Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 1 of 22 PageID: 1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`GESTURE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS,
`LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:21-cv-00123
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT
`INFRINGEMENT
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`LG ELECTRONICS INC., AND LG
`ELECTRONICS U.S.A., INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff Gesture Technology Partners, LLC (“GTP” or “Plaintiff”) files this original
`
`complaint against LG Electronics Inc. (“LGE”), and LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. (“LG USA”)
`
`(collectively “LG”) alleging, based on its own knowledge as to itself and its own actions, and based
`
`on information and belief as to all other matters, as follows:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Gesture Technology Partners, LLC is a limited liability company filed under the
`
`laws of the State of Ohio, with its principal place of business at 2815 Joelle Drive, Toledo, Ohio
`
`43617.
`
`2.
`
`Defendant LG Electronics Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the
`
`laws of the Republic of Korea. It has its principal place of business at LG Twin Towers, 128
`
`Yeouidaero, Yeongdungpo-gu, Seoul, South Korea. LGE designs, manufactures, makes, uses,
`
`imports into the United States, sells, and/or offers for sale in the United States LGE smartphones
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 2 of 22 PageID: 2
`
`and tablets. LGE’s smartphones and tablets are marketed, used, offered for sale, and/or sold
`
`throughout the United States, including within this district.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. is a corporation organized under the laws of
`
`the State of Delaware. It has a principal place of business at 1000 Sylvan Avenue Englewood
`
`Cliffs, New Jersey 07632. LG USA is a wholly owned subsidiary of LGE and oversees domestic
`
`sales and distribution of LG’s consumer electronics products, including the products accused of
`
`infringement in this case.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`4.
`
`GTP repeats and re-alleges the allegations in Paragraphs 1-3 as though fully set
`
`forth in their entirety.
`
`5.
`
`This is an action for infringement of United States patents arising under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§§ 271, 281, and 284–85, among others. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction of the action
`
`under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and § 1338(a).
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1400(b) and 1391(c).
`
`LG is subject to this Court’s specific and general personal jurisdiction due at least
`
`to LG’s substantial business in this forum, including (i) at least a portion of the infringements
`
`alleged herein; or (ii) regularly doing or soliciting business, engaging in other persistent courses
`
`of conduct, or deriving substantial revenue from goods and services provided to individuals in
`
`Texas and in this district.
`
`8.
`
`Specifically, LG intends to and does business in Texas, directly or through
`
`intermediaries and offers its products or services, including those accused herein of infringement,
`
`to customers and potential customers located in Texas, including in the Western District of Texas.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 3 of 22 PageID: 3
`
`9.
`
`LG USA maintains a regular and established place of business in this District,
`
`including at 9420 Research Blvd, Austin, Texas 78759, and a representative office at 9600 Great
`
`Hills Trail, Suite 150W, Austin, Texas 78759. LG USA maintains additional regular and
`
`established places of business at 21251-2155 Eagle Parkway, Fort Worth, Texas 76177 and 14901
`
`Beach St, Fort Worth, TX 76177. LG USA may be served with process through its registered
`
`agent for service in Texas: United States Corporation Co. 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin,
`
`Texas 78701.
`
`10.
`
`Venue is proper against LGE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(3) because venue is
`
`proper in any judicial district against a foreign corporation. See In re HTC Corp., 889 F.3d 1349,
`
`1354 (Fed. Cir. 2018).
`
`11.
`
`Venue is proper against LG USA in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b)
`
`because it has maintained established and regular places of business in this District and has
`
`committed acts of patent infringement in the District. See In re Cray Inc., 871 F.3d 1355, 1362-
`
`63 (Fed. Cir. 2017).
`
`THE TECHNOLOGY
`
`12.
`
`GTP repeats and re-alleges the allegations in Paragraphs 1-11 as though fully set
`
`forth in their entirety.
`
`13.
`
`GTP was founded in 2013 by Dr. Timothy Pryor, the sole inventor of the five
`
`Asserted Patents. He currently resides in Toledo, Ohio. Dr. Pryor received a B.S. in Engineering
`
`Physics from Johns Hopkins University in 1962, where he was also a member of the Army Reserve
`
`Officer in Training (ROTC) program. Upon graduation, he was commissioned as a Second
`
`Lieutenant in the United States Army. Dr. Pryor continued his education, obtaining an M.S. in
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 4 of 22 PageID: 4
`
`Physics from the University of Illinois (1964) and a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from the
`
`University of Windsor (1972).
`
`14.
`
`Dr. Pryor rose to the rank of Captain in the U.S. Army before his honorable
`
`discharge in 1967. Dr. Pryor at the U.S. Army Aberdeen Proving Ground and served in Italy,
`
`commanding missile teams supporting the Italian armed forces on a NATO anti-aircraft missile
`
`site, charged with guarding nuclear warheads and providing technical assistance to NATO.
`
`15.
`
`Dr. Pryor is a named inventor on over 200 patents and patent applications. For the
`
`past four decades, he has been a pioneer in laser sensing technology, motion sensing technology,
`
`machine vision technology and camera-based interactive technology.
`
`16.
`
`Since the 1970’s, Dr. Pryor has founded and led three other operating companies:
`
`two small operating companies in the automotive parts inspection and robotics businesses, one
`
`company that developed new forms of vehicle instrument panel controls, and co-founded another
`
`company that utilized camera-based sensors for physical therapy. Dr. Pryor is responsible for a
`
`significant amount of the research and development for the technologies at these companies.
`
`17.
`
`The patents-in-suit, U.S. Patent Nos. 8,194,924 (the “’924 patent”), 7,933,431 (the
`
`“’431 patent”), 8,878,949 (the “’949 patent”), and 8,553,079 (the “’079 patent”), and 7,804,530
`
`(the “’530 patent”) (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”), are generally directed to innovations in
`
`using mobile phone cameras to assist a user to interact with their smartphone, including, for
`
`example, but not limited to unlocking their phone, taking and using photos or videos, and providing
`
`other functions.
`
`18.
`
`Dr. Pryor conceived of the inventions embodied in the Asserted Patents in the mid-
`
`to late-1990s, when he was working on a variety of different projects related to imaging and
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 5 of 22 PageID: 5
`
`computer control. Dr. Pryor describes the process as a brainstorm that led to several breakthrough
`
`moments, ultimately resulting in the Asserted Patents.
`
`DISCUSSIONS WITH LG
`
`Dr. Pryor and his patents are well-known to LG.
`
`On September 12, 2017, GTP initiated a licensing discussion with LG by sending
`
`19.
`
`20.
`
`a letter to LG providing LG with the Asserted Patents and describing how LG was using the
`
`technology.
`
`21.
`
`LG responded by email on September 29, 2017 and the parties engaged in a series
`
`of email discussions over the course of next four months through at least January of 2018.
`
`22.
`
`As a result of the correspondence described above and other negotiations, LG was
`
`aware of the details of the Asserted Patents and was aware that LG needed a license to practice the
`
`inventions in the Asserted Patents.
`
`23.
`
`On information and belief, LG did not take any steps to change their products or to
`
`inform its engineers and design team of the Asserted Patents to avoid infringing them.
`
`THE ACCUSED PRODUCTS
`
`24.
`
`GTP repeats and re-alleges the allegations in Paragraphs 1-23 as though fully set
`
`forth in their entirety.
`
`25.
`
`LG infringed the asserted patents by making, using, selling, offering to sell, and
`
`importing its smartphones and tablets. Exemplary accused smartphones and tablets include, but
`
`are not limited to, the LG G Pad F 8.0 2nd Gen ACG, LG G Pad 5 10.1, LG Wing 5G, the LG
`
`G8X ThinQ Dual Screen, the LG Q70, the LG Stylo 6, the LG K51, the LG K31, the LG Stylo 5,
`
`the LG Dual Screen for LG Velvet 5G, the LG K30, the LG K31 Rebel, the LG K92, the LG
`
`VELVET 5G, the LG VELVET 5G UW, the LG V60 ThinQ 5G, the LG V60 ThinQ 5G UW, the
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 6 of 22 PageID: 6
`
`LG Xpression Plus 3, the LG Phoenix 5, the LG Neon Plus, the LG G8X ThinQ, the LG Arena 2,
`
`the LG Prime 2, and LG G-series smartphones (collectively the “Accused Products”).
`
`EXAMPLES OF LG’S MARKETING OF THE ACCUSED FEATURES
`
`26.
`
`The Accused Products have features including, but not limited to, at least the
`
`following: Tracking Focus, Picture Face Recognition, Selfie Focus, Portrait Mode, Gesture Shots,
`
`Gesture Shutter Take, Hand ID, Air Motion, Auto Shot, and 3D AR Stickers (the “Features”).
`
`27.
`
`28.
`
`The Features drive the popularity and sales of the Accused Products.
`
`For example, LG has marketed the Accused Products using touchless commands to
`
`unlock the phone as a superior security feature, as described in the following screenshot from LG’s
`
`website:1
`
`1 LG Electronics Co., Ltd., LG G8 ThinQ, available at https://www.lg.com/us/cell-
`phones/lg-lmg820qm7-unlocked-g8-thinq-black (last accessed January 18, 2020).
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 7 of 22 PageID: 7
`
`29.
`
`LG has marketed its Accused Products using Air Motion as a new way to interact
`
`with LG phones, as described in the following screenshot from LG’s website:2
`
`30.
`
`LG has marketed its Accused Products using functions in taking photos and videos,
`
`such as taking portrait photos that separate the object from the background, as described in the
`
`following screenshot from LG’s website:3
`
`2 LG Electronics Co., Ltd., LG G8 ThinQ, available at https://www.lg.com/us/cell-
`phones/lg-lmg820qm7-unlocked-g8-thinq-black (last accessed January 18, 2020).
`3 LG Electronics Co., Ltd., LG G8 ThinQ, available at https://www.lg.com/us/cell-
`phones/lg-lmg820qm7-unlocked-g8-thinq-black (last accessed January 18, 2020).
`7
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 8 of 22 PageID: 8
`
`31.
`
`LG has marketed its Accused Products using functions in taking photos and videos,
`
`such as Gesture Shot to take pictures with the front facing camera, as described in the following
`
`screenshot from LG’s website:4
`
`4 LG Electronics Co., Ltd., How to take interval Gesture Shot using front camera,
`available at https://www.lg.com/ae/support/help-library/v10-how-to-take-interval-gesture-shot-
`using-front-camera-CT20076025-20150104136670 (last accessed January 18, 2020).
`8
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 9 of 22 PageID: 9
`
`COUNT I
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,194,924
`
`32.
`
`GTP repeats and re-alleges the allegations in Paragraphs 1-31 as though fully set
`
`forth in their entirety.
`
`33.
`
`GTP owns all substantial rights, interest, and title in and to the ’924 patent,
`
`including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce the ’924 patent against
`
`infringers, and to collect damages for all relevant times. The United States Patent and Trademark
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 10 of 22 PageID: 10
`
`Office duly issued the ’924 patent on June 5, 2012. A copy of the ’924 patent is attached as Exhibit
`
`A.
`
`34.
`
`The ’924 patent is titled “Camera Based Sensing in Handheld, Mobile, Gaming or
`
`Other Devices.” The ’924 patent describes using a camera output such that the handheld device’s
`
`computer performs a control function on the device, such as acquiring or taking images, reading
`
`things, determining data, transmitting data, printing data, and actuating a vehicle or function.
`
`35.
`
`36.
`
`The claims of the ’924 patent are not directed to an abstract idea.
`
`LG has directly infringed (literally or under the doctrine of equivalents) at least
`
`Claim 1 of the ’924 patent.
`
`37.
`
`LG has infringed the ’924 patent by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and
`
`importing the Accused Products.
`
`38.
`
`The Accused Products are handheld devices with a housing and a computer,
`
`including but not limited to one or more System-on-Chips.
`
`39.
`
`The Accused Products have at least one first camera oriented to view a user of the
`
`Accused Product. The first camera has an output when used.
`
`40.
`
`The Accused Products have at least one second camera oriented to view an object
`
`other than the user. The second camera has an output when used.
`
`41.
`
`The first and second cameras of the Accused Products have non-overlapping fields
`
`of view.
`
`42.
`
`The computer of the Accused Products is adapted to perform a control function,
`
`such as the control functions associated with the Features, based on an output of either the first
`
`camera or the second camera.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 11 of 22 PageID: 11
`
`43.
`
`Plaintiff has been damaged as a result of the infringing conduct by LG alleged
`
`above. Thus, LG is liable to Plaintiff in an amount that compensates it for such infringements,
`
`which by law cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by
`
`this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.
`
`44.
`
`Plaintiff has satisfied all statutory obligations required to collect pre-filing damages
`
`for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’924 patent.
`
`45.
`
`Plaintiff has not offered for sale nor sold any product implicated by 35 U.S.C. §
`
`287 with respect to the ’924 patent.
`
`46.
`
`LG had knowledge of the ’924 patent at least as early as September 12, 2017, when
`
`GTP contacted LG in an attempt to license the Asserted Patents.
`
`47.
`
`LG has also indirectly infringed one or more claims of the ’924 patent by inducing
`
`others to directly infringe the ’924 patent. LG has induced end-users and other third-parties to
`
`directly infringe (literally or under the doctrine of equivalents) the ’924 patent by using the
`
`Accused Products. LG took active steps, directly or through contractual relationships with others,
`
`with the specific intent to cause them to use the Accused Products in a manner that infringes one
`
`or more claims of the ’924 patent, including, for example, Claim 1 of the ’924 patent. Such steps
`
`by LG included, among other things, advising or directing end-users and other third-parties to use
`
`the Accused Features in the Accused Products in an infringing manner; advertising and promoting
`
`the use of the Accused Products in an infringing manner; or distributing instructions that guide
`
`end-users and other third-parties to use the Accused Products in an infringing manner. LG
`
`performed these steps, which constitute induced infringement with the knowledge of the ’924
`
`patent and with the knowledge that the induced acts constitute infringement. LG was aware that
`
`the normal and customary use of the Accused Products by others would infringe the ’924 patent.
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 12 of 22 PageID: 12
`
`LG’s direct infringement of the ’924 patent was willful, intentional, deliberate, or in conscious
`
`disregard of Plaintiff’s rights under the patent.
`
`COUNT II
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,933,431
`
`48.
`
`GTP repeats and re-alleges the allegations in Paragraphs 1-47 as though fully set
`
`forth in their entirety.
`
`49.
`
`GTP owns all substantial rights, interest, and title in and to the ’431 patent,
`
`including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce the ’431 patent against
`
`infringers, and to collect damages for all relevant times. The United States Patent and Trademark
`
`Office duly issued the ’431 patent on April 26, 2011. A copy of the ’431 patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit B.
`
`50.
`
`The ’431 patent is titled “Camera Based Sensing in Handheld, Mobile, Gaming, or
`
`Other Devices.” The ’431 patent describes a method for a user to control a handheld device using
`
`gestures that are observed by a sensor on the handheld device.
`
`51.
`
`LG has directly infringed (literally or under the doctrine of equivalents) at least
`
`Claim 7 of the ’431 patent. LG has infringed the ’431 patent by making, using, selling, offering
`
`to sell, and importing the Accused Products.
`
`52.
`
`53.
`
`54.
`
`55.
`
`The claims of the ’431 patent are not directed to an abstract idea.
`
`The Accused Products are handheld computers.
`
`The Accused Products have a housing.
`
`The Accused Products have one or more cameras associated with their housing.
`
`The one or more cameras obtain images of objects using reflected light from the objects.
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 13 of 22 PageID: 13
`
`56.
`
`A computer, including but not limited to at least one System on Chip, resides within
`
`the housing of the Accused Products. The computer analyzes images obtained by the one or more
`
`images to determine information about a position or movement of the object.
`
`57.
`
`The Accused Products use information about the object to control a function of the
`
`Accused Products, such as the functions associated with the Features.
`
`58.
`
`Plaintiff has been damaged as a result of the infringing conduct by LG alleged
`
`above. Thus, LG is liable to Plaintiff in an amount that adequately compensates it for such
`
`infringements, which by law cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and
`
`costs as fixed by this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.
`
`59.
`
`Plaintiff has satisfied all statutory obligations required to collect pre-filing damages
`
`for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’431 Patent.
`
`60.
`
`Plaintiff has not offered for sale nor sold any product implicated by 35 U.S.C. §
`
`287 with respect to the ’431 patent.
`
`61.
`
`LG had knowledge of the ’431 patent at least as early as September 12, 2017, when
`
`GTP contacted LG in an attempt to license the Asserted Patents.
`
`62.
`
`LG has also indirectly infringed one or more claims of the ’431 patent by inducing
`
`others to directly infringe the ’431 patent. LG has induced end-users and other third-parties to
`
`directly infringe (literally or under the doctrine of equivalents) the ’431 patent by using the
`
`Accused Products. LG took active steps, directly or through contractual relationships with others,
`
`with the specific intent to cause them to use the Accused Products in a manner that infringes one
`
`or more claims of the ’431 patent, including, for example, Claim 7 of the ’431 patent. Such steps
`
`by LG included, among other things, advising or directing end-users and other third-parties to use
`
`the Accused Products in an infringing manner; advertising and promoting the use of the Accused
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 14 of 22 PageID: 14
`
`Products in an infringing manner; or distributing instructions that guide end-users and other third-
`
`parties to use the Accused Products in an infringing manner. LG performed these steps, which
`
`constitute induced infringement with the knowledge of the ’431 patent and with the knowledge
`
`that the induced acts constitute infringement. LG was aware that the normal and customary use of
`
`the Accused Products by others would infringe the ’431 patent. LG’s direct and indirect
`
`infringement of the ’431 patent was willful, intentional, deliberate, or in conscious disregard of
`
`Plaintiff’s rights under the patent.
`
`COUNT III
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,878,949
`
`63.
`
`GTP repeats and re-alleges the allegations in Paragraphs 1-62 as though fully set
`
`forth in their entirety.
`
`64.
`
`GTP owns all substantial rights, interest, and title in and to the ’949 patent,
`
`including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce the ’949 patent against
`
`infringers, and to collect damages for all relevant times. The United States Patent and Trademark
`
`Office duly issued the ’949 patent on November 4, 2014. A copy of the ’949 patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit C.
`
`65.
`
`The ’949 Patent is titled “Camera Based Interaction and Instruction.” The ’949
`
`patent describes a device that allows a user to control the device using gestures registered by the
`
`front-facing camera and an electro-optical sensor.
`
`66.
`
`67.
`
`The claims of the ’949 patent are not directed to an abstract idea.
`
` LG has directly infringed (literally or under the doctrine of equivalents) at least
`
`Claim 1 of the ’949 patent. LG infringed the ’949 patent by making, using, selling, offering for
`
`sale, and importing the Accused Products.
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 15 of 22 PageID: 15
`
`68.
`
`69.
`
`The Accused Products are portable devices.
`
`The Accused Products have a housing. The housing has a forward-facing portion
`
`that includes an electro-optical sensor that has a field of view and a digital camera.
`
`70.
`
`Within the housing is a processing unit including, but not limited to, at least one
`
`System on Chip. The processing unit is coupled to the electro-optical sensor.
`
`71.
`
`The processing unit in the Accused Products has been programmed to determine if
`
`a gesture has been performed in the electro-optical sensors field of view based on an output from
`
`the electro-optical sensor.
`
`72.
`
`The processing unit of the Accused Products controls the digital camera in response
`
`to the gesture performed. Such gestures are used by the Features.
`
`73.
`
`Plaintiff has been damaged as a result of the infringing conduct by LG alleged
`
`above. Thus, LG is liable to Plaintiff in an amount that adequately compensates it for such
`
`infringements, which by law cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and
`
`costs as fixed by this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.
`
`74.
`
`Plaintiff has satisfied all statutory obligations required to collect pre-filing damages
`
`for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’949 Patent.
`
`75.
`
`Plaintiff has not offered for sale nor sold any product implicated by 35 U.S.C. §
`
`287 with respect to the ’949 patent.
`
`76.
`
`LG had knowledge of the ’949 patent at least as early as September 12, 2017, when
`
`GTP contacted LG in an attempt to license the Asserted Patents.
`
`77.
`
`LG has also indirectly infringed one or more claims of the ’949 patent by inducing
`
`others to directly infringe the ’949 patent. LG has induced end-users and other third-parties to
`
`directly infringe (literally or under the doctrine of equivalents) the ’949 patent by using the
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 16 of 22 PageID: 16
`
`Accused Products. LG took active steps, directly or through contractual relationships with others,
`
`with the specific intent to cause them to use the Accused Products in a manner that infringes one
`
`or more claims of the ’949 patent, including, for example, Claim 1 of the ’949 patent. Such steps
`
`by LG included, among other things, advising or directing end-users and other third-parties to use
`
`the Accused Products in an infringing manner; advertising and promoting the use of the Accused
`
`Products in an infringing manner; or distributing instructions that guide end-users and other third-
`
`parties to use the Accused Products in an infringing manner. LG performed these steps, which
`
`constitute induced infringement with the knowledge of the ’949 patent and with the knowledge
`
`that the induced acts constitute infringement. LG was aware that the normal and customary use of
`
`the Accused Products by others would infringe the ’949 patent. LG’s direct and indirect
`
`infringement of the ’949 patent was willful, intentional, deliberate, or in conscious disregard of
`
`Plaintiff’s rights under the patent.
`
`COUNT IV
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,553,079
`
`78.
`
`GTP repeats and re-alleges the allegations in Paragraphs 1-77 as though fully set
`
`forth in their entirety.
`
`79.
`
`GTP owns all substantial rights, interest, and title in and to the ’079 patent,
`
`including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce the ’079 patent against
`
`infringers, and to collect damages for all relevant times. The United States Patent and Trademark
`
`Office duly issued the ’079 patent on October 8, 2013. A copy of the ’079 patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit D.
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 17 of 22 PageID: 17
`
`80.
`
`The ’079 patent is titled “More Useful Man Machine Interfaces and Applications.”
`
`The ’079 patent describes methods and apparatuses related to determining gestures illuminated by
`
`a light source of a computer by using a camera housed in the computer.
`
`81.
`
`82.
`
`The claims of the ’079 patent are not directed to an abstract idea.
`
`LG has directly infringed (literally or under the doctrine of equivalents) at least
`
`Claim 11 of the ’079 patent. LG has infringed the ’079 patent by making, using, selling, offering
`
`for sale, and importing the Accused Products.
`
`83.
`
`84.
`
`The Accused Products are computer apparatuses.
`
`The Accused Products contain a light source that will illuminate a human body part
`
`within a work volume.
`
`85.
`
`The Accused Products have one or more cameras. The one or more cameras have
`
`a fixed relation to the light source. The one or more cameras of the Accused Products are oriented
`
`to observe gestures performed by a human body part.
`
`86.
`
`The Accused Products have one or more processors including, but not limited to,
`
`one or more System on Chips, that have been programmed to determine a gesture performed based
`
`on output from the one or more cameras.
`
`87.
`
`Plaintiff has been damaged as a result of the infringing conduct by LG alleged
`
`above. Thus, LG is liable to Plaintiff in an amount that adequately compensates it for such
`
`infringements, which by law cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and
`
`costs as fixed by this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.
`
`88.
`
`Plaintiff has satisfied all statutory obligations required to collect pre-filing damages
`
`for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’079 patent.
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 18 of 22 PageID: 18
`
`89.
`
`Plaintiff has not offered for sale nor sold any product implicated by 35 U.S.C. §
`
`287 with respect to the ’079 patent.
`
`90.
`
`LG had knowledge of the ’079 patent at least as early as September 12, 2017, when
`
`GTP contacted LG in an attempt to license the Asserted Patents.
`
`91.
`
`LG has also indirectly infringed one or more claims of the ’079 patent by inducing
`
`others to directly infringe the ’079 patent. LG has induced end-users and other third-parties to
`
`directly infringe (literally or under the doctrine of equivalents) the ’079 patent by using the
`
`Accused Products. LG took active steps, directly or through contractual relationships with others,
`
`with the specific intent to cause them to use the Accused Products in a manner that infringes one
`
`or more claims of the ’079 patent, including, for example, Claim 11 of the ’079 patent. Such steps
`
`by LG included, among other things, advising or directing end-users and other third-parties to use
`
`the Accused Products in an infringing manner; advertising and promoting the use of the Accused
`
`Products in an infringing manner; or distributing instructions that guide end-users and other third-
`
`parties to use the Accused Products in an infringing manner. LG performed these steps, which
`
`constitute induced infringement with the knowledge of the ’079 patent and with the knowledge
`
`that the induced acts constitute infringement. LG was aware that the normal and customary use of
`
`the Accused Products by others would infringe the ’079 patent. LG’s inducement is ongoing.
`
`92.
`
`LG’s direct and indirect infringement of the ’079 patent was willful, intentional,
`
`deliberate, or in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights under the patent.
`
`COUNT V
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,804,530
`
`93.
`
`GTP repeats and re-alleges the allegations in Paragraphs 1-92 as though fully set
`
`forth in their entirety.
`
`18
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 19 of 22 PageID: 19
`
`94.
`
`GTP owns all substantial rights, interest, and title in and to the ’530 patent,
`
`including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce the ’530 patent against
`
`infringers, and to collect damages for all relevant times. The United States Patent and Trademark
`
`Office duly issued the ’530 patent on September 28, 2010. A copy of the ’530 patent is attached
`
`as Exhibit E.
`
`95.
`
`The ’530 patent is titled “Picture Taking Method and Apparatus.” The ’530 patent
`
`describes a method and apparatus for enhancing the quality and usefulness of taking photos and
`
`videos.
`
`96.
`
`97.
`
`The claims of the ’530 patent are not directed to an abstract idea.
`
`LG has directly infringed (literally or under the doctrine of equivalents) at least
`
`Claim 1 of the ’530 patent. LG has infringed the ’530 patent by making, using, selling, offering
`
`for sale, and importing the Accused Products.
`
`98.
`
`99.
`
`The Accused Products are designed to enable a method of photographing a person.
`
`The Accused Products have one or more cameras, a computer, and an image
`
`processing software.
`
`100.
`
`The Accused Products may be positioned so that the one or more cameras of the
`
`Accused Products view a person, including that person’s face, so that the one or more cameras of
`
`the Accused Products are positioned separate from that person.
`
`101.
`
`The one or more cameras of the Accused Products are able to acquire an image of
`
`a person.
`
`102.
`
`103.
`
`The computer of the Accused Products is able to process that image.
`
`The computer of the Accused Products is able to determine from that processed
`
`image a state of that person.
`
`19
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 20 of 22 PageID: 20
`
`104.
`
`The computer of the Accused products is able to compare the state of that person
`
`to a desired state.
`
`105.
`
`The computer of the Accused Products is able to record an image that is viewable
`
`later as a photograph, if the result of the aforementioned comparison is that the state of that person
`
`is the desired state.
`
`106.
`
`Plaintiff has been damaged as a result of the infringing conduct by LG alleged
`
`above. Thus, LG is liable to Plaintiff in an amount that adequately compensates it for such
`
`infringements, which by law cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and
`
`costs as fixed by this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.
`
`107.
`
`Plaintiff has satisfied all statutory obligations required to collect pre-filing damages
`
`for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’530 patent.
`
`108.
`
`Plaintiff has not offered for sale nor sold any product implicated by 35 U.S.C. §
`
`287 with respect to the ’530 patent.
`
`109.
`
`LG had knowledge of the ’530 patent at least as early as September 12, 2017, when
`
`GTP contacted LG in an attempt to license the Asserted Patents.
`
`110.
`
`LG has also indirectly infringed one or more claims of the ’530 patent by inducing
`
`others to directly infringe the ’530 patent. LG has induced end-users and other third-parties to
`
`directly infringe (literally or under the doctrine of equivalents) the ’530 patent by using the
`
`Accused Products. LG took active steps, directly or through contractual relationships with others,
`
`with the specific intent to cause them to use the Accused Products in a manner that infringes one
`
`or more claims of the ’530 patent, including, for example, Claim 1 of the ’530 patent. Such steps
`
`by LG included, among other things, advising or directing end-users and other third-parties to use
`
`the Accused Products in an infringing manner; advertising and promoting the use of the Accused
`
`20
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-19234-EP-MAH Document 1 Filed 02/04/21 Page 21 of 22 PageID: 21
`
`Products in an infringing manner; or distributing instructions that guide end-users and other third-
`
`parties to use the Accused Products in an infringing manner. LG performed these steps, which
`
`constitute induced infringement w