throbber
Case 1:14-cv-00338-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`C.A. No. _____________
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`))))))))))))))))))))
`
`SURPASS TECH INNOVATION LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`SHARP CORPORATION; SHARP
`ELECTRONICS CORPORATION; SHARP
`ELECTRONICS MANUFACTURING
`COMPANY OF AMERICA, INC.; SAMSUNG
`ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.; SAMSUNG
`ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.; SONY
`CORPORATION; SONY ELECTRONICS
`INC.; and SONY CORPORATION OF
`AMERICA,
`
`Defendants.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff Surpass Tech Innovation LLC (“Plaintiff” or “Surpass Tech”), by and
`
`through its undersigned attorneys, hereby pleads the following claims of patent infringement
`
`against Sharp Corporation; Sharp Electronics Corporation; Sharp Electronics Manufacturing
`
`Company of America, Inc. (collectively, “Sharp”); Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Samsung
`
`Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, “Samsung Electronics”); Sony Corporation; Sony
`
`Electronics Inc.; and Sony Corporation of America; (collectively, “Sony”) and alleges as
`
`follows:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff Surpass Tech is a Delaware limited liability company having an
`
`address at 3422 Old Capitol Trail, Suite 700, Wilmington, Delaware 19808-6192. Surpass
`
`LGD_000040
`
`LG Display Ex. 1003
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00338-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 2 of 11 PageID #: 2
`
`Tech owns all title, rights and interest to United States Patent No. 7,202,843 (the “’843
`
`Patent”) and United States Patent No. 7,420,550 (the “’550 Patent”).
`
`2.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Sharp Corporation is a Japanese
`
`corporation having its principal place of business at 22-22 Nagaike-cho, Abeno-ku, Osaka
`
`545-8522, Japan. Sharp Corporation may be served with process under the Delaware long
`
`arm statute, 10 Del. C. § 3104.
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Sharp Electronics Corporation is a
`
`New York corporation having its principal place of business at 1 Sharp Plaza, Mahwah,
`
`New Jersey 07495-1163. Defendant Sharp Electronics Corporation can be served via its
`
`registered agent, C T Corporation System, 111 Eighth Avenue, New York, NY 10011.
`
`4.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Sharp Electronics Manufacturing
`
`Company of America, Inc. is a California corporation having its principal place of business
`
`at 1 Sharp Plaza, Mahwah, New Jersey 07495-1163. Defendant Sharp Electronics
`
`Manufacturing Company of America, Inc. can be served via its registered agent, C T
`
`Corporation System, 818 W. Seventh Street, Los Angeles, CA 90017.
`
`5.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. is a
`
`Korean corporation having its principal place of business at San #24 Nongseo-dong,
`
`Giheung-gu, Yongin-City, Gyeonggi-do, Korea 446-711. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
`
`may be served with process under the Delaware long arm statute, 10 Del. C. § 3104.
`
`6.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Samsung Electronics America, Inc.
`
`is a New York corporation having its principal place of business at 85 Challenger Road,
`
`Ridgefield Park, New Jersey 07660. Defendant Samsung Electronics America, Inc. can be
`
`2
`
`LGD_000041
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00338-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 3 of 11 PageID #: 3
`
`served via its registered agent, C T Corporation System, 111 Eighth Avenue, New York, NY
`
`10011.
`
`7.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Sony Corporation is a Japanese
`
`corporation having its principal place of business at 1-7-1, Konan, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-
`
`0075, Japan. Sony Corporation may be served with process under the Delaware long arm
`
`statute, 10 Del. C. § 3104.
`
`8.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Sony Electronics Inc. is a Delaware
`
`corporation having its principal place of business at 16530 Via Esprillo, San Diego,
`
`California 92127. Defendant Sony Electronics, Inc. can be served via its registered agent,
`
`Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, DE 19808.
`
`9.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Sony Corporation of America is a
`
`New York corporation having its principal place of business at 550 Madison Ave., 27th
`
`Floor, New York, New York 10022. Defendant Sony Corporation of America can be served
`
`via its registered agent, Corporation Service Company, 80 State Street, Albany, NY 12207.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`10.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the
`
`United States of America, Title 35 of the United States Code. This Court has subject matter
`
`jurisdiction over the matters plead herein under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) in that this is
`
`a civil action arising out of the patent laws of the United States of America.
`
`11.
`
`Samsung Electronics, Sony and Sharp (collectively, “Defendants”) regularly
`
`and deliberately engaged in and continue to engage in activities that result in using, selling,
`
`offering for sale, and/or importing infringing products in and/or into the State of Delaware
`
`and this judicial district. These activities violate Surpass Tech’s rights under the ’843 and
`
`3
`
`LGD_000042
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00338-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 4 of 11 PageID #: 4
`
`’550 Patents plead herein. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants because,
`
`among other things, Defendants conduct business in the State of Delaware and in this
`
`judicial district and thus enjoy the privileges and protections of Delaware law.
`
`12.
`
`Venue is proper in the District of Delaware pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b),
`
`(c) and (d) and 1400(b).
`
`COUNT I
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,202,843
`(Against Sharp, Samsung Electronics and Sony)
`
`13.
`
`Plaintiff incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 12 herein by reference as if fully
`
`stated herein.
`
`14.
`
`The ’843 Patent, entitled “Driving Circuit of A Liquid Crystal Display Panel
`
`and Related Driving Method,” issued on April 10, 2007. The ’843 Patent names Yung-
`
`Hung Shen, Shih-Chung Wang, Yuh-Ren Shen and Cheng-Jung Chen as inventors. Surpass
`
`Tech owns by assignment the entire right, title and interest in and to the ’843 Patent,
`
`including the sole right to sue for past and present patent infringement thereof. A true and
`
`correct copy of the ‘843 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`
`15.
`
`Several of Samsung Electronics’, Sony’s and Sharp’s products, including but
`
`not limited to Samsung Electronics’ UN60ES8000F television having Sharp’s
`
`LK600D3Lxxx liquid crystal display (“LCD”) module, Sony’s KDL-40NX800 television
`
`having Sharp’s LK400D3LA8S LCD module, and Sharp’s LC-70LE735U television having
`
`Sharp’s LK695D3GW20R LCD module practice claims of the ’843 Patent. Surpass Tech
`
`believes, and further alleges, that additional Sharp LCD modules, Samsung Electronics
`
`televisions having Sharp LCD modules, Sony televisions having Sharp LCD modules, and
`
`Sharp televisions having Sharp LCD modules also practice one or more claims of the ’843
`
`4
`
`LGD_000043
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00338-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 5 of 11 PageID #: 5
`
`Patent (products covered by this paragraph are collectively referred to as “Accused ’843
`
`Products”).
`
`16.
`
`Surpass Tech believes, and thereon alleges, that Sharp has sold and offered to
`
`sell and is selling and offering to sell infringing LCD modules for use in infringing
`
`televisions, and that these LCD modules are material to practicing the ’843 Patent’s
`
`invention, have no substantial non-infringing uses, and are known by Defendants to be
`
`especially made or especially adapted for use in what constitutes infringement of the ’843
`
`Patent. At least as early as February 25, 2014, Sharp had actual knowledge of the ’843
`
`Patent and Plaintiff’s claims that Sharp’s LCD modules are covered by the ’843 Patent.
`
`Sharp is contributing to the acts of using, offering to sell, and/or selling in the United States
`
`and/or importing into the United Sates the infringing Accused ’843 Products by Defendants
`
`by intentionally supplying such material components to Defendants with such knowledge of
`
`the ’843 Patent.
`
`17.
`
`Surpass Tech believes, and thereon alleges, that Sharp has induced and is
`
`inducing the infringement of the ’843 Patent by Defendants with the knowledge that the
`
`induced acts constitute patent infringement, by providing modules which contain every
`
`element of claims of the ’843 Patent. At least as early as February 25, 2014, Sharp had
`
`actual knowledge of the ’843 Patent and Plaintiff’s claims that Sharp’s LCD modules are
`
`covered by the ’843 Patent. Sharp is continuing to induce infringement by Defendants by
`
`intentionally inducing acts of using, offering to sell, and/or selling in the United States
`
`and/or importing into the United States the Accused ’843 Products with such knowledge of
`
`the ’843 Patent.
`
`5
`
`LGD_000044
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00338-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 6 of 11 PageID #: 6
`
`18.
`
`Surpass Tech believes, and thereon alleges, that any applicable requirements
`
`of 35 U.S.C. § 287 have been satisfied.
`
`19.
`
`Surpass Tech believes, and thereon alleges, that Sharp, Samsung Electronics
`
`and Sony have each infringed, and continue to infringe, claims of the ’843 Patent, in
`
`violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, by among other things, making, using, offering to sell, selling
`
`and/or importing in and/or into the United States, without authority or license from Surpass
`
`Tech, the Accused ’843 Products falling within the scope of claims of the ’843 Patent.
`
`20.
`
`Sharp’s, Samsung Electronics’ and Sony’s acts of infringement have caused
`
`and will continue to cause substantial and irreparable damage to Surpass Tech.
`
`21.
`
`As a result of the infringement of the ’843 Patent by Sharp, Samsung
`
`Electronics and Sony, Surpass Tech has been damaged. Surpass Tech is, therefore, entitled
`
`to such damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 in an amount that presently cannot be pled but
`
`that will be determined at trial.
`
`22.
`
`At least as early as March 10, 2014, Samsung Electronics, Sony and Sharp
`
`had actual knowledge of the ’843 Patent and Plaintiff’s claims that Sharp’s LCD modules,
`
`Samsung Electronics’ televisions containing Sharp’s LCD modules, Sony’s televisions
`
`containing Sharp’s LCD modules, and Sharp’s televisions containing Sharp’s LCD modules
`
`are covered by the ’843 Patent. Upon information and belief, Samsung Electronics’, Sony’s
`
`and Sharp’s acts of infringement of the ’843 Patent have been willful and intentional. Since
`
`at least the above-mentioned date of notice, Samsung Electronics, Sony and Sharp have
`
`acted with an objectively high likelihood that their actions constitute infringement of the
`
`’843 Patent by refusing to take a license and continuing to make and sell infringing Accused
`
`6
`
`LGD_000045
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00338-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 7 of 11 PageID #: 7
`
`’843 Products. The objectively-defined risk was either known or was so obvious that it
`
`should have been known.
`
`COUNT II
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,420,550
`(Against Sharp, Samsung Electronics, and Sony)
`
`23.
`
`Plaintiff incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 22 herein by reference as if fully
`
`stated herein.
`
`24.
`
`The ’550 Patent, entitled “Liquid Crystal Display Driving Device of Matrix
`
`Structure Type and Its Driving Method,” issued on September 2, 2008. The ’550 Patent
`
`names Yuh-Ren Shen, Cheng-Jung Chen, and Chun-Chi Chen as inventors. Surpass Tech
`
`owns by assignment the entire right, title and interest in and to the ’550 Patent, including the
`
`sole right to sue for past and present patent infringement thereof. A true and correct copy of
`
`the ‘550 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
`
`25.
`
`Several of Samsung Electronics’, Sony’s and Sharp’s products, including but
`
`not limited to Samsung Electronics’ UN60ES8000F television having Sharp’s
`
`LK600D3Lxxx liquid crystal display (“LCD”) module, Sony’s KDL-40NX800 television
`
`having Sharp’s LK400D3LA8S LCD module, and Sharp’s LC-70LE735U television having
`
`Sharp’s LK695D3GW20R LCD module practice claims of the ’550 Patent. Surpass Tech
`
`believes, and further alleges, that additional Sharp LCD modules, Samsung Electronics
`
`televisions having Sharp LCD modules, Sony televisions having Sharp LCD modules, and
`
`Sharp televisions having Sharp LCD modules also practice one or more claims of the ’550
`
`Patent (products covered by this paragraph are collectively referred to as “Accused ’550
`
`Products”).
`
`7
`
`LGD_000046
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00338-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 8 of 11 PageID #: 8
`
`26.
`
`Surpass Tech believes, and thereon alleges, that Sharp has sold and offered to
`
`sell and is selling and offering to sell infringing LCD modules for use in infringing
`
`televisions, and that these LCD modules are material to practicing the ’550 Patent’s
`
`invention, have no substantial non-infringing uses, and are known by Defendants to be
`
`especially made or especially adapted for use in what constitutes infringement of the ’550
`
`Patent. At least as early as February 25, 2014, Sharp had actual knowledge of the ’550
`
`Patent and Plaintiff’s claims that Sharp’s LCD modules are covered by the ’550 Patent.
`
`Sharp is contributing to the acts of using, offering to sell, and/or selling in the United States
`
`and/or importing into the United Sates the infringing Accused ’550 Products by Defendants
`
`by intentionally supplying such material components to Defendants with such knowledge of
`
`the ’550 Patent.
`
`27.
`
`Surpass Tech believes, and thereon alleges, that Sharp has induced and is
`
`inducing the infringement of the ’550 Patent by Defendants with the knowledge that the
`
`induced acts constitute patent infringement, by providing modules which contain every
`
`element of claims of the ’550 Patent. At least as early as February 25, 2014, Sharp had
`
`actual knowledge of the ’550 Patent and Plaintiff’s claims that Sharp’s LCD modules are
`
`covered by the ’550 Patent. Sharp is continuing to induce infringement by Defendants by
`
`intentionally inducing acts of using, offering to sell, and/or selling in the United States
`
`and/or importing into the United States the Accused ’550 Products with such knowledge of
`
`the ’550 Patent.
`
`28.
`
`Surpass Tech believes, and thereon alleges, that any applicable requirements
`
`of 35 U.S.C. § 287 have been satisfied.
`
`8
`
`LGD_000047
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00338-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 9 of 11 PageID #: 9
`
`29.
`
`Surpass Tech believes, and thereon alleges, that Sharp, Samsung Electronics
`
`and Sony have each infringed, and continue to infringe, claims of the ’550 Patent, in
`
`violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, by among other things, making, using, offering to sell, selling
`
`and/or importing in and/or into the United States, without authority or license from Surpass
`
`Tech, the Accused ’550 Products falling within the scope of claims of the ’550 Patent.
`
`30.
`
`Sharp’s, Samsung Electronics’ and Sony’s acts of infringement have caused
`
`and will continue to cause substantial and irreparable damage to Surpass Tech.
`
`31.
`
`As a result of the infringement of the ’550 Patent by Sharp, Samsung
`
`Electronics and Sony, Surpass Tech has been damaged. Surpass Tech is, therefore, entitled
`
`to such damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 in an amount that presently cannot be pled but
`
`that will be determined at trial.
`
`32.
`
`At least as early as March 10, 2014, Sharp, Samsung Electronics and Sony
`
`had actual knowledge of the ’550 Patent and Plaintiff’s claims that Sharp’s LCD modules,
`
`Samsung Electronics’ televisions containing Sharp’s LCD modules, Sony’s televisions
`
`containing Sharp’s LCD modules, and Sharp’s televisions containing Sharp’s LCD modules
`
`are covered by the ’550 Patent. Upon information and belief, Sharp’s, Samsung Electronics’
`
`and Sony’s acts of infringement of the ’550 Patent have been willful and intentional. Since
`
`at least the above-mentioned date of notice, Sharp, Samsung Electronics, and Sony have
`
`acted with an objectively high likelihood that their actions constitute infringement of the
`
`’550 Patent by refusing to take a license and continuing to make and sell infringing Accused
`
`’550 Products. The objectively-defined risk was either known or was so obvious that it
`
`should have been known.
`
`9
`
`LGD_000048
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00338-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 10 of 11 PageID #: 10
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`33.
`
`Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendants the damages sustained by
`
`Plaintiff as a result of Defendants’ wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial,
`
`which, by law, cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as
`
`fixed by this Court.
`
`34.
`
`Plaintiff has incurred and will incur attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses in the
`
`prosecution of this action. The circumstances of this dispute create an exceptional case
`
`within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285, and Plaintiff is entitled to recover its reasonable and
`
`necessary attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff hereby requests a trial by jury pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal
`
`Rules of Civil Procedure.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELEF
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court find in its favor and against
`
`Defendants, and that the Court grant Plaintiff the following relief:
`
`A.
`
`A judgment that Defendants have infringed the ’843 Patent and/or the ’550
`
`Patent as alleged herein, directly and/or indirectly by way of contributing and/or
`
`inducing infringement of the ’843 Patent and/or the ’550 Patent;
`
`B.
`
`A judgment for an accounting of all damages sustained by Plaintiff as a result of
`
`the acts of infringement by Defendants;
`
`C.
`
`A judgment and order requiring Defendants to pay Plaintiff damages under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 284, including up to treble damages for willful infringement as
`
`provided by 35 U.S.C. § 284, and any royalties determined to be appropriate;
`
`10
`
`LGD_000049
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00338-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 11 of 11 PageID #: 11
`
`D.
`
`A permanent injunction enjoining Defendants and its officers, directors, agents,
`
`servants, employees, affiliates, divisions, branches, subsidiaries, parents and all
`
`others acting in concert or privity with them from direct and/or indirect
`
`infringement of the ’843 Patent and/or the ’550 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §
`
`283;
`
`E.
`
`A judgment and order requiring Defendants to pay Plaintiff pre-judgment and
`
`post-judgment interest on the damages awarded;
`
`F.
`
`A judgment and order finding this to be an exceptional case and requiring
`
`Defendants to pay the costs of this action (including all disbursements) and
`
`attorneys’ fees as provided by 35 U.S.C. § 285; and
`
`G.
`
`Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable.
`
`Dated: March 14, 2014
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`Hsiang “James” H. Lin
`Kevin Jones
`Michael C. Ting
`Ken K. Fung
`TECHKNOWLEDGE LAW GROUP LLP
`1521 Diamond Street
`San Francisco, CA 94131
`(415) 816-9525
`jlin@techknowledgelawgroup.com
`kjones@techknowledgelawgroup.com
`mting@techknowledgelawgroup.com
`kfung@techknowledgelawgroup.com
`
`BAYARD, P.A.
`
`/s/ Stephen B. Brauerman
`Richard D. Kirk (rk0922)
`Stephen B. Brauerman (sb4952)
`Vanessa R. Tiradentes (vt5398)
`Sara Bussiere (sb5725)
`222 Delaware Avenue, Suite 900
`P.O. Box 25130
`Wilmington, DE 19899
`(302) 655-5000
`rkirk@bayardlaw.com
`sbrauerman@bayardlaw.com
`vtiradentes@bayardlaw.com
`sbussiere@bayardlaw.com
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff Surpass Tech Innovation
`LLC
`
`11
`
`LGD_000050
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00337-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 23
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`C.A. No. _____________
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`))))))))))))))))
`
`SURPASS TECH INNOVATION LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`SAMSUNG DISPLAY CO., LTD.; SAMSUNG
`ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.; SAMSUNG
`ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.; SONY
`CORPORATION; SONY ELECTRONICS
`INC.; and SONY CORPORATION OF
`AMERICA,
`
`Defendants.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff Surpass Tech Innovation LLC (“Plaintiff” or “Surpass Tech”), by and
`
`through its undersigned attorneys, hereby pleads the following claims of patent infringement
`
`against Samsung Display Co., Ltd. (“Samsung Display”); Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.;
`
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, “Samsung Electronics”); Sony
`
`Corporation; Sony Electronics Inc.; and Sony Corporation of America; (collectively,
`
`“Sony”) and alleges as follows:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff Surpass Tech is a Delaware limited liability company having an
`
`address at 3422 Old Capitol Trail, Suite 700, Wilmington, Delaware 19808-6192. Surpass
`
`Tech owns all title, rights and interest to United States Patent No. 7,202,843 (the “’843
`
`Patent”).
`
`LGD_000051
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00337-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 2 of 8 PageID #: 24
`
`2.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Samsung Display Co., Ltd. is a
`
`Korean corporation having its principal place of business at Samsung st 181, Tangieong-
`
`Myeon, Asan-City, Chungcheongnam-Do, Korea 336-741. Samsung Display Co., Ltd. may
`
`be served with process under the Delaware Long Arm Statute, 10 Del. C. § 3104.
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. is a
`
`Korean corporation having its principal place of business at San #24 Nongseo-dong,
`
`Giheung-gu, Yongin-City, Gyeonggi-do, Korea 446-711. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
`
`may be served with process under the Delaware Long Arm Statute, 10 Del. C. § 3104.
`
`4.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Samsung Electronics America, Inc.
`
`is a New York corporation having its principal place of business at 85 Challenger Road,
`
`Ridgefield Park, New Jersey 07660. Defendant Samsung Electronics America, Inc. can be
`
`served via its registered agent, C T Corporation System, 111 Eighth Avenue, New York, NY
`
`10011.
`
`5.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Sony Corporation is a Japanese
`
`corporation having its principal place of business at 1-7-1, Konan, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-
`
`0075, Japan. Sony Corporation may be served with process under the Delaware Long Arm
`
`Statute, 10 Del. C. § 3104.
`
`6.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Sony Electronics Inc. is a Delaware
`
`corporation having its principal place of business at 16530 Via Esprillo, San Diego,
`
`California 92127. Defendant Sony Electronics Inc. can be served via its registered agent,
`
`Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, DE 19808.
`
`7.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Sony Corporation of America is a
`
`New York corporation having its principal place of business at 550 Madison Ave., 27th
`
`2
`
`LGD_000052
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00337-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 3 of 8 PageID #: 25
`
`Floor, New York, New York 10022. Defendant Sony Corporation of America can be served
`
`via its registered agent, Corporation Service Company, 80 State Street, Albany, NY 12207.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`8.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the
`
`United States of America, Title 35 of the United States Code. This Court has subject matter
`
`jurisdiction over the matters plead herein under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) in that this is
`
`a civil action arising out of the patent laws of the United States of America.
`
`9.
`
`Samsung Display, Samsung Electronics, and Sony (collectively,
`
`“Defendants”) regularly and deliberately engaged in and continue to engage in activities that
`
`result in using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing infringing products in and/or into
`
`the State of Delaware and this judicial district. These activities violate Surpass Tech’s rights
`
`under the ’843 Patent plead herein. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants
`
`because, among other things, Defendants conduct business in the State of Delaware and in
`
`this judicial district and thus enjoy the privileges and protections of Delaware law.
`
`10.
`
`Venue is proper in the District of Delaware pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b),
`
`(c) and (d) and 1400(b).
`
`COUNT I
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,202,843
`
`11.
`
`Plaintiff incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 10 herein by reference as if fully
`
`stated herein.
`
`12.
`
`The ’843 Patent, entitled “Driving Circuit of A Liquid Crystal Display Panel
`
`and Related Driving Method,” issued on April 10, 2007. The ’843 Patent names Yung-
`
`Hung Shen, Shih-Chung Wang, Yuh-Ren Shen and Cheng-Jung Chen as inventors. Surpass
`
`3
`
`LGD_000053
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00337-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 4 of 8 PageID #: 26
`
`Tech owns by assignment the entire right, title and interest in and to the ’843 Patent,
`
`including the sole right to sue for past and present patent infringement thereof. A true and
`
`correct copy of the ‘843 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`
`13.
`
`Several of Defendants’ products, including but not limited to Samsung
`
`Electronics’ UN40F6300AF television having Samsung Display’s LSF400HJ01-A01 liquid
`
`crystal display (“LCD”) module, Samsung Electronics’ UN46ES8000 television having
`
`Samsung Display’s LTJ460HQ10-V LCD module, Samsung Electronics’ UN55F8000BF
`
`television having Samsung Display’s LSF550HQ01-A01 LCD module, and Sony’s KDL-
`
`32EX720 television having Samsung Display’s LTY320HJ01 LCD module, practice claims
`
`of the ’843 Patent. Surpass Tech believes, and further alleges, that additional Samsung
`
`Display’s and Samsung Electronics’ LCD modules, Samsung Electronics televisions having
`
`Samsung Display’s or Samsung Electronics’ LCD modules, and Sony televisions having
`
`Samsung Display’s or Samsung Electronics’ LCD modules also practice claims of the ’843
`
`Patent (products covered by this paragraph are collectively referred to as “Accused
`
`Products”).
`
`14.
`
`Surpass Tech believes, and thereon alleges, that Samsung Display and
`
`Samsung Electronics have sold and offered to sell and/or are selling and offering to sell
`
`infringing LCD modules for use in infringing televisions, and that these LCD modules are
`
`material to practicing the ’843 Patent’s invention, have no substantial non-infringing uses,
`
`and are known by Defendants, including Samsung Display and Samsung Electronics, to be
`
`especially made or especially adapted for use in what constitutes infringement of the ’843
`
`Patent. At least as early as March 6, 2014, Samsung Display had actual knowledge of the
`
`’843 Patent and Plaintiff’s claims that Samsung Display’s LCD modules are covered by the
`
`4
`
`LGD_000054
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00337-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 5 of 8 PageID #: 27
`
`’843 Patent. Samsung Display is contributing to the acts of using, offering to sell, and/or
`
`selling in the United States and/or importing into the United Sates the infringing Accused
`
`Products by Samsung Electronics and Sony by intentionally supplying such material
`
`components to Samsung Electronics and Sony with such knowledge of the ’843 Patent.
`
`15.
`
`Surpass Tech believes, and thereon alleges, that Samsung Display has
`
`induced and is inducing the infringement of the ’843 Patent by Samsung Electronics and
`
`Sony with the knowledge that the induced acts constitute patent infringement, by providing
`
`modules which contain every element of claims of the ’843 Patent. At least as early as
`
`March 6, 2014, Samsung Display had actual knowledge of the ’843 Patent and Plaintiff’s
`
`claims that Samsung Display’s LCD modules are covered by the ’843 Patent. Samsung
`
`Display is continuing to induce infringement by Samsung Electronics and Sony by
`
`intentionally inducing acts of using, offering to sell, and/or selling in the United States
`
`and/or importing into the United States the Accused Products with such knowledge of the
`
`’843 Patent.
`
`16.
`
`Surpass Tech believes, and thereon alleges, that any applicable requirements
`
`of 35 U.S.C. § 287 have been satisfied.
`
`17.
`
`Surpass Tech believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendants have each
`
`infringed, and continue to infringe, claims of the ’843 Patent, in violation of 35 U.S.C. §
`
`271, by among other things, making, using, offering to sell, selling and/or importing in
`
`and/or into the United States, without authority or license from Surpass Tech, the Accused
`
`Products falling within the scope of claims of the ’843 Patent.
`
`18.
`
`Defendants’ acts of infringement have caused and will continue to cause
`
`substantial and irreparable damage to Surpass Tech.
`
`5
`
`LGD_000055
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00337-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 6 of 8 PageID #: 28
`
`19.
`
`As a result of the infringement of the ’843 Patent by Defendants, Surpass
`
`Tech has been damaged. Surpass Tech is, therefore, entitled to such damages pursuant to 35
`
`U.S.C. § 284 in an amount that presently cannot be pled but that will be determined at trial.
`
`20.
`
`At least as early as March 10, 2014, Samsung Display, Samsung Electronics
`
`and Sony had actual knowledge of the ’843 Patent and Plaintiff’s claims that Samsung
`
`Display’s and Samsung Electronics’ LCD modules, Samsung Electronics’ televisions
`
`containing Samsung Display’s or Samsung Electronics’ LCD modules, and Sony’s
`
`televisions containing Samsung Display’s or Samsung Electronics’ LCD modules are
`
`covered by the ’843 Patent. Upon information and belief, Samsung Display’s, Samsung
`
`Electronics’ and Sony’s acts of infringement of the ’843 Patent have been willful and
`
`intentional. Since at least the above-mentioned date of notice, Samsung Display, Samsung
`
`Electronics and Sony have acted with an objectively high likelihood that their actions
`
`constitute infringement of the ’843 Patent by refusing to take a license and continuing to
`
`make and sell infringing Accused Products. The objectively-defined risk was either known
`
`or was so obvious that it should have been known.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`21.
`
`Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendants the damages sustained by
`
`Plaintiff as a result of Defendants’ wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial,
`
`which, by law, cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as
`
`fixed by this Court.
`
`22.
`
`Plaintiff has incurred and will incur attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses in the
`
`prosecution of this action. The circumstances of this dispute create an exceptional case
`
`6
`
`LGD_000056
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00337-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 7 of 8 PageID #: 29
`
`within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285, and Plaintiff is entitled to recover its reasonable and
`
`necessary attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`23.
`
`Plaintiff hereby requests a trial by jury pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal
`
`Rules of Civil Procedure.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELEF
`
`24.
`
`Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court find in its favor and against
`
`Defendants, and that the Court grant Plaintiff the following relief:
`
`A.
`
`A judgment that Defendants have infringed the ’843 Patent as alleged herein,
`
`directly and/or indirectly by way of contributing and/or inducing infringement
`
`of the ’843 Patent;
`
`B.
`
`A judgment for an accounting of all damages sustained by Plaintiff as a result of
`
`the acts of infringement by Defendants;
`
`C.
`
`A judgment and order requiring Defendants to pay Plaintiff damages under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 284, including up to treble damages for willful infringement as
`
`provided by 35 U.S.C. § 284, and any royalties determined to be appropriate;
`
`D.
`
`A permanent injunction enjoining Defendants and its officers, directors, agents,
`
`servants, employees, affiliates, divisions, branches, subsidiaries, parents and all
`
`others acting in concert or privity with them from direct and/or indirect
`
`infringement of the ’843 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283;
`
`E.
`
`A judgment and order requiring Defendants to pay Plaintiff pre-judgment and
`
`post-judgment interest on the damages awarded;
`
`F.
`
`A judgment and order finding this to be an exceptional case and requiring
`
`7
`
`LGD_000057
`
`

`
`Case 1:14-cv-00337-LPS Document 1 Filed 03/14/14 Page 8 of 8 PageID #: 30
`
`Defendants to pay the costs of this action (including all disbursements) and
`
`attorneys’ fees as provided by 35 U.S.C. § 285; and
`
`G.
`
`Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable.
`
`Dated: March 14, 2014
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`Hsiang “James” H. Lin
`Kevin Jones
`Michael C. Ting
`Ken K. Fung
`TECHKNOWLEDGE LAW GROUP LLP
`1521 Diamond Street
`San Francisco, CA 94131
`(415) 816-9525
`jlin@techknowledgelawgroup.com
`kjones@techknowledgelawgroup.com
`mting@techknowledgelawgroup.com
`kfung@techknowledgelawgroup.com
`
`BAYARD, P.A.
`
`/s/ Stephen B. Brauerman
`Richard D. Kirk (rk0922)
`Stephen B. Brauerman (sb4952)
`Vanessa R. Tiradentes (vt5398)
`Sara Bussiere (sb5725)
`222 Delaware Avenue, Suite 900
`P.O. Box 25130
`Wilmington, DE 19899
`(302) 655-5000
`rkirk@bayardlaw.com
`sbrauerman@bayardlaw.com
`vtiradentes@bayardlaw.com
`sbussiere@bayardlaw.com
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff Surpass Tech Innovation
`LLC
`
`8
`
`LGD_000058

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