` % A0 120 Rev.
` REPORT ON THE
`
`
`
`FILING OR DETERMINATION OF AN
`TO:
`Mail Stop 8
`
`
`Director of the US. Patent & Trademark Office
`ACTION REGARDING A PATENT OR
`
`
`
`PO. Box 1450
`TRADEMARK
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`In Compliance with 35 § 290 and/or 15 U.S.Cl § 1116 you are hereby advised that a court action has been
`filed in the US District Court
`Northern California
`on the following
`X Patents or
`Cl Trademarks:
`
`
`DATE FILED
`U.S. DISTRICT COURT
`
`
`
` DOCKET NO.
`450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco. CA 94102
`4/15/2014
`
`
`DEFENDANT
`CV 14-01727 MEJ
`
`
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF
`CROSSROADS SYSTEMS, INC
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TRADEMARKN0.
`OR TRADEMARK
`HOLDER OF PATENT ORTRADEMARK
`
`
`PATENT OR
`
`DATE OF PATENT
`
`NETAPP: INC.
`
`In the above—entitled case, the following patent(s) have been included:
`
`In the above—entitled case, the following decision has been rendered or judgement issued:
`
`
`
`(BY) DEPUTY CLERK
`April 17, 2014
`Hilary Jackson
`Richard W. Wieking
`
`
`Copy 3—Upon termination of action, mail this copy to Commissioner
`Copy l—Upon initiation of action, mail this copy to Commissioner
`Copy 4——Case file copy
`Copy 2—Upon filing document adding patent(s), mail this copy to Commissioner
`
`DATE
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 1
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 1
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`10
`1 1
`
`12
`
`Case No.
`
`
`
`Case3zl4-cv—Ol727-MEJ Docum
`
`entl Filed04/15/14 Pagel Of5
`
`DUANE MORRIS LLP
`Karineh Khachatourian (CA SBN 202634)
`kkhachatourian@duanemorri5.00m
`Patrick S. Salceda (CA SBN 247978)
`psalceda@duanemorris.com
`David T. Xuc, Ph.D. (CA SBN 256668)
`dtxue@duanemorris.com
`2475 Hanover Street
`Palo Alto, CA 94304-1134
`Telephone: 650.847.4150
`Facsimile: 650.847.4151
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`NETAPP, INC.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`NETAPP, INC,
`
`13
`
`14
`15
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V_
`CROSSROADS SYSTEMS, INC.
`Defendant
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY
`JUDGMENT
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`DMZ\4870591.3 01309/00003
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND DEMAND FOR JU
`
`
`
` RY TRIAL
`
`
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 2
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 2
`
`

`

`Case3214—cv-Ol727-MEJ Documentl FiledO4/15/l4 Page2 of5
`
`78759.
`
`PlaintiffNetApp, Inc. (“‘NetApp” or “Plaintiff’), by its attorneys, alleges as follows:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`This is an action by Plaintiff for Declaratory Judgment against Defendant Crossroads
`
`Systems, Inc, (“Crossroads” or “Defendant”). NetApp seeks declaratory reliefpursuant to 28 U.S.C.
`
`§§ 2201 and 2202, declaring United States Patent Nos. 7,051,147 (“the ’147 Patent”) and 7,987,311
`
`(“the ’3 11 Patent”) (collectively the “patents-in—suit”) to be not infringed.
`
`THE PARTIES
`PlaintiffNetApp, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place ofbusiness at
`1.
`495 East Java Drive, Sunnyvale, California 94089.
`2.
`Defendant Crossroads is a corporation incorporated under the laws ofthe State of
`Delaware and has its principal place ofbusiness at 11000 North MoPac Expressway, Austin, Texas,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BACKGROUND STATEMENT
`NetApp brings this declaratory judgment action in response to accusations of
`3.
`infringement involving the ’147 and ’311 Patents levied against NetApp by Crossroads for products
`referenced in its “Concise Statement ofInfringement” filed on April 9, 2014 in Civil Action No.
`1:14-cv—149-SS currently pending in the Western District ofTexas and attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`Neither the ’147 nor the ’3 11 Patents were asserted in Crossroads’ Original Complaint, nor has
`Crossroads sought to amend its Original Complaint to include these patents.
`4.
`Accordingly, NetApp brings this Declaratory Judgment action because an actual
`allegation of infringement has been made by Crossroads related to the patents—in-suit.
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over NetApp’s request for a declaratory
`5.
`judgment under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202. This action arises under the patent laws ofthe United
`States, 35 U.S.C. §§ 100 et seq., which are within the subject matterjurisdiction ofthis Court under
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`6.
`Crossroads’ allegations threaten actual and imminent injury to NetApp that can be
`redressed by judicial relief and that injury is of sufficient immediacy and reality to warrant the
`
`-1-
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`DM2\4870591.3 G1309/00003
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 3
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 3
`
`

`

`Ca583214—cv—01727-MEJ Documentl FiledO4/15/14 Page3 0f5
`
`
`
`issuance of a declaratory judgment. Absent a declaration ofnon—infringement, Crossroads’
`continued wrongful assertions of infringement related to NetApp’s products will cause NetApp
`
`harm .
`
`
`
`
`
`This Court has general and specific personal jurisdiction over Crossroads because of
`7.
`
`its purposeful, systematic, and continuous contacts with California. Crossroads sells products and
`
`services in California, including its StrongBox® product line and actively solicits customers in
`
`California by presenting at conferences such as Createasphere’s Digital Asset Management
`
`Conference in Beverly Hills, California and the Hollywood Post Alliance Tech Retreat in Indian
`
`Wells, California. Moreover, Crossroads maintains sales personnel in California and conducts
`
`business in this district. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Crossroads for another reason:
`
`Crossroads has purposefully directed into California its enforcement activities regarding the patents-
`
`in-suit. On information and belief, Crossroads’s licensing and enforcement efforts in California
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`have generated substantial revenues.
`8.
`Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § l39l(b) because, inter alia, a
`
`substantial part ofthe events and omissions giving rise to the claims occurred here and because
`
`Crossroads is subject to personal jurisdiction in this district.
`
`INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT
`
`Division assignment to the San Jose Division ofthe United States District Court for
`9.
`
`the Northern District of California is proper pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-2(e) because this is both
`
`
`an Intellectual Property Action that arose in, among other places, Santa Clara County, and because a
`
`substantial part ofthe events giving rise to the claims occurred in Santa Clara County.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`Crossroads purports to be the owner of the ’147 Patent. The ’147 Patent is entitled
`10.
`
`
`“Storage router and method for providing virtual local storage” and issued on May 23, 2006. A cop
`
`of the ’147 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
`
`11.
`Crossroads purports to be the owner of the ’311 Patent. The ’3 ll Patent is also
`
`entitled “Storage router and method for providing virtual local storage” and issued on July 26, 201 l.
`
`
`A copy of the ’31 1 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit C.
`-2-
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`DM2\487059I .3 G [309!00003
`
`
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 4
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 4
`
`

`

`Case3114—cv—Ol727-MEJ Documentl FiledO4/15/l4 Page4 of5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`(Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement of the ’147 Patent)
`ence each of the allegations in the preceding paragraphs
`NetApp incorporates by refer
`
`12.
`
`of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
`he ’ 147 Patent has been or is infringed, either directly or indirectly, by
`
`13.
`
`No claim oft
`
`
`
`
`
`NetApp or the purchasers of NetApp’s products.
`14.
`As a result ofthe acts described in the foregoing paragraphs, there exists a substantial
`controversy of sufficient immediacy and reality between Crossroads and NetApp to wa
`issuance of a declaratory judgment that NetApp has not infringed, and does not infringe, directly or
`
`rrant the
`
`indirectly, any claim of the ’ 147 Patent.
`SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`(Declaratory Judgment of Non—Infringement of the ’31] Patent)
`NetApp incorporates by reference each ofthe allegations in the preceding paragraphs
`
`15.
`
`of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
`16.
`No claim ofthe ’3 11 Patent has been or is infringed, either directly or indirectly, by
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`NetApp or the purchasers of NetApp’ 3 products
`17.
`As a result ofthe acts described1n the foregoing paragraphs, there exists a substantial
`controversy ofsufficient immediacy and reality between Crossroads and NetApp to warrant the
`issuance ofa declaratory judgment that NetApp has not infringed, and does not infringe, directly or
`indirectly, any claim ofthe ’311 Patent.
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays forjudgment as follows:
`1.
`For entry of a declaration that NetApp products have not infringed and are not
`
`infringing, either directly or indirectly, any claim ofthe ’147 or 3]] Patents;
`
`2.
`An order that Crossroads and each of its officers, employees, agents, attorneys, and
`
`any and all persons acting in concert or participation with them are restrained and enjoined from
`
`further prosecuting or instituting any action against NetApp claiming that the ’147, and ’3 11 Patents
`
`are infringed or from representing that NetApp s products or their use by the purchasers ofthose
`
`GMENT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUD
`DM2\4870591 .3 G l 309/00003
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 5
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 5
`
`

`

`CaseB:14-cv-01727-MEJ Documentl FiledO4/15/14 Page5 of5
`
`l
`
`products infringe the ’147, and ’3 11 Patents;
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`A declaration that this is an exceptional case under 35 U .S.C. § 285;
`
`An award to NetApp of its costs and attorneys’ fees incurred herein; and
`
`For such other reliefas the Court deems just and proper.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`NetApp demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable.
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`2o
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Dated: April 15, 2014
`
`DUANE MORRIS LLP
`
`By:
`
`/s/ Karineh Khachatourian
`Karinch Khachatourian
`Patrick S. Salceda
`David T. Xue
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`NETAPP, INC.
`
`
`
`DM2‘14870591.3 Gl309/00003
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 6
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 6
`
`

`

`TRADEMARK
`
`Mail Stop 8
`Director of the US. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.0. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`REPORT ON THE
`FILING 0R DETERMINATION OF AN
`ACTION REGARDING A PATENT 0R
`
`In Compliance with 35 U.S.C. § 290 and/or 15 U.S.C. § 1116 you are hereby advised that a court action has been
`
`filed in the U.S. District Court
`Western District of Texas, Austin Division
`on the following
`I] Trademarks or
`Ell Patents.
`( E] the patent action involves 35 U.S.C. § 292.):
`
`PATENT 0R
`MW
`
`DATE OF PATENT
`
`DOCKET NO.
`DATE FILED
`US. DISTRICT COURT
`
`1:13-cv—1025-SS
`11/26/2013
`Western District of Texas, Austin Division
`
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF
`DEFENDANT
`
`
`Crossroads Systems, Inc.
`Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd., Huawei Enterprise USA
`
`Inc. and Huawei Technologies USA Inc.
`
`
`
`
`——_
`
`2t 935.4235__
`
`«2 937 ow—_
`
`47 05/ W?
`
`
`
`
`DATE INCLUDED
`
`PATENT OR
`TRADEMARK NO.
`
`l
`
`In the above—entitled case, the following patent(s)/ trademark(s) have been included:
`INCLUDED BY
`
`I] Amendment
`DATE OF PATENT
`OR TRADEMARK
`
`I] Answer
`
`[I Cross Bill
`
`[I Other Pleading
`
`HOLDER OF PATENT OR TRADEMARK
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`In the above—entitled case, the following decision has been rendered orjudgement issued:
`DEC] SIGN/JUDGEMENT
`
`
`c,
`
`
`‘ 0,!
`.
`.
`
`CLERK
`William G Putnicki
`..
`_
`.
`.
`
`DATE
`
`1 1/27/2013
`
`Copy l—Upon initiation of action, mail this copy to Director Copy 3—Upon termination of action, mail this copy to Director
`Copy 2—Upon filing document adding patent(s), mail this copy to Director Copy 4—Case file copy
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 7
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 7
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-bv-01025—SS Document 1 Filed 11/26/13 Page 9 of 11
`
`H.
`
`That Defendants account for and pay to Crossroads all damages caused by
`
`the infringement of the ’041 Patent;
`
`1.
`
`That Crossroads receive enhanced damages from Defendants in the form
`
`of treble damages, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 based on Defendants’
`
`willful infringement of the ’041 Patent;
`
`J.
`
`That Crossroads be granted pre-judgment and post—judgment interest on
`
`the damages caused to it by reason of Defendants’ infringement of the
`
`’041 Patent,
`
`including pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on any
`
`enhanced damages or attorneys’ fees award;
`
`That Defendants have infringed the ’ 147 Patent;
`
`That such infringement of the ’ 147 Patent by Defendants has been willful;
`
`K.
`
`L.
`
`M.
`
`That Defendants account for and pay to Crossroads all damages caused by
`
`the infringement of the ’ 147 Patent;
`
`N.
`
`That Crossroads receive enhanced damages from Defendants in the form
`
`of treble damages, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 based on Defendants’
`
`willful infringement of the ’ 147 Patent;
`
`0.
`
`That Crossroads be granted pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on
`
`the damages caused to it by reason of Defendants’ infringement of the
`
`’147 Patent,
`
`including pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on any
`
`enhanced damages or attorneys’ fees award;
`
`P.
`
`That Defendants pay Crossroads all of Crossroads’ reasonable attorneys”
`
`fees and expenses;
`
`Q.
`
`That costs be awarded to Crossroads;
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 8
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 8
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-01025-SS Document 1 Filed 11/26/13 Page 10 of 11
`
`R.
`
`That Defendants, Defendants’
`
`agents,
`
`employees,
`
`representatives,
`
`successors and assigns, and those acting in privity or in concert with
`
`Defendants, be preliminary and permanently enjoined from further
`
`infringement of the ’035 Patent;
`
`S.
`
`That Defendant, Defendants’
`
`agents,
`
`employees,
`
`representatives,
`
`successors and assigns, and those acting in privity or in concert with
`
`Defendants, be preliminary and permanently enjoined from further
`
`infringement of the ”041 Patent;
`
`T.
`
`That Defendants, Defendants’
`
`agents,
`
`employees,
`
`representatives,
`
`successors and assigns, and those acting in privity or in concert with
`
`Defendants, be preliminary and permanently enjoined from further
`
`infringement of the ’147 Patent;
`
`That this is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285; and
`
`That Crossroads be granted such other and further relief as the Court may
`
`U.
`
`V.
`
`deem just and proper under the circumstances.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Crossroads hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues.
`
`10
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 9
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 9
`
`

`

`1
`
`Case 1:13-cv—01025-SS Document 1 Filed 11/26/13 Page 11 of 11
`
`Dated: November 26, 2013
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By:
`
`/s/ Steven Sprinkle
`Steven Sprinkle
`Texas Bar No. 00794962
`Elizabeth J. Brown Fore
`Texas Bar No. 24001795
`
`Sprinkle IP Law Group, PC
`1301 w. zs‘h Street, Suite 408
`Austin, Texas 78705
`Tel: 512-637—9220
`Fax: 512-371-9088
`
`ssprinkle@sprinklelaw.com
`ebrownfore@sprinklelaw.com
`
`Susan K. Knoll
`Texas Bar No. 11616900
`Russell T. Wong
`Texas Bar No. 21884235
`James H. Hall
`Texas Bar No. 24041040
`
`WONG, CABELLO, LUTSCH,
`RUTHERFORD & BRUCCULERI, L.L.P.
`20333 SH 249, Suite 600
`Houston, TX 77070
`Tel: 832-446-2400
`Fax: 832-446-2424
`
`sknoll@counselip.com
`rwong@counselip.com
`jhall@counselip.eom
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`CROSSROADS SYSTEMS, INC.
`
`11
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 10
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 10
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv—01025—SS Document 1 Filed 11/26/13 Page 1 of 11
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`AUSTIN DIVISION
`
`CROSSROADS SYSTEMS, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO. LTD.,
`HUAWEI ENTERPRISE USA INC.
`HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES USA INC.
`
`Defendants.
`
`womwemmomwcomcoazmoo:
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:13-CV-1025
`
`JURY DEMANDED
`
`PLAINTIFF CROSSROADS SYSTEMS, INC.’S
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff Crossroads Systems, Inc. (“Crossroads”) is a corporation incorporated
`
`under the laws of the State of Delaware and has its principal place of business at 11000 North
`
`MoPac Expressway, Austin, Texas 78759.
`
`2.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. (“Huawei
`
`China”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the People’s Republic of China
`
`with its principal place of business in Huawei Industrial Base, Bantian, Longgang, Shenzshen,
`
`Guangdong, PR. China, 518129.
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Huawei Enterprise USA Inc. (“Huawei
`
`Enterprise”) is a California Corporation with its principal office at 3965 Freedom Circle, 11th
`
`Floor, Santa Clara, CA 95054.
`
`4.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Huawei Technologies USA Inc.
`
`is a
`
`Texas corporation with its principal office at 5700 Tennyson Parkway, Suite 500, Plano, TX
`
`75024.
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 11
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 11
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-lcv-01025-SS Document 1 Filed 11/26/13 Page 2 of 11
`
`W
`
`5.
`
`This action arises under the laws of the United States, more specifically under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 100, et seq. Subject matter jurisdiction is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
`
`1331 and 1338.
`
`6.
`
`Personal jurisdiction and venue are proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391
`
`and 1400(b). Upon information and belief, Defendants Huawei China, Huawei Enterprise and
`
`Huawei Technologies USA Inc. established minimum contacts with this forum such that the
`
`exercise of jurisdiction over Defendants would not offend traditional notions of fair play and
`
`substantial justice. Upon information and belief, Defendants regularly conduct business in the
`
`State of Texas and in this judicial district and are subject to the jurisdiction of this Court. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendants have been doing business in Texas and this judicial district
`
`by distributing, marketing, selling and/or offering for sale its products, including, but not limited
`
`to, products that practice the subject matter claimed in the Patents-In-Suit, and/or regularly doing
`
`or soliciting business and/or engaging in other persistent courses of conduct in and/or directed to
`
`Texas and this judicial district.
`
`COUNT 1: INFRINGEMENT OF US. PATENT NO. 6,425,035
`
`7.
`
`Crossroads incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in the preceding
`
`paragraphs.
`
`8.
`
`On July 23, 2002, United States Patent No. 6,425,035 (the “’035 Patent”) was
`
`duly and legally issued. A true and correct copy of the ’035 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit
`
`A. Crossroads is the assignee and the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the ’035
`
`Patent. The ’035 Patent is entitled to a presumption of validity.
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 12
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 12
`
`

`

`Case 1:13—bv—01025-SS Document 1 Filed 11/26/13 Page 3 0t 11
`
`9.
`
`On information and belief, Defendants have directly infringed the ’035 Patent.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant continues to directly infringe the ’035 Patent.
`
`10.
`
`Specifically, on information and belief, Defendants have directly infringed the
`
`’035 Patent by making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing into the United States
`
`certain of products including at
`
`least the following: OceanStor SZ200T Storage System,
`
`OceanStor S6800T Storage System, OceanStor T Series Unified Storage Systems (including the
`
`OceanStor S2600T, OceanStor SSSOOT, OceanStor SS600T, OceanStor SSSOOT), OceanStor
`
`HVSSST Storage Systems, OceanStor l-lVS88T Storage Systems, OceanStor VIS6600T Storage
`
`Systems, OceanStor Dorado 2100 G2 Storage Systems, and OceanStor Dorado 5100 Storage
`
`Systems.
`
`11.
`
`Further, on information and belief, Defendants have been and now are indirectly
`
`infringing by way of inducing infringement of the ’035 Patent with knowledge of the ’035 Patent
`
`by making, offering for sale, selling, importing into the United States, marketing, supporting,
`
`providing product
`
`instruction and/or advertising certain products,
`
`including the OceanStor
`
`SZ200T Storage System, OceanStor S6800T Storage System, OceanStor T Series Unified
`
`Storage Systems (including the OceanStor S2600T, OceanStor SSSOOT, OceanStor SS600T,
`
`OceanStor SS800T), OceanStor HVS85T Storage Systems, OceanStor HVS88T Storage
`
`Systems, OceanStor VISG6OOT Storage Systems, OceanStor Dorado 2100 G2 Storage Systems,
`
`and OceanStor Dorado 5100 Storage Systems, and Defendants knew that these actions were
`
`inducing end users to infringe the ’035 Patent.
`
`12.
`
`Further, on information and belief, Defendants have been and now are indirectly
`
`infringing by way of contributing to the infringement by end users of the ’035 Patent by selling,
`
`offering to sell and/or importing into the United States components, including the OceanStor
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 13
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 13
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-01025-SS Document 1 Filed 11/26/13 Page 4 of 11
`
`SZ200T Storage System, OceanStor S6800T Storage System, OceanStor T Series Unified
`
`Storage Systems (including the OceanStor S2600T, OceanStor SSSOOT, OceanStor SS600T,
`
`OceanStor SS800T) OceanStor HV885T Storage Systems, OceanStor HVS88T Storage Systems,
`
`OceanStor VIS6600T Storage Systems, OceanStor Dorado 2100 G2 Storage Systems, and
`
`OceanStor Dorado 5100 Storage Systems, knowing the components to be especially made or
`
`especially adapted for use in the infringement of the ’035 Patent. Such components are not a
`
`staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses.
`
`13.
`
`Defendants have been on constructive and/or actual notice of the ”035 Patent
`
`since at
`
`least as early as February 2012, and Defendants have not ceased their infringing
`
`activities. The infringement of the ’035 Patent by Defendants has been and continues to be
`
`willful and deliberate.
`
`14.
`
`Crossroads has been irreparably harmed by Defendants’ acts of infringement of
`
`the ’035 Patent, and will continue to be harmed unless and until Defendants’ acts of infringement
`
`are enjoined and restrained by order of this Court.
`
`15.
`
`As a result of the acts of infringement of the ’035 Patent by Defendants,
`
`Crossroads has suffered and will continue to suffer damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
`
`COUNT 2: INFRINGEMENT OF US. PATENT NO. 7,934,041
`
`16.
`
`Crossroads incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in the preceding
`
`paragraphs.
`
`17.
`
`On April 26, 2011, United States Patent No. 7,934,041 (the “’041 Patent”) was
`
`duly and legally issued. A true and correct copy of the ’04] Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit
`
`B. Crossroads is the assignee and the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the ’041
`
`Patent. The ’041 Patent is entitled to a presumption of validity.
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 14
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 14
`
`

`

`Case 1:13—cv—01025—SS Document 1 Filed 11/26/13 Page 5 of 11
`
`18.
`
`On information and belief, Defendants have directly infringed the ’041 Patent.
`
`On information and belief, Defendants continue to directly infringe the ’04] Patent.
`
`19.
`
`Specifically, on information and belief, Defendants have directly infringed the
`
`’041 Patent by making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing into the United States
`
`certain products including at least the following: OceanStor $2200T Storage System, OceanStor
`
`S6800T Storage System, OceanStor T Series Unified Storage Systems (including the OceanStor
`
`S2600T, OceanStor S5500T, OceanStor SS600T, OceanStor SS800T) OceanStor HVSSST
`
`Storage Systems, OceanStor HV888T Storage Systems, OceanStor VIS6600T Storage Systems,
`
`OceanStor Dorado 2100 G2 Storage Systems, and OceanStor Dorado 5100 Storage Systems.
`
`20.
`
`Further, upon information and belief, Defendants have been and now are
`
`indirectly infringing by way of inducing infringement of the ’041 Patent with knowledge of the
`
`’041 Patent by making, offering for sale, selling, importing into the United States, marketing,
`
`supporting, providing product
`
`instruction and/0r advertising certain products,
`
`including the
`
`OceanStor S2200T Storage System, OceanStor S6800T Storage System, OceanStor T Series
`
`Unified Storage Systems (including the OceanStor $2600T, OceanStor SSSOOT, OceanStor
`
`SS600T, OceanStor SSSOOT), OceanStor HVSSST Storage Systems, OceanStor HVSSST Storage
`
`Systems, OceanStor VIS6600T Storage Systems, OceanStor Dorado 2100 G2 Storage Systems,
`
`and OceanStor Dorado 5100 Storage Systems, and Defendant knew that these actions were
`
`inducing end users to infringe the ’041 Patent.
`
`21.
`
`Further, upon information and belief, Defendants have been and now are
`
`indirectly infiinging by way of contributing to the infringement by end users of the ’041 Patent
`
`by selling, offering to sell and/or importing into the United States components, OceanStor
`
`SZZOOT Storage System, OceanStor S6800T Storage System, OceanStor T Series Unified
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 15
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 15
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv~01025-SS Document 1 Filed 11/26/13 Page 6 of 11
`
`Storage Systems (including the OceanStor SZ600T, OceanStor SSSOOT, OceanStor S5600T,
`
`OceanStor SS800T), OceanStor HVSSST Storage Systems, OceanStor HVSS8T Storage
`
`Systems, OceanStor VISGéOOT Storage Systems, OceanStor Dorado 2100 G2 Storage Systems,
`
`and OceanStor Dorado 5100 Storage Systems, knowing the components to be especially made or
`
`especially adapted for use in the infringement of the ’04] Patent. Such components are not a
`
`staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses.
`
`22.
`
`Defendants have been on constructive and/0r actual notice of the ’041 Patent
`
`since at least as early as early as February 2012, and Defendants have not ceased the infringing
`
`activities. The infringement of the ’041 Patent by Defendants has been and continues to be
`
`willfiil and deliberate.
`
`23.
`
`Crossroads has been irreparably harmed by Defendants’ acts of infringement of
`
`the ’04] Patent, and will continue to be harmed unless and until Defendants’ acts of infringement
`
`are enjoined and restrained by order of this Court.
`
`24.
`
`As a result of the acts of infringement of the ’04] Patent by Defendants,
`
`Crossroads has suffered and will continue to suffer damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
`
`COUNT 3: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT N0. 7,051,147
`
`25.
`
`Crossroads incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in the preceding
`
`paragraphs.
`
`26.
`
`On May 23, 2006, United States Patent No. 7,051,147 (the “’147 Patent”) was
`
`duly and legally issued. A true and correct copy of the ’ 147 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit
`
`C. Crossroads is the assignee and the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the ’147
`
`Patent. The ’ 147 Patent is entitled to a presumption of validity.
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 16
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 16
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-01025-SS Document 1 Filed 11/26/13 Page 7 of 11
`
`27.
`
`On information and belief, Defendants have directly infringed the ’147 Patent.
`
`On information and belief, Defendants continue to directly infringe the ’ 147 Patent.
`
`28.
`
`Specifically, on information and belief, Defendants have directly infringed the
`
`’147 Patent by making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing into the United States
`
`certain products including at
`
`least
`
`the following: OceanStor SS600T Storage Systems,
`
`OceanStor SSSOOT Storage Systems, OceanStor S6800T Storage Systems, OceanStor VIS6600T
`
`Storage Systems.
`
`29.
`
`Further, on information and belief, Defendants have been and now are indirectly
`
`infringing by way of inducing infringement of the ’ 147 Patent with knowledge of the ’ 147 Patent
`
`by making, offering for sale, selling, importing into the United States, marketing, supporting,
`
`providing product
`
`instruction and/or advertising certain products,
`
`including the OceanStor
`
`$5600T Storage Systems, OceanStor SS800T Storage Systems, OceanStor S6800T Storage
`
`Systems, OceanStor VIS6600T Storage Systems, and Defendants knew that these actions were
`
`inducing end users to infringe the ’ 147 Patent.
`
`30.
`
`Further, on information and belief, Defendants have been and now are indirectly
`
`infringing by way of contributing to the infringement by end users of the ’ 147 Patent by selling,
`
`offering to sell and/or importing into the United States components,
`
`including OceanStor
`
`SS600T Storage Systems, OceanStor SSSOOT Storage Systems, OceanStor $6800T Storage
`
`Systems, OceanStor VIS6600T Storage Systems, knowing the components to be especially made
`
`or especially adapted for use in the infringement of the ’147 Patent. Such components are not a
`
`staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses.
`
`31.
`
`Defendants have been on constructive and/or actual notice of the ’147 Patent
`
`since at least as early as February 2012, and Defendants have not ceased the infringing activities.
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 17
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 17
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-icv-01025-SS Document 1 Filed 11/26/13 Page 8 of 11
`
`The infringement of the ’147 Patent by Defendants has been and continues to be willful and
`
`deliberate.
`
`32.
`
`Crossroads has been irreparably harmed by Defendants’ acts of infringement of
`
`the ’147 Patent, and will continue to be harmed unless and until Defendants’ acts of infringement
`
`are enjoined and restrained by order of this Court.
`
`33.
`
`As a result of the acts of infringement of the ’147 Patent by Defendants,
`
`Crossroads has suffered and will continue to suffer damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Crossroads requests this Court enter judgment as follows:
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`That Defendants have infringed the ’035 Patent;
`
`That such infringement of the ’035 Patent by Defendants has been willful;
`
`That Defendants account for and pays to Crossroads all damages caused
`
`by the infringement of the ’035 Patent;
`
`D.
`
`That Crossroads receive enhanced damages from Defendants in the form
`
`of treble damages, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 based on Defendants’
`
`willful infringement of the ’035 Patent;
`
`E.
`
`That Crossroads be granted pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on
`
`the damages caused to it by reason of Defendants’ infringement of the
`
`”035 Patent,
`
`including pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on any
`
`enhanced damages or attorneys’ fees award;
`
`That Defendants have infringed the ’041 Patent;
`
`That such infringement of the ’041 Patent by Defendants has been willful;
`
`F.
`
`G.
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 18
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 18
`
`

`

`A0120 Rev. 08/10
`
`TRADEMARK
`
`Mail Stop 8
`Director of the US. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.0. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313—1450
`
`REPORT ON THE
`FILING OR DETERMINATION OF AN
`ACTION REGARDING A PATENT OR
`
`in Compliance with 35 U.S.C. § 290 and/or 15 U.S.C, § 1116 you are hereby advised that a court action has been
`
`filed in the US. District Court
`Western District of Texas. Austin Division
`on the following
`[I Trademarks or M Patents.
`[:1 the patent action involves 35 USCcT292.):
`(
`
`DATE FILED
`10/7/2013
`
`PATENT OR
`TRADEMARK NO.
`
`DATE OF PATENT
`OR TRADEMARK
`
`HOLDER OF PATENT OR TRADEMARK
`
`
`
`DOCKET NO.
`U.S. DISTRICT COURT
`1:13-cv-895-SS
`Western District of Texas, Austin Division
`
`PLAINTIFF
`DEFENDANT
` Oracle Corporation
`
`Crossroads Systems, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`No 935,0; r
`
`
`37 cm aw_—
`—l_—
`
`
`———
`
`
`
`DATE INCLUDED
`
`INCLUDED BY
`
`
`
`[:1 Amendment
`1:] Answer
`1:] Cross Bill
`[:| Other Pleading
`PATENT 0R
`DATE OF PATENT
`
`TRADEMARK NO.
`0R TRADEMARK
`HOLDER 0F PATENT OR TRADEMARK
`_—_
`———
`
`
`
`
`10/7/2013
`
`In the above—entitled case, the following decision has been rendered or judgement issued:
`DECISION/JUDGEMENT
`
`CLERK
`William G. Putnicki
`
`v
`
`DATE
`
`Copy l—Upon initiation ofaction, mail this copy to Director Copy 3—Upon termination ofaction, mail this copy to Director
`Copy 2—Upon filing document adding patent(s), mail this copy to Director Copy 4—-Case file copy
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 19
`
`Oracle Ex. 1002, pg. 19
`
`

`

`Case lle-CV-OOSQS-SS Document 1 Filed 10/07/13 Page 9 of 11
`
`j_._‘_——————
`
`F.
`
`G.
`
`H.
`
`That Defendant has infringed the ’041 Patent;
`
`That such infringement of the ’041 Patent by Defendant has been willful;
`
`That Defendant accounts for and pays to Crossroads all damages caused
`
`by the infringement of the ’041 Patent;
`
`1.
`
`That Crossroads receive enhanced damages from Defendant in the form of
`
`treble damages, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 based on Defendant’s willful
`
`infringement of the ’041 Patent;
`
`J.
`
`That Crossroads be granted pre—judgment and post—judgment interest on
`
`the damages caused to it by reason of Defendant’s infringement of the
`
`’04] Patent,
`
`including pre—judgment and post-judgment interest on any
`
`enhanced damages or attomeys’ fees award;
`
`That Defendant has infringed the ’147 Patent;
`
`That such infringement of the ’ 147 Patent by Defendant has been willful;
`
`K.
`
`L.
`
`M.
`
`That Defendant accounts for and pays to Crossroads all damages caused
`
`by the infringement of the ’147 Patent;
`
`N.
`
`That- Crossroads receive enhanced damages from Defendant in the form of
`
`treble damages, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 based on Defendant’s willful
`
`infringement of the ’147 Patent;
`
`0.
`
`That Crossroads be granted pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on
`
`th