throbber
Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 1 of 13
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
`
`
`Aplix IP Holdings Corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc. and
`Sony Computer Entertainment America,
`LLC,
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-12745-MLW
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Aplix IP Holdings Corporation (“Aplix”), for its amended complaint
`
`against defendants Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc. (“SCE”) and Sony Computer
`
`Entertainment America, LLC (“SCEA”), collectively “Defendants,” states and alleges as
`
`follows:
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`This case concerns patented technology covering game devices such as the
`
`hand-held Sony PlayStation Vita gaming console, the Sony PlayStation DualShock 3 and
`
`DualShock 4 controllers. The DualShock 3 and DualShock 4 controllers are used with
`
`the Sony Xperia line of smartphones and tablets. The DualShock 4 controller is also used
`
`with the PlayStation 4 system.
`
` APLIX EXHIBIT 2001
` SCEA v. Aplix IP Holdings Corp.
` IPR2015-00229
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 2 of 13
`
`
`
`2.
`
`Beginning in 2003, a group of Massachusetts inventors, led by Dr. Beth
`
`Marcus, developed interactive-design technologies for improving data entry, control, and
`
`game-play on hand-held devices and host devices. Among other advancements, Marcus
`
`and her team deployed configurable input systems and elements on multiple surfaces of a
`
`hand-held device, taking advantage of the biomechanics of the human hand; leveraged
`
`the benefits associated with thumb-finger opposition; and designed hand-held accessory
`
`devices that would enable users to remotely operate (and play video games on) cell
`
`phones and tablet devices. Marcus and her team applied for patents on their inventions,
`
`and, after a thorough review, the United States Patent & Trademark Office awarded them
`
`several patents. These patents were assigned to Marcus’ Boston-area start-up company,
`
`Zeemote, Inc., which sought to commercialize the technology. Aplix acquired Zeemote’s
`
`assets, including the patents, and now asks this Court to find that the Defendants infringe
`
`the patents by importing, marketing, selling, and using the PlayStation Vita and
`
`accessories, including memory cards and pre-installed or bundled games, as well as the
`
`DualShock 3 and DualShock 4 controllers.
`
`
`
`PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE
`
`3.
`
`Aplix is a Japanese corporation with its principal place of business in
`
`Tokyo, Japan.
`
`4.
`
`SCE is a Japanese corporation with its principal place of business in Tokyo,
`
`Japan.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 3 of 13
`
`
`
`5.
`
`SCEA is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of
`
`business in San Mateo, California.
`
`6.
`
`This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the
`
`United States Code. Accordingly, this Court has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to
`
`28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`7.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants pursuant to
`
`Massachusetts’s long-arm statute, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 223A, § 3. On information and
`
`belief, Defendants have, directly and/or indirectly through their agents and
`
`intermediaries, advertised (including through web sites), offered to sell, sold, and/or
`
`distributed in Massachusetts products that infringe Aplix’s patents. Given Defendants’
`
`substantial and sustained contacts with the state, and their purposeful availment of the
`
`state’s benefits and protections, the Court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over
`
`Defendants in this lawsuit satisfies due-process requirements. In addition, Defendants
`
`have voluntarily appeared in this action.
`
`8.
`
`Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c) and 28
`
`U.S.C. § 1400(b) because Defendants have committed, and continue to commit, acts of
`
`infringement in the district.
`
`
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`9.
`
`In the spring of 2003, Massachusetts residents Beth Marcus and David Lee
`
`began developing ideas for improving how people interact with hand-held devices.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 4 of 13
`
`
`
`Marcus and Lee, both graduates of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, applied for
`
`a patent in October of that same year.
`
`10.
`
`Two years later, Marcus, with three others residing in the Boston area,
`
`founded Zietoo, Inc. (later changing the company name to Zeetoo, Inc., and then to
`
`Zeemote, Inc. (“Zeemote”)) to continue the research and development of products.
`
`Among other activities, Zeemote developed and sold a hand-held electronic game
`
`controller that communicated with a user’s mobile phone via Bluetooth technology.
`
`11. Marcus brought additional inventors to Zeemote, including Massachusetts
`
`residents Elaine Chen, Lorraine Wheeler, and Rob Podoloff. Together, the team worked
`
`to patent their innovations.
`
`12. On May 15, 2007, the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`(“USPTO”) duly and legally issued United States Patent No. 7,218,313 (“the ’313
`
`patent”), titled “Human Interface System.”
`
`13. On October 9, 2007, the USPTO duly and legally issued United States
`
`Patent No. 7,280,097 (the “’097 patent”), titled “Human Interface Input Acceleration
`
`System.”
`
`14. On December 9, 2008, the USPTO duly and legally issued United States
`
`Patent No. 7,463,245 (the “’245 patent”), also titled “Human Interface System.”
`
`15. On February 23, 2010, the USPTO duly and legally issued United States
`
`Patent No. 7,667,692 (the “’692 patent”), also titled “Human Interface System.”
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 5 of 13
`
`
`
`16. On April 26, 2011, the USPTO duly and legally issued United States Patent
`
`No. 7,932,892 (the “’892 patent”), also titled “Human Interface Input Acceleration
`
`System.”
`
`17.
`
`In late 2009, Aplix, a Japanese operating company that sells a variety of
`
`products, purchased Zeemote’s assets and patent portfolio, which included the ’313, ’097,
`
`’245, ’692, and ’892 patents. Aplix owns all right, title and interest in this group of
`
`patents.
`
`18.
`
`In 2006, Defendants released the PlayStation 3 (“PS3”), a video game
`
`system, in the United States. Defendants offer for sale a hand-held controller, known as
`
`the DualShock 3, alone and in conjunction with the PS3.
`
`19.
`
`In 2008, Sony Mobile Communications (formerly Sony Ericsson Mobile
`
`Communications AB) released its first Xperia smartphone in the United States. Since
`
`that time, a family of Sony Xperia smartphones and tablets have been released.
`
`20.
`
`In 2012, Defendants released the PlayStation Vita (“PS Vita”), a hand-held
`
`electronic game console, in the United States. Defendants offer the PS Vita for sale with
`
`pre-installed applications and memory cards. Defendants offer for sale additional
`
`applications (e.g., video games) and memory cards for use with the PS Vita.
`
`21.
`
`In addition, Defendants induce users to install and use additional
`
`applications (e.g., video games) on the PS Vita delivered by download through the
`
`PlayStation Store or delivered on PlayStation Vita cards.
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 6 of 13
`
`
`
`22.
`
`In 2013, Defendants released the PlayStation 4 (“PS4”), a video game
`
`system including the DualShock 4, a hand-held controller, in the United States.
`
`Defendants sell and offer for sale the DualShock 4 controller alone and in conjunction
`
`with the PS4. Several applications are pre-installed on the PS4. Defendants offer for sale
`
`additional applications (e.g., video games) for use with the PS4.
`
`23.
`
`In addition, Defendants induce users to install and use additional
`
`applications (e.g., video games) on the PS4 delivered by download through the
`
`PlayStation Store or delivered on digital video discs.
`
`24.
`
`The DualShock 3 and DualShock 4 controllers can be used in conjunction
`
`with Sony’s Xperia smartphones and tablets as well as the PS3 and PS4.
`
`25.
`
`In the summer of 2013, Aplix notified Defendants that the PS Vita
`
`infringed numerous claims of the ’313, ’245, and ’692 patents, and Aplix offered to
`
`license the technology to Defendants in exchange for reasonable royalties. On or about
`
`August 29, 2013, Aplix presented detailed claim charts to Defendants’ representatives
`
`explaining how the PS Vita infringed the patents. Licensing negotiations continued
`
`between the parties through March 2014, but the parties did not reach an agreement.
`
`26. Despite having actual notice that the PS Vita infringes Aplix’s patents,
`
`Defendants continue to promote the PS Vita and encourage game developers to develop
`
`and users in the United States to install videogames that implement infringing features on
`
`the PS Vita via its website.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 7 of 13
`
`
`
`27.
`
`SCE and SCEA are members of the Sony group of companies and work in
`
`concert to promote and sell the PS Vita, as well as the DualShock 3 and DualShock 4
`
`controllers in the United States.
`
`28. On information and belief, Defendants use the PS Vita and DualShock 3
`
`and DualShock 4 controllers in the United States, in their effort to test and market the
`
`products.
`
`29.
`
`This is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Aplix is entitled to
`
`recover its attorneys’ fees and costs in connection with this action.
`
`
`
`COUNT I — INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’313 PATENT
`
`30. Aplix incorporates and realleges by reference paragraphs 1 through 29 as if
`
`fully set forth here.
`
`31. Defendants have had actual knowledge of the ’313 patent since at least
`
`August 29, 2013.
`
`32. Defendants have directly infringed, and continue to directly infringe, one or
`
`more of the ’313 patent’s claims by offering to sell, selling, and using the PS Vita and
`
`accessories, including memory cards and games, in the United States, and by importing
`
`the PS Vita into the United States.
`
`33. Defendants have indirectly infringed, and continue to indirectly infringe,
`
`one or more of the ’313 patent’s claims. Defendants have intended, and continue to
`
`intend, that users and/or game developers infringe the ’313 patent, as evidenced by
`
`Defendants’ continued efforts to promote, sell, and offer to sell the PS Vita and certain
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 8 of 13
`
`
`
`game applications and their continued instructions to game developers to design games
`
`that will implement infringing features of the PS Vita, despite having actual knowledge
`
`that the PS Vita infringes the ’313 patent.
`
`34. Because of Defendants’ infringement of the ’313 patent, Aplix is entitled to
`
`a reasonable royalty in an amount to be established at trial.
`
`35. At least since August 29, 2013, Defendants’ infringement of the ’313 patent
`
`has been willful.
`
`
`
`COUNT II — INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’097 PATENT
`
`36. Aplix incorporates and realleges by reference paragraphs 1 through 35 as if
`
`fully set forth here.
`
`37. Defendants have had actual knowledge of the ’097 patent since at least
`
`October 30, 2014.
`
`38. Defendants have directly infringed, and continue to directly infringe, one or
`
`more of the ’097 patent’s claims by offering to sell, selling, and using the DualShock 3
`
`and DualShock 4 controllers in the United States, and by importing the DualShock 3 and
`
`DualShock 4 controllers into the United States.
`
`39. Because of Defendants’ infringement of the ’097 patent, Aplix is entitled to
`
`a reasonable royalty in an amount to be established at trial.
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 9 of 13
`
`
`
`COUNT III — INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’245 PATENT
`
`40. Aplix incorporates and realleges by reference paragraphs 1 through 39 as if
`
`fully set forth here.
`
`41. Defendants have had actual knowledge of the ’245 patent since at least
`
`August 29, 2013.
`
`42. Defendants have directly infringed, and continue to directly infringe, one or
`
`more of the ’245 patent’s claims by offering to sell, selling, and using the PS Vita and
`
`DualShock 4 controller in the United States, and by importing the PS Vita and
`
`DualShock 4 controller into the United States.
`
`43. Defendants have indirectly infringed, and continue to indirectly infringe,
`
`one or more of the ’245 patent’s claims. Defendants have intended, and continue to
`
`intend, that users and/or game developers infringe the ’245 patent, as evidenced by
`
`Defendants’ continued efforts to promote, sell, and offer to sell the PS Vita and the
`
`DualShock 4 controller and their continued instructions to game developers to design
`
`games that will implement infringing features of the PS Vita and DualShock 4 controller
`
`despite having actual knowledge that the device and game applications infringe the ’245
`
`patent.
`
`44. Because of Defendants’ infringement of the ’245 patent, Aplix is entitled to
`
`a reasonable royalty in an amount to be established at trial.
`
`45. At least since August 29, 2013, Defendants’ infringement of the ’245 patent
`
`has been willful.
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 10 of 13
`
`COUNT IV — INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’692 PATENT
`
`46. Aplix incorporates and realleges by reference paragraphs 1 through 45 as if
`
`
`
`
`
`fully set forth here.
`
`47. Defendants have had actual knowledge of the ’692 patent since at least
`
`August 29, 2013.
`
`48. Defendants have directly infringed, and continue to directly infringe, one or
`
`more of the ’692 patent’s claims by offering to sell, selling, and using the PS Vita in the
`
`United States, and by importing the PS Vita into the United States.
`
`49. Because of Defendants’ infringement of the ’692 patent, Aplix is entitled to
`
`a reasonable royalty in an amount to be established at trial.
`
`50. At least since August 29, 2013, Defendants’ infringement of the ’692 patent
`
`has been willful.
`
`
`
`COUNT V — INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’892 PATENT
`
`51. Aplix incorporates and realleges by reference paragraphs 1 through 50 as if
`
`fully set forth here.
`
`52. Defendants have had actual knowledge of the ’892 patent since at least
`
`October 30, 2014.
`
`53. Defendants have directly infringed, and continue to directly infringe, one or
`
`more of the ’892 patent’s claims by offering to sell, selling, and using the DualShock 3
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 11 of 13
`
`
`
`and DualShock 4 controllers in the United States, and by importing the DualShock 3 and
`
`DualShock 4 controllers into the United States.
`
`54. Because of Defendants’ infringement of the ’892 patent, Aplix is entitled to
`
`a reasonable royalty in an amount to be established at trial.
`
`
`
`WHEREFORE, Aplix prays for the following judgment and relief:
`
`a. A judgment for Aplix and against Defendants;
`
`b. A judgment that Defendants have infringed the ’313, ’097, ’245, ’692, and
`
`’892 patents;
`
`c. An order that Defendants account for and pay to Aplix all damages that are
`
`available under 35 U.S.C. § 284, including treble damages for willful
`
`infringement;
`
`d. An order compelling Defendants to make an accounting of their sales,
`
`profits, royalties, and damages owed to Aplix, including a post-judgment
`
`equitable accounting of damages for the period of infringement of the ’313,
`
`’097, ’245, ’692, and ’892 patents following the period of damages
`
`established by Aplix at trial;
`
`e. An order compelling Defendants to pay to Aplix pre-judgment and post-
`
`judgment interest;
`
`f. An award to Aplix of its costs, fees, and expenses in this action, including
`
`by declaring this case to be exceptional under 35 U.S.C. § 285;
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 12 of 13
`
`g. A permanent injunction prohibiting Defendants from continuing to infringe
`
`the ’313, ’097, ’245, ’692, and ’892 patents; and
`
`h. Any other relief that the Court deems just and equitable.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`
`
`Aplix demands a jury trial on all issues so triable.
`
`
`Dated: October 30, 2014. Respectfully submitted,
`
` APLIX IP HOLDINGS CORPORATION
`
` By its attorneys,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Brandon T. Scruggs
` Lisa M. Tittemore (BBO # 567941)
` Brandon Scruggs (BBO # 672541)
` SUNSTEIN KANN MURPHY & TIMBERS LLP
` 125 Summer Street
` Boston, MA 02110-1618
` Telephone: (617) 443-9292
` Facsimile: (617) 443-0004
` E-mail:
`
`
`
`
`ltittemore@sunsteinlaw.com
`bscruggs@sunsteinlaw.com
`
` Robert J. Gilbertson
` Sybil L. Dunlop
` X. Kevin Zhao
` GREENE ESPEL PLLP
` 222 South Ninth Street, Suite 2200
` Minneapolis, MN 55402
` Telephone: (612) 373-0830
` Facsimile: (612) 373-0929
` E-mail:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(pro hac vice)
`(pro hac vice)
`(pro hac vice)
`
`BGilbertson@GreeneEspel.com
`SDunlop@GreeneEspel.com
`KZhao@GreeneEspel.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-12745-MLW Document 23 Filed 10/30/14 Page 13 of 13
`
`
`
` Sherman W. Kahn
` MAURIEL KAPOUYTIAN WOODS LLP
` 27 W. 24th Street, Third Floor
` New York, NY 10010
` Telephone: (212) 524-9309
` Facsimile: (212) 529-5132
` E-mail:
`
`(pro hac vice)
`
`skahn@mkwllp.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`Aplix IP Holdings Corporation
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I certify that, on the above date, this document filed through the ECF system will be sent
`electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF),
`and paper copies will be sent to those indicated as non-registered participants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Brandon Scruggs
` Brandon Scruggs
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`04088/05001 2198136.1
`
`
`
`13

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