Mark M. Bettilyon (4798)
`Arthur B. Berger (6490)
`RAY QUINNEY & NEBEKER P.C.
`36 South State Street, Suite 1400
`Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
`Telephone: (801) 532-1500
`Facsimile: (801) 532-7543
`mbettilyon@rqn.com
`aberger@rqn.com
`
`David Ben-Meir (pro hac vice)
`John A. O’Malley (pro hac vice)
`Spencer Persson (pro hac vice)
`John C. Gray (pro hac vice)
`NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP
`555 South Flower Street
`Forty-First Floor
`Los Angeles, California 90071
`Telephone: (213) 892-9200
`Facsimile: (213) 892-9494
`david.ben-meir@nortonrosefulbright.com
`john.omalley@nortonrosefulbright.com
`spencer.persson@nortonrosefulbright.com
`john.gray@nortonrosefulbright.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiffs
`Murata Machinery USA, Inc. and
`Murata Machinery, Ltd.
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
`
`CENTRAL DIVISION
`
`MURATA MACHINERY USA, INC.,
`MURATA MACHINERY, LTD.,
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`DAIFUKU CO., LTD.,
`DAIFUKU AMERICA CORP.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`Case No. 2:13-cv-00866-DAK-BCW
`
`JURY DEMANDED
`MURATA MACHINERY, LTD.
`Exhibit 2023
`DAIFUKU CO., LTD and
`DAIFUKU AMERICA CORP. V.
`MURATA MACHINERY, LTD
`IPR2015-01541
`1 of 10
`
`
`Arthur B. Berger (6490)
`RAY QUINNEY & NEBEKER P.C.
`36 South State Street, Suite 1400
`Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
`Telephone: (801) 532-1500
`Facsimile: (801) 532-7543
`mbettilyon@rqn.com
`aberger@rqn.com
`
`David Ben-Meir (pro hac vice)
`John A. O’Malley (pro hac vice)
`Spencer Persson (pro hac vice)
`John C. Gray (pro hac vice)
`NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP
`555 South Flower Street
`Forty-First Floor
`Los Angeles, California 90071
`Telephone: (213) 892-9200
`Facsimile: (213) 892-9494
`david.ben-meir@nortonrosefulbright.com
`john.omalley@nortonrosefulbright.com
`spencer.persson@nortonrosefulbright.com
`john.gray@nortonrosefulbright.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiffs
`Murata Machinery USA, Inc. and
`Murata Machinery, Ltd.
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
`
`CENTRAL DIVISION
`
`MURATA MACHINERY USA, INC.,
`MURATA MACHINERY, LTD.,
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`DAIFUKU CO., LTD.,
`DAIFUKU AMERICA CORP.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`Case No. 2:13-cv-00866-DAK-BCW
`
`JURY DEMANDED
`MURATA MACHINERY, LTD.
`Exhibit 2023
`DAIFUKU CO., LTD and
`DAIFUKU AMERICA CORP. V.
`MURATA MACHINERY, LTD
`IPR2015-01541
`1 of 10
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs Murata Machinery, Ltd. and Murata Machinery USA, Inc. (collectively
`
`“Murata”), for their Amended Complaint against defendants Daifuku Co., Ltd. and Daifuku
`
`America Corp. (collectively “Daifuku” or “Defendants”), hereby allege as follows:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff Murata Machinery USA, Inc. is a corporation organized under the laws
`
`of the state of Delaware, with a principal place of business at 2120 Queen City Drive, Charlotte,
`
`North Carolina 28208.
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff Murata Machinery, Ltd. is a corporation organized under the laws of
`
`Japan, with its principal place of business at 136, Takeda-Mukaishiro-cho, Fushimi-ku, Kyoto
`
`612-8686, Japan.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant Daifuku Co., Ltd., upon information and belief, is a corporation
`
`organized under the laws of Japan, with its principal place of business at 3-2-11 Mitejima,
`
`Nishiyodogawa-ku, Osaka 555-0012 Japan.
`
`4.
`
`Defendant Daifuku Co., Ltd., upon information and belief, is conducting or has
`
`conducted business in the state of Utah and in this District, making, using, selling, importing,
`
`and/or offering for sale automated material handling systems incorporating an overhead hoist for
`
`cleanroom applications.
`
`5.
`
`Defendant Daifuku America Corp., upon information and belief, is a corporation
`
`organized under the laws of the state of Ohio with its principal place of business at 6700 Tussing
`
`Road, Reynoldsburg, Ohio 43068-5083.
`
`6.
`
`Defendant Daifuku America Corp., upon information and belief, is conducting or
`
`has conducted business in the state of Utah and in this District, making, using, selling, importing,
`
`2 of 10
`
`
`
`and/or offering for sale automated material handling systems incorporating an overhead hoist for
`
`cleanroom applications, including the use of its facility at 5202 Douglas Corrigan Way, Suite
`
`150, Salt Lake City, Utah 84126.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`7.
`
`This is a civil action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the
`
`United States, Title 35, United States Code, including 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 and 281-285. Subject
`
`matter jurisdiction is conferred on this Court by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`8.
`
`Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendants have conducted or are conducting business in the District,
`
`including the operation of its facility in the District.
`
`GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`9.
`
`On January 23, 2007, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally
`
`issued U.S. Patent No. 7,165,927 (the 927 patent), entitled “Automated Material Handling
`
`System for Semiconductor Manufacturing Based on a Combination of Vertical Carousels and
`
`Overhead Hoists,” to inventors Brian J. Doherty, Thomas R. Mariano, and Robert P. Sullivan.
`
`10.
`
`On August 10, 2010, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally
`
`issued U.S. Patent No. 7,771,153 (the 153 patent), entitled “Automated Material Handling
`
`System for Semiconductor Manufacturing Based on a Combination of Vertical Carousels and
`
`Overhead Hoists,” to inventors Brian J. Doherty, Thomas R. Mariano, and Robert P. Sullivan.
`
`11.
`
`On June 12, 2012, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally issued
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,197,172 (the 172 patent), entitled “Automated Material Handling System for
`
`Semiconductor Manufacturing Based on a Combination of Vertical Carousels and Overhead
`
`3 of 10
`
`
`
`Hoists,” to inventors Brian J. Doherty, Thomas R. Mariano, and Robert P. Sullivan.
`
`12.
`
`On September 5, 2000, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally
`
`issued U.S. Patent No. 6,113,341 (the 341 patent), entitled “Tracking Cart System,” to inventor
`
`Masazumi Fukushima.
`
`13.
`
`On February 6, 2001, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally
`
`issued U.S. Patent No. 6,183,184 (the 184 patent), entitled “Work Transport System,” to inventor
`
`Tamotsu Shiwaku.
`
`14. Murata Machinery, Ltd. is the owner by assignment of the 927, 153, 172, 341, and
`
`184 patents (collectively the “Asserted Patents”).
`
`15. Murata Machinery USA, Inc. is the exclusive licensee of the Asserted Patents.
`
`16.
`
`Daifuku has infringed, and continue to infringe directly, contributorily, and/or
`
`through the inducement of others, the claimed inventions of the Asserted Patents by offering for
`
`sale, selling, making and/or using an automated material handling system incorporating an
`
`overhead hoist covered by the Asserted Patents.
`
`17.
`
`Daifuku is aware of the Asserted Patents at least as early as the time it was made
`
`aware of this Complaint. Further, upon information and belief, Daifuku was aware of the
`
`Asserted Patents prior to the filing of this Complaint.
`
`18. Murata has been damaged as a result of Daifuku’s infringing conduct. Therefore,
`
`Daifuku is liable to Murata in an amount that adequately compensates Murata for Defendants’
`
`infringement.
`
`4 of 10
`
`
`
`COUNT I
`
`Infringement of the 927 Patent
`
`19. Murata repeats and realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1-18 as though fully set
`
`forth herein.
`
`20.
`
`Daifuku has been and is now infringing, directly, contributorily, and/or through
`
`the inducement of others, the 927 patent by offering to sell, selling, making and/or using in the
`
`United States automated material handling system(s), for example, cleanroom systems for use in
`
`semiconductor fabrication applications that embody one or more of the claims of the 927 patent.
`
`21.
`
`Daifuku’s acts have caused, and unless restrained and enjoined, will continue to
`
`cause, irreparable injury and damage to Murata, for which there are no adequate remedy at law.
`
`Unless enjoined by this Court, Daifuku will continue to infringe the 927 patent.
`
`COUNT II
`
`Infringement of the 153 Patent
`
`22. Murata repeats and realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1-21 as though fully set
`
`forth herein.
`
`23.
`
`Daifuku has been and is now infringing, directly, contributorily, and/or through
`
`the inducement of others, the 153 patent by offering for sale, selling, making and/or using in the
`
`United States automated material handling system(s), for example, cleanroom systems for use in
`
`semiconductor fabrication applications, that embody one or more of the claims of the 153 patent.
`
`24.
`
`Daifuku’s acts have caused, and unless restrained and enjoined, will continue to
`
`cause, irreparable injury and damage to Murata, for which there are no adequate remedy at law.
`
`Unless enjoined by this Court, Daifuku will continue to infringe the 153 patent.
`
`5 of 10
`
`
`
`COUNT III
`
`Infringement of the 172 Patent
`
`25. Murata repeats and realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1-24 as though fully set
`
`forth herein.
`
`26.
`
`Daifuku has been and is now directly infringing, directly, contributorily, and/or
`
`through the inducement of others, the 172 patent by offering for sale, selling, making and/or
`
`using in the United States automated material handling systems, for example, cleanroom systems
`
`for use in semiconductor fabrication applications, that embody one or more of the claims of the
`
`172 patent.
`
`27.
`
`Daifuku’s acts have caused, and unless restrained and enjoined, will continue to
`
`cause, irreparable injury and damage to Murata, for which there are no adequate remedy at law.
`
`Unless enjoined by this Court, Daifuku will continue to infringe the 172 patent.
`
`COUNT IV
`
`Infringement of the 341 Patent
`
`28. Murata repeats and realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1-27 as though fully set
`
`forth herein.
`
`29.
`
`Daifuku has been and is now directly infringing, directly, contributorily, and/or
`
`through the inducement of others, the 341 patent by offering for sale, selling, making and/or
`
`using in the United States automated material handling systems, for example, cleanroom systems
`
`for use in semiconductor fabrication applications, that embody one or more of the claims of the
`
`341 patent.
`
`30.
`
`Daifuku’s acts have caused, and unless restrained and enjoined, will continue to
`
`cause, irreparable injury and damage to Murata, for which there are no adequate remedy at law.
`
`6 of 10
`
`
`
`Unless enjoined by this Court, Daifuku will continue to infringe the 341 patent.
`
`COUNT V
`
`Infringement of the 184 Patent
`
`31. Murata repeats and realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1-30 as though fully set
`
`forth herein.
`
`32.
`
`Daifuku has been and is now directly infringing, directly, contributorily, and/or
`
`through the inducement of others, the 184 patent by offering for sale, selling, making and/or
`
`using in the United States automated material handling systems, for example, cleanroom systems
`
`for use in semiconductor fabrication applications, that embody one or more of the claims of the
`
`184 patent.
`
`33.
`
`Daifuku’s acts have caused, and unless restrained and enjoined, will continue to
`
`cause, irreparable injury and damage to Murata, for which there are no adequate remedy at law.
`
`Unless enjoined by this Court, Daifuku will continue to infringe the 184 patent.
`
`
`
`WHEREFORE, Murata requests the following relief:
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`1.
`
`that Daifuku be enjoined from making, importing, using, offering for sale, selling,
`
`or causing to be sold any product or service falling within the scope of any claim of the Asserted
`
`Patents;
`
`2.
`
`a finding that Daifuku has directly infringed, and/or indirectly infringed by way of
`
`inducement and/or contributory infringement, the Asserted Patents;
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`that Murata be awarded its actual damages;
`
`that Murata be awarded enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`that Murata be awarded pre-judgment interest and post-judgment interest at the
`
`7 of 10
`
`
`
`maximum rate allowed by law;
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`that the Court order an accounting for damages;
`
`that the Court declare this to be an exceptional case pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285
`
`and award Murata its attorneys’ fees;
`
`the Murata be awarded costs of court; and
`
`that Murata be awarded such other and further relief as the Court deems just and
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`proper.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Pursuant to Rule 38, F.R.Civ.P., Murata hereby demands trial by jury of all issues so
`
`triable.
`
`DATED this 19th day of February, 2015.
`
`RAY QUINNEY & NEBEKER P.C.
`
`/s/ Mark M. Bettilyon
`Mark M. Bettilyon
`Arthur B. Berger
`
`David Ben-Meir
`John A. O’Malley
`Spencer Persson
`John C. Gray
`NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP
`555 South Flower Street, Forty-First Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90071
`Telephone (213) 892-9202
`Facsimile: (213) 892-9494
`david.ben-meir@nortonrosefulbright.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiffs
`Murata Machinery USA, Inc. and
`Murata Machinery, Ltd
`
`8 of 10
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs’ Addresses:
`
`Murata Machinery USA, Inc.
`2120 Queen City Drive
`Charlotte, NC 28208.
`
`Murata Machinery, Ltd.
`136, Takeda-Mukaishiro-cho, Fushimi-ku
`Kyoto 612-8686
`Japan.
`
`9 of 10
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on the 19th day of February, 2015, I electronically filed the foregoing
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which sent
`
`notification of such filing to the following:
`
`Maralyn M. English
`SNOW CHRISTENSEN & MARTINEAU
`10 Exchange Place, Eleventh Floor
`P.O. Box 45000
`Salt Lake City, Utah 84145
`
`Jeffrey K. Sherwood
`Mark Thronson
`Dipu A. Doshi
`DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP
`1825 Eye Street NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Lori McGee
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1318060
`
`10 of 10
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
