`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page2 of 171
`
`c
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Plaintiff Synopsys, Inc. ("Synopsys"), through its counsel, states and alleges as follows:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This case arises out ofDefendant ATopTech Inc.'s ("ATopTech") copying and
`
`theft of Synopsys' proprietary and confidential information, breaches of contractual obligations to
`
`Synopsys and infringement ofSynopsys' intellectual property.
`
`2.
`
`Synopsys is a leader in the electronic design automation ("EDA'') and
`
`semiconductor intellectual property industry. It develops, manufactures, sells and licenses
`
`products and services that enable designers to create, model and verify complex integrated circuit
`
`designs from concept to silicon. Since 1986, engineers around the world have used Synopsys
`
`technology to design and create billions of integrated circuits and systems.
`
`3.
`
`ATopTech describes itself as an EDA company that develops tools for the physical
`
`design of integrated circuits at 65 nanometers and below including its Aprisa "place and route"
`
`tool and Apogee "floor planning" tool. A Top Tech claims to have offices in the United States,
`
`India, Japan and Taiwan.
`
`4.
`
`Synopsys and a company Synopsys acquired-Extreme DA Corporation
`
`("Extreme DA")--licensed certain technology to ATopTech under two royalty-free license
`
`agreements: (i) a Connections Program License Agreement ("CPLA") and (ii) a license
`
`agreement relating to a method for parametric on chip variation ("POCV License"). A Top Tech
`
`agreed to maintain the confidentiality ofSynopsys' and Extreme DA's proprietary information
`
`and also agreed, among other things, not to reverse engineer or copy any software or other
`
`materials provided under the license agreements. Under the POCV License, ATopTech further
`
`agreed to certain communications and marketing obligations, and agreed to keep records of all of
`
`its customers that receive ATopTech's products in which the licensed POCV method is available
`
`and to provide Synopsys and Extreme DA with the names of such customers.
`
`5.
`
`In November 2012, based on concerns that ATopTech was not in compliance with
`
`these license agreements and had improperly copied Synopsys proprietary information, Synopsys
`
`exercised its right to verify ATopTech's compliance with the license agreements.
`
`6.
`
`Synopsys spent several months attempting to work with ATopTech on a voluntary
`
`- 2 -
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Exhibit 1003 - Page 2 of 171
`
`

`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page3 of 171
`(
`(
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`production allowing ATopTech to establish compliance with the agreements and demonstrate that
`
`it did not steal or copy Synopsys' proprietary information and software. Synopsys even offered
`
`ATopTech the opportunity to provide any information under a non-disclosure agreement that
`
`would restrict access to Synopsys' outside counsel and independent experts.
`
`7.
`
`Instead of taking advantage of this opportunity, ATopTech engaged in a
`
`systematic effort to frustrate and obstruct Synopsys' attempt to verify ATopTech's contractual
`
`compliance and ensure that Synopsys' intellectual property rights were not being infringed.
`
`Synopsys has also discovered that ATopTech improperly accessed and downloaded certain
`
`proprietary materials from Synopsys' secure customer support website, SolvNet.
`
`8.
`
`As a result, Synopsys has no alternative but to seek judicial relief. ATopTech's
`
`EDA products Aprisa and Apogee infringe Synopsys' patents and copyrights, misappropriate
`
`Synopsys' trade secrets and unfairly compete with and trade on Synopsys' industry leading EDA
`
`tools. Moreover, ATopTech improperly accessed, downloaded and used proprietary materials
`
`from Synopsys' secure customer support website to unfairly compete with Synopsys.
`
`Accordingly, Synopsys brings this suit for federal copyright infringement, federal patent
`
`infringement, trade secret misappropriation, violations of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse
`
`Act ("CF AA") and California Computer Data Access and Fraud Act ("CDAF A"), unfair
`
`competition, misappropriation, breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good
`
`faith and fair dealing.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`9.
`
`Synopsys is a corporation organized under Delaware law with its principal place of
`
`business in Santa Clara County at 700 East Middlefield Road, Mountain View, California 94043.
`
`10.
`
`On information and belief, ATop Tech is a corporation organized under Delaware
`
`law with its principal place ofbusiness in Santa Clara County at 2111 Tasman Drive, Santa Clara,
`
`California 95054. ATopTech also claims to have offices in India, Japan and Taiwan.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`11.
`
`This action arises in part under the United States Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101,
`
`et seq., the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 100, et seq. and the Computer Fraud and
`
`- 3 -
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Exhibit 1003 - Page 3 of 171
`
`

`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page4 of 171
`(
`(_)
`
`1 Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030 et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`under 18 U.S.C. § 1030(g) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338.
`
`12.
`
`This Court has supplemental subject matter jurisdiction over the pendent state law
`
`and common law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 because these claims are so related to Synopsys'
`
`claims under federal law that they form part of the same case or controversy and derive from a
`
`common nucleus of operative fact.
`
`13.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over ATopTech because its principle place of
`
`business is within the State of California and this judicial district, and because it has conducted
`
`and does conduct business within the State of California and this judicial district.
`
`14.
`
`Venue in this district is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400 because the
`
`events giving rise to the dispute occurred in this district.
`
`INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT
`
`15.
`
`This is an intellectual property action and is assigned on a district-wide basis under
`
`Civil L.R. 3-2(c) and General Order No. 44.
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`Synopsys' PrimeTime and GoldTime Products and Associated Intellectual Property
`
`16.
`
`As a world leader in EDA, Synopsys is helping the electronics market accelerate
`
`innovation in all aspects of semiconductor design. Synopsys provides a complete front-to-back
`
`design and test environment, software-level to silicon-level verification, design reuse technology,
`
`field-programmable gate array solutions and professional services to help its customers get their
`
`silicon working quickly and accurately. These technology-leading solutions help give Synopsys
`
`customers a competitive edge in quickly bringing the best products to market while reducing
`
`costs and schedule risk. Since 1986, engineers around the world have used Synopsys technology
`
`to design and create billions of integrated circuits and systems.
`
`17.
`
`To address the important issue of timing in integrated circuit design, Synopsys
`
`spent years investing in and developing PrimeTime, its proprietary static timing analysis tool that
`
`computes the expected timing of a digital circuit without requiring simulation. Prime Time is a
`
`successful product and is widely used in industry for gate-level static timing analysis.
`
`- 4 -
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Exhibit 1003 - Page 4 of 171
`
`

`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page5 of 171
`rl
`(
`'--
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`18.
`
`The Prime Time software includes hundreds of Synopsys-proprietary input formats
`
`and output formats. The compilation ofPrimeTime's input formats (sometimes referred to as a
`
`"command set") are proprietary to Synopsys and are not part of any open format or standard.
`
`These proprietary input formats are used within larger "scripts" that are executed by Prime Time.
`
`Prime Time provides feedback to the user using output formats. Synopsys' engineers and
`
`software developers expended significant creativity, time and effort in developing the individual
`
`input formats and output formats, as well as the compilation of input formats and output formats.
`
`19.
`
`PrimeTime also supports a set of open source commands (referred to as "Synopsys
`
`9 Design Constraints" or "SDC") that is distinct from the compilation of Synopsys-proprietary
`
`1 0
`
`input formats. These open source commands provide a standard interface and can be used by
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`developers to create products that intemperate with PrimeTime or other SDC-compliant EDA
`
`tools. Synopsys makes SDC available under a free, open source license.
`
`20.
`
`In addition to developing PrimeTime, Synopsys also invested substantial time,
`
`effort and money to protect its intellectual property and add technology and engineering talent to
`
`advance Synopsys' timing analysis solutions. In June of2011, Synopsys filed suit in the District
`
`ofDelaware against Extreme DA for improperly copying portions of the PrimeTime software into
`
`Extreme DA's static timing analysis tool, GoldTime. In October 2011, Synopsys acquired
`
`Extreme DA, including GoldTime, and confirmed that a significant portion of the Prime Time
`
`software had been copied into GoldTime.
`
`21.
`
`Synopsys' proprietary information, including its trade secrets at issue in this case,
`
`which has been copied and misappropriated by ATopTech, relates to Synopsys' PrimeTime,
`
`GoldTime and IC Compiler products. Such information includes Synopsys' proprietary input and
`
`output formats, scripts and technical product documentation, which generally are not publicly
`
`known, and derive value from being secret. Synopsys takes substantial steps to protect and
`
`25 maintain the confidentiality of its proprietary and confidential information, and such information
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`is only disclosed to Synopsys customers, business partners or others pursuant to strict
`
`confidentiality obligations. For example, user manuals and other documentation contain
`
`proprietary rights notices, e.g. stating that the provided software and documentation contain
`
`- 5-
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Exhibit 1003 - Page 5 of 171
`
`

`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page6 of 171
`(
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`confidential and proprietary information that are Synopsys' property, that Synopsys furnishes the
`
`software and documentation under a license agreement and that such software and documentation
`
`may only be used or copied in accordance with the license terms. The end user license agreement
`
`(EULA) to which customers further are bound precludes disclosure ofSynopsys confidential and
`
`proprietary information, including limiting access with respect to "employees and contractors on
`
`a 'need to know' basis."
`
`22.
`
`Synopsys takes other reasonable steps to protect its proprietary and confidential
`
`information by protecting its facilities, secure websites, servers, computers, networks, databases
`
`and communications systems using a variety of physical and electronic security systems, such as
`
`access cards, password protection systems, encrypted communications technology and vendor,
`
`customer and employee non-disclosure agreements.
`
`23.
`
`PrimeTime and GoldTime software and user documentation are original works of
`
`authorship and are subject to copyright protection.
`
`24.
`
`Synopsys owns all rights to the PrimeTime and GoldTime software and user
`
`documentation, which have been registered with the United States Copyright Office:
`
`U.S. Registration Nos. TX 7-261-049, TX 7-260-556, TX 7-670-937, TX 7-663-729, and TX 7-
`
`664-316. True and correct copies of these registrations are attached as Exhibits 1-5.
`
`25.
`
`Synopsys developed novel technologies and techniques related to integrated circuit
`
`design, which are protected by numerous U.S. patents.
`
`26.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,405,348 ('"348 Patent"), entitled "Deep sub-micron static timing
`
`analysis in the presence of crosstalk" and naming Peivand Fallah-Tehrani and Shang-Woo Chyou
`
`as inventors, was duly and legally issued by the USPTO on June 11, 2002. Synopsys is the
`
`assignee and holder of all rights, title and interests in the '348 Patent, including without limitation
`
`all rights to sue for damages for infringement thereof. A true and correct copy of the '348 Patent
`
`is attached hereto as Exhibit 6.
`
`27.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,507,941 ('"941 Patent"), entitled "Subgrid detailed routing" and
`
`naming Hardy Kwok-Shing Leung and Raymond X. Nijssen as inventors, was duly and legally
`
`issued by the USPTO on January 14, 2003. Synopsys is the owner and holder of all rights, title
`
`- 6 -
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Exhibit 1003 - Page 6 of 171
`
`

`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page7 of 171
`(
`
`c
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`and interests in the '941 Patent, including without limitation all rights to sue for damages for
`
`infringement thereof. A true and correct copy of the '941 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 7.
`
`28.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,237,127 ('" 127 Patent"), entitled "Static timing analysis of
`
`digital electronic circuits using non-default constraints known as exceptions" and naming Ted L.
`
`Craven, Denis M. Baylor, and Yael Rindenau as inventors, was duly and legally issued by the
`
`6 USPTO on May 22, 2001. Synopsys is the owner and holder of all rights, title and interests in
`
`7
`
`the ' 127 Patent, including without limitation all rights to sue for damages for infringement thereof.
`
`8 A true and correct copy of the '127 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 8.
`
`9
`
`29.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,567,967 ("'967 Patent"), entitled "Method for designing large
`
`1 0
`
`standard-cell base integrated circuits" and naming Y aacov I. Greidinger, David S. Reed, Ara
`
`11 Markosian, Stephen P. Sample, Jonathan A. Frankie, and Hasmik Lazaryan as inventors, was duly
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`and legally issued by the USPTO on May 20, 2003. Synopsys is the owner and holder of all
`
`rights, title and interests in the '967 Patent, including without limitation all rights to sue for
`
`damages for infringement thereof. A true and correct copy of the '967 Patent is attached hereto
`
`as Exhibit 9.
`
`30.
`
`The '348 '941, '127 and '967 patents are collectively referred to herein as the
`
`"Patents-in-Suit."
`
`18 ATopTech's Access to Synopsys' Software and Other Proprietary Information
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`31.
`
`On June 10, 2010, A Top Tech entered into the CPLA with Extreme DA, which
`
`related to Extreme DA's GoldTime software. When Synopsys acquired Extreme DA, Extreme
`
`DA assigned all rights, title and interest in the GoldTime intellectual property to Synopsys,
`
`including its rights under the CPLA. Synopsys extended the CPLA three times. The CPLA
`
`expired on February 15, 2013.
`
`32.
`
`Under the CPLA, ATopTech gained access to copies ofGoldTime software and
`
`documentation (and by extension, portions of the PrimeTime software and documentation that
`
`Extreme DA had copied into GoldTime).
`
`33.
`
`The CPLA, in all of its iterations, provided only a limited license to use GoldTime
`
`for specific interoperability purposes. The CPLA explicitly prohibited ATopTech from
`
`- 7 -
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Exhibit 1003 - Page 7 of 171
`
`

`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page8 of 171
`
`c
`
`"incorporat[ing]" GoldTime into other software products or "reverse engineering" .GoldTime.
`
`This limited license did not permit ATopTech to copy the GoldTime software, or any part of it,
`
`including the collection of input and output formats. Further, the CPLA restricted ATopTech
`
`from disclosing any confidential information provided under the agreement, including GoldTime(cid:173)
`
`related information.
`
`34.
`
`On December 3, 2010, Extreme DA and ATopTech entered into the POCV
`
`License granting ATopTech a limited, non-exclusive license to Extreme DA's proprietary POCV
`
`technology, including U.S. Patent No. 8,407,640 ("'640 Patent"), which ATopTech used to test
`
`timing effects resulting from variations that may occur to a chip during manufacture (from
`
`process, voltage or temperature effects). When Synopsys acquired Extreme DA, Extreme DA
`
`assigned all rights, title and interest in its POCV technology to Synopsys, including its rights
`
`under the POCV License.
`
`ATopTech Copied PrimeTime and GoldTime
`
`35.
`
`On information and belief, while ATopTech was continuing to receive and use
`
`Synopsys confidential information pursuant to the terms and limitations of its agreements with
`
`Synopsys, ATopTech copied portions ofthe PrimeTime and GoldTime software and
`
`documentation into Aprisa user documentation and software. Synopsys is in possession of a
`
`small portion of Aprisa documentation-provided by ATopTech-revealing that Aprisa includes
`
`proprietary PrimeTime and GoldTime input and output formats.
`
`36.
`
`This copying likely is widespread. ATopTech advertises that Aprisa has
`
`"excellent correlation with sign-off timing" and a "tight correlation" with Synopsys' PrimeTime
`
`software. On information and belief, such correlation is not possible without copying significant
`
`portions of the Prime Time software.
`
`ATopTech's Unauthorized Access and Improper Downloads from SolvNet
`
`37.
`
`ATopTech also improperly accessed and stole other Synopsys proprietary
`
`documentation, by downloading such materials from Synopsys' "SolvNet" secure website
`
`without permission.
`
`38.
`
`SolvNet is Synopsys' password protected support website on which Synopsys,
`
`- 8 -
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Exhibit 1003 - Page 8 of 171
`
`

`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page9 of 171
`(
`
`1
`
`among other things, hosts software, user guides, support documentation and other materials for
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`customers and partners with valid user IDs. When a user registers for a SolvNet password, that
`
`user must abide by "the terms of the Privacy Policy and the end user license agreement and other
`
`agreements with Synopsys" that his or her company signed "regarding the confidential nature of
`
`all SolvNet content." This means that users must only access and download materials for which
`
`their company has a license.
`
`39.
`
`In 2013, Synopsys discovered that ATopTech accessed SolvNet and engaged in
`
`unauthorized access to and downloading of articles, F AQs and other documentation related to
`
`PrimeTime and another Synopsys EDA product called "IC Compiler." ATopTech's access,
`
`downloading and other use of these materials was beyond the scope of its licenses with Synopsys.
`
`40.
`
`On information and belief, ATopTech sought commercial gain and competitive
`
`advantage by accessing and using Synopsys proprietary information to develop its products,
`
`including ATopTech's Aprisa, which incorporate and are derived from Synopsys' confidential
`
`information and trade secrets.
`
`ATopTech's Refusal To Demonstrate Compliance with the License Agreements
`
`41.
`
`Fearing that ATopTech wrongfully copied, used and disclosed portions of the
`
`PrimeTime and GoldTime software, and otherwise breached the CPLA and POCV License
`
`agreements, on November 28,2012, Synopsys invoked its rights to verify compliance under both
`
`license agreements, and thereafter diligently worked to commence and complete the audit.
`
`42.
`
`For months, Synopsys attempted to work with ATopTech to establish compliance
`
`with the license agreements and confirm that A Top Tech did not steal or copy Synopsys'
`
`proprietary information and software. Synopsys even agreed that ATopTech could provide any
`
`information under a non-disclosure agreement that would restrict access to Synopsys' outside
`
`counsel and independent experts. Rather than cooperating with Synopsys, ATopTech
`
`systematically frustrated and obstructed the audit process.
`
`43.
`
`On May 8, 2013-after ATopTech's continued refusal to cooperate with the
`
`audit-Synopsys served ATopTech with a default notice under the POCV license stating that
`
`28 ATopTech materially breached several of its obligations under the POCV license, including its
`
`- 9 -
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Exhibit 1003 - Page 9 of 171
`
`

`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page10 of 171
`(
`
`c
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`obligation to comply with the audit provisions.
`
`44.
`
`In this May 8th letter, and in subsequent communications, Synopsys also put
`
`ATopTech on notice ofSynopsys' good faith beliefthat ATopTech copied proprietary
`
`PrimeTime and GoldTime command sets into Aprisa, in violation of the CPLA agreement and
`
`Synopsys' valuable intellectual property rights, including those covered by Synopsys' PrimeTime
`
`and GoldTime federal copyright registrations.
`
`45.
`
`Synopsys set a June 10, 2013 deadline for completion of the audit. The June 10
`
`deadline came and went without ATopTech providing any of the requested information.
`
`46.
`
`On June 17, 2013, Synopsys again gave ATopTech the opportunity to demonstrate
`
`that it had not copied and was in compliance with the license agreements. ATopTech still refused
`
`to provide Synopsys with the information Synopsys requested under its contractual audit rights.
`
`COUNT I- COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
`
`4 7.
`
`48.
`
`Synopsys incorporates paragraphs 1-46 as though fully set forth herein.
`
`The Prime Time and GoldTime software and user documentation ("Copyrighted
`
`Software") are original works of authorship and constitute copyrightable subject matter under the
`
`copyright laws ofthe United States, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. The Copyrighted Software has been
`
`registered with the Copyright Office. The relevant U.S. Registration Numbers include: TX
`
`7-261-049, TX 7-260-556, TX 7-670-937, TX 7-663-729, and TX 7-664-316. Synopsys is the
`
`owner of all right, title and interest to the copyright registrations for the Copyrighted Software
`
`and has complied in all respects with the laws governing copyright.
`
`49.
`
`In compliance with copyright regulations, Synopsys filed with the Copyright
`
`Office a copyright application, the registration fee and a deposit of the works being registered.
`
`The effective date of the copyright registrations is the day on which an application, deposit and
`
`fee have all been received in the Copyright Office. 17 U.S.C. § 410(d).
`
`50.
`
`As owner of the Copyrighted Software, Synopsys enjoys the exclusive right to,
`
`among other things, reproduce the Copyrighted Software, prepare derivative works and distribute
`
`copies of the Copyrighted Software. 17 U.S.C. §§ 101, 106.
`
`51.
`
`On information and belief, ATopTech had access to the Copyrighted Software,
`
`- 1 0 -
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Exhibit 1003 - Page 10 of 171
`
`

`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page11 of 171
`
`1
`
`copied portions of the Copyrighted Software and prepared derivative works based upon the
`
`2 Copyrighted Software.
`
`3
`
`4
`
`52.
`
`By its actions alleged above, ATopTech directly infringed, and will continue to
`
`infringe, Synopsys' copyrights in the Copyrighted Software by reproducing and distributing its
`
`5 Aprisa product and associated documentation.
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`53.
`
`On information and belief, ATopTech's infringement was deliberate, willful and in
`
`disregard ofSynopsys' rights, and was committed for the purpose of commercial gain.
`
`54.
`
`The infringement of Synopsys' copyrights by ATopTech harmed and will continue
`
`to irreparably harm Synopsys unless restrained by this Court. Synopsys' remedy at law is not
`
`adequate, by itself, to compensate for the harm inflicted and threatened by ATopTech. Thus, in
`
`addition to all other remedies to which it is entitled, Synopsys is entitled to injunctive relief
`
`restraining ATopTech, its officers, agents, employees and all persons acting in concert with it,
`
`from engaging in further acts of copyright infringement as described herein.
`
`55.
`
`Synopsys is also entitled to recover from ATopTech the damages it has suffered
`
`and will continue to suffer as a result of ATopTech's infringement, in actual amounts to be
`
`proven at trial and including, but not limited to, any and all gains, profits and advantages
`
`17 ATopTech has gained as a result of its infringement. In the alternative, Synopsys is entitled to
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`statutory damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504(c).
`
`56.
`
`Synopsys is also entitled to recover its attorney's fees and costs of suit pursuant to
`
`17 U.S.C. § 505.
`
`COUNT II- TRADE SECRET MISAPPROPRIATION
`
`Synopsys incorporates paragraphs 1-56 as though fully set forth herein.
`
`The Synopsys confidential and proprietary information alleged in this complaint
`
`57.
`
`58.
`
`contains processes and information that are Synopsys trade secrets within the meaning of the
`
`California Uniform Trade Secrets Act, California Civil Code§§ 3426, et. seq. Such information
`
`derives actual and potential economic value from not being generally known to the public or to
`
`other persons who can obtain economic value from their disclosure or use.
`
`59.
`
`Synopsys made reasonable efforts under the circumstances to maintain and protect
`
`- 11 -
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Exhibit 1003 - Page 11 of 171
`
`

`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page12 of 171
`(
`(
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`the secrecy of such trade secrets including disclosing such information only pursuant to strict
`
`confidentiality requirements.
`
`60.
`
`On information and belief, ATopTech misappropriated Synopsys' trade secrets by
`
`improperly acquiring, using and/or disclosing the trade secrets without Synopsys' authorization or
`
`consent and by permitting third parties to use the trade secrets without Synopsys' authorization or
`
`consent.
`
`61.
`
`ATop Tech knew or had reason to know that the trade secrets were proprietary and
`
`secret and that any such information was derived from a person who utilized improper means to
`
`acquire it or acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain secrecy or limit use.
`
`62.
`
`ATopTech's misappropriation ofSynopsys' trade secrets has caused and will
`
`continue to cause Synopsys substantial injury, including, but not limited to, lost profits and the
`
`diminution in value of its trade secrets. In addition, A Top Tech has been unjustly enriched by its
`
`misappropriation of Synopsys' trade secrets.
`
`63.
`
`Synopsys is entitled to recover its actual damages for ATopTech's
`
`misappropriation and to recover for ATopTech's unjust enrichment resulting from the
`
`misappropriation.
`
`64.
`
`Synopsys also suffered irreparable harm as a result of A TopTech' s activities and
`
`will continue to suffer irreparable injury that cannot be adequately remedied at law unless
`
`ATop Tech, and its officers, agents, and employees and all persons acting in concert with them,
`
`are enjoined from engaging in any further acts of misappropriation. Synopsys also is entitled to
`
`injunctive relief restraining ATopTech's improper use and disclosure ofSynopsys trade secrets.
`
`65.
`
`On information and belief, ATopTech's misappropriation of Synopsys trade
`
`secrets was and is willful and malicious, and accordingly, Synopsys is entitled to an award of
`
`exemplary damages and reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and expenses.
`
`COUNT III- INFRINGEMENT OF THE '348 PATENT
`
`Synopsys incorporates paragraphs 1-65 as though fully set forth herein.
`
`On information and belief, ATopTech has been and currently is directly infringing
`
`66.
`
`67.
`
`one or more claims of the '348 Patent by making, using, offering to sell, and selling within the
`
`- 12 -
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Exhibit 1003 - Page 12 of 171
`
`

`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page13 of 171
`0
`
`1 United States products that embody the inventions disclosed and claimed in the '348 patent, or by
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`importing into the United States products that embody the inventions disclosed and claimed in
`
`the '348 patent. The ATopTech products that infringe the '348 patent include, but are not limited
`
`to, its Aprisa software products that embody the patented invention by analyzing and reducing
`
`crosstalk effects on interconnects of an integrated circuit design represented as a netlist in a
`
`6 manner that infringes the '348 Patent.
`
`7
`
`68.
`
`On information and belief, ATopTech has been, is currently, and unless enjoined,
`
`8 will continue to actively induce, encourage or contribute to the infringement of the '348 Patent.
`
`9 At least as of the filing of this Complaint, ATopTech has had knowledge and notice of the '348
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`Patent and nevertheless induced, encouraged or contributed to its customers' direct infringement
`
`by providing, selling or offering for sale the Aprisa software that is designed and intended to
`
`enable analyzing and reducing crosstalk effects on interconnects of an integrated circuit design
`
`represented as a netlist in a manner that infringes the '348 Patent and by dictating by its design
`
`and instructions to users thereto the manner in which the software is used causing such
`
`infringement. On information and belief, ATopTech acted with specific intent to induce,
`
`encourage or contribute to its customers' infringement.
`
`69.
`
`ATopTech's acts of'direct and indirect infringement are willful, as ATopTech
`
`knew or should have known ofthe '348 Patent and that making, using, offering to sell and selling
`
`19 within the United States, or importing into the United States, its Aprisa software products would
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`infringe the '348 Patent, but acted despite an objectively high likelihood that such activities
`
`would infringe the patent.
`
`70.
`
`As a direct and proximate cause of ATopTech's infringement and willful
`
`infringement of the '348 Patent, Synopsys has suffered and will continue to suffer irreparable
`
`injury unless and until ATopTech's acts of infringement are enjoined and restrained by order of
`
`this Court. Synopsys has no adequate remedy at law and is entitled to a preliminary and
`
`permanent injunction against ATopTech and its infringing products.
`
`71.
`
`As a direct and proximate cause of ATopTech's infringement, Synopsys suffered
`
`and will continue to suffer damages, in an amount to be determined at trial.
`
`- 13-
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Exhibit 1003 - Page 13 of 171
`
`

`

`Case3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document1 Filed06/26/13 Page14 of 171
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`72.
`
`This case is an "exceptional" case within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285 and
`
`Synopsys is entitled to an award of attorneys fees.
`
`COUNT IV- INFRINGEMENT OF THE '941 PATENT
`
`Synopsys incorporates paragraphs 1-72 as though fully set forth herein.
`
`On information and belief, ATopTech has been and currently is directly infringing
`
`73.
`
`74.
`
`one or more claims of the '941 Patent by making, using, offering to sell, and selling within the
`
`United States products that embody the inventions disclosed and claimed in the '941 patent, or by
`
`importing into the United States products that embody the inventions disclosed and claimed in
`
`the '941 patent. The ATopTech products that infringe the '941 patent include, but are not limited
`
`to, its Aprisa or Apogee software products that embody the patented invention by providing off(cid:173)
`
`grid routing that automatically extends wire location representations from one grid to another grid
`
`in a manner that infringes the '941 Patent.
`
`75.
`
`On information and belief, ATopTech has been, is currently, and unless enjoined,
`
`will continue to actively induce, encourage or contribute to the infringement of the '941 Patent.
`
`At least as ofthe filing ofthis Complaint, ATopTech has had knowledge and notice ofthe '941
`
`Patent and nevertheless induced, encouraged or contributed to its customers' direct