Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8727 Filed 01/07/23 Page 1 of 14
`
`
`IN RE NEO WIRELESS, LLC
`PATENT LITIG.
`
`
`2:22-md-03034-TGB
`
`
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
`SOUTHERN DIVISION
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`2:22-cv-11402-TGB
`
`
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
` JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` §
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`Defendant.
`§
`
`NEO WIRELESS LLC’S ANSWER TO FORD MOTOR COMPANY’S
`COUNTERCLAIMS
`Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Neo Wireless LLC (“Neo”) hereby submits its
`
`
`NEO WIRELESS, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`FORD MOTOR COMPANY,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Answer to Defendant/Cross-Plaintiff Ford Motor Company (“Ford”)’s
`
`Counterclaims filed December 16, 2022, on information, knowledge and belief as
`
`follows:
`
`1.
`
`Admitted.
`
`BACKGROUND1
`
`
`1 Neo reproduces the headlines of Ford’s Counterclaims as they appear in that filing solely for convenience. To the
`extent that any of the headlines can be construed as allegations, they are denied.
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN RE NEO WIRELESS, LLC
`PATENT LITIG.
`
`
`2:22-md-03034-TGB
`
`
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
`SOUTHERN DIVISION
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`2:22-cv-11402-TGB
`
`
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
` JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` §
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`Defendant.
`§
`
`NEO WIRELESS LLC’S ANSWER TO FORD MOTOR COMPANY’S
`COUNTERCLAIMS
`Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Neo Wireless LLC (“Neo”) hereby submits its
`
`
`NEO WIRELESS, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`FORD MOTOR COMPANY,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Answer to Defendant/Cross-Plaintiff Ford Motor Company (“Ford”)’s
`
`Counterclaims filed December 16, 2022, on information, knowledge and belief as
`
`follows:
`
`1.
`
`Admitted.
`
`BACKGROUND1
`
`
`1 Neo reproduces the headlines of Ford’s Counterclaims as they appear in that filing solely for convenience. To the
`extent that any of the headlines can be construed as allegations, they are denied.
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8728 Filed 01/07/23 Page 2 of 14
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Paragraph 3 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`PARTIES
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`Paragraph 6 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`7.
`
`Paragraph 7 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT ONE: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT
`OF THE ’366 PATENT
`Paragraph 8 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`8.
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`9.
`
`Admitted.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8729 Filed 01/07/23 Page 3 of 14
`
`10. Paragraph 10 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`11. Paragraph 11 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`12. Paragraph 12 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT TWO: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT
`OF THE ’908 PATENT
`13. Paragraph 13 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`14. Admitted.
`
`15. Paragraph 15 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8730 Filed 01/07/23 Page 4 of 14
`
`16. Paragraph 16 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`17. Paragraph 17 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT THREE: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-
`INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’941 PATENT
`18. Paragraph 18 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`19. Admitted.
`
`20. Paragraph 20 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`21. Paragraph 21 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8731 Filed 01/07/23 Page 5 of 14
`
`22. Paragraph 22 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT FOUR: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-
`INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’450 PATENT
`23. Paragraph 23 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`24. Admitted.
`
`25. Paragraph 25 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`26. Paragraph 26 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`27. Paragraph 27 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT FIVE: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT
`OF THE ’512 PATENT
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8732 Filed 01/07/23 Page 6 of 14
`
`28. Paragraph 28 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`29. Admitted.
`
`30. Paragraph 30 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`31. Paragraph 31 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`32. Paragraph 32 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT SIX: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT
`OF THE ’302 PATENT
`33. Paragraph 33 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`34. Admitted.
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8733 Filed 01/07/23 Page 7 of 14
`
`35. Paragraph 35 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`36. Paragraph 36 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`37. Paragraph 37 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT SEVEN: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY OF
`THE ’366 PATENT
`38. Paragraph 38 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`39. Admitted.
`
`40. Paragraph 40 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`41. Paragraph 41 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8734 Filed 01/07/23 Page 8 of 14
`
`42. Paragraph 42 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT EIGHT: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY OF
`THE ’908 PATENT
`43. Paragraph 43 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`44. Admitted.
`
`45. Paragraph 45 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`46. Paragraph 46 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`47. Paragraph 47 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT NINE: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY OF THE
`’941 PATENT
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8735 Filed 01/07/23 Page 9 of 14
`
`48. Paragraph 48 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`49. Admitted.
`
`50. Paragraph 50 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`51. Paragraph 51 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`52. Paragraph 52 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT TEN: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY OF THE
`’450 PATENT
`53. Paragraph 53 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`54. Admitted.
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8736 Filed 01/07/23 Page 10 of 14
`
`55. Paragraph 55 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`56. Paragraph 56 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`57. Paragraph 57 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT ELEVEN: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY OF
`THE ’512 PATENT
`58. Paragraph 58 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`59. Admitted.
`
`60. Paragraph 60 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`61. Paragraph 61 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8737 Filed 01/07/23 Page 11 of 14
`
`62. Paragraph 62 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT TWELVE: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY OF
`THE ’302 PATENT
`63. Paragraph 63 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`64. Admitted.
`
`65. Paragraph 65 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`66. Paragraph 66 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`67. Paragraph 67 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`COUNT THIRTEEN: UNENFORCEABILITY DUE TO INEQUITABLE
`CONDUCT
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8738 Filed 01/07/23 Page 12 of 14
`
`68. Paragraph 68 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`69. Denied.
`
`70. Denied.
`
`71. Paragraph 71 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations, including those incorporated by reference, except that Neo admits that
`
`the inventors of each patent in suit signed an inventor declaration, and those
`
`declarations were recorded.
`
`72. Paragraph 72 contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent a response is required, Neo denies any remaining
`
`allegations.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`Neo denies that Ford is entitled to judgment in its favor or to any of the
`
`relief listed in Ford’s Prayer for Relief.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`Neo admits that Ford has demanded a jury trial for its counterclaims.
`
`DEFENSES
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8739 Filed 01/07/23 Page 13 of 14
`
`Neo asserts the following affirmative and other defenses set forth below in
`
`response to Ford’s Counterclaims. Neo does not concede that it bears the burden of
`
`proof as to any of them. Fact discovery is ongoing in this matter, and Neo reserves
`
`the right to amend, modify, or expand these defenses and to take further positions
`
`as discovery proceeds in this matter.
`
`FIRST DEFENSE
`Ford’s counterclaims fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
`
`RESERVATION OF DEFENSES
`
`
`
`Neo alleges all other affirmative defenses under Rule 8(c) of the Federal
`
`Rules of Civil Procedure and any other defense, at law or in equity, which may
`
`potentially become available as a result of information developed through
`
`discovery or trial.
`
`DATED: January 7, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Jason D. Cassady
`Jason D. Cassady
`Texas State Bar No. 24045625
`Email: jcassady@caldwellcc.com
`Christopher S. Stewart
`Texas State Bar No. 24079399
`Email: cstewart@caldwellcc.com
`CALDWELL CASSADY CURRY
`P.C.
`2121 N. Pearl St., Suite 1200
`Dallas, Texas 75201
`Telephone: (214) 888-4848
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 112, PageID.8740 Filed 01/07/23 Page 14 of 14
`
`Facsimile: (214) 888-4849
`
`Jaye Quadrozzi (P71646)
`YOUNG, GARCIA &
`QUADROZZI, PC
`2775 Stansbury Blvd., Suite 125
`Farmington Hills, MI 48334
`Telephone: (248) 353-8620
`Email: quadrozzi@youngpc.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`NEO WIRELESS, LLC
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that on January 7, 2023, the foregoing document
`
`was filed electronically with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which
`
`will send notification of such filing to all attorneys of record.
`
`
`
`/s/ Jason D. Cassady
`Jason D. Cassady
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
