throbber
Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 1 of 18 PageID #: 3325
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`TYLER DIVISION
`
`
`GARNET DIGITAL, LLC
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`(cid:36)(cid:83)(cid:83)(cid:79)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:81)(cid:70)(cid:17)
`Exh. 1022
`(cid:51)(cid:72)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:36)(cid:83)(cid:83)(cid:79)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:81)(cid:70)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:18)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:50)(cid:90)(cid:81)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:40)(cid:16)(cid:58)(cid:68)(cid:87)(cid:70)(cid:75)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:81)(cid:70)(cid:17)
`(cid:44)(cid:51)(cid:53)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:24)(cid:16)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:23)(cid:20)(cid:21)
`
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:11-cv-647
`
`
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`(1)
`AT&T INC.;
`(2)
`AT&T MOBILITY LLC;
`(3)
`DELL INC.;
`(4)
`PANTECH WIRELESS, INC.;
`(5)
`HTC AMERICA, INC.;
`(6)
`HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY;
`(7) MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC;
`(8)
`SONY ERICSSON MOBILE
`COMMUNICATIONS (USA) INC.;
`(9)
`GOOGLE INC.;
`(10) KYOCERA COMMUNICATIONS,
`INC.;
`(11) VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC.;
`(12) CELLCO PARTNERSHIP (DBA
`VERIZON WIRELESS);
`(13) SPRINT SOLUTIONS, INC.;
`(14) SPRINT NEXTEL CORPORATION;
`(15) T-MOBILE USA, INC.;
`(16) BOOST MOBILE, LLC;
`(17) VIRGIN MOBILE USA, INC.;
`(18) VIRGIN MOBILE USA, L.P.;
`(19) METROPCS COMMUNICATIONS,
`INC.;
`(20) LEAP WIRELESS INTERNATIONAL,
`INC.;
`(21) STX WIRELESS OPERATIONS, LLC;
`(22) HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES USA INC.;
`and
`(23) RADIOSHACK CORPORATION;
`
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 2 of 18 PageID #: 3326
`
`Plaintiff Garnet Digital, LLC (“Garnet”) files this amended complaint against the
`
`above-named defendants, alleging, based on its own knowledge with respect to itself and
`
`its own actions and based on information and belief as to all other matters, as follows:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Garnet is a limited liability corporation formed under the laws of the State
`
`of Texas, with a principal place of business in Plano, Texas.
`
`2.
`
`Defendant AT&T Inc. is a corporation organized under the laws of the state
`
`of Delaware, with a principal place of business at 208 S. Akard Street; Dallas, TX 75202.
`
`AT&T Inc. can be served with process by serving its registered agent: CT Corporation
`
`System; 350 N. St. Paul Street, Ste. 2900; Dallas, TX 75201.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant AT&T Mobility LLC (“AT&T Mobility”) is a limited liability
`
`company organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of
`
`business at 5565 Glenridge Connector, Ste. 510; Atlanta, GA 30342. AT&T Mobility can
`
`be served with process by serving its registered agent: CT Corporation System; 350 N. St.
`
`Paul Street, Ste. 2900; Dallas, TX 75201.
`
`4.
`
`Defendant Dell Inc. (“Dell”) is a corporation organized under the laws of
`
`the state of Delaware, with a principal place of business at 1 Dell Way, Round Rock, TX
`
`78682-7000. Dell can be served with process by serving its registered agent: Corporation
`
`Service Company; 211 East 7th Street, Ste. 620; Austin, TX 78701-3218.
`
`5.
`
`Defendant Pantech Wireless, Inc. (“Pantech”) is a corporation organized
`
`under the laws of the state of Georgia, with a principal place of business at 5607 Glenridge
`
`Drive, Ste. 500; Atlanta, GA 30342. Under the Texas Long Arm Statute, as well as the
`
`Texas Business Corporations Act, Pantech can be served by serving the Secretary of State
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 3 of 18 PageID #: 3327
`
`because it is doing business in Texas but has not registered an agent for the service of
`
`process in Texas. The address of its home, home office, and principal office is 5607
`
`Glenridge Drive, Ste. 500; Atlanta, GA 30342.
`
`6.
`
`Defendant HTC America, Inc. (“HTC”) is a corporation organized under the
`
`laws of the state of Washington, with a principal place of business at 13920 SE Eastgate
`
`Way, Ste. 400; Bellevue, WA 98005. HTC can be served with process by serving its
`
`registered agent: National Registered Agents; 16055 Space Center, Ste. 235; Houston, TX
`
`77062.
`
`7.
`
`Defendant Hewlett-Packard Company (“HP”) is a corporation organized
`
`under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of business at 3000 Hanover
`
`Street; Palo Alto, CA 94304. HP can be served with process by serving its registered
`
`agent: CT Corporation System; 350 N. St. Paul Street, Ste. 2900; Dallas, TX 75201.
`
`8.
`
`Defendant Motorola Mobility, LLC (“Motorola”) is a limited liability
`
`company organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of
`
`business at 1303 East Algonquin Road; Schaumburg, IL 60196. Motorola can be served
`
`with process by serving its registered agent: CT Corporation System; 350 N. St. Paul
`
`Street, Ste. 2900; Dallas, TX 75201.
`
`9.
`
`Defendant Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications (USA) Inc. (“Sony
`
`Ericsson”) is a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a
`
`principal place of business at 7001 Development Drive; PO Box 13969; Research Triangle
`
`Park, NC 27709. Sony Ericsson can be served with process by serving its registered agent:
`
`Capitol Corporate Services, Inc.; 800 Brazos, Ste. 400; Austin, TX 78701.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 4 of 18 PageID #: 3328
`
`10.
`
`Defendant Google Inc. (“Google”) is a corporation organized under the
`
`laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of business at 1600 Ampitheatre
`
`Parkway; Mountain View, CA 94043. Google can be served with process by serving its
`
`registered agent: Corporation Service Company dba CSC--Lawyers Incorporating Service
`
`Company; 211 East 7th Street, Ste. 620; Austin, TX 78701-3218.
`
`11.
`
`Defendant Kyocera Communications, Inc. (“Kyocera”) is a corporation
`
`organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of business at
`
`10300 Campus Point Drive; San Diego, CA 92121. Kyocera can be served with process
`
`by serving its registered agent: Corporation Service Company dba CSC--Lawyers
`
`Incorporating Service Company; 211 East 7th Street, Ste. 620; Austin, TX 78701-3218.
`
`12.
`
`Defendant Verizon Communications, Inc. (“Verizon Communications”) is a
`
`corporation organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of
`
`business at 140 West Street; New York, NY 10007. Under the Texas Long Arm Statute, as
`
`well as the Texas Business Corporations Act, Verizon Communications can be served by
`
`serving the Secretary of State because it is doing business in Texas but has not registered
`
`an agent for the service of process in Texas. The address of its home, home office, and
`
`principal office is 140 West Street; New York, NY 10007.
`
`13.
`
`Defendant Cellco Partnership (dba Verizon Wireless) (“Cellco”) is a
`
`partnership organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of
`
`business at One Verizon Way; Basking Ridge, NJ 07920. Under the Texas Long Arm
`
`Statute, as well as the Texas Business Corporations Act, Cellco can be served by serving
`
`the Secretary of State because it is doing business in Texas but has not registered an agent
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 5 of 18 PageID #: 3329
`
`for the service of process in Texas. The address of its home, home office, and principal
`
`office is One Verizon Way; Basking Ridge, NJ 07920.
`
`14.
`
`Defendant Sprint Solutions, Inc. (“Sprint Solutions”) is a corporation
`
`organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of business at 701
`
`Brazos St., Ste. 1050; Austin, TX 78701. Sprint Solutions can be served with process by
`
`serving its registered agent: Corporation Service Company dba CSC--Lawyers
`
`Incorporating Service Company; 211 East 7th Street, Ste. 620; Austin, TX 78701-3218.
`
`15.
`
`Defendant Sprint Nextel Corporation (“Sprint Nextel”) is a corporation
`
`organized under the laws of the state of Kansas, with a principal place of business at 6200
`
`Sprint Parkway; Overland Park, KS 66251. Under the Texas Long Arm Statute, as well as
`
`the Texas Business Corporations Act, Sprint Nextel can be served by serving the Secretary
`
`of State because it is doing business in Texas but has not registered an agent for the service
`
`of process in Texas. The address of its home, home office, and principal office is 6200
`
`Sprint Parkway; Overland Park, KS 66251.
`
`16.
`
`Defendant T-Mobile USA, Inc. (“T-Mobile”) is a corporation organized
`
`under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of business at 12920 SE
`
`38th Street; Bellevue, WA 98006. T-Mobile can be served with process by serving its
`
`registered agent: Corporation Service Company; 211 East 7th Street, Ste. 620; Austin, TX
`
`78701-3218.
`
`17.
`
`Defendant Boost Mobile, LLC (“Boost”) is a limited liability company
`
`organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of business at
`
`6200 Sprint Parkway, KSOPHF0302-3B124; Overland Park, KS 66251. Boost can be
`
`served with process by serving its registered agent: Corporation Service Company dba
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 6 of 18 PageID #: 3330
`
`CSC--Lawyers Incorporating Service Company; 211 East 7th Street, Ste. 620; Austin, TX
`
`78701-3218.
`
`18.
`
`Defendant Virgin Mobile USA, Inc. (“Virgin Mobile”) is a corporation
`
`organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of business at 10
`
`Independence Blvd.; Warren, NJ 07059. Under the Texas Long Arm Statute, as well as the
`
`Texas Business Corporations Act, Virgin Mobile can be served by serving the Secretary of
`
`State because it is doing business in Texas but has not registered an agent for the service of
`
`process in Texas. The address of its home, home office, and principal office is 10
`
`Independence Blvd.; Warren, NJ 07059..
`
`19.
`
`Defendant Virgin Mobile USA, L.P. (“Virgin Limited”) is a limited
`
`partnership organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of
`
`business at 10960 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 600; Los Angeles, CA 90024. Virgin Limited can
`
`be served with process by serving its registered agent: Corporation Service Company dba
`
`CSC--Lawyers Incorporating Service Company; 211 East 7th Street, Ste. 620; Austin, TX
`
`78701-3218.
`
`20.
`
`Defendant MetroPCS Communications, Inc. (“MetroPCS”) is a corporation
`
`organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of business at
`
`2250 Lakeside Blvd.; Richardson, TX 75082. Under the Texas Long Arm Statute, as well
`
`as the Texas Business Corporations Act, MetroPCS can be served by serving the Secretary
`
`of State because it is doing business in Texas but has not registered an agent for the service
`
`of process in Texas. The address of its home, home office, and principal office is 2250
`
`Lakeside Blvd.; Richardson, TX 75082.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 7 of 18 PageID #: 3331
`
`21.
`
`Defendant Leap Wireless International, Inc. (“Leap Wireless”) is a
`
`corporation organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of
`
`business at 5887 Copley Drive; San Diego, CA 92111. Under the Texas Long Arm
`
`Statute, as well as the Texas Business Corporations Act, Leap Wireless can be served by
`
`serving the Secretary of State because it is doing business in Texas but has not registered
`
`an agent for the service of process in Texas. The address of its home, home office, and
`
`principal office is 5887 Copley Drive; San Diego, CA 92111.
`
`22.
`
`Defendant STX Wireless Operations, LLC (“STX”) is a limited liability
`
`company organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of
`
`business at 5887 Copley Drive; San Diego, CA 92111. STX can be served with process by
`
`serving its registered agent: Corporation Service Company dba CSC--Lawyers
`
`Incorporating Service Company; 211 East 7th Street, Ste. 620; Austin, TX 78701-3218.
`
`23.
`
`Defendant Huawei Technologies USA Inc. (“Huawei”) is a corporation
`
`organized under the laws of the state of Texas, with a principal place of business at 5700
`
`Tennyson Parkway; Ste. 500; Plano, Texas 75024. Huawei can be served with process by
`
`serving its registered agent: CT Corporation System; 350 N. St. Paul Street, Ste. 2900;
`
`Dallas, TX 75201.
`
`24.
`
`Defendant RadioShack Corporation (“RadioShack”) is a corporation
`
`organized under the laws of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of business at 300
`
`RadioShack Circle, Fort Worth, Texas. RadioShack can be served with process by serving
`
`its registered agent: Corporation Service Company dba CSC--Lawyers Incorporating
`
`Service Company; 211 East 7th Street, Ste. 620; Austin, TX 78701-3218.
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 8 of 18 PageID #: 3332
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`25.
`
`This is an action for infringement of a United States patent arising under 35
`
`U.S.C. §§ 271, 281, and 284-285, among others. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction
`
`of the action under 28 U.S.C. §1331 and §1338(a).
`
`26.
`
`Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b).
`
`Upon information and belief, each defendant has transacted business in this district, and
`
`has committed and/or induced acts of patent infringement in this district.
`
`27.
`
`Each defendant is subject to this Court’s specific and general personal
`
`jurisdiction pursuant to due process and/or the Texas Long Arm Statute, due at least to
`
`each defendant’s substantial business in this forum, including: (i) at least a portion of the
`
`infringements alleged herein; and/or (ii) regularly doing or soliciting business, engaging in
`
`other persistent courses of conduct, and/or deriving substantial revenue from goods and
`
`services provided to individuals in Texas and in this district.
`
`JOINDER
`
`28.
`
`Defendants are properly joined under 35 U.S.C. § 299(a)(1) because a right
`
`to relief is asserted against the parties jointly, severally, and in the alternative with respect
`
`to the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences relating to the
`
`making, using, importing into the United States, offering for sale, and/or selling the same
`
`accused products. Specifically, as alleged in detail below, defendants are alleged to
`
`infringe the patent in suit with respect to a large number of overlapping smartphone
`
`products.
`
`29.
`
`Defendants are properly joined under 35 U.S.C. § 299(a)(2). Questions of
`
`fact will arise that are common to all defendants, including for example, whether the
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 9 of 18 PageID #: 3333
`
`overlapping smartphone products alleged to infringe have features that meet the limitations
`
`of one or more claims of the patent-in-suit, and what reasonable royalty will be adequate to
`
`compensate the owner of the patent-in-suit for its infringement.
`
`COUNT I
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,379,421
`
`30.
`
`On January 3, 1995, United States Patent No. 5,379,421 was duly and
`
`legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office for an invention entitled
`
`“Interactive Terminal For The Access Of Remote Database Information.” On October 10,
`
`1995, a certificate of correction of the 421 patent was duly and legally issued by the Patent
`
`Office. A true and correct copy of the 421 patent, along with its certificate of correction, is
`
`attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`
`31.
`
`Garnet is the owner of the 421 patent with all substantive rights in and to
`
`that patent, including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce the
`
`421 patent against infringers, and to collect damages for all relevant times.
`
`32.
`
`AT&T Inc. and AT&T Mobility (collectively “AT&T”) directly or through
`
`intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold,
`
`and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including at least the AT&T Impulse; the
`
`Dell Venue; the HTC HD7, Inspire, and Status; the Motorola Atrix; Palm Pixi; Pantech
`
`Crossover; and Sony Ericsson Xperia smartphones) that infringed one or more claims of
`
`the 421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the infringement of one
`
`or more of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`33.
`
`Dell directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported,
`
`provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 10 of 18 PageID #: 3334
`
`(including at least Dell Venue smartphones) that infringed one or more claims of the 421
`
`patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the infringement of one or more
`
`of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`34.
`
`Pantech directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used,
`
`imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or
`
`systems (including at least Pantech Breakout and Crossover smartphones) that infringed
`
`one or more claims of the 421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to
`
`the infringement of one or more of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`35.
`
`HTC directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported,
`
`provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems
`
`(including at least HTC Amaze, 7 Pro, Arrive, Desire EVO HD7, Hero, Inspire Merge,
`
`Radar, Rhyme, Sensation, Status, Thunderbolt, Trophy, and Wildfire smartphones) that
`
`infringed one or more claims of the 421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or
`
`contributed to the infringement of one or more of the claims of the 421 patent by its
`
`customers.
`
`36.
`
`HP directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported,
`
`provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems
`
`(including at least HP Veer, Palm Pixi, and Palm Pre2 smartphones) that infringed one or
`
`more claims of the 421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the
`
`infringement of one or more of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`37. Motorola directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used,
`
`imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or
`
`systems (including at least Motorola Admiral, Atrix, Citrus, Cliq, Droid, Electrify,
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 11 of 18 PageID #: 3335
`
`ES400S, XPRT, Photon, Titanium, and Triumph smartphones) that infringed one or more
`
`claims of the 421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the
`
`infringement of one or more of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`38.
`
`Sony Ericsson directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used,
`
`imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or
`
`systems (including at least Sony Ericsson Xperia smartphones) that infringed one or more
`
`claims of the 421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the
`
`infringement of one or more of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`39.
`
`Google directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported,
`
`provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems
`
`(including at least Google Nexus smartphones) that infringed one or more claims of the
`
`421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the infringement of one or
`
`more of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`40.
`
`Kyocera directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used,
`
`imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or
`
`systems (including at least Milano, Sanyo Zio, and Sanyo Incognito smartphones) that
`
`infringed one or more claims of the 421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or
`
`contributed to the infringement of one or more of the claims of the 421 patent by its
`
`customers.
`
`41.
`
`Verizon Communications and Cellco (collectively “Verizon”) directly or
`
`through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported, provided, supplied, distributed,
`
`sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including at least HTC Rhyme,
`
`Thunderbolt, and Trophy; Motorola Citrus and Droid; Palm Pre2; Pantech Breakout; and
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 12 of 18 PageID #: 3336
`
`Sony Ericsson Xperia smartphones) that infringed one or more claims of the 421 patent,
`
`and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the infringement of one or more of the
`
`claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`42.
`
`Sprint Solutions and Sprint Nextel (collectively “Spring”) directly or
`
`through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported, provided, supplied, distributed,
`
`sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including at least Google Nexus;
`
`HTC Arrive and EVO; Kyocera Milano; and Motorola Admiral, ES400S, XPRT, Photon,
`
`and Titanium smartphones) that infringed one or more claims of the 421 patent, and/or
`
`induced infringement and/or contributed to the infringement of one or more of the claims
`
`of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`43.
`
`T-Mobile directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used,
`
`imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or
`
`systems (including at least HTC Amaze, HD7, Radar, Sensation, and Wildfire; Motorola
`
`Cliq; and T-Mobile Comet, G2x, myTouch, and Sidekick smartphones) that infringed one
`
`or more claims of the 421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the
`
`infringement of one or more of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`44.
`
`Boost directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported,
`
`provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems
`
`(including at least Kyocera Sanyo Incognito smartphones) that infringed one or more
`
`claims of the 421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the
`
`infringement of one or more of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`45.
`
`Virgin Mobile and Virgin Limited (collectively “Virgin”) directly or
`
`through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported, provided, supplied, distributed,
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 13 of 18 PageID #: 3337
`
`sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including at least HTC Wildfire; and
`
`Motorola Triumph and Intercept smartphones) that infringed one or more claims of the 421
`
`patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the infringement of one or more
`
`of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`46. MetroPCS directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used,
`
`imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or
`
`systems (including at least Huawei M835 smartphones) that infringed one or more claims
`
`of the 421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the infringement of
`
`one or more of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`47.
`
`Leap Wireless and STX (collectively “Leap”) directly or through
`
`intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold,
`
`and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including at least Huawei Ascend; and
`
`Kyocera Sanyo Zio smartphones) that infringed one or more claims of the 421 patent,
`
`and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the infringement of one or more of the
`
`claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`48.
`
`Huawei directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported,
`
`provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems
`
`(including at least Huawei Ascend and M835 smartphones) that infringed one or more
`
`claims of the 421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the
`
`infringement of one or more of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`49.
`
`RadioShack directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used,
`
`imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or
`
`systems (including at least Motorola and HTC smartphones) that infringed one or more
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 14 of 18 PageID #: 3338
`
`claims of the 421 patent, and/or induced infringement and/or contributed to the
`
`infringement of one or more of the claims of the 421 patent by its customers.
`
`ADDITIONAL ALLEGATIONS REGARDING INDIRECT INFRINGEMENT
`
`50.
`
`Each defendant has indirectly infringed the 421 patent, both by inducement
`
`and by contributory infringement.
`
`51.
`
`The direct infringement underlying each defendants’ indirect infringement
`
`consists of the use of the accused smartphones by end-user customers.
`
`52.
`
`Each defendant induces end-user customers to use the accused smartphones,
`
`and specifically to use them in a manner that infringes the patent-in-suit. They do so by
`
`(1) providing instructions, for example in their user manuals for the accused phones, to
`
`their customers that explain how to use the features of the accused devices that are accused
`
`of infringement (specifically those features that allow video to be downloaded and
`
`displayed by the smartphone as set forth in the infringement contentions that were served
`
`in this case, which are hereby incorporated by reference); and (2) by touting the accused
`
`features of the smartphones, including but not limited to advertisements and on their
`
`websites. Additionally, the carrier defendants maintain wireless networks that are
`
`designed to be accessed by the accused smartphones and that are designed to carry data
`
`such as video. The carrier defendants sell data plans to their customers that are designed
`
`for the accused smartphones’ high use of data.
`
`53.
`
`Each defendant has contributed to the infringement of the 421 patent by
`
`end-user customers by making and selling the accused smartphones. The accused features
`
`of the accused smartphones have no substantial use other than infringing the 421 patent. In
`
`particular, the accused features that allow video to be downloaded and displayed by the
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 15 of 18 PageID #: 3339
`
`smartphone, for example, to be displayed on the integrated display that is part of the
`
`smartphone or on an external display through a link such as an HDMI output, have no
`
`practical use other than uses that infringe the patent-in-suit, as detailed in the infringement
`
`contentions that have been served in this action, which are incorporated by reference. The
`
`use of these features of the accused smartphones for their intended purpose necessarily
`
`results in infringement of the 421 patent.
`
`54.
`
`Each defendant has knowledge of the 421 patent, as well as the fact that its
`
`customers use of the accused products infringes the 421 patent, since at least as early as
`
`receiving notice of this lawsuit, when it was served with the complaint in this action.
`
`Additionally, when each defendant began making and/or selling the accused products it did
`
`so without taking adequate steps to determine whether it would be infringing the patent
`
`rights of others, and thus remained willfully blind to the existence of the 421 patent.
`
`Finally, some defendants (including at least AT&T and Sony) knew about the 421 patent
`
`because it was brought to their attention in connection with the filing of their own patents.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`Garnet hereby requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable by right.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`Garnet requests that the Court find in its favor and against defendants, and that the
`
`Court grant Garnet the following relief:
`
`a.
`
`Judgment that one or more claims of the 421 patent have been infringed,
`
`either literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, by one or more defendants and/or
`
`by others to whose infringement defendants have contributed and/or by others whose
`
`infringement has been induced by defendants;
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 16 of 18 PageID #: 3340
`
`b.
`
`A permanent injunction enjoining defendants and their officers, directors,
`
`agents, servants, affiliates, employees, divisions, branches, subsidiaries, parents, and all
`
`others acting in active concert therewith from infringement, inducing infringement of, or
`
`contributing to infringement of the 421 patent;
`
`c.
`
`Judgment that defendants account for and pay to Garnet all damages to and
`
`costs incurred by Garnet because of defendants’ infringing activities and other conduct
`
`complained of herein;
`
`d.
`
`That Garnet be granted pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the
`
`damages caused by defendants’ infringing activities and other conduct complained of
`
`herein;
`
`e.
`
`That this Court declare this an exceptional case and award Garnet its
`
`reasonable attorney’s fees and costs in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 285; and
`
`f.
`
`That Garnet be granted such other and further relief as the Court may deem
`
`just and proper under the circumstances.
`
`
`
`Dated: October 3, 2012
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` /s/ Matthew J. Antonelli
`Matthew J. Antonelli (lead attorney)
`Texas Bar No. 24068432
`
`matt@ahtlawfirm.com
`Zachariah S. Harrington
`Texas Bar No. 24057886
`zac@ahtlawfirm.com
`Larry D. Thompson, Jr.
`Texas Bar No. 24051428
`larry@ahtlawfirm.com
`ANTONELLI, HARRINGTON &
`THOMPSON LLP
`4200 Montrose Blvd., Ste. 430
`Houston, TX 77006
`
`16
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 17 of 18 PageID #: 3341
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(713) 581-3000
`
`S. Calvin Capshaw
`Texas Bar No. 03873900
`ccapshaw@capshawlaw.com
`Elizabeth L. DeRieux
`Texas Bar No. 05770585
`ederieux@capshawlaw.com
`D. Jeffrey Rambin
`Texas Bar No. 00791478
`jrambin@capshawlaw.com
`CAPSHAW DeRIEUX, LLP
`114 E. Commerce Ave.
`Gladewater, TX 75647
`(903) 236-9800
`(903) 236-8787 (fax)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorneys for Garnet Digital, LLC
`
`17
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Case 6:11-cv-00647-LED Document 390 Filed 10/03/12 Page 18 of 18 PageID #: 3342
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on the 3rd day of October 2012, I electronically filed the
`foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send
`notification of such filing to all counsel of record.
`
`/s/ Matthew J. Antonelli
`Matthew J. Antonelli
`
`18

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