`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
`
`
`
` Plaintiff,
`
`
`Aplix IP Holdings Corporation,
`
`
`
`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.
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 1
`
`
`
`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
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 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
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 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
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 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
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 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
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 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
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 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
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 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
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 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
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 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
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 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 (pro hac vice)
` Sybil L. Dunlop (pro hac vice)
` 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)
`
`BGilbertson@GreeneEspel.com
`SDunlop@GreeneEspel.com
`KZhao@GreeneEspel.com
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 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.
`
`
`
`
`
`04088/05001 2198136.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Brandon Scruggs
` Brandon Scruggs
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`SCEA Ex. 1011 Page 13
`
`