`
`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