throbber
Case 2:13-cv-00290-JRG-RSP Document 11 Filed 07/01/13 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 114
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`CARDSOFT (ASSIGNMENT FOR THE
`BENEFIT OF CREDITORS), LLC,
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`
`v.
`
`FIRST DATA CORPORATION,
`
`
`
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 2:13-CV-0290
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`FIRST DATA CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`First Data Corporation (“First Data”) responds to the Complaint for Patent Infringement
`
`(“Complaint”) of Plaintiff CardSoft (Assignment for the Benefit of Creditors), LLC as follows:
`
`1.
`
`First Data is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 1 of the Complaint and therefore denies those allegations.
`
`2.
`
`First Data admits that it is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
`
`the state of Delaware, but its principal place of business is located at 5565 Glenridge Connector,
`
`N.E., Suite 2000, Atlanta, Georgia 30342, United States of America. First Data denies that it is a
`
`limited liability company.
`
`3.
`
`First Data admits that the Complaint purports to state an action against First Data
`
`for patent infringement under the patent laws of the United States, including 35 U.S.C. § 271 et
`
`seq., over which this Court has subject matter jurisdiction, but First Data denies that Plaintiff has
`
`a valid claim for patent infringement against First Data under those laws.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`First Data denies the allegations in Paragraph 4 of the Complaint.
`
`First Data denies the allegations in Paragraph 5 of the Complaint.
`
`Cardsoft (ABC) EXHIBIT 2003
`First Data v. Cardsoft
`IPR2014-00720
`
`

`
`Case 2:13-cv-00290-JRG-RSP Document 11 Filed 07/01/13 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 115
`
`6.
`
`First Data admits that the ’945 Patent attached to the Complaint as Exhibit A is
`
`entitled “Method and Apparatus for Controlling Communications.” First Data is without
`
`knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations
`
`in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint and therefore denies those allegations.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`First Data denies the allegations in Paragraph 7 of the Complaint.
`
`First Data is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 8 of the Complaint and therefore denies those allegations.
`
`9.
`
`10.
`
`First Data denies the allegations in Paragraph 9 of the Complaint.
`
`First Data denies the allegations in Paragraph 10 (incorrectly numbered as
`
`Paragraph 8 in the Complaint) of the Complaint.
`
`11.
`
`First Data denies the allegations in Paragraph 11 (incorrectly numbered as
`
`Paragraph 9 in the Complaint) of the Complaint.
`
`12.
`
`First Data admits that the ’683 patent attached to the Complaint as Exhibit B is
`
`entitled “Method and Apparatus for Controlling Communications.” First Data is without
`
`knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations
`
`in Paragraph 12 (incorrectly numbered as Paragraph 10 in the Complaint) of the Complaint and
`
`therefore denies those allegations.
`
`13.
`
`First Data denies the allegations in Paragraph 13 (incorrectly numbered as
`
`Paragraph 11 in the Complaint) of the Complaint.
`
`14.
`
`First Data is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 14 (incorrectly numbered as Paragraph 12 in the Complaint)
`
`of the Complaint and therefore denies those allegations.
`
`DLI-6446648v3
`
`2
`
`Cardsoft (ABC) EXHIBIT 2003
`First Data v. Cardsoft
`IPR2014-00720
`
`

`
`Case 2:13-cv-00290-JRG-RSP Document 11 Filed 07/01/13 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 116
`
`15.
`
`First Data denies the allegations in Paragraph 15 (incorrectly numbered as
`
`Paragraph 9 in the Complaint) of the Complaint.
`
`16.
`
`First Data denies the allegations in Paragraph 16 (incorrectly numbered as
`
`Paragraph 12 in the Complaint) of the Complaint.
`
`17.
`
`First Data denies the allegations in Paragraph 17 (incorrectly numbered as
`
`Paragraph 13 in the Complaint) of the Complaint.
`
`Prayer for Relief: The Prayer for Relief requires no response. To the extent that any
`
`response is required, First Data denies that the Plaintiff should be granted any of the relief it
`
`requests.
`
`AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
`
`First Data asserts the following affirmative defenses to Plaintiff’s claims for patent
`
`infringement. The assertion of an affirmative defense is not a concession that First Data has the
`
`burden of proving the matter asserted.
`
`FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`First Data has not infringed and does not infringe the ‘945 Patent or the ‘683 Patent,
`
`either directly or indirectly, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. First Data has not
`
`contributed to any infringement by others or induced others to infringe any claim of either patent.
`
`SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`On information and belief, the ’945 Patent and the ’683 Patent are invalid for failure to
`
`satisfy the conditions of patentability as specified under one or more sections of Title 35 of the
`
`United States Code, including, without limitation, 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, and/or 112. First
`
`Data reserves the right to assert any other basis for invalidity or unenforceability, or any other
`
`defense, that discovery may reveal.
`
`DLI-6446648v3
`
`3
`
`Cardsoft (ABC) EXHIBIT 2003
`First Data v. Cardsoft
`IPR2014-00720
`
`

`
`Case 2:13-cv-00290-JRG-RSP Document 11 Filed 07/01/13 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 117
`
`THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`On information and belief, Plaintiff’s claims for injunctive relief and for damages for
`
`infringement of the ’945 Patent and the ’683 Patent are limited by the doctrines of laches, waiver,
`
`equitable estoppel and unclean hands.
`
`FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiff’s claims for damages for infringement of the ’945 Patent and the ’683 Patent are
`
`limited by 35 U.S.C. § 287 to those damages occurring only after notice of infringement.
`
`FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiff’s claims for equitable relief and for damages are barred, in whole or in part, by
`
`35 U.S.C. § 287.
`
`SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
`
`SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`On information and belief, the ’945 Patent and the ’683 Patent are unenforceable because
`
`Plaintiff failed to disclose the patents in a standards-setting organization.
`
`EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`On information and belief, the ’945 Patent and the ’683 Patent are unenforceable due to
`
`inequitable conduct.
`
`For all of the above reasons, First Data prays that Plaintiff takes nothing by its Complaint
`
`and that First Data be awarded such other and further relief to which it may be justly entitled.
`
`
`
`DLI-6446648v3
`
`4
`
`Cardsoft (ABC) EXHIBIT 2003
`First Data v. Cardsoft
`IPR2014-00720
`
`

`
`Case 2:13-cv-00290-JRG-RSP Document 11 Filed 07/01/13 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 118
`
`Dated: July 1, 2013
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Robert W. Kantner
`Robert W. Kantner
`Texas State Bar No. 11093900
`E-mail: rwkantner@jonesday.com
`Attorney in Charge
`Matthew Hawkins
`Texas State Bar No. 24066779
`Email: mhawkins@jonesday.com
`JONES DAY
`2727 North Harwood Street
`Dallas, Texas 75201-1515
`Phone: (214) 969-3737
`Fax: (214) 969-5100
`
`Melissa Richards Smith
`State Bar No. 24001351
`Gillam & Smith
`303 South Washington Avenue
`Marshall, Texas 75670
`Phone: 903.934.8450
`Fax: 903.934.9257
`E-mail: melissa@gillamsmithlaw.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT FIRST
`DATA CORPORATION
`
`
`DLI-6446648v3
`
`5
`
`Cardsoft (ABC) EXHIBIT 2003
`First Data v. Cardsoft
`IPR2014-00720
`
`

`
`Case 2:13-cv-00290-JRG-RSP Document 11 Filed 07/01/13 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 119
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in
`
`compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a). As such, this document was served on all counsel who
`
`have consented to electronic service. Local Rule CV-5(a)(3)(A). Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
`
`5(d) and Local Rule CV-5(e), all other counsel of record not deemed to have consented to
`
`electronic service were served with a true and correct copy of the foregoing by U.S. mail or
`
`facsimile transmission, on this 1st day of July, 2013.
`
`
`
`/s/ Robert W. Kantner
`Robert W. Kantner
`
`
`
`
`DLI-6446648v3
`
`6
`
`Cardsoft (ABC) EXHIBIT 2003
`First Data v. Cardsoft
`IPR2014-00720

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket