Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 1 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART
` & SULLIVAN, LLP
`Kevin P.B. Johnson (CA Bar No. 177129)
`kevinjohnson@quinnemanuel.com
`Ray R. Zado (Bar No. 208501)
`rayzado@quinnemanuel.com
`Brice C. Lynch (CA Bar No. 288567)
`bricelynch@quinnemanuel.com
`555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor
`Redwood Shores, California 94065
`Telephone: (650) 801-5000
`Facsimile: (650) 801-5100
`
`Edward J. DeFranco (CA Bar No. 165596)
`eddefranco@quinnemanuel.com
`Joseph Milowic III (pro hac vice pending)
`josephmilowic@quinnemanuel.com
`51 Madison Ave., 22nd Floor
`New York, New York 10010
`Telephone: (212) 849-7000
`Facsimile: (212) 849-7100
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Memjet
`Technology Limited
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`
`
`MEMJET TECHNOLOGY LIMITED,
`an Irish corporation,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, a
`Delaware Corporation
`
`
`vs.
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
` CASE NO.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT
`INFRINGEMENT
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`'15
`
`CV1769
`
`BLM
`
`BEN
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 2 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Memjet Technology Limited (“Memjet” or “Plaintiff”), by and
`
`through its undersigned counsel, complains and alleges as follows against the
`
`Hewlett-Packard Company (“HP” or “Defendant”):
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This is a civil action for patent infringement arising under the patent
`
`laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq.
`2.
`
`HP has infringed and continues to infringe, contributed to and
`
`continues to contribute to the infringement of, and/or actively induced and
`
`continues to induce others to infringe Memjet’s U.S. Patent No. 6,575,549, U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,880,914, U.S. Patent No. 7,156,492, U.S. Patent No. 7,325,986, U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,662,636, U.S. Patent No. 8,678,550, U.S. Patent No. 8,696,096, and
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,056,475 (collectively, “the Asserted Patents”). Memjet is the
`
`legal owner by assignment of the Asserted Patents, which were duly and legally
`
`issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Memjet seeks injunctive
`
`relief and monetary damages.
`
`THE PARTIES
`3. Memjet Technology Ltd. is a corporation organized under the laws of
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`Ireland, with its principal place of business at 61/62 Fitzwilliam Lane, Dublin 2,
`
`19
`
`20
`
`Ireland.
`4.
`
`On information and belief, Hewlett-Packard Company is a corporation
`
`21
`
`organized under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of
`
`22
`
`business located at 3000 Hanover Street, Palo Alto, CA 94304-1185.
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`5.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action under
`
`28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`6.
`
`HP is subject to this Court’s personal jurisdiction. HP regularly
`
`27
`
`conducts business in the Southern District of California at its facility at 16399 W
`
`28
`
`Bernardo Dr, San Diego, CA 92127. HP has committed acts of patent infringement
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-2-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 3 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`and has contributed to and induced acts of patent infringement by others in this
`
`District. HP designed, developed and/or tested its infringing pagewide printing
`
`products in this District. HP has publicly demonstrated its infringing pagewide
`
`products in this District (e.g., HP demonstrated the HP PageWide XL Printer at the
`
`2015 Esri User Conference, held July 20–24, 2015 in San Diego). As such, HP has
`
`purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting business within this
`
`District; has established sufficient minimum contacts with this District such that it
`
`should reasonably and fairly anticipate being haled into court in this District; has
`
`purposefully directed activities at residents of this State and District; and it has
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`committed patent infringement in this State and District.
`7.
`
`Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391
`
`12
`
`& 1400 because HP regularly conducts business in this District, and certain acts
`
`13
`
`complained of herein occurred in this District.
`
`14
`
`15
`
`8.
`
`MEMJET’S ASSERTED PATENTS
`
`On June 10, 2003, the United States Patent Office issued U.S. Patent
`
`16
`
`No. 6,575,549 (the “’549 patent”), titled “Ink Jet Fault Tolerance Using Adjacent
`
`17
`
`18
`
`Nozzles.” A true and correct copy of the ’549 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`9.
`
`On April 19, 2005, the United States Patent Office issued U.S. Patent
`
`19
`
`No. 6,880,914 (the “’914 patent”), titled “Inkjet Pagewidth Printer For High Volume
`
`20
`
`Pagewidth Printing.” A true and correct copy of the ’914 patent is attached hereto
`
`21
`
`22
`
`as Exhibit B.
`10. On January 2, 2007, the United States Patent Office issued U.S. Patent
`
`23
`
`No. 7,156,492 (the “’492 patent”), titled “Modular Printhead Assembly With A
`
`24
`
`Carrier Of A Metal Alloy.” A true and correct copy of the ’492 patent is attached
`
`25
`
`26
`
`hereto as Exhibit C.
`11. On February 5, 2008, the United States Patent Office issued U.S. Patent
`
`27
`
`No. 7,325,986 (the “’986 patent”), titled “Printhead Assembly with Stacked Ink
`
`28
`
`Distribution Sheets.” A true and correct copy of the ‘986 patent is attached hereto
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-3-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 4 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`as Exhibit D.
`12. On March 4, 2014, the United States Patent Office issued U.S. Patent
`
`No. 8,662,636 (the “’636 patent”), titled “Inkjet Printhead Having Rows Of
`
`Printhead Segments.” A true and correct copy of the ’636 patent is attached hereto
`
`as Exhibit E.
`13. On March 25, 2014, the United States Patent Office issued U.S. Patent
`
`No. 8,678,550 (the “’550 patent”), titled “Printhead Assembly With Laminated Ink
`
`Distribution Stack.” A true and correct copy of the ’550 patent is attached hereto as
`
`Exhibit F.
`14. On April 15, 2014, the United States Patent Office issued U.S. Patent
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`No. 8,696,096 (the “’096 patent”), titled “Laminated Ink Supply Structure Mounted
`
`12
`
`In Ink Distribution Arrangement Of An Inkjet Printer.” A true and correct copy of
`
`13
`
`14
`
`the ’096 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
`15. On June 16, 2015, the United States Patent Office issued U.S. Patent
`
`15
`
`No. 9,056,475 (the “’475 patent”), titled “Inkjet Printer With Web Feed
`
`16
`
`Maintenance Assembly.” A true and correct copy of the ’475 patent is attached
`
`17
`
`18
`
`hereto as Exhibit H.
`16. Memjet is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to each of the
`
`19
`
`Asserted Patents with full and exclusive right to bring suit to enforce the Asserted
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`Patents, including the right to recover for past damages and/or royalties.
`17. The Asserted Patents are valid and enforceable.
`
`COUNT I
`
`Infringement of the ’549 Patent
`18. Memjet re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations of the
`
`preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
`19. On information and belief, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, HP has
`
`27
`
`infringed and is currently infringing one or more claims of the ’549 patent, including
`
`28
`
`but not limited to claim 1, directly and/or indirectly, by making, using, selling,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-4-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 5 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`offering for sale, and/or importing into the United States, without authority certain
`
`products, including the OfficeJet Pro X Series products, and on information and
`
`belief, OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products, HP PageWide XL Printers, and
`
`printers using 4.25-inch thermal inkjet printheads, including HP Web Presses and
`
`Photo Kiosks. HP has infringed and is currently infringing literally and/or under the
`
`doctrine of equivalents.
`20. HP has actual knowledge of its infringement of the ’549 patent at least
`
`as of the filing date of this Complaint.
`21. On information and belief, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, HP has
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`actively induced and/or is continuing to actively induce infringement of the ’549
`
`11
`
`patent by encouraging acts of direct infringement, and HP knows (or believes there
`
`12
`
`is a high probability, but is taking deliberate steps to avoid knowing) that it is
`
`13
`
`inducing direct infringement by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
`
`14
`
`importing into the United States, without authority OfficeJet Pro X Series products,
`
`15
`
`and on information and belief, OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products, and printers
`
`16
`
`using 4.25-inch thermal inkjet printheads, including HP Web Presses and Photo
`
`17
`
`Kiosks that practice one or more claims of the ’549 patent. On information and
`
`18
`
`belief, HP knows (or believes there is a high probability, but is taking deliberate
`
`19
`
`steps to avoid knowing) that third parties, such as customers, directly infringe, and
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`HP intends its products be used by third party entities to infringe the ’549 patent.
`22. For example, on information and belief, HP offers, sells and markets
`
`(and after the filing of this complaint continues to offer, sell and market) its
`
`products, including the OfficeJet Pro X Series products, its OfficeJet Enterprise X
`
`Series products, and printers using 4.25-inch thermal inkjet printheads, including
`
`HP Web Presses and Photo Kiosks, through its web site and through various
`
`channels including U.S. distributors and/or other third parties.
`23. On information and belief, HP’s actions as alleged herein have
`
`contributed and are continuing to contribute to infringement of the ’549 patent by
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-5-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 6 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`offering to sell or selling within the United States or importing into the United
`
`States a component of a patented machine, manufacture, combination, or
`
`composition, or a material or apparatus for use in practicing a patented process,
`
`constituting a material part of the claimed invention(s) of the ’549 patent, knowing
`
`the same to be especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of
`
`such patent, and not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for
`
`substantial non-infringing use.
`24. For example, as set forth above, on information and belief, HP’s
`
`OfficeJet Pro X Series products, OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products, and
`
`printers using 4.25-inch thermal inkjet printheads, including HP Web Presses and
`
`Photo Kiosks are designed, manufactured, and sold, so as to practice one or more
`
`claims of the ’549 patent when used. On information and belief, the OfficeJet Pro
`
`X Series products, OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products, and printers using 4.25-
`
`inch thermal inkjet printheads, including HP Web Presses and Photo Kiosks
`
`therefore have no substantial non-infringing uses.
`25. HP is not licensed or otherwise authorized to practice, contributorily
`
`practice and/or induce third parties to practice the claims of the ’549 patent.
`26. By reason of HP’s infringing activities, Memjet has suffered, and will
`
`continue to suffer, substantial damages.
`27. Memjet is entitled to recover from HP the damages sustained as a result
`
`of HP’s wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial.
`28. HP’s continuing acts of infringement are irreparably harming and
`
`causing damage to Memjet, for which Memjet has no adequate remedy at law, and
`
`Memjet will continue to suffer such irreparable injury unless HP’s continuing acts
`
`of infringement are enjoined by the Court. The hardships that an injunction would
`
`impose are less than those faced by Memjet should an injunction not issue. The
`
`public interest would be served by issuance of an injunction. Thus, Memjet is
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-6-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 7 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`entitled to a preliminary and a permanent injunction against further infringement of
`
`the ’549 patent.
`29. On information and belief, HP’s infringement of the ’549 patent, at
`
`least as of the filing of this complaint, constitutes willful infringement justifying a
`
`trebling of damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284. Upon information and belief, HP’s
`
`accused actions continue despite an objectively high likelihood that they constitute
`
`infringement of the ’549 patent. HP either knows or should have known about its
`
`risk of infringing the ’549 patent. HP’s conduct despite this knowledge is made
`
`with both objective and subjective reckless disregard for the infringing nature of its
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`activities.
`30. On information and belief, HP’s continuing infringement of the ’549
`
`12
`
`patent is exceptional and entitles Memjet to attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in
`
`13
`
`prosecuting this action under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`COUNT II
`
`Infringement of the ’914 Patent
`31. Memjet re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations of the
`
`preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
`32.
`
`In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, HP has infringed and is currently
`
`19
`
`infringing one or more claims of the ’914 patent, including but not limited to claim
`
`20
`
`1, directly and/or indirectly, by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
`
`21
`
`importing into the United States, without authority certain products, including the
`
`22
`
`HP PageWide XL Printers. For example, HP demonstrated the HP PageWide XL
`
`23
`
`Printer at the 2015 Esri User Conference, held July 20–24 in San Diego. HP has
`
`24
`
`infringed and is currently infringing literally and/or under the doctrine of
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`equivalents.
`33. HP has actual knowledge of its infringement of the ’914 patent at least
`
`as of the filing date of this Complaint.
`34. HP is not licensed or otherwise authorized to practice the claims of the
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-7-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 8 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`’914 patent.
`35. By reason of HP’s infringing activities, Memjet has suffered, and will
`
`continue to suffer, substantial damages.
`36. Memjet is entitled to recover from HP the damages sustained as a result
`
`of HP’s wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial.
`37. HP’s continuing acts of infringement are irreparably harming and
`
`causing damage to Memjet, for which Memjet has no adequate remedy at law, and
`
`Memjet will continue to suffer such irreparable injury unless HP’s continuing acts
`
`of infringement are enjoined by the Court. The hardships that an injunction would
`
`impose are less than those faced by Memjet should an injunction not issue. The
`
`public interest would be served by issuance of an injunction. Thus, Memjet is
`
`entitled to a preliminary and a permanent injunction against further infringement of
`
`the ’914 patent.
`38. On information and belief, HP’s infringement of the ’914 patent, at
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`least as of the filing of this complaint, constitutes willful infringement justifying a
`
`16
`
`trebling of damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284. Upon information and belief, HP’s
`
`17
`
`accused actions continue despite an objectively high likelihood that they constitute
`
`18
`
`infringement of the ’914 patent. HPs either knows or should have known about its
`
`19
`
`risk of infringing the ’914 patent. HP’s conduct despite this knowledge is made
`
`20
`
`with both objective and subjective reckless disregard for the infringing nature of its
`
`21
`
`22
`
`activities.
`39. On information and belief, HP’s continuing infringement of the ’914
`
`23
`
`patent is exceptional and entitles Memjet to attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in
`
`24
`
`prosecuting this action under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`COUNT III
`
`Infringement of the ’492 Patent
`40. Memjet re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations of the
`
`28
`
`preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-8-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 9 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`41.
`
`In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, HP has infringed and is currently
`
`infringing one or more claims of the ’492 patent, including but not limited to claim
`
`1, directly and/or indirectly, by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
`
`importing into the United States, without authority certain products, including the
`
`OfficeJet Pro X Series products, and on information and belief, OfficeJet Enterprise
`
`X Series products, and HP PageWide XL Printers. HP has infringed and is currently
`
`infringing literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents.
`42. HP has actual knowledge of its infringement of the ’492 patent at least
`
`as of the filing date of this Complaint.
`43. On information and belief, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, HP has
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`actively induced and/or is continuing to actively induce infringement of the ’492
`
`12
`
`patent by encouraging acts of direct infringement, and HP knows (or believes there
`
`13
`
`is a high probability, but is taking deliberate steps to avoid knowing) that it is
`
`14
`
`inducing direct infringement by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
`
`15
`
`importing into the United States, without authority OfficeJet Pro X Series products,
`
`16
`
`and on information and belief, OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products. On
`
`17
`
`information and belief, HP knows (or believes there is a high probability, but is
`
`18
`
`taking deliberate steps to avoid knowing) that third parties, such as customers,
`
`19
`
`directly infringe, and HP intends its products be used by third party entities to
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`infringe the ’492 patent.
`44. For example, on information and belief, HP offers, sells and markets
`
`(and after the filing of this complaint continues to offer, sell and market) its
`
`products, including the OfficeJet Pro X Series products and its OfficeJet Enterprise
`
`X Series products, through its web site and through various channels including U.S.
`
`distributors and/or other third parties.
`45. On information and belief, HP’s actions as alleged herein have
`
`contributed and are continuing to contribute to infringement of the ’492 patent by
`
`offering to sell or selling within the United States or importing into the United
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-9-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 10 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`States a component of a patented machine, manufacture, combination, or
`
`composition, or a material or apparatus for use in practicing a patented process,
`
`constituting a material part of the claimed invention(s) of the ’492 patent, knowing
`
`the same to be especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of
`
`such patent, and not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for
`
`substantial non-infringing use.
`46. For example, as set forth above, on information and belief, HP’s
`
`OfficeJet Pro X Series products and OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products are
`
`designed, manufactured, and sold, so as to practice one or more claims of the ’492
`
`patent when used. On information and belief, the OfficeJet Pro X Series products
`
`and OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products therefore have no substantial non-
`
`infringing uses.
`47. HP is not licensed or otherwise authorized to practice, contributorily
`
`practice and/or induce third parties to practice the claims of the ’492 patent.
`48. By reason of HP’s infringing activities, Memjet has suffered, and will
`
`continue to suffer, substantial damages.
`49. Memjet is entitled to recover from HP the damages sustained as a result
`
`of HP’s wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial.
`50. HP’s continuing acts of infringement are irreparably harming and
`
`causing damage to Memjet, for which Memjet has no adequate remedy at law, and
`
`Memjet will continue to suffer such irreparable injury unless HP’s continuing acts
`
`of infringement are enjoined by the Court. The hardships that an injunction would
`
`impose are less than those faced by Memjet should an injunction not issue. The
`
`public interest would be served by issuance of an injunction. Thus, Memjet is
`
`entitled to a preliminary and a permanent injunction against further infringement of
`
`the ’492 patent.
`51. On information and belief, HP’s infringement of the ’492 patent, at
`
`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
`
`least as of the filing of this complaint, constitutes willful infringement justifying a
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-10-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 11 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`trebling of damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284. Upon information and belief, HP’s
`
`accused actions continue despite an objectively high likelihood that they constitute
`
`infringement of the ’492 patent. HPs either knows or should have known about its
`
`risk of infringing the ’492 patent. HP’s conduct despite this knowledge is made
`
`with both objective and subjective reckless disregard for the infringing nature of its
`
`activities.
`52. On information and belief, HP’s continuing infringement of the ’492
`
`patent is exceptional and entitles Memjet to attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in
`
`prosecuting this action under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
`
`COUNT IV
`
`Infringement of the ’986 Patent
`53. Memjet re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations of the
`
`preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
`54.
`
`In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, HP has infringed and is currently
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`infringing one or more claims of the ’986 patent, including but not limited to claim
`
`16
`
`1, directly and/or indirectly, by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
`
`17
`
`importing into the United States, without authority certain products, including the
`
`18
`
`OfficeJet Pro X Series products, and on information and belief, OfficeJet Enterprise
`
`19
`
`X Series products, and HP PageWide XL Printers. HP has infringed and is currently
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`infringing literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents.
`55. HP has actual knowledge of its infringement of the ’986 patent at least
`
`as of the filing date of this Complaint.
`56. On information and belief, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, HP has
`
`24
`
`actively induced and/or is continuing to actively induce infringement of the ’986
`
`25
`
`patent by encouraging acts of direct infringement, and HP knows (or believes there
`
`26
`
`is a high probability, but is taking deliberate steps to avoid knowing) that it is
`
`27
`
`inducing direct infringement by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
`
`28
`
`importing into the United States, without authority OfficeJet Pro X Series products,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-11-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 12 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`and on information and belief, OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products that practice
`
`one or more claims of the ’986 patent. On information and belief, HP knows (or
`
`believes there is a high probability, but is taking deliberate steps to avoid knowing)
`
`that third parties, such as customers, directly infringe and HP intends its products be
`
`used by third party entities to infringe the ’986 patent.
`57. For example, on information and belief, HP offers, sells and markets
`
`(and after the filing of this complaint continues to offer, sell and market) its
`
`products, including the OfficeJet Pro X Series products and its OfficeJet Enterprise
`
`X Series products, through its web site and through various channels including U.S.
`
`distributors and/or other third parties.
`58. On information and belief, HP’s actions as alleged herein have
`
`contributed and are continuing to contribute to infringement of the ’986 patent by
`
`offering to sell or selling within the United States or importing into the United
`
`States a component of a patented machine, manufacture, combination, or
`
`composition, or a material or apparatus for use in practicing a patented process,
`
`constituting a material part of the claimed invention(s) of the ’986 patent, knowing
`
`the same to be especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of
`
`such patent, and not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for
`
`substantial non-infringing use.
`59. For example, as set forth above, on information and belief, HP’s
`
`OfficeJet Pro X Series products and OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products are
`
`designed, manufactured, and sold, so as to practice one or more claims of the ’986
`
`patent when used. On information and belief, the OfficeJet Pro X Series products
`
`and OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products therefore have no substantial non-
`
`infringing uses.
`60. HP is not licensed or otherwise authorized to practice, contributorily
`
`practice and/or induce third parties to practice the claims of the ’986 patent.
`61. By reason of HP’s infringing activities, Memjet has suffered, and will
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-12-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 13 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`continue to suffer, substantial damages.
`62. Memjet is entitled to recover from HP the damages sustained as a result
`
`of HP’s wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial.
`63. HP’s continuing acts of infringement are irreparably harming and
`
`causing damage to Memjet, for which Memjet has no adequate remedy at law, and
`
`Memjet will continue to suffer such irreparable injury unless HP’s continuing acts
`
`of infringement are enjoined by the Court. The hardships that an injunction would
`
`impose are less than those faced by Memjet should an injunction not issue. The
`
`public interest would be served by issuance of an injunction. Thus, Memjet is
`
`entitled to a preliminary and a permanent injunction against further infringement of
`
`the ’986 patent.
`64. On information and belief, HP’s infringement of the ’986 patent, at
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`least as of the filing of this complaint, constitutes willful infringement justifying a
`
`14
`
`trebling of damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284. Upon information and belief, HP’s
`
`15
`
`accused actions continue despite an objectively high likelihood that they constitute
`
`16
`
`infringement of the ’986 patent. HPs either knows or should have known about its
`
`17
`
`risk of infringing the ’986 patent. HP’s conduct despite this knowledge is made
`
`18
`
`with both objective and subjective reckless disregard for the infringing nature of its
`
`19
`
`20
`
`activities.
`65. On information and belief, HP’s continuing infringement of the ’986
`
`21
`
`patent is exceptional and entitles Memjet to attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in
`
`22
`
`prosecuting this action under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`COUNT V
`
`Infringement of the ’636 Patent
`66. Memjet re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations of the
`
`preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
`67.
`
`In violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, HP has infringed and is currently
`
`28
`
`infringing one or more claims of the ’636 patent, including but not limited to claim
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-13-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 14 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`16, directly and/or indirectly, by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
`
`importing into the United States, without authority certain products, including the
`
`OfficeJet Pro X Series products, and on information and belief, OfficeJet Enterprise
`
`X Series products, HP PageWide XL Printers, and printers using 4.25-inch thermal
`
`inkjet printheads, including HP Web Presses, Photo Kiosks, and Wide Scan printers.
`
`HP has infringed and is currently infringing literally and/or under the doctrine of
`
`equivalents.
`68. HP has actual knowledge of its infringement of the ’636 patent at least
`
`as of the filing date of this Complaint.
`69. On information and belief, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, HP has
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`actively induced and/or is continuing to actively induce infringement of the ’636
`
`12
`
`patent by encouraging acts of direct infringement, and HP knows (or believes there
`
`13
`
`is a high probability, but is taking deliberate steps to avoid knowing) that it is
`
`14
`
`inducing direct infringement by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or
`
`15
`
`importing into the United States, without authority OfficeJet Pro X Series products,
`
`16
`
`and on information and belief, OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products, and printers
`
`17
`
`using 4.25-inch thermal inkjet printheads, including HP Web Presses and Photo
`
`18
`
`Kiosks that practice one or more claims of the ’636 patent. On information and
`
`19
`
`belief, HP knows (or believes there is a high probability, but is taking deliberate
`
`20
`
`steps to avoid knowing) that third parties, such as customers, directly infringe, and
`
`HP intends its products be used by third party entities to infringe the ’636 patent.
`70. For example, on information and belief, HP offers, sells and markets
`
`(and after the filing of this complaint continues to offer, sell and market) its
`
`products, including the OfficeJet Pro X Series products, its OfficeJet Enterprise X
`
`Series products, and printers using 4.25-inch thermal inkjet printheads, including
`
`HP Web Presses and Photo Kiosks, through its web site and through various
`
`channels including U.S. distributors and/or other third parties.
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-14-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 15 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`71. On information and belief, HP’s actions as alleged herein have
`
`contributed and are continuing to contribute to infringement of the ’636 patent by
`
`offering to sell or selling within the United States or importing into the United
`
`States a component of a patented machine, manufacture, combination, or
`
`composition, or a material or apparatus for use in practicing a patented process,
`
`constituting a material part of the claimed invention(s) of the ’636 patent, knowing
`
`the same to be especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of
`
`such patent, and not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for
`
`substantial non-infringing use.
`72. For example, as set forth above, on information and belief, HP’s
`
`OfficeJet Pro X Series products, OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products, and
`
`printers using 4.25-inch thermal inkjet printheads, including HP Web Presses and
`
`Photo Kiosks are designed, manufactured, and sold, so as to practice one or more
`
`claims of the ’636 patent when used. On information and belief, the OfficeJet Pro
`
`X Series products, OfficeJet Enterprise X Series products, and printers using 4.25-
`
`inch thermal inkjet printheads, including HP Web Presses and Photo Kiosks
`
`therefore have no substantial non-infringing uses.
`73. HP is not licensed or otherwise authorized to practice, contributorily
`
`practice and/or induce third parties to practice the claims of the ’636 patent.
`74. By reason of HP’s infringing activities, Memjet has suffered, and will
`
`continue to suffer, substantial damages.
`75. Memjet is entitled to recover from HP the damages sustained as a result
`
`of HP’s wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial.
`76. HP’s continuing acts of infringement are irreparably harming and
`
`causing damage to Memjet, for which Memjet has no adequate remedy at law, and
`
`Memjet will continue to suffer such irreparable injury unless HP’s continuing acts
`
`of infringement are enjoined by the Court. The hardships that an injunction would
`
`impose are less than those faced by Memjet should an injunction not issue. The
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-15-
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`
`Case 3:15-cv-01769-BEN-BLM Document 1 Filed 08/11/15 Page 16 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`