Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1716 Filed 07/20/22 Page 1 of 38
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
`SOUTHERN DIVISION
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF NEO WIRELESS, LLC’S FIRST AMENDED
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Neo Wireless, LLC (“Neo Wireless,” “Neo,” or “Plaintiff”), brings
`
`this action for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271 against Defendant Tesla,
`
`Inc. (“Tesla” or “Defendant”). 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
`
`
`2:22-MD-03034-TGB
`
`
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2:22-CV-11408-TGB
`
`
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
` JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
` §
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`IN RE NEO WIRELESS, LLC
`PATENT LITIG.
`
`
`NEO WIRELESS, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`TESLA INC.,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
`SOUTHERN DIVISION
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF NEO WIRELESS, LLC’S FIRST AMENDED
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Neo Wireless, LLC (“Neo Wireless,” “Neo,” or “Plaintiff”), brings
`
`this action for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271 against Defendant Tesla,
`
`Inc. (“Tesla” or “Defendant”). 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
`
`
`2:22-MD-03034-TGB
`
`
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2:22-CV-11408-TGB
`
`
`HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
`
`
` JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
` §
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`IN RE NEO WIRELESS, LLC
`PATENT LITIG.
`
`
`NEO WIRELESS, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`TESLA INC.,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1717 Filed 07/20/22 Page 2 of 38
`
`
`
`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, Tesla, Inc. is a company organized and
`
`existing under the laws of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 3500
`
`Deer Creek Road, Palo Alto, California. Tesla may do business with the fictitious
`
`name Tesla Motors, Inc. Tesla may be served through its registered agent, CT
`
`Corporation, at 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas, 75201.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`This action arises under the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.
`
`Subject matter jurisdiction is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`§§ 1331, 1332 and 1338(a).
`
`5.
`
`Venue is proper in the Eastern District of Texas under 28 U.S.C.
`
`§ 1400(b) against Tesla because, on information and belief, Tesla (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.
`
`6.
`
`The Eastern District of Texas has personal jurisdiction over Tesla.
`
`Tesla has continuous and systematic business contacts with the State of Texas.
`
`Tesla, directly or through subsidiaries or intermediaries (including distributors,
`
`retailers, and others), conducts its business extensively throughout Texas, by
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1718 Filed 07/20/22 Page 3 of 38
`
`
`
`shipping, distributing, offering for sale, selling, and advertising (including the
`
`provision of interactive web pages) its vehicles and services in the State of Texas
`
`and the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`7.
`
`Tesla, directly and through subsidiaries or intermediaries (including
`
`distributors, retailers, and others), has purposefully and voluntarily placed its
`
`infringing vehicles and services into the Eastern District of Texas and into the
`
`stream of commerce with the intention and expectation that they will be purchased
`
`and used as designed by consumers in the Eastern District of Texas. Tesla has
`
`offered and sold and continues to offer and sell these infringing vehicles and
`
`services in the Eastern District of Texas, including at physical Tesla stores located
`
`within the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`8.
`
`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.
`
`9.
`
`Tesla occupies several permanent, physical places within the Eastern
`
`District of Texas from which Tesla carries out its business. For example, Tesla has
`
`physical gallery/stores in the following locations in the Eastern District of Texas:
`
`(1) 5800 Democracy Drive, Plano, TX 75024 (“Plano-Democracy Drive”); (2)
`
`7500 Windrose Avenue Space B185, Plano TX 75024 (“Plano-Legacy West”); and
`
`(3) 3408 S SW Loop 323, Tyler, TX 75701 (“Tyler Site”). Tesla conducts business
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1719 Filed 07/20/22 Page 4 of 38
`
`
`
`from these locations and has employees who work at these Tesla locations in the
`
`Eastern District of Texas. For example, on information and belief, Tesla’s Plano-
`
`Democracy Drive and Tyler sites provide both sales and services. On further
`
`information and belief, Tesla operates a sales gallery at the Plano-Legacy West
`
`site.
`
`10. As another example of permanent, physical places within the Eastern
`
`District of Texas from which Tesla carries out its business, Tesla has a number of
`
`Supercharger stations in the Eastern District of Texas, including at least: (1)
`
`Texarkana Supercharger, 3101 Mall Drive Texarkana, TX 75503; (2) Sulphur
`
`Springs Supercharger, 300 W Tomlinson Street Sulphur Springs, TX 75482; (3)
`
`Lindale Supercharger, 17044 I-20 Lindale, TX 75771; (4) Nacogdoches
`
`Supercharger, 2615 NW Stallings Dr Nacogdoches, TX 75964; (5) Plano, TX
`
`Supercharger, 7161 Bishop Road, Plano TX 75024; and (6) Denison, TX
`
`Supercharger, 4300 TX-91, Denison, TX 75020. These Supercharger stations have
`
`commercial signage identifying the location as a regular and established place of
`
`Tesla’s business and are closely monitored and serviced by Tesla Service
`
`Technicians.
`
`11. As a further example of permanent physical places within the Eastern
`
`District of Texas from which Tesla carries out its business, Tesla maintains
`
`multiple destination charger stations in the Eastern District of Texas. Upon
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1720 Filed 07/20/22 Page 5 of 38
`
`
`
`information and belief, these destination charger stations have commercial signage
`
`identifying the location as a regular and established place of Tesla’s business, and
`
`Tesla provides assistance with installation and charging hardware for these
`
`destination charger stations.
`
`12. On information and belief, Tesla monitors and controls supercharging
`
`or destination charging and sends notifications when charging is complete with the
`
`Tesla app. On information and belief, the monitoring and controlling of charging
`
`and the transmission of notification messages are conducted over cellular
`
`networks.
`
`13. Tesla has 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.
`
`14. 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
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1721 Filed 07/20/22 Page 6 of 38
`
`
`
`“Methods and Apparatus for Random Access in Multi-Carrier Communication
`
`Systems.” A copy of the ’366 patent is attached as Exhibit 1.
`
`15. 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 November
`
`22, 2019 before it was assigned to Neo Wireless LLC on January 23, 2020.
`
`16. The ’366 patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`II. The ’908 Patent
`
`17. 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 2.
`
`18. 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.
`
`19. The ’908 patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`III. The ’941 Patent
`
`20. 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”),
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1722 Filed 07/20/22 Page 7 of 38
`
`
`
`entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Multi-Carrier Communications with Adaptive
`
`Transmission and Feedback.” A copy of the ’941 patent is attached as Exhibit 3.
`
`21. The ’941 patent issued from U.S. Patent Application 15/082,878,
`
`which was filed by Neocific, Inc. on March 28, 2016. The now-issued ’941 patent
`
`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.
`
`22. The ’941 patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`IV. The ’450 Patent
`
`23. 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 4.
`
`24. 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.
`
`25. The ’450 patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`V. The ’512 Patent
`
`26. 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
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1723 Filed 07/20/22 Page 8 of 38
`
`
`
`“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 5.
`
`27. The ’512 patent issued from U.S. Patent Application 17/012,813,
`
`which was filed by Neo Wireless on September 4, 2020.
`
`28. The ’512 patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`VI. The ’302 Patent
`
`29. 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 6.
`
`30. 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.
`
`31. The ’302 patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`32. 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” or “Asserted
`
`Patents”) and possesses all rights of recovery.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1724 Filed 07/20/22 Page 9 of 38
`
`
`
`33.
`
`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 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.
`
`34. 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.
`
`35. 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
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1725 Filed 07/20/22 Page 10 of 38
`
`
`
`50 times at industry events. He has been granted more than 100 U.S. and foreign
`
`patents.
`
`36. The inventions in the Patents-in-Suit relate to various improvements
`
`in OFDMA networks and corresponding user equipment, and those improvements
`
`have since been incorporated into the 3GPP standards for 4G/LTE and 5G/NR
`
`networks.
`
`37. 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.
`
`38. 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.
`
`39. 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
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1726 Filed 07/20/22 Page 11 of 38
`
`
`
`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.
`
`40.
`
`In recent years, automakers have implemented this cellular
`
`communications technology into their vehicles. 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 after a collision. In 2007, 3G technology emerged, bringing greater speed
`
`and capacity to these features and allowing automakers to design more advanced
`
`functions.
`
`41. When the technology emerged, Tesla 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, Tesla 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.
`
`11
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1727 Filed 07/20/22 Page 12 of 38
`
`
`
`42. Tesla provides 4G LTE connectivity in its various products at least via
`
`its Premium Connectivity system integrated into its vehicles.
`
`43. Building on these 4G LTE capabilities, Tesla developed and utilizes
`
`the Tesla App that enables its customers to interact with their vehicles from their
`
`cellular devices, using the cellular connectivity of the vehicles. Features on the
`
`Tesla App include accessing climate controls, understanding charge stats, setting
`
`the charge limit, viewing charge history, and locking and unlocking the vehicle.
`
`44. Tesla models that implement 4G/LTE communications—including
`
`but not limited to the Model S, Model Y, Model 3, and Model X—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.”
`
`45. Tesla’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.
`
`12
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1728 Filed 07/20/22 Page 13 of 38
`
`
`
`46. Additionally, the communications between Tesla’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
`
`uplink and downlink, obtaining network parameters, etc. And Tesla’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, Tesla’s Accused Products are configured to operate across the
`
`various modes, formats, and schemes defined in the 4G/LTE and NR/5G 3GPP
`
`standards.
`
`47. As described further below and set forth in Exhibits 7–12, the
`
`Asserted Patents read onto portions of the 4G/LTE or NR/5G standards, each of
`
`which Tesla implements in its Accused Products. In particular, Tesla 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, Tesla’s implementation(s) of
`
`the LTE/4G and/or NR/5G standards necessarily infringes one or more claims of
`
`the Asserted Patents.
`
`48. Tesla does not have any rights to the Patents-in-Suit.
`
`13
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1729 Filed 07/20/22 Page 14 of 38
`
`
`
`49. 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 Tesla received with actual notice of its infringement prior to the filing of
`
`this lawsuit, or at a minimum by the filing of this Complaint.
`
`50.
`
`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 Tesla will be disclosed in compliance with
`
`the Court’s rules related to infringement contentions.
`
`TESLA’S ACTS OF PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`51. Neo Wireless incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`52. As set forth below, Tesla’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
`
`Tesla’s infringement.
`
`53. Tesla has directly infringed, and continues to directly infringe, the
`
`Asserted Patents under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by making, using, selling and/or
`
`14
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1730 Filed 07/20/22 Page 15 of 38
`
`
`
`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 Tesla’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.
`
`54. Tesla makes, sells, offers for sale, uses, designs, develops, tests,
`
`manufactures, and imports vehicles outfitted with instrumentalities that infringe the
`
`Asserted Patents in the United States.
`
`55. For example, Tesla owns and operates at least four Gigafactory
`
`operations in the United States responsible for designing, building, assembling,
`
`manufacturing, offering for sale, and selling the Accused Products sold throughout
`
`the United States.
`
`56. Similarly, Tesla engages 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.
`
`57. Tesla owns and operates the official Tesla website for the United
`
`States that offers for sale infringing vehicles outfitted with instrumentalities that
`
`infringe the Asserted Patents to subsidiaries, dealerships, distributors, retailers, and
`
`end-user customers.1
`
`
`1 See https://www.tesla.com/.
`
`15
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1731 Filed 07/20/22 Page 16 of 38
`
`
`
`58. Tesla also imports foreign-made vehicles outfitted with
`
`instrumentalities that infringe the Asserted Patents for use, sale, offer for sale, and
`
`other distribution throughout the United States.
`
`59. Tesla 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 Tesla performed these acts with full knowledge of the
`
`Asserted Patents and its infringement thereof, as set forth in detail below, Tesla 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.
`
`60. For example, Tesla’s advertising, sales, design, development, and/or
`
`technical materials related to the 3GPP LTE/4G and/or 5G/NR standards
`
`associated with the 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,
`
`16
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1732 Filed 07/20/22 Page 17 of 38
`
`
`
`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.
`
`61. Tesla provides 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.
`
`62. Tesla advertises on its website to its customers and other end users its
`
`Connectivity Packages and explains that its post-June 2015 vehicles are equipped
`
`with 4G LTE capable modems.2 These 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.
`
`
`2 See https://www.tesla.com/support/connectivity; https://www.tesla.com/support/3g-cellular-
`network-retirement.
`
`17
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1733 Filed 07/20/22 Page 18 of 38
`
`
`
`63. Tesla further advertises and provides its customers and end users with
`
`specifications describing the Accused Instrumentalities and how they are used in
`
`the Accused Products.
`
`64. Tesla took the above actions intending to cause infringing acts by
`
`others.
`
`65. Further, Tesla has made, used, sold, offered to sell, imported and/or
`
`encouraged the making, using, selling, offering to sell, or importing of Tesla’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, Tesla 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.
`
`66. Neo sent a letter to Tesla on November 29, 2021 that Tesla received
`
`no later than December 1, 2021 informing Tesla of Neo Wireless’s relevant patent
`
`portfolio, including listing the patents-in-suit and how the patents-in-suit cover
`
`certain 3GPP wireless standards used in Tesla’s Accused Products in an attempt to
`
`initiate commercial licensing discussions. Tesla did not respond, refused to engage
`
`in any good-faith licensing negotiations, and continued infringing the Asserted
`
`Patents. In any event, Tesla was on actual notice of the Asserted Patents and its
`
`infringement on the date of service of this Complaint. Therefore, Tesla was or is
`
`18
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1734 Filed 07/20/22 Page 19 of 38
`
`
`
`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 and has
`
`deliberately and wantonly continued to infringe on Neo’s patent rights.
`
`67. For the reasons described above, Tesla’s infringement of the Asserted
`
`Patents has been willful and egregious.
`
`68. Tesla’s acts of infringement have caused damage to Neo Wireless.
`
`Neo Wireless is entitled to recover from Tesla the damages incurred by Neo
`
`Wireless as a result of Tesla’s wrongful acts.
`
`COUNT ONE: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’366 PATENT
`69. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations of all of the foregoing paragraphs
`
`as if fully restated herein.
`
`70. As described above, Tesla 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.
`
`71. Tesla’s Accused Products are configured to operate across the various
`
`modes, formats, and schemes defined in the 4G/LTE and NR/5G 3GPP standards.
`
`Tesla’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
`
`19
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1735 Filed 07/20/22 Page 20 of 38
`
`
`
`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, Tesla’s Accused Products are configured to
`
`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.
`
`72. Each of Tesla’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 7. Exhibit 7 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 7 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
`
`7, 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
`
`20
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1736 Filed 07/20/22 Page 21 of 38
`
`
`
`connectivity. The technology covered by claim 1 of the ’366 patent and reflected in
`
`the 3GPP standard portions set out in Exhibit 7 is a core part of communications on
`
`an LTE network, and would be required in any device operating on said network.
`
`For example, the covered functionality related to the random-access procedure is
`
`integral to the establishment of connections between Tesla’s Accused Products and
`
`the serving base stations for LTE networks. Additionally, based on FCC filings and
`
`corroborating public information, Tesla’s 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 Tesla advertises as enabled by the 4G/LTE functionality, including
`
`but not limited to remote connectivity and Wi-Fi internet access, Tesla’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.
`
`73. Tesla’s Accused Products therefore meet at least one claim of the ’366
`
`patent.
`
`74. To the extent that Tesla releases any new version of Tesla’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 Tesla’s current
`
`infringement described above.
`
`21
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1737 Filed 07/20/22 Page 22 of 38
`
`
`
`75. Neo Wireless has been damaged and continues to be damaged by
`
`Tesla’s infringement of the ’366 patent.
`
`COUNT TWO: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’908 PATENT
`
`76. Neo Wireless incorporates the allegations of the foregoing paragraphs
`
`as if fully restated herein.
`
`77. As described above, Tesla 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.
`
`78. Tesla’s Accused Products are configured to operate across the various
`
`modes, formats, and schemes defined in the 4G/LTE and NR/5G 3GPP standards.
`
`Tesla’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, Tesla’s Accused Products are configured to
`
`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. For example, the Accused Products are configured
`
`to operate within a frequency band corresponding to more than 6 resource blocks,
`
`22
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-md-03034-TGB ECF No. 33, PageID.1738 Filed 07/20/22 Page 23 of 38
`
`
`
`and thus, are configured to transmit a random access signal in only a portion of the
`
`frequency band.
`
`79. Each of Tesla’s Accused Products implements the portions of the
`
`3GPP LTE standard specification that read on at least claim 11 of the ’908 patent.
`
`See Exhibit 8. Exhibit 8 illustrates how implementing and carrying out certain
`
`portions of the 3GPP LTE standard (“covered functionality”) require the practicing
`
`of at least claim 11 of the ’908 patent. Id. On information
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
