Case 3:20-cv-06754-WHA Document 877 Filed 11/07/23 Page 1 of 8
`
`
`
`
`
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
` Sean Pak (Bar No. 219032)
` seanpak@quinnemanuel.com
` Melissa Baily (Bar No. 237649)
` melissabaily@quinnemanuel.com
` James Judah (Bar No. 257112)
` jamesjudah@quinnemanuel.com
` Lindsay Cooper (Bar No. 287125)
` lindsaycooper@quinnemanuel.com
` Iman Lordgooei (Bar No. 251320)
` imanlordgooei@quinnemanuel.com
`50 California Street, 22nd Floor
`San Francisco, California 94111-4788
`Telephone:
`(415) 875-6600
`Facsimile:
`(415) 875-6700
`
` Marc Kaplan (pro hac vice)
` marckaplan@quinnemanuel.com
`191 N. Wacker Drive, Ste 2700
`Chicago, Illinois 60606
`Telephone:
`(312) 705-7400
`Facsimile:
`(312) 705-7401
`
`Attorneys for GOOGLE LLC
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
`
`
`
`SONOS, INC.,
`
`
`Plaintiff and Counter-
`Defendant,
`
`
`
`vs.
`
`
`GOOGLE LLC,
`
`
`Defendant and Counter-
`Claimant.
`
` Case No. 3:20-cv-06754-WHA
`Consolidated with Case No. 3:21-cv-07559-
`WHA
`
`GOOGLE LLC’S NOTICE OF MOTION
`AND MOTION TO AMEND THE
`JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO FED. R.
`CIV. P. 59(E)
`
`
` December 14, 2023, 8:00 a.m.
`Date:
`Location: Courtroom 12, 19th Floor
` Hon. William Alsup
`Judge:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-1-
`GOOGLE’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO AMEND THE JUDGMENT
`
`Case No. 3:20-cv-06754-WHA
`
`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
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06754-WHA Document 877 Filed 11/07/23 Page 2 of 8
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION
`
`TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
`
`PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Google LLC (“Google”) will and hereby does move to
`
`4
`
`amend the judgment under Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 59(e). This Motion will be heard on December 14,
`
`5
`
`2023 at 8:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in Courtroom 12, 19 th
`
`6
`
`Floor of the San Francisco Courthouse at 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco,
`
`7
`
`California, before the Honorable William H. Alsup. This Motion is based on all pleadings,
`
`8
`
`exhibits, and records in this action, and such other papers, evidence, and/or argument as may be
`
`9
`
`submitted to the Court in connection with this Motion or that the Court may take notice or otherwise
`
`10
`
`consider.
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DATED: November 7, 2023
`
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN,
`LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By
`
`/s Sean Pak
`Sean Pak
`Melissa Baily
`James D. Judah
`Lindsay Cooper
`Marc Kaplan
`Iman Lordgooei
`
`
`Attorneys for Google LLC
`
`
`
`-1-
`GOOGLE’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO AMEND THE JUDGMENT
`
`Case No. 3:20-cv-06754-WHA
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06754-WHA Document 877 Filed 11/07/23 Page 3 of 8
`
`
`
`1
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`
`
`2
`
`The judgment that the Court entered on October 10, 2023 addresses only two of the asserted
`
`3
`
`patents and a subset of Google’s defenses to Sonos’s infringement claims regarding those patents.
`
`4
`
`Google respectfully requests that the Court amend the judgment to address all of the parties’ claims,
`
`5
`
`defenses and requested remedies to ensure that the Federal Circuit can exercise appellate jurisdiction
`
`6
`
`over the pending appeal. Sonos does not oppose this Motion.
`
`7
`
`II.
`
`PROCEDURAL HISTORY
`
`8
`
`This case includes two cases that have been consolidated: (1) Google’s declaratory judgment
`
`9
`
`action, which was originally filed in this District (Google LLC v. Sonos, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-06754-
`
`10
`
`WHA, the “California Action”), and (2) Sonos’s patent infringement action, which it originally filed
`
`11
`
`in the Western District of Texas (Sonos, Inc. v. Google LLC, No. 3:21-cv-07559-WHA, the
`
`12
`
`“Transferred Action”).
`
`13
`
`14
`
`A.
`
`The Relevant Pleadings
`
`In the California Action, Google’s original complaint sought declaratory judgments of non-
`
`15
`
`infringement of five patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 9,967,615, 10,779,033, 9,344,206, 10,469,966, and
`
`16
`
`9,219,460. Dkt. 1. Google’s first amended complaint added additional allegations to these claims.
`
`17
`
`Dkt. 41. Google’s second amended complaint (“SAC”) added claims for breach of contract,
`
`18
`
`conversion, declaratory judgment of invalidity of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,967,615, 10,779,033,
`
`19
`
`10,469,966, and declaratory judgment of invalidity and non-infringement of U.S. Patent No.
`
`20
`
`10,848,885. Dkt. 123-3. Because Sonos had withdrawn its infringement allegations regarding the
`
`21
`
`’206 and ’460 patents in the Transferred Action, Google’s SAC likewise dropped its declaratory
`
`22
`
`judgment claims for these patents. Dkts. 123-3, 132; Trans. Action, Dkt. 151.
`
`23
`
`In response to Google’s SAC, Sonos asserted affirmative defenses to Google’s claims. Dkt.
`
`24
`
`135. Sonos also asserted as counterclaims the affirmative claims that were pending in the
`
`25
`
`Transferred Action, including claims for infringement of the ’615, ’033, ’966 and ’885 patents. Id.
`
`26
`
`Sonos’s amended answer added additional allegations to these claims and defenses. Dkt. 175-2.
`
`27
`
`Google’s answers to Sonos’s counterclaims and third amended complaint asserted
`
`28
`
`affirmative defenses including non-infringement, invalidity and prosecution laches, among others.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-2-
`GOOGLE’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO AMEND THE JUDGMENT
`
`Case No. 3:20-cv-06754-WHA
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06754-WHA Document 877 Filed 11/07/23 Page 4 of 8
`
`
`
`1
`
`Dkt. 198-2; Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2.
`
`
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`B.
`
`Pretrial Disposition Of Claims
`
`In the “patent showdown,” the Court granted Google’s summary judgment motion with respect
`
`to claim 13 of the ’615 patent, finding it both invalid and not infringed. Dkt. 316. In a later round of
`
`summary judgment briefing, the Court also granted summary judgment (1) of invalidity of the asserted
`
`’033 patent claims and (2) of no willful infringement of the ’885 patent. Dkt. 566.
`
`Although Sonos moved for summary judgment on Google’s breach of contract and
`
`8
`
`conversion claims (Dkt. 478), Google offered to voluntarily withdraw these claims without
`
`9
`
`prejudice to streamline the issues for summary judgment and trial if the Court determined that the
`
`10
`
`’033 claims were invalid. Dkt. 566 at 31. Because the Court did determine that the ’033 claims
`
`11
`
`were invalid, it denied Sonos’s motion as moot “with the understanding that the breach of contract
`
`12
`
`and conversion claims are out of the case.” Id. at 31-32.
`
`13
`
`14
`
`C.
`
`Posttrial Disposition Of Claims
`
`In May 2023, the parties proceeded to trial on the ’885 and ’966 patents. The jury was asked
`
`15
`
`to address (1) validity of both patents, (2) infringement of the ’966 patent by Google’s original
`
`16
`
`design; (3) infringement of both patents by Google’s redesign; (4) willful and indirect infringement
`
`17
`
`of the ’966 patent; and (5) damages. Dkt. 566 at 33. The jury found that Google’s redesigned
`
`18
`
`products infringed claim 1 of the ’885 patent. Dkt. 774. The jury found that Google’s products did
`
`19
`
`not infringe the ’966 patent. Id. at 2-3.
`
`20
`
`Google asserted certain equitable defenses that the parties agreed the Court would decide
`
`21
`
`after trial. Dkt. 615 at 3, 4, 6. The Court heard argument regarding Google’s equitable defenses on
`
`22
`
`August 10, 2023, and issued an order on October 6, 2023, finding the ’885 and ’966 claims
`
`23
`
`unenforceable and invalid for anticipation. Dkts. 855, 868.
`
`24
`
`The Court entered judgment in favor of Google and against Sonos on October 10, 2023. Dkt.
`
`25
`
`869. However, the Court’s judgment addressed only a subset of the parties’ claims, defenses and
`
`26
`
`requested remedies. Id.
`
`27
`
`III. ARGUMENT
`
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`To be final, a judgment must dispose of all claims pending in the case. The Federal Circuit
`
`-3-
`GOOGLE’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO AMEND THE JUDGMENT
`
`Case No. 3:20-cv-06754-WHA
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06754-WHA Document 877 Filed 11/07/23 Page 5 of 8
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`has refused to exercise appellate jurisdiction where a judgment did not clearly dispose of all claims,
`
`2
`
`defenses and/or requested remedies. See e.g. Vroom, Inc. v. Sidekick Technology, LLC, No. 2023-
`
`3
`
`1362, 2023 WL 2881390, at *1-2 (Fed. Cir. 2023) (nonprecedential) (granting appellee’s motion to
`
`4
`
`dismiss the appeal as premature because although the district court’s order “granting Vroom’s
`
`5
`
`motion for judgment on the pleadings necessarily resolved Vroom’s claims for declaratory judgment
`
`6
`
`of non-infringement . . . Vroom’s request for injunctive relief remains pending, rendering this appeal
`
`7
`
`premature”); Leggett & Platt, Inc. v. VUTEk, Inc., 239 Fed. Appx. 602 (Fed. Cir. 2007)
`
`8
`
`(nonprecedential) (dismissing appeal for lack of jurisdiction because although the district court had
`
`9
`
`granted accused infringer’s motion for summary judgment on invalidity, “the district court’s
`
`10
`
`judgment did not, one way or the other, decide its counterclaim for a declaratory judgment of
`
`11
`
`noninfringement”).
`
`12
`
`To streamline the issues to be presented on appeal and ensure that the Federal Circuit will
`
`13
`
`exercise appellate jurisdiction, Google respectfully requests that the Court enter a final judgment
`
`14
`
`addressing all claims, defenses and requested remedies in accordance with the proposed amended
`
`15
`
`judgment submitted herewith. To aid the Court, the disposition of each claim, defense and requested
`
`16
`
`remedy in the parties’ operative pleadings is summarized below:
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`Claim, Defense or Requested Remedy
`
`Disposition
`
`Google’s claim for a declaration of
`noninfringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,967,615
`(Dkt. 123-3) and affirmative defense of non-
`infringement (Dkt. 198-2; Trans. Action, Dkt.
`222-2)
`Google’s claim for a declaration of invalidity
`of U.S. Patent No. 9,967,615 (Dkt. 123-3) and
`affirmative defense of invalidity (Dkt. 198-2;
`Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`
`Google’s claim for a declaration of
`noninfringement of U.S. Patent No.
`10,779,033 (Dkt. 123-3) and affirmative
`defense of non-infringement (Dkt. 198-2;
`Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`Google’s claim for a declaration of invalidity
`of U.S. Patent No. 10,779,033 (Dkt. 123-3)
`and affirmative defense of invalidity (Dkt.
`
`Judgment for Google and against Sonos on
`Claim 13 pursuant to Dkt. 316.
`
`Sonos elected not to try the remaining claims
`based on this ruling. Dkt. 615.
`Judgment for Google and against Sonos on
`Claim 13 pursuant to Dkt. 316.
`
`Sonos elected not to try the remaining claims
`based on this ruling. Dkt. 615.
`Moot in light of invalidity determination in Dkt.
`566.
`
`Judgment for Google and against Sonos
`pursuant to Dkt. 566.
`
`
`
`
`
`-4-
`GOOGLE’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO AMEND THE JUDGMENT
`
`Case No. 3:20-cv-06754-WHA
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06754-WHA Document 877 Filed 11/07/23 Page 6 of 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
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`198-2; Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`Google’s claim for a declaration of
`noninfringement of U.S. Patent No.
`10,469,966 (Dkt. 123-3) and affirmative
`defense of non-infringement (Dkt. 198-2;
`Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`Google’s claim for a declaration of invalidity
`of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,966 (Dkt. 123-3)
`and affirmative defense of invalidity (Dkt.
`198-2; Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`Google’s claim for a declaration of
`noninfringement of U.S. Patent No.
`10,848,885 (Dkt. 123-3) and affirmative
`defense of non-infringement (Dkt. 198-2;
`Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`Google’s claim for a declaration of invalidity
`of U.S. Patent No. 10,848,885 (Dkt. 123-3)
`and affirmative defense of invalidity (Dkt.
`198-2; Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`Google’s claim for breach of contract (Dkt.
`123-3)
`
`Google’s claim for conversion (Dkt. 123-3)
`
`Moot in light of invalidity and unenforceability
`determination in Dkt. 868.
`
`Judgment favor for Google and against Sonos
`pursuant to Dkt. 868.
`
`Moot in light of invalidity and unenforceability
`determination in Dkt. 868.
`
`Judgment for Google and against Sonos
`pursuant to Dkt. 868.
`
`Dismissed without prejudice based on Google’s
`agreement to withdraw if the Court determined
`that the ’033 claims were invalid. Dkt. 566.
`Dismissed without prejudice based on Google’s
`agreement to withdraw if the Court determined
`that the ’033 claims were invalid. Dkt. 566.
`Dismissed without prejudice based on Google’s
`agreement to withdraw if the Court determined
`that the ’033 claims were invalid. Dkt. 566.
`
`Dismissed without prejudice based on Google’s
`agreement to withdraw if the Court determined
`that the ’033 claims were invalid. Dkt. 566.
`
`Google’s request for a declaration that the
`’033 patent and any Sonos intellectual
`property based on the cloud queue technology
`is Google’s and/or an order requiring Sonos
`to assign such intellectual property to Google
`(Dkt. 123-3)
`Google’s request for monetary damages
`and/or imposition of a constructive trust over
`Sonos’s breach of the Content Integration
`Agreement (Dkt. 123-3)
`Sonos’s unclean hands defenses (Dkt. 175-2) Denied as moot in light of Google’s withdrawal
`of its breach of contract and conversion claims.
`Dkt. 566.
`Denied as moot in light of Google’s withdrawal
`of its breach of contract and conversion claims.
`Dkt. 566.
`Denied as moot in light of Google’s withdrawal
`of its breach of contract and conversion claims.
`Dkt. 566.
`Denied as moot in light of Google’s withdrawal
`of its breach of contract and conversion claims.
`Dkt. 566.
`Denied as moot in light of Google’s withdrawal
`
`Sonos’s defense of frustration of purpose
`(Dkt. 175-2)
`
`Sonos’s defense of breach of covenant of
`good faith and fair dealing (Dkt. 175-2)
`
`Sonos’s novation defenses (Dkt. 175-2)
`
`Sonos’s waiver defenses (Dkt. 175-2)
`
`
`
`
`
`-5-
`GOOGLE’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO AMEND THE JUDGMENT
`
`Case No. 3:20-cv-06754-WHA
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06754-WHA Document 877 Filed 11/07/23 Page 7 of 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
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`Sonos’s statute of limitations defenses (Dkt.
`175-2)
`
`Sonos’s defense of right to possession (Dkt.
`175-2)
`Sonos’s consent defense (Dkt. 175-2)
`
`Sonos’s counterclaim for infringement of
`U.S. Patent No. 9,967,615 (Dkt. 175-2) and
`claim for infringement of U.S. Patent No.
`9,967,615 (Trans. Action, Dkt. 211)
`
`Sonos’s counterclaim for infringement of
`U.S. Patent No. 10,779,033 (Dkt. 175-2) and
`claim for infringement of U.S. Patent No.
`10,779,033 (Trans. Action, Dkt. 211)
`Sonos’s counterclaim for infringement of
`U.S. Patent No. 10,469,966 (Dkt. 175-2) and
`claim for infringement of U.S. Patent No.
`10,469,966 (Trans. Action, Dkt. 211)
`Sonos’s counterclaim for infringement of
`U.S. Patent No. 10,848,885 (Dkt. 175-2) and
`claim for infringement of U.S. Patent No.
`10,848,885 (Trans. Action, Dkt. 211)
`Sonos’s request for an injunction (Dkt. 175-2;
`Trans. Action, Dkt. 211)
`Sonos’s request for enhanced damages for
`Google’s willful infringement (Dkt. 175-2;
`Trans. Action, Dkt. 211)
`Sonos’s request for attorneys’ fees, costs and
`expenses (Dkt. 175-2; Trans. Action, Dkt.
`211)
`Sonos’s request for pre-judgment and post-
`judgment interest (Dkt. 175-2; Trans. Action,
`Dkt. 211)
`Google’s defense of prosecution history
`estoppel (Dkt. 199; Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-
`2)
`Google’s defense of unclean hands (Dkt. 198-
`2; Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`Google’s defense of equitable estoppel (Dkt.
`198-2; Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`Google’s waiver defense (Dkt. 198-2; Trans.
`Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`Google’s defense of implied license (Dkt.
`198-2; Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`
`of its breach of contract and conversion claims.
`Dkt. 566.
`Denied as moot in light of Google’s withdrawal
`of its breach of contract and conversion claims.
`Dkt. 566.
`Denied as moot in light of Google’s withdrawal
`of its conversion claim. Dkt. 566.
`Denied as moot in light of Google’s withdrawal
`of its conversion claim. Dkt. 566.
`Judgment for Google and against Sonos on
`Claim 13 pursuant to Dkt. 316.
`
`Sonos elected not to try the remaining claims
`based on this ruling. Dkt. 615.
`Moot in light of invalidity determination in Dkt.
`566.
`
`Moot in light of invalidity and unenforceability
`determinations in Dkt. 868.
`
`Moot in light of invalidity and unenforceability
`determinations at Dkt. 868.
`
`Denied as moot. Dkt. 868.
`
`Denied as moot. Dkt. 868.
`
`Denied as moot. Dkt. 868.
`
`Denied as moot. Dkt. 868.
`
`Moot in light of determinations for Google on
`all asserted patents. Dkts. 316, 566, 868.
`
`Moot in light of determinations for Google on
`all asserted patents. Dkts. 316, 566, 868.
`Moot in light of determinations for Google on
`all asserted patents. Dkts. 316, 566, 868.
`Moot in light of determinations for Google on
`all asserted patents. Dkts. 316, 566, 868.
`Moot in light of determinations for Google on
`all asserted patents. Dkts. 316, 566, 868.
`
`
`
`
`
`-6-
`GOOGLE’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO AMEND THE JUDGMENT
`
`Case No. 3:20-cv-06754-WHA
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 3:20-cv-06754-WHA Document 877 Filed 11/07/23 Page 8 of 8
`
`
`
`
`
`Google’s defense of limitation on liability
`(Dkt. 198-2; Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`
`Google’s defense of damages limitations
`(Dkt. 198-2; Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`Google’s defense of res judicata (Dkt. 199)
`
`Google’s defense of collateral estoppel (Dkt.
`199)
`Google’s defense of prosecution laches (Dkt.
`198-2; Trans. Action, Dkt. 222-2)
`
`
`IV. CONCLUSION
`
`Moot in light of determinations for Google and
`against Sonos on ’615 and ’033 patents. Dkts.
`316, 566, 615.
`Moot in light of determinations for Google on
`all asserted patents. Dkts. 316, 566, 868.
`Moot in light of determinations for Google on
`all asserted patents. Dkts. 316, 566, 868.
`Moot in light of determinations for Google on
`all asserted patents. Dkts. 316, 566, 868.
`Judgment in favor of Google and against Sonos
`pursuant to Dkt. 868.
`
`Google respectfully requests that the Court enter an amended final judgment in accordance
`
`with the proposed amended judgment submitted herewith.
`
`
`DATED: November 7, 2023
`
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN,
`LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s Sean Pak
`Sean Pak
`Melissa Baily
`James D. Judah
`Lindsay Cooper
`Marc Kaplan
`Iman Lordgooei
`
`
`Attorneys for Google LLC
`
`By
`
`
`
`-7-
`GOOGLE’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO AMEND THE JUDGMENT
`
`Case No. 3:20-cv-06754-WHA
`
`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
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`