throbber
Case 2:13-cv-01059-JRG-RSP Document 35 Filed 02/10/14 Page 1 of 64 PageID #: 638
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`SOLOCRON MEDIA, LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`Case No. 2:13-cv-1059-JRG
`
`
`
`
`
`[JURY TRIAL DEMANDED]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC., CELLCO
`PARTNERSHIP D/B/A VERIZON WIRELESS,
`AT&T INC., AT&T MOBILITY LLC, SPRINT
`CORPORATION, SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS
`COMPANY L.P., SPRINT SOLUTIONS INC., AND
`T-MOBILE USA, INC.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANTS VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. AND CELLCO PARTNERSHIP
`D/B/A VERIZON WIRELESS’S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND
`DEFENDANT CELLCO PARTNERSHIP’S COUNTERCLAIMS TO PLAINTIFF’S
`AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Defendants Verizon Communications Inc. (“VCI”) and Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon
`
`Wireless (“Verizon Wireless”) (collectively, “Verizon”) hereby submit their Answer and
`
`Affirmative Defenses and Verizon Wireless’s Counterclaims to Plaintiff Solocron Media, LLC’s
`
`(“Solocron”) First Amended Complaint:
`
`THE NATURE OF THE ACTION1
`
`1.
`
`Paragraph 1 contains conclusions of law and not averments of fact to which an
`
`answer is required, but insofar as an answer may be deemed required, Verizon admits only that
`
`the Amended Complaint purports to assert claims for patent infringement. Verizon specifically
`
`denies that it has committed or continues to commit any wrongful acts, including direct or
`
`
`1
`For ease of reference, Verizon incorporates the outline headings used in the Complaint. To the extent that
`such headings make factual allegations, Verizon does not adopt or admit such statements and instead denies them.
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`Page 2024-001
`
`Solocron Ex. 2024 - Verizon Wireless, AT&T Mobility - IPR2015-00390
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-01059-JRG-RSP Document 35 Filed 02/10/14 Page 2 of 64 PageID #: 639
`
`indirect infringement of any valid, enforceable claim of any of the Patents-in-Suit. Verizon
`
`denies all remaining allegations contained in paragraph 1 to the extent they relate to Verizon.
`
`Verizon lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in
`
`paragraph 1 as to the other named defendants and therefore denies same.
`
`2.
`
`Paragraph 2 contains conclusions of law and not averments of fact to which an
`
`answer is required, but insofar as an answer may be deemed required, Verizon lacks information
`
`sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 2 and therefore
`
`denies same.
`
`3.
`
`Paragraph 3 contains conclusions of law and not averments of fact to which an
`
`answer is required, but insofar as an answer may be deemed required, Verizon specifically denies
`
`that it has committed or continues to commit any wrongful acts, including direct or indirect
`
`infringement of any valid, enforceable claim of any of the Patents-in-Suit. Verizon denies that
`
`Solocron is or has been damaged and/or is entitled to injunctive relief. Verizon denies that
`
`Solocron is entitled to the requested relief or any other relief. Verizon denies all remaining
`
`allegations contained in paragraph 3 to the extent they relate to Verizon. Verizon lacks
`
`information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 3 as to the
`
`other named defendants and therefore denies same.
`
`4.
`
`Paragraph 4 contains conclusions of law and not averments of fact to which an
`
`answer is required, but insofar as an answer may be deemed required, Verizon denies that
`
`Solocron is entitled to the request relief or any relief. Verizon denies all remaining allegations
`
`contained in paragraph 4.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`5.
`
`Verizon lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`
`
`2
`
`Page 2024-002
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-01059-JRG-RSP Document 35 Filed 02/10/14 Page 3 of 64 PageID #: 640
`
`allegations contained in paragraph 5 and therefore denies same.
`
`6.
`
`Verizon admits that VCI is a Delaware corporation with a principal place of
`
`business at 140 West Street, New York, New York. Verizon admits that VCI may be served
`
`through its agent, The Corporation Trust Company, at Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange
`
`Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801. Verizon denies that VCI is doing business in the Eastern
`
`District of Texas. Verizon denies all remaining allegations contained in paragraph 6.
`
`7.
`
`Verizon admits Verizon Wireless is a general partnership organized and existing
`
`under the laws of the State of Delaware and that it has a principal place of business in Basking
`
`Ridge, New Jersey. Verizon admits that Verizon Wireless may be served through its agent, The
`
`Corporation Trust Company, at Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington,
`
`Delaware 19801. Verizon admits that Verizon Wireless provides wireless service around the
`
`country, including in the Eastern District of Texas. Verizon denies all remaining allegations
`
`contained in paragraph 7.
`
`8.
`
`Verizon lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations contained in paragraph 8 and therefore denies same.
`
`9.
`
`Verizon lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations contained in paragraph 9 and therefore denies same.
`
`10.
`
`Verizon lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations contained in paragraph 10 and therefore denies same.
`
`11.
`
`Verizon lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations contained in paragraph 11 and therefore denies same.
`
`12.
`
`Verizon lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations contained in paragraph 12 and therefore denies same.
`
`
`
`3
`
`Page 2024-003
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-01059-JRG-RSP Document 35 Filed 02/10/14 Page 4 of 64 PageID #: 641
`
`13.
`
`Verizon lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations contained in paragraph 13 and therefore denies same.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`14.
`
`Paragraph 14 contains conclusions of law and not averments of fact to which an
`
`answer is required, but insofar as an answer may be deemed required, Verizon admits that this
`
`action purports to arise under the Patent Laws of the United States, Title 35, United States Code.
`
`15.
`
`Paragraph 15 contains conclusions of law and not averments of fact to which an
`
`answer is required, but insofar as an answer may be deemed required, Verizon Wireless admits
`
`that this Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter based upon the Patent Laws of the United
`
`States, Title 35, United States Code, and by Title 28, United States Code, § 1331 and § 1338(a).
`
`16.
`
`Paragraph 16 contains conclusions of law and not averments of fact to which an
`
`answer is required, but insofar as an answer may be deemed required, Verizon lacks information
`
`sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 16 and
`
`therefore denies same.
`
`17.
`
`Paragraph 17 contains conclusions of law and not averments of fact to which an
`
`answer is required, but insofar as an answer may be deemed required, Verizon admits only that
`
`VCI is the parent corporation of Verizon Wireless. Verizon specifically denies that VCI
`
`conducts substantial business in Texas, maintains retail stores, or offers to sell products or
`
`services in Texas. Verizon specifically denies that it has committed or continues to commit any
`
`wrongful acts, including direct or indirect infringement of any valid, enforceable claim of any of
`
`the Patents-in-Suit. Verizon denies all remaining allegations contained in paragraph 17.
`
`18.
`
`Paragraph 18 contains conclusions of law and not averments of fact to which an
`
`answer is required, but insofar as an answer may be deemed required, Verizon admits that
`
`
`
`4
`
`Page 2024-004
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-01059-JRG-RSP Document 35 Filed 02/10/14 Page 62 of 64 PageID #: 699
`
`COUNTERCLAIM COUNT XIV
`(Non-infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,594,651)
`
`Verizon Wireless realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in
`
`58.
`
`paragraphs 1-57 above.
`
`59.
`
`60.
`
`Solocron has asserted that Verizon Wireless infringes the ‘651 patent.
`
`An actual controversy exists between Solocron and Verizon Wireless regarding
`
`infringement of the ‘651 patent.
`
`61.
`
`Verizon Wireless has not infringed and does not infringe any valid, enforceable
`
`claim of the ‘651 patent literally, directly, jointly, contributorily, by way of inducement, and/or
`
`under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`In accordance with FED. R. CIV. P. 38(b), Verizon Wireless demands a trial by jury on all
`
`issues so triable.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Verizon prays that this Court enter judgment:
`
`A.
`
`dismissing the First Amended Complaint with prejudice and denying each and
`
`every prayer for relief contained therein;
`
`B.
`
`declaring that none of the claims of the Patents-in-Suit are directly, jointly, or
`
`indirectly infringed by the use, sale or offer for sale of any of Verizon’s services or products or
`
`any other activity attributable to Verizon, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents;
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`declaring that the claims of the Patents-in-Suit patent are invalid;
`
`declaring that this case is “exceptional” within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285,
`
`and that all costs and expenses of this action, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, be awarded to
`
`Verizon;
`
`
`
`62
`
`Page 2024-005
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-01059-JRG-RSP Document 35 Filed 02/10/14 Page 63 of 64 PageID #: 700
`
`declaring that Solocron is not entitled to any injunctive relief against Verizon; and
`
`granting Verizon such further relief as this Court may deem necessary, just or
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`proper.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`Dated: February 10, 2014
`
`/s/ Michael E. Jones
`Michael E. Jones
`State Bar No. 10929400
`mikejones@potterminton.com
`POTTER MINTON
`A Professional Corporation
`110 N. College, Suite 500
`Tyler, TX 75702
`Tel: (903) 597-8311
`Fax: (903) 593-0846
`
`Kevin P. Anderson
`kanderson@wileyrein.com
`WILEY REIN LLP
`1776 K Street, NW
`Washington, D.C. 20006
`Tel: 202.719.7000
`Fax: 202.719.7049
`
`Attorneys for Defendants Verizon Communications
`Inc. and Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon
`Wireless
`
`
`
`63
`
`Page 2024-006
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-01059-JRG-RSP Document 35 Filed 02/10/14 Page 64 of 64 PageID #: 701
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`I hereby certify that all counsel of record who have consented to electronic service are
`
`being served with a copy of this document via the Court’s EM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-
`
`5(a)(3) on this 10th day of February, 2014.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/Michael E. Jones
`
`Michael Jones
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`64
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 2024-007
`
`

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