will be forwarded to her attention.

First of all, I advertised, on the internet that I was seeking a U.S. Manufacturer and
Marketer; one in which would advertise my “PottedPlant Holder” invention in various stores
such as Lowes or the likes. He said yes “Spring Your Idea Into Action”. This was said on April
28, 2014. I also asked [redacted] if he wanted to advertise my “[redacted]s in
these stores, and what was the precentage cost that he would charge for advertising on my
behalf?” He said, $695.00 and 10% Royalty fee. HE answered my advertisement thru my
computer and so did others and he asked me to contact him by phone. Before then, I had
never heard of him or his company. So he should stop pretending memory loss.
Enclosed is a copy of the connversation that was sent to Davison by computer on April
28, 2014, and now he says that he does not “advertise”. Then, Why would I talk about
advertising? See, my message to him, enclosed on a separate sheet. Shortly thereafter,
Davison asked me to send him $695,00. I sent him $695,00 thru my Credit Card. Weeks
passed by and then I became suspicious, not hearing from him after he received my money
and I called him and that is when he sent me a additional papers later, seeking more money.
(Enclosed). He did not send me the papers that he is mentioning BEFORE I sent him the
mnnnw H~ cant mA nthor innnrc AP~FR ran;znctnt~ mu mnn~u k~ rAt,,rnn,~ tn m~ thrn,,uh mu
— _,——.———...————.~.——...——o
HSDC Dank because he had not attemped, to market or advertise my invention as said. He
1
certainly told me that he would ADVERTISE my invention in stores, BUT NOW HE IS
RETRACTING THIS. Hetold methis by phone, also. Please read my computer message to him.
(Enclosed). Unfortunately I didnot record ourphone conversation.
In the next paragraph, I am speaking of what I was so-called obligated to send to
him, and it was not a physical patent sample, because we were initially brainstorming on the
phone, and this was NEVER MENTIONED in the phone conversation.
Also, you will note in the document in which I signed and sent him the money, it
clearly states in DOCUMENT #2, Davison’s Obligations; Paragraph Three.
“Typically, presentation first involve emailed or MAILED
DESIGN IMAGES and communication is conducted
primarily via telephone. A SAMPLE IS SHIPPED ONLY
UPON REQUEST OF A LICENSEE. UNLESS A LICENSEE
PROPOSES A LICENSE AGREEMENT OR WANT TO DISCUSS
POSSIBLE CHANGES TO THE PRODUCt.”, ETC. We had not EVEN gotten to this
stage in which I was requestling a License Agreement. I only wanted my product advertised in
Plant Stores and for him to inform me of the stores or give me some sort of feed back for my
money that I had sent But the only feedback that he sent was asking me for more money, of
which I was not willing to engage.
PART B. #1. AND #2. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY UPON RECEIPT.
I mailed him design images at the time that I sent him the money and a website for
his use. I also advised him that I had an attorney appealing my non-provisional patent of
which another attorney advised me to hire since he was retiring. However, the question is,
what did Davison do on my behalf all those weeks that he had my money. The answer is
NOTHING. Which caused me to ask for the return of my money. There is nothing that this
company can concretely tell me what they did on my behalf but take my money, and refuse to
send it back to my bank. This is quite disturbing.
My, Bank [redacted] made awful mistakes also, by returning my money back to your
company without my input, but this is some what another matter that I will deal with later.
Also, if you were only brainstorming, as was said, why would you ask for a physical
product sample? This was never the issue when we were communicating by phone.
Davison, if you did the right-thing,-you would return my-$695,00 back to my account.
I certainly believe that you have done this to other clients, because you have gotten quite
good at distorting-the-facts-and conversations. No I would never go into business with your
company, and YOU have NO BASIS for keeping my money. l am a retired Senior Citizen with
a fixed income, so why would you Davison want to keep my $695.00 dollars. l do hope that
your company is not doing that bad. I have a lot of friends on Face Book and I want to let
them and others know about you. I will continue with my invention, but no thanks to you,

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]
[redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about
11 05 2014. Customer concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard to
troubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a minimum....

From the time of an
initial contact, to the presentation of a client’s product sample, we try to maintain an open
channel of communication, disclosing our fees and services in advance. In his statement,
Mr. [redacted] alleges he was not informed of the additional fees associated with the offer of
additional services for his new product idea. He is simply incorrect. As will be detailed
below, he was provided a complete disclosure of the types of services offered, and their
related fees, as well as an explicit statement that it is Davison’s normal practice to seek
more than one contract for a submitted idea BEFORE any contract was entered.
On 12/09/2013, Mr. [redacted] contacted Davison about a new product idea through
Davison’s website. The system Davison utilizes for electronic submissions makes it
impossible for a person to submit an idea without first having two separate disclosures
displayed in a printable and savable format, and the person electronically acknowledging
the disclosures. Mr. [redacted] acknowledged, via an electronic signature, that he received
and read the two disclosure statements. It is important to note that the disclosures are
made BEFORE the Client makes any payment to Davison. Among the disclosures is the
statement that “It is Davison’s normal practice to seek more than one contract in
connection with a submitted idea.” The disclosure then provides a listing of the various
services and related fees. A copy of the disclosure, as provided to Mr. [redacted], is
enclosed. Further, this information is freely available on Davison’s website. To allege
he was not provided this information is simply false.
On 12/17/2013, Mr. [redacted] entered into an agreement for Pre-Development
services which obligated Davison to compile research data related to his product idea.
These services were completed and the research material sent to Mr. [redacted] on
02/06/2014. He has acknowledged receipt of these materials in his complaint. The
agreement contains the following provisions;
“Section II B. Product Samples; Approvals. Client is responsible for obtaining a product
sample and relevant information about the product in a professional format for
presentation to a Licensee, at Client’s sole expense. Davison, at its option, will offer to
provide further development services, under a separate contract for a separate fee,
to assist in obtaining or creating the sample and presentation material for the targeted
Licensee. Client is aware that he or she is free to obtain such materials elsewhere or not
to obtain them.”
On 0314 2014, after completion of the initial pre-development services, Mr.
[redacted] was offered a contract for additional services for an additional fee. This offer is
consistent with the disclosures as well as the terms of the Pre-Development agreement.
Mr. [redacted] has not engaged these additional services, which is his prerogative. In his
complaint, he requests to “be done with Davison”; accordingly his project file has been
closed.
As detailed above, Mr. [redacted] was informed of the additional services twice; the
first disclosure occurring BEFORE he entered any contract and the second disclosure
occurring within the terms of the Pre-Development Agreement. The allegation that he
was not informed of these facts is unjustified. The services for which there existed a
contract have been performed. No additional services have been contracted and no
additional payments have been made. There is no basis to warrant a refund for services
rendered to his documented satisfaction.
Sincerely
[redacted]
Associate Counsel
Davison Design and Development, Inc.
Enclosures
Turning ideas

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about03/14/2015. Please note that Ms. [redacted] has been refunded her payment in full. A copyof the refund receipt is attached hereto.In light of the...

refund, I kindly ask that her complaint be closed as “resolved”.Since ly,[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.EnclosureDavison

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 01/26/2015. At the outsetit should be clarified that Mr. [redacted]’s project was actually submitted as ajoint project, theother individual being Mr. [redacted]l. As will be detailed below, each step of thedevelopment and presentation process was conducted with the express written approval andauthorization of both Mr. [redacted] and Mr. [redacted]l.We understand that customer service is vital in all businesses and is imperative whenoperating a successful business. Customer concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hardto troubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a minimum. From the time of an initialcontact, through the research and development of a new product idea, to the presentation of aclient’s product sample, we try to maintain an open channel of communication, disclosing ourservices and fees upfront and securing our clients’ approval and authorization throughout theprocess. Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, clients are occasionally dissatisfied, particularlywhen their product ideas are not licensed. This appears to be the case in Mr. [redacted]’ssituation.His complaint contains numerous false and defamatory statements. He alleges there hasbeen no activity on his project since 2012 this is false. We continued to work with him through2013. He authorized a presentation of the project in February 2013, and the presentation wasmade in April 2013. Our last contact with him was on December 02, 2013. He alleges “not onecompany has yet had the opportunity to review” his project this is false. He specificallyauthorized, in writing, three presentations of his project. All three presentations were made,however no corporation chose to license the product idea. Finally, his post completely ignoresthe fact that each step of the process was performed with his express written approval andauthorization. He even completed questionnaires in which he provided positive feedback.On 02/09 2009 Mr. [redacted] and Mr. [redacted]l entered an agreement for the designand construction of a product sample. A proposed design was prepared and submitted for theirapproval. They approved the product sample design in July 2009 and completed a questionnaireabout the design providing positive feedback. Based upon this approval, the physical productsample was constructed and presentation materials prepared. The presentation material, in theform of an Executive Briefing, which included an actual photograph of the constructed productsample, was provided to them. On 10/30/2009, they authorized, in writing, the presentation of theproduct sample to a corporation and completed a questionnaire about the Executive Briefing inwhich they provided positive feedback. The product idea was presented; unfortunately, thecorporation chose not to license the product idea. At their express direction, a secondpresentation was made to a second corporation, who again chose not to license the idea. Asnoted in the complaint, the product sample was re-designed following concerns they hadexpressed. This re-design was performed at no cost to the clients. They approved the re-designedsample in November 2012. Presentation materials were again created and they authorized a thirdpresentation on 02/14/2013. This presentation was made; again the corporation did not licensethe idea. Our last contact with the clients was in December 2013.Throughout this process, they had been continually apprised of the status throughconsistent updates. We contacted them to discuss further services which they have not engaged.As such, we have completed all services with their approval, authorization and to theirdocumented satisfaction. We have not received any further authorization to pursue additionalpresentations. As stated, our last contact was in December 2013. Now, more than a year later,Mr. [redacted] feels justified in filing this complaint. There is no basis to warrant a refund forservices performed with the clients’ express written approval and with their express writtenauthorization.Attached, please find copies of the various approvals, authorizations and completedquestionnaires referenced above. Note the actual approved designs have been redacted forconfidentiality purposes. In the interest of customer satisfaction, we will offer two additionalpresentations at no cost to the clients. If they choose to accept this offer, they need only contactour Licensing Department who will coordinate the necessary paperwork to authorize thepresentations.Sincerely[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.EnclosuresTurning ideas

This letter is in follow up to our response of 09/02/2014 regarding the above referenced complaint. Please note that we have located Mr. [redacted]’ prototype and have shipped the same to his attention via Federal Express; tracking number 576425628388. Delivery was confirmed on 09/10/2014.
Davison has closed Mr. [redacted]’ project file, and respectfully request that your office close his complaint as resolved.
 
Sincerely,
 
[redacted]
Associate Counsel
Davison Design and Development, Inc.

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]
against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about 08/06/20 14. Customer
concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard to troubleshoot them so communication
errors are kept to a...

minimum. From the time of an initial contact, to the presentation of a client’s
product sample, we fly to maintain an open channel of communication. Unfortunately, despite
our best efforts, clients are occasionally dissatisfied, particularly when their product ideas are not
licensed. That appears to be the simple truth with Mr. [redacted]. As will be detailed below,
Davison has provided its services, to Mr. [redacted]’s documented satisfaction. There is no basis
for a refund.
A brief summary of the services provided to Mr. [redacted], and his documented approval,
authorizations, and stated satisfaction follows;
1. 01/07/2007 Mr. [redacted] submitted an idea to Davison.
2. 0 1/08/2007 — He signed a disclosure of Davison’s historical statistics regarding
the product development process and the securing of license agreements.
3. 01/15/2007 He entered an agreement for research services which were
performed and provided to him.
4. 11/15 2007 - He entered an agreement for the design and construction of a
product sample and presentation materials. He made periodic payments toward
the contract fee over the next several years.
5. 11/29/2011 - He approved the design and completed a questionnaire about
the design giving positive feedback.
6. Based upon his approval, the physical product sample and presentation materials
were created. An Executive Briefing, which included a photograph of the
physical product sample, was submitted to him.
7. 04/23/2012 - He approved, in writing, the presentation and completed yet
another questionnaire about the Executive Briefing, providing positive
feedback
8. 05 12/20 12 - The presentation was made; unfortunately the corporation chose not
to license his idea.
9. Mr. [redacted] has declined any additional services related to his project.
Copies of the referenced documents are enclosed (note the actual approved design has
been redacted for confidentiality purposes). The last contact with Mr. [redacted], in relation to his
project, was on 05/02/20 13. In January of this year, Mr. [redacted] retained counsel. Davison
advised his attorney of the above referenced facts and we have had no further contact from his
attorney. This complaint followed.
As stated, the design, construction, and presentation of Mr. [redacted]’s product sample
have been performed with his express written approval and authorization, and to his documented
satisfaction. No additional contracts have been entered and no additional payments have been
received. There is no basis to warrant a refund for services rendered. The simple fact is; the
product development process provides no guarantees of financial gain. Our contracts and
disclosures are explicit in this regard. While this is of little comfort to a client who has expended
considerable time, money, effort and emotion into a project, the fact that a particular project does
not bring financial gain to the client does not invalidate the services that were provided.
In the interest of customer satisfaction, we will offer two additional presentations at no
cost to Mr. [redacted]. If he chooses to accept this offer, he need only contact our Licensing
Department who will coordinate the necessary documents to provide these presentations.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 10415686, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
Regards,
I did not contact [redacted], I did start to fill out the form, But when I seem they was asking for money, I did not contain the form, I click out. The days later, [redacted] call me and said he seen where I started and idea and didn't completed. He wanted to find out about my idea. That's when the first time I told him, I was not working and don't have any money for it right now. Then he was explaining to me how to get started and what the company that except my idea , will pay you for your idea. I keep telling him, I'm not working, he suggested borrowing money from family members to just get started. He told me about the$795.00 and he would give me a discount and I can pay monthly payments as I get the money, please! Why would I pay a company $ 715.00 knowing, I'm going to lose it after my last payment. I did no get or was told about the new product sample agreement and the thousands of dollars I have to pay And pay in seven days, after I paid him $ 315. On 2/1/2013. Even though I told him everytime I made a payment toward getting started, I can't and don't have any more money to pay, That's when I was told these things on the phone by [redacted], that where company royalty come in at. I was not fully aware of no more fee or money to pay. I did try to contact Mr [redacted], I was told he was not longer with the company. And last time talking with Mr [redacted], I told him again I don't have any more money. His words he email to me was, His feeling at this stage is that you're unable and willing to continue pursuing your idea or,at the very least , pursuing it with our company.if that's the case, call him. I did call him. Then 9/24/3013 Mr [redacted] contact me and tried the same thing with me. They recorded every thing,

I never said they would steal my Invention I just stated that I am afraid they may steal it since I have read many complaints that they have in the past to other clients. And the first $800 was a retainer not a research fee. My sister was a witness to this who help pay for it. Then they said that I need to pay another $1000 to start the development of my Invention and to this day they haven't shown me any thing about my ideal except other people stuff. I have contact  a patent lawyer who told me that a research of invention ideals costs only $199.00 so what was the other $600 I paid them for? I want all of the $1600 and they can keep the $199.00.
Thank you.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and I accept this resolution that was decided for me by Davison without having an option to choose.  It is unfortunate that a company that highlights (the very few) significant success stories on their websites and public appearances can be so shallow in terms of core values.  I initially believed in Davison, but lost trust due to aggressive sales tactics and lack of professionalism.  Even my concerns were not received as an opportunity to work with me (a client that believed in her product), instead a resolution to just refund fees by Davison's lawyer was how Davison decided to end my journey.  Good luck to everyone else.

[redacted]     They Failed to mention that I was told to just sign the last page and Fax it back to them. Not only that but I told them I had a limited income, and not once did they mention I would have to pay more money. I felt trapped and used!

This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by Ms. [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison) on or about
09 16 2014. Customer concerns upset everyone and our staff works very hard to
troubleshoot them so communication errors are kept to a...

minimum. From the time of an
initial contact, to the presentation of a client’s product sample, we try to maintain an open
channel of communication.
On or abut 06/06/20 14, Ms. [redacted] entered into an agreement for Pre
Development services which obligated Davison to compile research data related to her
product idea. This contract provided a revocation period during which a refund of
payments would be made if the contract was timely cancelled. Ms. [redacted] did not
provide her cancellation until 07/14/2014, well beyond the stated period. The contract
does not provide for a refund of payments for cancellations made beyond the stated
revocation period. However, Davison has no interest in retaining fees for services which
will not be performed. Accordingly, Ms. [redacted]’s payment

[redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania[redacted]February 20, 2015Re: [redacted]Your ID#: [redacted]Dear [redacted];This letter is in response to the above referenced complaint filed by [redacted] against Davison Design and Development, Inc. (Davison)...

on or about 02/14/2015.At the outset, it should be made clear the **. [redacted] has not engaged any services withDavison, nor has she made any payments to Davison.On 0119/2015, **. [redacted] initiated contact with Davison by submitting an ideafor a new product through Davison’s website. She made this contact by entering aConfidentially Agreement. Under the express term of the Agreement; “Davison will notuse, disclose, license or sell this idea with out my [**. [redacted]] express writtenpermission.” Davison takes the obligation of confidentiality seriously, and abides by theterrm of the Agreement. Representatives from Davison have been in contact with her todiscuss her idea and to offer Davison’s services. **. [redacted] has not engaged any services.At her request, as contained within her complaint, she has been placed on our “DoNot Contact” list. In light of the fact that no service contract was entered, no paymentswere received, and no future contact with **. [redacted] is anticipated, I kindly request thather complaint be closed as “resolved”.Sincere[redacted]Associate CounselDavison Design and Development, Inc.

Please be advised that I have, this date, spoken with Ms. [redacted] about her
project at Davison. Ms. [redacted] has expressed her approval of the design of her product
sample, has acknowledged the outstanding balance on her contract and has expressed a
desire to proceed forward with her project. Accordingly, Davison will be continuing its
work with Ms. [redacted] on her project. Ms. [redacted] has agreed to noti& your office
directly.
In light of the above resolution, I ask that her complaint be closed as “resolved.”