throbber
Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 1 of 15 Page ID #:190
`
`
`
`
`William E. Thomson, Jr. (SBN 47195)
`BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C.
`6005 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 2080
`Los Angeles, California 90017-5726
`Phone: (213) 622-3003 / Fax: (213) 622-3053
`E-Mail: wthomson@brookskushman.com
`
`Marc Lorelli (Admitted pro hac vice)
`mlorelli@brookskushman.com
`John P. Rondini (Admitted pro hac vice)
`jrondini@brookskushman.com
`BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C.
`1000 Town Center, 22nd Floor
`Southfield, MI 48075
`Phone: (248) 358-4400 / Fax: (248) 358-3351
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`Ancora Technologies, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`ANCORA TECHNOLOGIES,
`INC.
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`
`
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`[Hon. Josephine L. Staton]
`
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`
`Courtroom: 10A, 10th Floor
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`16
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`TCL CORP., SHENZHEN TCL
`CREATIVE CLOUD
`TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.,
`HUIZHOU TCL MOBILE
`COMMUNICATION CO,
`LTD., and TCT MOBILE (US)
`INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
` RELATED CASE 2:20-cv-01252
`
` *
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 2 of 15 Page ID #:191
`
`
`
`1
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff, Ancora Technologies, Inc. (“Ancora”), for its Complaint
`
`2
`
`against TCL Corp., Shenzhen TCL Creative Cloud Technology Co., Ltd., Huizhou
`
`3
`
`TCL Mobile Communication Co. Ltd., and TCT Mobile (US) Inc. (collectively
`
`4
`
`“TCL”) herein, states as follows.
`
`5
`
`2.
`
`Ancora further notes that the same claims exist in case No. 2:20-cv-
`
`6
`
`01252. As noted in the filing of Docket No. 22 in the 8:19-cv-02192 case, the
`
`7
`
`parties believe these cases should be consolidated.
`
`I.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`3.
`
`Plaintiff Ancora Technologies, Inc. is a corporation organized and
`
`existing under the laws of the State of Delaware and having a place of business at
`
`23977 S.E. 10th Street, Sammamish, Washington 98075.
`
`4.
`
` Upon information and belief, TCL Corp. is a corporation duly
`
`organized and existing under the laws of the People’s Republic of China, with a
`
`principal place of business at No. 26, the Third Road, Zhongkai Avenue, Huizhou
`
`City, Guangdong, P.R. China 516006.
`
`5.
`
`Upon
`
`information and belief, Shenzhen TCL Creative Cloud
`
`Technology Co., Ltd. is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of
`
`the People’s Republic of China, with a principal place of business at 7F, Block F4,
`
`TCL Communication Technology Building, TCL International E-city, Zhong Shan
`
`Yuan Road, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, Guangdong, P.R. China.
`
`6.
`
`Upon information and belief, Huizhou TCL Mobile Communication
`
`Co. Ltd. is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the People’s
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`1
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 3 of 15 Page ID #:192
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`Republic of China, with a principal place of business at No. 86 Hechang Qi Lu Xi,
`
`Zhongkai Gaoxin District, Huizhou City, Guandong Province, P.R. China.
`
`7.
`
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the
`
`laws of Delaware with a principal place of business at 25 Edelman, Suite 200,
`
`Irvine, California 92618.
`
`8.
`
`Upon information and belief, TCL is licensed to make, use, and sell
`
`7
`
`Alcatel-branded mobile devices in the United States.
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`http://www.tctusa.com/
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`https://us.alcatelmobile.com/about-us/
`
`9.
`
`Upon information and belief, TCL is licensed to make, use, and sell
`
`Blackberry-branded mobile devices in the United States.
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 4 of 15 Page ID #:193
`
`
`
`http://www.tctusa.com/
`
`
`
`
`
`https://blackberrymobile.com/us/about-us/
`
`10. The Defendants identified in paragraphs 2-5 above are an interrelated
`
`group of companies which together comprise a manufacturer and seller of Android
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`3
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 5 of 15 Page ID #:194
`
`
`
`1
`
`mobile devices in the United States, including Android mobile devices that are sold
`
`2
`
`under the Alcatel and Blackberry brands.
`
`II.
`
`JURISDICTION
`
`11. This is an action for infringement of United States patents arising under
`
`35 U.S.C. §§ 271, 281, and 284–85, among others. This Court has subject matter
`
`jurisdiction of the action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and § 1338(a).
`
`12. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants pursuant to due
`
`process and/or the California Long Arm Statute and additional based on admission
`
`by way of the Declaratory Judgment Action and the parties’ stipulation contained in
`
`Docket No. 22.
`
`13. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b),
`
`1391(c), and 1400(b) because (i) Defendants have done and continue to do business
`
`in this district; (ii) Defendants have committed and continue to commit acts of patent
`
`infringement in this district, including making, using, offering to sell, and/or selling
`
`accused products in this district, and/or importing accused products into this district,
`
`including by internet sales and sales via retail and wholesale stores, and/or inducing
`
`others to commit acts of patent infringement in this district; and (iii) Defendants are
`
`foreign entities.
`
`14. Venue is proper as to Defendants based on the Declaratory Judgment
`
`Action and on agreement/stipulation and also because they are organized under the
`
`laws of the People’s Republic of China. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(3) provides that “a
`
`defendant not resident in the United States may be sued in any judicial district, and
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`4
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 6 of 15 Page ID #:195
`
`
`
`1
`
`the joinder of such a defendant shall be disregarded in determining where the action
`
`2
`
`may be brought with respect to other defendants.”
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`III. BACKGROUND
`
`15. On June 25, 2002, U.S. Patent No. 6,411,941 (“the ’941 patent”)
`
`entitled “Method Of Restricting Software Operation Within A License Limitation”
`
`was duly and legally issued. (See Exhibit A, U.S. Patent No. 6,411,941.) A
`
`reexamination certificate also issued to the ’941 Patent on June 1, 2010 where the
`
`patentability of all claims was confirmed by the United States Patent Office.
`
`(Exhibit B, Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate Issued Under 35 U.S.C. § 307.)
`
`16. The ’941 patent has been involved in litigation against Microsoft
`
`Corporation, Dell Incorporated, Hewlett Packard Incorporated, and Toshiba America
`
`Information Systems. (See 2009-cv-00270, Western District of Washington).
`
`17. The ’941 patent has also been involved in litigation against Apple
`
`Incorporated. (See 2015-cv-03659, Northern District of California).
`
`18. The ’941 patent is currently involved in litigation against HTC
`
`America, Inc. and HTC Corporation. (See 2016-cv-01919, Western District of
`
`Washington).
`
`19. The ’941 patent is currently involved in litigation against Samsung
`
`Electronics America, Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (See 2019-cv-00385,
`
`Western District of Texas).
`
`20.
`
` The ’941 patent is currently involved in litigation against LG
`
`Electronics USA, Inc. and LG Electronics, Inc. (See 2019-cv-00384, Western
`
`District of Texas).
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 7 of 15 Page ID #:196
`
`
`
`1
`
`21. The ’941 patent was involved in a Covered Business Method
`
`2
`
`proceeding before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (See PTAB-CBM2017-
`
`3
`
`00054). The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office denied institution of the petition
`
`4
`
`filed by HTC and found the ’941 patent recites a “technological improvement to
`
`5
`
`problems arising in prior art software and hardware methods of restricting an
`
`6
`
`unauthorized software program’s operation.” (See PTAB-CBM2017-00054, Paper
`
`7
`
`No. 7 at pg. 9).
`
`8
`
`22. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit further issued an
`
`9
`
`order on November 16, 2018 regarding the validity of the ‘941 patent. (See CAFC
`
`10
`
`18-1404, Dkt. # 39.) In this appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
`
`11
`
`held:
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`[T]he claimed invention moves a software-verification structure to a
`
`BIOS location not previously used for this computer-security purpose
`
`and alters how the function is performed (in that the BIOS memory
`
`used for verification now interacts with distinct computer memory to
`
`perform a software-verification
`
`function), yielding a
`
`tangible
`
`technological benefit (by making the claimed system less susceptible to
`
`hacking).
`
`19
`
`CAFC 18-1404, Dkt. # 39, pg. 13.
`
`20
`
`23. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit further issued an
`
`21
`
`order on March 3, 2014 regarding claim construction and invalidity of the ’941
`
`22
`
`Patent. (See CAFC 13-1378, Dkt. # 57).
`
`24. Ancora is the owner of all right, title and interest in the ’941 patent.
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`6
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 8 of 15 Page ID #:197
`
`
`
`IV. COUNT I – PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`25. Ancora realleges the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully
`
`herein.
`
`26. TCL has infringed the ’941 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by,
`
`prior to the expiration of the ’941 patent, selling, and/or offering for sale in the
`
`United States, and/or importing into the United States, without authorization,
`
`products that are capable of performing at least Claim 1 of the ’941 patent literally or
`
`under the doctrine of equivalents and/or, without authorization, causing products to
`
`perform each step of at least Claim 1 of the ’941 patent.
`
`27. Accused Products include, but are not limited to,
`
`the Alcatel
`
`3c/33x/3v/3L; Alcatel 1c/1x/1/1t7/1T10; Alcatel A3/A3XL/A7XL/A7/A2XL/A3A;
`
`Alcatel A5; Alcatel IDOL 4/4S/5; Alcatel POP 4/4S/4PLUS; Alcatel PIXI
`
`4(4)/4(5)/4(6); Blackberry KeyONE; and Blackberry Key2 (“Accused Devices”).
`
`28. Upon information and belief, TCL began selling the accused Alcatel
`
`products between 2016 - 2018.
`
`29. Upon information and belief, TCL began selling the Blackberry
`
`KeyONE in 2017.
`
`
`
`
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`7
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 9 of 15 Page ID #:198
`
`
`
`https://blackberrymobile.com/press-room/
`
`30. Upon information and belief, TCL began selling the Blackberry Key2
`
`in 2018.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`https://blackberrymobile.com/press-room/
`
`31. At a minimum, the Accused Products include servers/software utilized
`
`by TCL to transmit an over-the-air (“OTA”) software update, as well as those
`
`smartphones and other devices and technology that received from TCL, or received
`
`at TCL’s direction, an OTA update that caused such device to perform the method
`
`recited in Claim 1 prior to the expiration of the ’941 patent.
`
`32. Such Accused Products are configured by TCL such that they are
`
`capable of performing each step of Claim 1 of the ’941 patent and to which TCL
`
`provided one or more OTA updates before the expiration of the ’941 patent that
`
`would cause a TCL device to perform each step of Claim 1 in order to upgrade its
`
`operating
`
`system.
`
`(See
`
`e.g.,
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`8
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 10 of 15 Page ID #:199
`
`
`
`1
`
`https://www.att.com/devicehowto/tutorial.html#!/stepbystep/id/stepbystep_KM1231
`
`2
`
`051?make=BlackBerry&model=BBB100&gsi=mpo8f8;
`
`3
`
`https://support.sprint.com/support/pages/printTemplate.jsp?articleId=WServiceAdvi
`
`4
`
`sory_542_GKB92134-dvc9760001prd.)
`
`5
`
`33. For example, Claim 1 of the ’941 patent claims “a method of restricting
`
`6
`
`software operation within a license for use with a computer including an erasable,
`
`7
`
`non-volatile memory area of a BIOS of the computer, and a volatile memory area;
`
`8
`
`the method comprising the steps of: [1] selecting a program residing in the volatile
`
`9
`
`memory, [2] using an agent to set up a verification structure in the erasable, non-
`
`10
`
`volatile memory of the BIOS, the verification structure accommodating data that
`
`11
`
`includes at least one license record, [3] verifying the program using at least the
`
`12
`
`verification structure from the erasable non-volatile memory of the BIOS, and [4]
`
`13
`
`acting on the program according to the verification.”
`
`14
`
`34. When TCL transmitted an OTA update, TCL performed and/or caused
`
`15
`
`to be performed each of these elements as part of what is described as “verified
`
`16
`
`boot”:
`
`
`
`
`
`https://source.android.com/security/verifiedboot
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`9
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 11 of 15 Page ID #:200
`
`
`
`1
`
`35.
`
`In particular, each mobile device contains both erasable, non-volatile
`
`2
`
`memory in the form of ROM and volatile memory in the form of RAM.
`
`3
`
`36. Further, each mobile device was configured by TCL to perform the
`
`4
`
`below described process (or one substantially like it) in order to install an OTA
`
`5
`
`update:
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`https://source.android.com/devices/tech/ota/nonab
`
`37. For example, during this process, a program running on one or more
`
`19
`
`OTA servers owned and/or controlled by TCL set up a verification structure in the
`
`20
`
`erasable, non-volatile memory of the BIOS of the Accused Products by transmitting
`
`21
`
`to the device an OTA update. The Accused Products are then configured by TCL to
`
`22
`
`save to a partition (e.g., the “cache” or “A/B” partitions) of the erasable, non-volatile
`
`23
`
`memory of its BIOS.
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 12 of 15 Page ID #:201
`
`
`
`1
`
`38. The OTA update contains a verification structure that include data
`
`2
`
`accommodating at least one license record. Examples of such a license record
`
`3
`
`include a cryptographic signature or key:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`https://source.android.com/devices/tech/ota/sign_builds
`
`39. Such license record also may comprise a cryptographic hash or hash
`
`tree:
`
`
`
`
`
`https://source.android.com/security/verifiedboot/verified-boot.
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`11
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 13 of 15 Page ID #:202
`
`
`
`1
`
`40. Once the verification structure has been set up in the BIOS, the
`
`2
`
`Accused Products are configured by TCL to reboot into recovery mode, load the
`
`3
`
`OTA update into its volatile memory (e.g., RAM), and use the at least one license
`
`4
`
`record from the BIOS to verify the OTA update.
`
`5
`
`41.
`
`If the OTA update is verified, the Accused Products are configured to
`
`6
`
`load and execute the update.
`
`7
`
`42.
`
`In sum, as described above, once TCL has set up the verification
`
`8
`
`structure by transmitting to a device an OTA update, each Accused Product is
`
`9
`
`configured to automatically perform each of the remaining Claim 1 steps.
`
`10
`
`43. Further, on information and belief, when TCL provided OTA updates,
`
`11
`
`TCL performed or caused to be performed each of the Claim 1 steps.
`
`12
`
`44. Further, TCL conditions participation in the OTA update process and
`
`13
`
`the receipt of the benefit of a software update on the performance of each of the
`
`14
`
`above steps.
`
`15
`
`45. Primarily, as described above, TCL pre-configures/programs each
`
`16
`
`Accused Product to perform the above described steps upon receiving an OTA
`
`17
`
`update from TCL.
`
`18
`
`46. Further, TCL takes steps to ensure that each Accused Product cannot
`
`19
`
`install an OTA update except by performing each of the above described steps.
`
`20
`
`47. Further, TCL emphasizes the benefits associated with updating the
`
`21
`
`software of its Accused Products.
`
`22
`
`48. Further, TCL controlled the manner of the performance of such method.
`
`23
`
`As set forth above, TCL configured each Accused Product such that, upon receiving
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 14 of 15 Page ID #:203
`
`
`
`1
`
`an OTA update, it would automatically perform each remaining step of the claimed
`
`2
`
`method.
`
`3
`
`49. TCL also controlled the timing of the performance of such method by
`
`4
`
`determining when to utilize its OTA servers/software to set up a verification
`
`5
`
`structure in each Accused Product.
`
`6
`
`50. TCL also had the right and ability to stop or limit infringement simply
`
`7
`
`by not performing the initial step of using its OTA servers/software to set up a
`
`8
`
`verification structure in each Accused Product. Absent this action by TCL, the
`
`9
`
`infringement at issue would not have occurred.
`
`10
`
`51. TCL’s infringement has caused damage to Ancora, and Ancora is
`
`11
`
`entitled to recover from TCL those damages Ancora has sustained as a result of
`
`12
`
`TCL’s infringement.
`
`V. DEMAND FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as follows:
`
`A. Declaring that TCL has infringed United States Patent No. 6,411,941
`
`in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271;
`
`B. Awarding damages to Ancora arising out of this infringement,
`
`including enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 and prejudgment and post-
`
`judgment interest, in an amount according to proof;
`
`C. Awarding such other costs and relief the Court deems just and proper,
`
`including any relief that the Court may deem appropriate under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`13
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS Document 24 Filed 02/19/20 Page 15 of 15 Page ID #:204
`
`
`
`VI. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Ancora respectfully demands a trial by jury of any and all issues triable of
`
`right by a jury in the above-captioned action.
`
`
`
`Date: February 19, 2020
`
`BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C.
`
` /s/ Marc Lorelli
`Marc Lorelli (Admitted pro hac vice)
`mlorelli@brookskushman.com
`John P. Rondini (Admitted pro hac vice)
`jrondini@brookskushman.com
`1000 Town Center, 22nd Floor
`Southfield, MI 48075
`P: (248) 358-4400 /F: (248) 358-3351
`
`William E. Thomson, Jr. (SBN 47195)
`6005 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 2080
`Los Angeles, California 90017-5726
`Phone: (213) 622-3003
`Fax: (213) 622-3053
`wthomson@brookskushman.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`Ancora Technologies, Inc.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`Case No. 8:19-cv-02192-JLS-ADS
`
`14
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket