Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1380 Filed 07/20/22 Page 1 of 39
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
`SOUTHERN DIVISION
`
`
`IN RE NEO WIRELESS, LLC
`PATENT LITIG.
`
`
`2:22-MD-03034-TGB
`
`
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
`
`2:22-CV-11407-TGB
`
`
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
` JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
` §
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`NEO WIRELESS, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`GENERAL MOTORS
`COMPANY & GENERAL
`MOTORS LLC,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF NEO WIRELESS LLC’S FIRST AMENDED
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Neo Wireless LLC (“Neo Wireless,” “Neo,” or “Plaintiff”), brings this
`
`action for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271 against Defendants General
`
`Motors Company and General Motors LLC (collectively, “GM,” “GM
`
`Defendants,” or “Defendants”). Plaintiff alleges, based upon its own personal
`
`knowledge with respect to its own actions and based upon information and belief
`
`with respect to all others’ actions, as follows:
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
`SOUTHERN DIVISION
`
`
`IN RE NEO WIRELESS, LLC
`PATENT LITIG.
`
`
`2:22-MD-03034-TGB
`
`
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
`
`2:22-CV-11407-TGB
`
`
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
` JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
` §
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`NEO WIRELESS, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`GENERAL MOTORS
`COMPANY & GENERAL
`MOTORS LLC,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF NEO WIRELESS LLC’S FIRST AMENDED
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Neo Wireless LLC (“Neo Wireless,” “Neo,” or “Plaintiff”), brings this
`
`action for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271 against Defendants General
`
`Motors Company and General Motors LLC (collectively, “GM,” “GM
`
`Defendants,” or “Defendants”). Plaintiff alleges, based upon its own personal
`
`knowledge with respect to its own actions and based upon information and belief
`
`with respect to all others’ actions, as follows:
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1381 Filed 07/20/22 Page 2 of 39
`
`
`
`THE PARTIES
`Plaintiff Neo Wireless LLC is a Delaware corporation with its
`
`1.
`
`principal place of business located in Wayne, Pennsylvania.
`
`2.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant General Motors Company
`
`(“GMC”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of
`
`Delaware, with its principal place of business at 300 Renaissance Center in Detroit,
`
`Michigan. GMC may be served through its registered agent, Corporation Service
`
`Company, 251 Little Falls Drive, Wilmington, DE, 19808.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant General Motors LLC (“GM LLC”) is a corporation
`
`organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, with its principal
`
`place of business at 300 Renaissance Center in Detroit, Michigan. GM LLC may
`
`be served through its registered agent, Corporation Service Company d/b/a CSC-
`
`Lawyers Incorporating Service Company at 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin,
`
`TX 78701-4234.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`This action includes a claim of patent infringement arising under the
`
`4.
`
`patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.
`
`5.
`
`Subject matter jurisdiction is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C.
`
`§§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1382 Filed 07/20/22 Page 3 of 39
`
`
`
`6.
`
`Venue in the Eastern District of Texas is proper under 28 U.S.C.
`
`§ 1400(b) against Defendants because, on information and belief, each GM
`
`Defendant (1) has committed acts of infringement in the Eastern District of Texas
`
`and (2) has a regular and established place of business in the Eastern District of
`
`Texas.
`
`7.
`
`The Eastern District of Texas has personal jurisdiction over GM. On
`
`information and belief, GM LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of GMC.
`
`Defendants have continuous and systematic business contacts with the State of
`
`Texas. Specifically, Defendants conduct business in, have committed acts of patent
`
`infringement in, and have induced acts of patent infringement by others in the
`
`Eastern District of Texas, the State of Texas, and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`Defendants, directly and through subsidiaries or intermediaries, have committed
`
`and continue to commit acts of infringement in the Eastern District of Texas by,
`
`among other things, designing, developing, manufacturing, importing, offering to
`
`sell, and selling products that infringe the asserted patents.
`
`8.
`
`Defendants do and intend to do business in Texas and in the Eastern
`
`District of Texas, directly or through intermediaries, and offer their products and/or
`
`services, including those accused herein of infringement, to customers and
`
`potential customers located in Texas and in the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1383 Filed 07/20/22 Page 4 of 39
`
`
`
`9.
`
`Defendants, both directly and through their subsidiaries or
`
`intermediaries (including distributors, retailers, and others), have purposefully and
`
`voluntarily placed one or more infringing products and/or services, as described
`
`below, into the stream of commerce with the expectation that those products will
`
`be purchased and used by customers and/or consumers in the Eastern District of
`
`Texas.
`
`10. Defendants maintain facilities throughout the state of Texas, including
`
`at least the Austin IT Innovation Center at 13201 McCallen Pass, Austin, TX
`
`78753; an automotive assembly factory at 2525 E Abram St., Arlington, TX
`
`76010;1 a customer engagement center at 7401 E Ben White Blvd., Austin, TX
`
`78741;2 the South Central Regional Office at 545 E John W Carpenter Fwy, Irving,
`
`TX 75062;3 the GM Financial Headquarters at 801 Cherry St., Fort Worth, TX
`
`76102;4 the GM Financial San Antonio Customer Service Center at 3302 N Ellison
`
`Dr., San Antonio, Texas 78251,5 and the Fort Worth Parts Distribution Center at
`
`301 Freedom Drive, Roanoke, Texas 76262.6
`
`
`1 See https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/company_info/facilities/assembly/arlington.html.
`2 See https://www.austincontactcenter.org/event-2529266.
`3 See https://www.gm.com/.
`4 See https://www.gmfinancial.com/en-us/home.html.
`5 See https://www.gmfinancial.com/en-us/home.html.
`6 See https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/company_info/facilities/cca/fortworth.html.
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1384 Filed 07/20/22 Page 5 of 39
`
`
`
`11. Defendants’ Austin Innovation Center employs more than 2,600
`
`employees,7 including innovation excellence teams responsible for GM’s
`
`technological improvements.
`
`12. Defendants employ Software Developers and Engineers working on
`
`GM’s 4G LTE capabilities, myGMC application development, hotspot capabilities,
`
`and other activities related to the making, using, offering for sale, or selling of
`
`GM’s Accused Products in the United States.8 For example, GM currently has job
`
`postings seeking a Senior Software Developer for the Austin IT Innovation Center
`
`who would serve as a Connected Ecosystem Integration employee. This developer
`
`is responsible for working on GM’s functionalities, including software
`
`development, support, data structures, and databases, enabled by the
`
`implementation of 4G LTE capabilities into GM’s accused products.9
`
`13. Defendants maintain at least one “facilit[y] in the Eastern District of
`
`Texas.” Ex. 1. Indeed, Defendants have committed acts of infringement in the
`
`Eastern District of Texas and maintain regular and established places of business in
`
`
`7 See https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2018/06/21/cognitive-convergence-inside-gms-
`austin-tech.html.
`8 See https://search-careers.gm.com/jobs/job/senior-software-developer-austin-jr-000045613/;
`https://search-careers.gm.com/jobs/job/software-developer-austin-jr-000065859/; https://search-
`careers.gm.com/jobs/job/principal-software-architect-technology-innovation-excellence-austin-
`jr-000074956/; https://search-careers.gm.com/jobs/job/principal-cloud-architect-technology-
`innovation-excellence-austin-jr-000074958/.
`9 See https://search-careers.gm.com/jobs/job/senior-software-developer-austin-jr-000045613/.
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1385 Filed 07/20/22 Page 6 of 39
`
`
`
`the Eastern District of Texas, including the Fort Worth Parts Distribution Center
`
`located at 301 Freedom Drive, Roanoke, Texas 76262.10
`
`14. These infringing products and/or services have been and continue to
`
`be made, used, sold, offered for sale, purchased, and/or imported by customers
`
`and/or consumers in the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`15. Defendants have placed the Accused Products into the stream of
`
`commerce by selling and/or offering to sell the Accused Products in the Eastern
`
`District of Texas, shipping Accused Products into the Eastern District of Texas,
`
`and/or shipping Accused Products knowing that those products would be shipped
`
`into the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`THE ASSERTED PATENTS
`The ’366 Patent
`
`I.
`
`16. On June 18, 2013, the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`duly and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 8,467,366 (“the ’366 patent”), entitled
`
`“Methods and Apparatus for Random Access in Multi-Carrier Communication
`
`Systems.” A copy of the ’366 patent is attached as Exhibit 2.
`
`17. The ’366 patent issued from U.S. Patent Application 13/205,579,
`
`which was filed by Neocific Inc. on August 8, 2011 on behalf of the inventors. The
`
`now-issued ’366 patent was assigned from Neocific, Inc. to CFIP NCF LLC on
`
`
`10 See https://www.gm.com/company/usa-operations/texas.
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1386 Filed 07/20/22 Page 7 of 39
`
`
`
`November 22, 2019 before it was assigned to Neo Wireless LLC on January 23,
`
`2020.
`
`18. The ’366 patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`II. The ’908 Patent
`
`19. On November 10, 2020, the United States Patent and Trademark
`
`Office duly and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 10,833,908 (“the ’908 patent”),
`
`entitled “Channel Probing Signal for a Broadband Communication System.” A
`
`copy of the ’908 patent is attached as Exhibit 3.
`
`20. The ’908 patent issued from U.S. Patent Application 16/902,740,
`
`which was filed on June 16, 2020 by Neo Wireless, LLC on behalf of the
`
`inventors.
`
`21. The ’908 patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`III. The ’941 Patent
`
`22. On September 11, 2018, the United States Patent and Trademark
`
`Office duly and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 10,075,941 (“the ’941 patent”),
`
`entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Multi-Carrier Communications With
`
`Adaptive Transmission and Feedback.” A copy of the ’941 patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit 4.
`
`23. The ’941 patent issued from U.S. Patent Application 15/082,878,
`
`which filed by Neocific, Inc. on March 28, 2016. The now-issued ’941 patent was
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1387 Filed 07/20/22 Page 8 of 39
`
`
`
`assigned from Neocific, Inc. to CFIP NCF LLC on November 22, 2019 before it
`
`was assigned to Neo Wireless LLC on January 23, 2020.
`
`24. The ’941 patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`IV. The ’450 Patent
`
`25. On October 15, 2019, the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`duly and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 10,447,450 (“the ’450 patent”), entitled
`
`“Method and System for Multi-Carrier Packet Communication with Reduced
`
`Overhead.” A copy of the ’450 patent is attached as Exhibit 5.
`
`26. The ’450 patent issued from U.S. Patent Application 15/676,421,
`
`which was filed by Neocific, Inc. on August 14, 2017. The now-issued ’450 patent
`
`was later assigned from Neocific, Inc. to CFIP NCF LLC on November 22, 2019
`
`before it was assigned to Neo Wireless LLC on January 23, 2020.
`
`27. The ’450 patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`V. The ’512 Patent
`
`28. On March 30, 2021, the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`duly and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 10,965,512 (“the ’512 patent”), entitled
`
`“Method and Apparatus Using Cell-Specific and Common Pilot Subcarriers in
`
`multi-Carrier, Multi Cell Wireless Communication Networks.” A copy of the ’512
`
`patent is attached as Exhibit 6.
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1388 Filed 07/20/22 Page 9 of 39
`
`
`
`29. The ’512 patent issued from U.S. Patent Application 17/012,813,
`
`which was filed by Neo Wireless on September 4, 2020.
`
`30. The ’512 patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`VI. The ’302 Patent
`
`31. On September 8, 2020, the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`duly and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 10,771,302 (“the ’302 patent”), entitled
`
`“Channel Probing Signal for a Broadband Communication System.” A copy of the
`
`‘302 patent is attached as Exhibit 7.
`
`32. The ’302 patent issued from U.S. Patent Application 15/953,950,
`
`which was filed on April 16, 2018 and was assigned from Neocific, Inc. to CFIP
`
`NCF LLC on November 22, 2019 before it was assigned to Neo Wireless LLC on
`
`January 23, 2020.
`
`33. The ’302 patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`34. Neo Wireless owns all rights, title, and interest in and to each of the
`
`’366, ’908, ’941, ’450, ’512, and ’302 patents (the “Patents-in-Suit”) and possesses
`
`all rights of recovery.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`35.
`
` Inventor Xiaodong (Alex) Li, Ph.D. founded Neocific Inc. in the
`
`early 2000s to design, develop, and implement a new wireless communication
`
`system. He and his co-inventors had extensive experience with wireless
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1389 Filed 07/20/22 Page 10 of 39
`
`
`
`communications systems, including the development of the Wi-Max standards, and
`
`a deep understanding of the flaws in existing systems at the time. The inventors
`
`saw an opportunity to create a new wireless communication system meant to
`
`address those flaws while incorporating cutting-edge Orthogonal Frequency-
`
`Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) based technologies, and, starting in the 2004–
`
`2005 timeframe, they filed patents on the work.
`
`36. Dr. Li served as the President and Founder of Neocific. Dr. Li
`
`obtained his Ph.D. in electrical engineering from the University of Washington, his
`
`M.S. from Shanghai Jiao Tong University, and his B.S. from Tsinghua University.
`
`Dr. Li has authored more than 30 journal and conference papers in wireless
`
`communications, video coding, and networking. He has been granted more than
`
`100 U.S. and foreign patents.
`
`37. Dr. Titus Lo, Ph.D. is a founding employee of Neocific. Dr. Lo
`
`obtained his Ph.D. in electrical engineering from McMaster University and his B.S.
`
`from the University of British Columbia. Dr. Lo has authored more than 30
`
`technical papers in international peer-reviewed journals and presented more than
`
`50 time at industry events. He has been granted more than 100 U.S. and foreign
`
`patents.
`
`38. The inventions in the Patents-in-Suit relate to various improvements
`
`in OFDMA networks and corresponding user equipment, and those improvements
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1390 Filed 07/20/22 Page 11 of 39
`
`
`
`have since been incorporated into the 3GPP standards for 4G/LTE and 5G/NR
`
`networks.
`
`39. Neo Wireless owns all substantial right, title, and interest in the
`
`Patents-in-Suit, and holds the right to sue and recover damages for infringement
`
`thereof.
`
`40. David Loo is the CEO of Plaintiff Neo Wireless. Mr. Loo works and
`
`resides in Wayne, Pennsylvania. Mr. Loo has over a decade of experience as a
`
`licensing executive and patent attorney with a well-established track record of
`
`assisting companies, inventors and patent holders to ensure they are fairly
`
`compensated for their inventions.
`
`41. The wireless communication industry has been developing rapidly
`
`since Bell Labs developed the First Generation of modern commercial cellular
`
`technology in 1984. Multiple wireless communication technologies designated by
`
`generations emerged and brought new capacities to people all over the world. In
`
`2008, 3GPP created and finalized the LTE standards as an upgrade to 3G. The
`
`cellular industry recognized its major benefits, and virtually all cellular device
`
`manufacturers have embraced LTE as the next generation of commercial cellular
`
`technology and developed phones, hotspots, and other cellular-connectivity
`
`devices to utilize the 4G LTE technology.
`
`11
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1391 Filed 07/20/22 Page 12 of 39
`
`
`
`42.
`
`In recent years, automakers have implemented this cellular
`
`communications technology into their vehicles. For example, telematics systems
`
`first debuted in 1996 through OnStar using analog cell networks, which allowed
`
`consumers to receive remote diagnostics, remotely unlock vehicles, and receive
`
`emergency services including aid after a collision. In 2007, 3G technology
`
`emerged bringing greater speed and capacity to these features allowing automakers
`
`to design more advanced functions.
`
`43. When the technology emerged, GM began implementing the newest
`
`4G LTE cellular technology into many of its products. 4G LTE technology
`
`provided for 10 times faster data speeds, increased responsiveness, and the ability
`
`to support voice and data connections simultaneously. 4G LTE connection further
`
`provides consumers with a variety of in-vehicle wi-fi hot spots and vast
`
`entertainment options. As a result, GM could better support a variety of wireless
`
`features including SOS emergency assistance, automatic collision notification,
`
`stolen vehicle tracking, roadside assistance, remote start, remote climate control
`
`adjustment, navigation map updates, live traffic data, and Wi-Fi hotspot, etc.
`
`44. GM provides 4G LTE connectivity in its various products via the
`
`OnStar system integrated into the Accused Products.
`
`45. Building on these 4G LTE capabilities, GM developed and utilizes the
`
`myGMC App that enables its customers to interact with their vehicles from their
`
`12
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1392 Filed 07/20/22 Page 13 of 39
`
`
`
`cellular devices, using the cellular connectivity of the vehicles. Features on the
`
`myGMC app include remote start, unlock and locking the vehicle, and monitor fuel
`
`levels and tire pressure.
`
`46. GM models that implement 4G/LTE communications—including but
`
`not limited to the Blazer, Bolt, Equinox, Sierra, Cadillac XT5, and Encore
`
`models—as well as those that may in the future implement 4G/LTE or 5G/NR
`
`capabilities, are collectively referred to herein as the “Accused Products.”
`
`47. GM’s Accused Products are configured to operate within 4G/LTE
`
`and/or NR/5G cellular networks and in communication with base stations and other
`
`network access points. The cellular networks and base stations are interoperable
`
`and implement the one or more releases of the 4G/LTE and NR/5G 3GPP
`
`standards from release 8 through at least release 17. The cellular networks,
`
`including the cell-serving base stations, are controlled and configured by various
`
`carriers and implemented using a variety of hardware and/or software.
`
`Additionally, each base station may operate differently based on the wireless
`
`conditions, location, and/or network configuration.
`
`48. Additionally, the communications between GM’s Accused Products
`
`and the serving base station include a multitude of signals back and forth in normal
`
`operation, such as when establishing connections, sending and receiving control
`
`information, sending and receiving reference signaling, communicating data in the
`
`13
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1393 Filed 07/20/22 Page 14 of 39
`
`
`
`uplink and downlink, obtaining network parameters, etc. And GM’s Accused
`
`Products do this across a potentially large range of time and locations, including
`
`across a variety of base station equipment and configurations and/or wireless
`
`conditions. As such, GM’s Accused Products are configured to operate across the
`
`various modes, formats, and schemes defined in the 4G/LTE and NR/5G 3GPP
`
`standards.
`
`49. As described further below and set forth in Exhibits 8–13, the
`
`Asserted Patents read onto portions of the 4G/LTE or NR/5G standards, each of
`
`which GM implements in its Accused Products. In particular, GM and/or its
`
`customers and end users must practice one or more claims from each of the
`
`Asserted Patents in order to implement the 4G/LTE and/or NR/5G standards in the
`
`Accused Products. Thus, on information and belief, GM’s implementation(s) of the
`
`LTE/4G and/or NR/5G standards necessarily infringes one or more claims of the
`
`Asserted Patents.
`
`50. GM does not have any rights to the Patents-in-Suit.
`
`51. Neo Wireless has complied with 35 U.S.C. § 287. Neo Wireless does
`
`not make, offer for sale, or sell within the United States any patented article under
`
`the Asserted Patents. Additionally, to the extent it was necessary, Neo Wireless
`
`provided GM with actual notice of its infringement at least by the filing of this
`
`Complaint.
`
`14
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1394 Filed 07/20/22 Page 15 of 39
`
`
`
`52.
`
`In the interest of providing detailed averments of infringement, Neo
`
`Wireless has identified below at least one claim per patent to demonstrate
`
`infringement. However, the selection of claims should not be considered limiting,
`
`and additional claims of the Patents-in-Suit (including method, system, and
`
`apparatus claims) that are infringed by the GM Defendants will be disclosed in
`
`compliance with the Court’s rules related to infringement contentions.
`
`GM’S ACTS OF PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`53. Neo Wireless incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`54. As set forth below, GM’s Accused Products incorporate, without any
`
`license from Neo Wireless, 4G/LTE and/or 5G/NR technology protected by patents
`
`owned by Neo Wireless. Neo Wireless respectfully seeks relief from this Court for
`
`GM’s infringement.
`
`55. Each GM entity has directly infringed, and continues to directly
`
`infringe, the Asserted Patents under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by making, using, selling
`
`and/or offering to sell, in the Eastern District of Texas and elsewhere in the United
`
`States, and/or importing into the Eastern District of Texas and elsewhere in the
`
`United States, one or more of GM’s Accused Products, that is, certain infringing
`
`vehicles outfitted with instrumentalities that infringe the Asserted Patents, as
`
`further described in detail in Counts I–VI infra.
`
`15
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1395 Filed 07/20/22 Page 16 of 39
`
`
`
`56. GMC, directly or by controlling the activities of its subsidiaries,
`
`makes, sells, offers for sale, uses, and imports the Accused Products in the United
`
`States.
`
`57. Similarly, GMC and GM LLC engage in the designing, developing,
`
`testing, and manufacturing of the Accused Products sold, used, and offered for sale
`
`in the United States, as well as the sales the Accused Products.
`
`58. For example, GMC and GM LLC sell, and offer for sale infringing
`
`vehicles outfitted with instrumentalities that infringe the Asserted Patents to its
`
`customers, subsidiaries, distributors, retailers, dealerships and/or end users in the
`
`United States.
`
`59. Moreover, GM has 118 facilities across the United States, including
`
`eleven assembly plants; twenty-two stamping, propulsion, component, and battery
`
`plants; nineteen parts distribution centers; and two engineering campuses
`
`responsible for manufacturing, designing, building, assembling, testing, offering
`
`for sale, and selling the Accused Products sold throughout the United States.11
`
`
`11 See https://www.gm.com/company/usa-
`operations#:~:text=How%20many%20General%20Motors%20plants,centers%3B%20and%20tw
`o%20engineering%20campuses.
`
`16
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1396 Filed 07/20/22 Page 17 of 39
`
`
`
`60. GMC owns and operates the Official General Motors Website that
`
`offers for sale infringing vehicles outfitted with instrumentalities that infringe the
`
`Asserted Patents in the United States.12
`
`61. GMC and GM LLC import foreign-made vehicles outfitted with
`
`instrumentalities that infringe the Asserted Patents for use, sale, offer for sale, and
`
`other distribution throughout the United States.
`
`62. Each GM entity has indirectly infringed the Asserted Patents under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 271(b) by actively inducing infringement by others, such as its
`
`subsidiaries, dealerships, distributors, retailers, and end-user customers, by, for
`
`example, implementing the infringing features in its cellular-capable products,
`
`encouraging its users to take advantage of LTE and/or NR features within the
`
`United States, and/or instructing, dictating, or training its dealerships and
`
`customers to use the infringing features. Because they performed these acts with
`
`full knowledge of the Asserted Patents and their infringement thereof, as set forth
`
`in detail below, each GM entity has specifically intended others such as its
`
`subsidiaries, dealerships, distributors, retailers, and end-user customers to infringe
`
`Neo’s Asserted Patents knowing its subsidiaries, dealerships, distributors, retailers,
`
`and end-user customers’ acts constitute infringement.
`
`
`12 See https://www.gm.com/.
`
`17
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1397 Filed 07/20/22 Page 18 of 39
`
`
`
`63. For example, GMC and GM LLC’s advertising, sales, design,
`
`development and/or technical materials related to the 3GPP LTE/4G and/or 5G/NR
`
`standards associated with the GM Accused Products contained and continue to
`
`contain instructions, directions, suggestions, and/or invitations that invite, entice,
`
`lead on, influence, encourage, prevail on, move by persuasion, and/or cause its
`
`subsidiaries, distributors, retailers, dealerships, customers, and the public to
`
`directly infringe at least one claim of each of the Patents-in-Suit, either literally or
`
`under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`64. GMC and GM LLC provide the above-mentioned technical
`
`documentation and training materials to its subsidiaries, distributors, retailers,
`
`dealerships, customers, and the public that cause end users of the Accused
`
`Products to utilize the products in a manner that directly infringe on one or more
`
`claims of the Asserted Patents, and engaged in such inducement to promote the
`
`sales of the Accused Products (e.g. through user manuals, product support,
`
`marketing materials, technical materials, and training materials) to actively induce
`
`the end users of the Accused Products to infringe the Asserted Patents.
`
`65. Similarly, GMC and GM LLC advertise on their websites to its
`
`customers and other end users that certain vehicles are equipped with Wi-Fi
`
`Hotspot technological capabilities for the Accused Products.13 These
`
`
`13 See, e.g., https://www.gmc.com/suvs/terrain/technology-safety.
`
`18
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1398 Filed 07/20/22 Page 19 of 39
`
`
`
`advertisements are meant to entice sales and the use of the Accused
`
`Instrumentalities. These advertisements, among others, further describe to a
`
`customer or end user how to use the Accused Instrumentalities.
`
`66. GMC and GM LLC further advertise and provide its customers and
`
`end users with specifications describing the Accused Instrumentalities and how
`
`they are used in the Accused Products.
`
`67. GM took the above actions intending to cause infringing acts by
`
`others.
`
`68. Further, GM has made, used, sold, offered to sell, imported and/or
`
`encouraged the making, using, selling, offering to sell, or importing of GM’s
`
`Accused Products despite knowing of an objectively high likelihood that its actions
`
`constituted infringement of the Asserted Patents at all times relevant to this suit.
`
`Alternatively, each GM entity subjectively believed there was a high probability
`
`that others would infringe the Asserted Patents but took deliberate steps to avoid
`
`confirming that it was actively inducing infringement by others.
`
`69. Each GM entity received actual notice of its infringement at least as
`
`early as the date of service of this Complaint. Therefore, each GM entity was or is
`
`now aware of the Asserted Patents or has willfully blinded itself as to the existence
`
`of the Asserted Patents and the Accused Products’ infringement thereof.
`
`19
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1399 Filed 07/20/22 Page 20 of 39
`
`
`
`70. For the reasons described above, GM’s infringement of the Asserted
`
`Patents has been willful.
`
`71. GM’s acts of infringement have caused damage to Neo Wireless. Neo
`
`Wireless is entitled to recover from GM the damages incurred by Neo Wireless as
`
`a result of GM’s wrongful acts.
`
`COUNT ONE: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’366 PATENT
`
`72. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations of all of the foregoing paragraphs
`
`as if fully restated herein.
`
`73. As described above, each GM entity has infringed and continues to
`
`infringe the ’366 Patent by implementing, using, offering for sale, and selling
`
`4G/LTE and/or 5G/NR cellular functionality according to one or more 3GPP
`
`standard releases from 8 through 17 in the Accused Products, and performing the
`
`acts of infringement described above.
`
`74. GM’s Accused Products are configured to operate across the various
`
`modes, formats, and schemes defined in the 4G/LTE and NR/5G 3GPP standards.
`
`GM’s Accused Products are configured to operate within 4G/LTE and/or NR/5G
`
`cellular networks that are controlled and configured by various carriers and
`
`implemented using a variety of hardware and/or software. Additionally, each base
`
`station may operate differently based on the wireless conditions, location, and/or
`
`network configuration. Accordingly, GM’s Accused Products are configured to
`
`20
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1400 Filed 07/20/22 Page 21 of 39
`
`
`
`accommodate those differences and implement the 3GPP standards holistically,
`
`and do not exclude particular modes or schemes in which a serving base station
`
`may be configured to operate.
`
`75. Each of GM’s Accused Products implements the portions of the 3GPP
`
`LTE standard specification that read on at least claim 1 of the ’366 patent. See
`
`Exhibit 8. Exhibit 8 illustrates how implementing and carrying out certain portions
`
`of the 3GPP LTE standard (“covered functionality”) requires the practicing of at
`
`least claim 1 of the ’366 patent. Id. On information and belief, each portion of the
`
`standard cited in Exhibit 8 is implemented to provide LTE functionality in the
`
`Accused Products. For example, the covered functionality of the ’366 patent is
`
`present in the 3GPP LTE standard from the earliest release number 8 through the
`
`last LTE release number 17. As further illustrated in Exhibit 8, third-party industry
`
`experts through textbooks and articles confirm the inclusion of the covered
`
`functionality within the 3GPP LTE standard. Further, industry experts consulted by
`
`Neo have confirmed that, based on their experience with and knowledge of the
`
`3GPP standards and their implementation, the Accused Products are configured to
`
`practice the covered functionality when they provide LTE connectivity. The
`
`technology covered by claim 1 of the ’366 patent and reflected in the 3GPP
`
`standard portions set out in Exhibit 8 is a core part of communications on an LTE
`
`network, and would be required in any device operating on said network. For
`
`21
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1401 Filed 07/20/22 Page 22 of 39
`
`
`
`example, the covered functionality related to the random-access procedure is
`
`integral to the establishment of connections between GM’s Accused Products and
`
`the serving base stations for LTE networks. Additionally, based on FCC filings and
`
`corroborating public information, Defendants’ Accused Products are compliant
`
`with various 3GPP LTE releases, including release 8 and later releases, and are
`
`configured with the covered functionalities. Finally, on information and belief, due
`
`to the features GM advertises as enabled by the 4G/LTE functionality, including
`
`but not limited to remote connectivity and Wi-Fi internet access, GM’s Accused
`
`Products implement the covered functionality of the 3GPP LTE standard
`
`regardless of whether one or more aspects of that functionality is mandatory or
`
`optional to implement the LTE standard.
`
`76. GM’s Accused Products therefore meet at least one claim of the ’366
`
`patent.
`
`77. To the extent that GM releases any new version of GM’s Accused
`
`Products, such instrumentalities will meet the claims of the ’366 patent and infringe
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a)–(b) in ways analogous to GM’s current infringement
`
`described above.
`
`78. Neo Wireless has been damaged and continues to be damaged by GM’s
`
`infringement of the ’366 patent.
`
`22
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 32, PageID.1402 Filed 07/20/22 Page 23 of 39
`
`
`
`COUNT TWO: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’908 PATENT
`
`79. Neo Wireless incorporates the allegations of the foregoing paragraphs
`
`as if fully restated herein.
`
`80. As described above, each GM entity has infringed and continues to
`
`infringe the Asserted Patents by implementing and using 4G/LTE and/or 5G/NR
`
`cellular functionality according to one or more 3GPP standard releases from 8
`
`through 17 in the Accused Products, and performing the acts of infringement
`
`described above.
`
`81. GM’s Accused Products are configured to operate across the various
`
`modes, formats, and schemes defined in the 4G/LTE and NR/5G 3GPP standards.
`
`GM’s Accused Products are configured to operate within 4G/LTE and/or NR
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
