Case 209-cv-00172-MHS-CMC
`
`Document
`
`Filed 05/29/09
`
`Page
`
`of
`
`PagelD
`
`Th1 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`PARALLEL NETWORKS LLC
`
`Plaintiff
`
`Civil Action No 209cv172
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION
`
`Defendant
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiff Parallel Networks LLC brings this action for patent infringement and alleges
`
`the following
`
`PARTIES
`
`Plaintiff Parallel Networks LLC Parallel Networks is
`
`Texas limited liability
`
`company with
`
`place of business at 100
`
`Ferguson Suite 602 Tyler Texas 75702
`
`On information and belief
`
`defendant Microsoft Corp Microsoft
`
`is
`
`Washington corporation with its principal place of business at One Microsoft Way Redmond
`
`Washington 98052 and is doing business in the Eastern District and elsewhere in the State of
`
`Texas Microsoft may be served with process by service upon its registered agent Corporation
`
`Service Company 701 Brazos Street Suite 1050 Austin Texas 78701
`
`II JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`This infringement action arises under the patent
`
`laws of the United States Title
`
`35 United States Code This Court has jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.C
`
`1331 and
`
`1338a
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1053, p. 1
`
`
`
`Document
`
`Filed 05/29/09
`
`Page
`
`of
`
`PagelD
`
`Th1 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`PARALLEL NETWORKS LLC
`
`Plaintiff
`
`Civil Action No 209cv172
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION
`
`Defendant
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiff Parallel Networks LLC brings this action for patent infringement and alleges
`
`the following
`
`PARTIES
`
`Plaintiff Parallel Networks LLC Parallel Networks is
`
`Texas limited liability
`
`company with
`
`place of business at 100
`
`Ferguson Suite 602 Tyler Texas 75702
`
`On information and belief
`
`defendant Microsoft Corp Microsoft
`
`is
`
`Washington corporation with its principal place of business at One Microsoft Way Redmond
`
`Washington 98052 and is doing business in the Eastern District and elsewhere in the State of
`
`Texas Microsoft may be served with process by service upon its registered agent Corporation
`
`Service Company 701 Brazos Street Suite 1050 Austin Texas 78701
`
`II JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`This infringement action arises under the patent
`
`laws of the United States Title
`
`35 United States Code This Court has jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.C
`
`1331 and
`
`1338a
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1053, p. 1
`
`
`
`Case 209-cv-00172-MHS-CMC
`
`Document
`
`Filed 05/29/09
`
`Page
`
`of
`
`PagelD
`
`Microsoft has done and continues to do business in the Eastern District of Texas
`
`Microsoft has minimum contacts with the Eastern District of Texas such that this venue is
`
`fair
`
`and reasonable one Microsoft has committed purposeful
`
`acts or transactions in the State of
`
`Texas such that it reasonably knew and expected
`
`that it could be haled into
`
`Texas court as
`
`consequence
`
`of such activity
`
`Accordingly
`
`venue in the Eastern District of Texas is proper
`
`under 28 U.S.C
`
`1391b and 1400b
`
`III PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`On April 13 1999 and July
`
`2002 United States Patent Nos 5894554 and
`
`6415335 B1 which are collectively
`
`referred to as the Parallel Networks Patents duly and
`
`legally issued
`
`These two patents
`
`concern
`
`among other
`
`things systems and methods for
`
`managing dynamic Web page generation requests Copies of the Parallel Networks Patents are
`
`attached hereto as Exhibits
`
`and
`
`and made
`
`part hereof
`
`Parallel Networks is the owner of the Parallel Networks Patents and has the right
`
`to enforce those patents with respect
`
`to the defendants
`
`On information and belief Microsoft makes and/or uses systems and methods for
`
`managing dynamic Web page generation requests within the scope of one or more of the claims
`
`of the Parallel Networks Patents As
`
`result Microsoft has been and still
`
`is infringing one or
`
`more of the claims of the Parallel Networks Patents as defined by 35 U.S.C 271
`
`and/or
`
`Parallel Networks
`
`has suffered damage by reason of defendants
`
`infringement and will
`
`continue to suffer additional damage until
`
`this Court enjoins the infringing conduct
`
`To the extent
`
`that Microsoft has continued or does continue its
`
`infringing
`
`activities after
`
`receiving notice of the Parallel Networks Patents
`
`such infringement is willful
`
`entitling Parallel Networks to the recovery of increased damages under 35 U.S.C 284
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1053, p. 2
`
`
`
`Case 209-cv-00172-MHS-CMC
`
`Document
`
`Filed 05/29/09
`
`Page
`
`of
`
`PagelD
`
`This is an exceptional case justifying an award of attorneys fees and costs to
`
`Parallel Networks pursuant to 35 U.S.C 285
`
`10
`
`Parallel Networks believes that Microsoft will continue to infringe the Parallel
`
`Networks
`
`Patents unless enjoined by this Court
`
`Such infringing activity
`
`causes Parallel
`
`Networks
`
`irreparable harm and will continue to cause such harm without
`
`the issuance of an
`
`injunction
`
`IV JURY DEMAND
`
`11
`
`Plaintiff
`
`requests trial by jury of all
`
`issues so triable pursuant
`
`to Federal Rule of
`
`civil Procedure 38
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`12
`
`Parallel Networks requests that the Court find in its favor and against Microsoft
`
`and that the Court grant the following relief
`
`that one or more of the claims of the Parallel Networks Patents have
`Judgment
`been infringed
`under
`the doctrine of equivalents
`defendant
`
`either
`
`literally
`
`and/or
`
`by
`
`in favor of Parallel Networks for the full amount of its actual damages
`Judgment
`caused by Microsofts infringing activities including an assessment of interest
`and costs
`
`Judgment
`284
`
`for increased damages
`
`for willful
`
`infringement pursuant
`
`to 35 U.S.C
`
`that this is an exceptional case and awarding Parallel Networks its
`Judgment
`reasonable attorneys fees and costs pursuant to 35 U.S.C 285
`
`That Microsoft be permanently enjoined from further activity or conduct
`infringes the claims of the Parallel Networks Patents and
`
`that
`
`That the Court award Parallel Networks such other and further relief as is just and
`proper under the circumstances
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1053, p. 3
`
`
`
`Case 209-cv-00172-MHS-CMC
`
`Document
`
`Filed 05/29/09
`
`Page
`
`of
`
`PagelD
`
`Respectfully submitted
`
`Is Larry
`Carlson
`Carlson Lead Attorney
`Larry
`Texas State Bar No 03814500
`larry.carlson@bakerbotts.com
`Ryan Bangert
`Texas State Bar No
`ryanbangertbakerbotts.com
`BAKER BOTTS L.L.P
`2001 Ross Avenue
`Dallas Texas 75201
`Telephone 214 953-6500
`Facsimile 214 953-6503
`
`Kevin Meek
`Texas State Bar No 13899600
`E-Mail kevin.meek@bakerbotts.com
`Adams
`Darryl
`Texas State Bar No
`E-Mail darryl adam sbakerbotts corn
`BAKER BOTTS L.L.P
`1500 San Jacinto Center
`98 San Jacinto Blvd
`Austin Texas 78701
`Telephone 512 322-2500
`Facsimile 512 322-2501
`
`John Ward Jr
`State Bar No 00794818
`E-mail jw@jwfirm.com
`Smith Law Firm
`Ward
`P.O Box 1231
`Longview Texas 75606-123
`Telephone 903 757-6400
`Facsimile 903 757-2323
`
`LI
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1053, p. 4
`
`
`
`Case 209-cv-00172-MHS-CMC
`
`Document
`
`Filed 05/29/09
`
`Page
`
`of
`
`PagelD
`
`Calvin Capshaw
`State Bar No 03783900
`E-mail ccapshaw@capshawlaw corn
`Capshaw DeRieux LLP
`P.O Box 3999
`Longview Texas 75606-3999
`Telephone 903 233-4826
`Facsimile 903 236-8787
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAiNTIFF
`PARALLEL NETWORKS LLC
`
`Petitioner IBM – Ex. 1053, p. 5
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
