`Transmittal Number: 13224737
`Date Processed: 12/03/2014
`
`Notice of Service of Process
`
`Primary Contact:
`
`Zach Peret
`Plaid Technologies, Inc.
`25 Maiden Lane
`Suite 304
`San Francisco, CA 94108
`
`Entity:
`
`Entity Served:
`
`Title of Action:
`
`Document(s) Type:
`
`Nature of Action:
`
`Court/Agency:
`
`Case/Reference No:
`
`Jurisdiction Served:
`
`Date Served on CSC:
`
`Answer or Appearance Due:
`
`Originally Served On:
`
`How Served:
`
`Sender Information:
`
`Plaid Technologies, Inc.
`Entity ID Number 3124201
`Plaid Technologies Inc.
`Yodlee, Inc. vs. Plaid Technologies Inc.
`Summons/Complaint
`Trademark / Copyright / Patent
`U.S. District Court, Delaware
`1:14-cv-01445-UNA
`Delaware
`12/02/2014
`21 Days
`CSC
`Personal Service
`Robert M. Oakes
`302-652-5070
`
`Information contained on this transmittal form is for record keeping, notification and forwarding the attached document(s). It does not
`constitute a legal opinion. The recipient is responsible for interpreting the documents and taking appropriate action.
`
`To avoid potential delay, please do not send your response to CSC
`CSC is SAS70 Type II certified for its Litigation Management System.
`2711 Centerville Road Wilmington, DE 19808 (888) 690-2882 | sop@cscinfo.com
`
`Plaid Technologies Inc.
`Exhibit 1002
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 1
`
`
`
`AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action
`
`_. (cid:9)
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`for the
`District of Delaware
`
`YODLEE, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff(s)
`
`V.
`
`PLAID TECHNOLOGIES INC.,
`
`Defendant(s)
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`) (cid:9)
`) (cid:9)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`14-1445
`
`Civil Action No.
`•
`
`SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
`
`To: (Defendant's name and addres PLAID~TECHN~OLOGGIES INC.,
`
`2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400
`Wilmington, DE 19808
`
`A lawsuit has been filed against you.
`
`Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you
`are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.
`P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of
`the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff''s attorney,
`whose name and address are: Robert M. Oakes / Tel: (302) 652-5070
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`222 Delaware Ave., 17th Floor
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`Email: oakes@fr.com
`
`If you fail to respond, j udgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.
`You also must file your answer or motion with the court.
`
`Date: (cid:9)
`
`(;;r'`(; (cid:9)
`
`2 2.09
`
`CLE (cid:9)
`
`F CG`URT
`
`Sigrwture of Clerk or Deputv Clerk
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 2
`
`
`
`AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)
`
`Civil Action No.
`
`PROOF OF SERVICE
`(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed R. Civ. P. 4(1))
`
`This sumnlons for (name of individual and title, if any)
`
`was received by me on (date)
`
`O I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)
`on (date) (cid:9)
`
`; or
`
`O I left the summons at the individual's residence or usual place of abode with (name)
`
`on (date) (cid:9)
`
`, and mailed a copy to the individual's last known address; or
`
`, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,
`
`0 1 served the summons on (name ofindividual). (cid:9)
`
`designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name oforganization)
`
`on (date) (cid:9)
`
`; or
`
`Cl I retumed the summons unexecuted because (cid:9)
`
`0 Other (specify): (cid:9)
`
`_
`
`, who is
`
`; or
`
`My fees are $ (cid:9)
`
`for travel and $ (cid:9)
`
`for services, for a total of $ (cid:9)
`
`0.00
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
`
`Date:
`
`Server's signature
`
`Printed name and title
`
`Server's address
`
`Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 3
`
`
`
`AO 85 (Rev. O] /09) Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge
`
`UIyITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`for the
`District of Delaware
`
`Plaintiff
`
`V.
`
`Defendant
`
`)
`)
`) (cid:9)
`)
`)
`
`Civil Action No.
`
`NOTICE, CONSENT, AND REFERENCE OF A CIVIL ACTION TO A MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`Notice of a magtstrate judge's availabllity. A United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all
`proceedings in this civil action (including a jury or nonjury trial) and to order the entry of a fmal judgment. The judgment may
`then be appealed directly to the United States court of appeals like any other judgment of this court. A magistrate judge may
`exercise this authority only if all parties voluntarily consent.
`
`You may consent to have your case referred to a magistrate judge, or you may withhold your consent without adverse
`substantive consequences. The name of any party withholding consent will not be revealed to any judge who may otherwise
`be involved with your case.
`
`" (cid:9)
`
`Consent to a magistrate judge's authority. The following parties consent to have a United States magistrate judge
`conduct all proceedings in this case including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial.proceedings..
`
`Parties' printed names (cid:9)
`
`Signatures of parties or attorneys (cid:9)
`
`Dates
`
`IT IS ORDERED: This case is referred to a United States magistrate judge to conduct all proceedings and
`order the entry of a final judgment in accordance with 28 U:S.C. § 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73.
`
`Reference Order
`
`Date
`
`District Judge's signature
`
`Printed name and title
`
`Note: Return this form to the clerk of court only if you are consenting to the exercise of jurisdiction by a United States
`magistrate judge. Do not retum this form to a judge.
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 4
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 1 of 21 PagelD #: 1
`
`1N THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`YODLEE, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`PLAID TECHNOLOGIES INC.,
`
`C. A. No.
`
`Defendant.
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff Yodlee Inc. ("Yodlee") for its complaint against Plaid Technologies Inc.
`
`("Plaid" or "Defendant") requesting damages and other relief, and alleging as follows:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`I. (cid:9)
`
`This is an action for infringement of United States Patent No. 6,199,077 (the
`
`"'077 patent"), United States Patent No. 6,317,783 (the "'783 patent"), United States Patent No.
`
`6,510,451 (the `451 patent"), United States Patent No. 7,263,548 (the `548 patent"), United
`
`States Patent No. 7,424,520 (the "'520 patent"), United States Patent No. 7,752,535 (the `535
`
`patent"), and United States Patent No. 8,266,515 (the "'515 patent") (collectively, "Asserted
`
`Patents") under 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, et seq.
`
`' (cid:9)
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`2. (cid:9)
`
`Plaintiff Yodlee is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
`
`State of Delaware with a principal place of business at 3600 Bridge Parkway, Suite 200,
`
`Redwood City, California 94065. Yodlee develops software and services that allow users to
`
`view all financial and other personal accounts in one place. Yodlee also develops applications to
`
`1
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 5
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 2 of 21 PagelD #: 2
`
`help consumers manage their finances online througll features such as personal ftnancial
`
`management, bill payment, expense tracking, and investment management.
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Plaid is a corporation organized and
`
`existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with a principal place of business at 25 1Vlaiden
`
`Lane, San Francisco, California 941.08. According to its website, Plaid offers a competing
`
`software application programming interface ("API") that allows users and developers to interact
`
`with financial institutions.
`
`4.
`
`Upon information and belief, the officers of Defendant Plaid fonnerly operated
`
`under the name Copperpog lnc. ("Copperpog"), which was also a corporation organized and
`
`existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with a principal place of business at 4230
`
`Stoney Brook Rd, Clemmons, NC 27012.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`5.
`
`This action arises under the patent laws of the United States of America, United
`
`States Code, Title 35, Section 1, et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the action
`
`pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338.
`
`6.
`
`Venue is proper in the District of Delaware under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and 28
`
`U.S.C. § 1400(b).
`
`7.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Plaid because Plaid is incorporated in
`
`the State of Delaware and has purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities
`
`within this State and District.
`
`BACKGROUNll
`
`8.
`
`Plaintiff Yodlee was founded in 1999. Over the past fifteen years, it has become
`
`the leading provider of account aggregation services and personal financial management
`
`~a
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 6
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 3 of 21 PagelD #: 3
`
`applications through software it developed from the ground up. More than 750 organizations in
`
`over 10 countries use Yodlee's services and applications, including 9 of the 15 largest banks in
`
`the United States. Yodlee 11as over 16 million paid users and reaches more than 100 million end
`
`users through its network of financial institutions. In October 2014, Yodlee completed its initial
`
`public offering.
`
`9.
`
`According to its website, Defendant Plaid considers itself to be "the API for
`
`banking data." The API gives developers the ability to integrate with banking institutions and
`
`access and authorize personal user accounts at those institutions.
`
`10. On February 11, 2012, Zach Perret, co-founder of Defendant Plaid and president
`
`of Copperpog, signed a nondisclosure agreement ("NDA") with Yodlee. The NDA was a
`
`proactive measure taken prior to granting Copperpog access to Yodlee's confidential
`
`technology. By signing the agreement, Zach Perret and his company Copperpog agreed to
`
`protect the secrecy of Yodlee's confidential information and technology and not use that
`
`confidential information and technology for unauthorized purposes.
`
`11. On April 5, 2012, Zach Perret signed a 30-day evaluation license agreeinent
`
`("Evaluation Agreement") giving him, William Hockey, another co-fotlnder of Defendant Plaid
`
`and the technical contact at Copperpog, and the company aecess to use and explore Yodlee's
`
`software development kit ("SDK"). Specifically, the Evaluation Agreement provided access to
`
`Yodlee's core technology in the form of C# source code, Java binary files, sample application
`
`codes, and development environments. The Evaluation Agreement also provided use of
`
`Yodlee's aggregation services to pull real user account data from financial institutions.
`
`12. On April 6, 2012, Zach Perret was provided login credentials to Yodlee's
`
`developer resources. The login credentials allowed downloading of a multitude of confidential,
`
`3
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 7
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 4 of 21 PagelD #: 4
`
`and highly inforniative, technical documents including the "Yodlee Aggregation SDK FAQs,"
`
`"Yodlee Aggregation SDK Quick Reference Guide," "Yodlee SDK Developers Guide vl 1.0,"
`
`"Yodlee PersonalFinance SDK Implementation Guide vl 1.0," and application files.
`
`13. According to its website, at around this time Defendant Plaid started operations,
`
`acquiring its first customer shortly thereafter. On July 20, 2012, Plaid became an official
`
`corporation of the State of Delaware.
`
`14. On November 16, 2012, Zach Perret was provided another set of 30-day
`
`evaluation login credentials to Yodlee's developer resources.
`
`15. On November 16, 2012, Defendant also received two pricing proposals from
`
`Yodlee that would grant Defendant a one-year license to use Yodlee's aggregation APIs. Along
`
`with ihose pricing proposals were hyperlinks to four documents containing Yodlee confidential
`
`technical and security information. Two of those documents, "Yodlee Categorization Engine
`
`Overview v11.0" and "Yodlee Data Model vl l," contain notices that the technology presented in
`
`the documentation is "protected by one or more U.S. Patents or Patents Pending." Furthermore,
`
`it is highly likely that both of these documents were read by both co-founders of Defendant
`
`because both documents state that they should be read by the "Product Functional Lead" and
`
`"Technical Lead" of the licensee. Upon information and belief, in the case of Defendant, those
`
`people are Zach Perret and William Hockey, respectively.
`
`16. Ori January 10, 2013, Defendant entered into a one-year services agreement
`
`("Services Agreement") to begin fully licensing Yodlee's services. Pursuant to the Services
`
`Agreement, Defendant was required to pay Yodlee on January 21, 2013.
`
`4
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 8
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12(01/14 Page 5 of 21 Page1D #: 5
`
`17_ (cid:9)
`
`After three months of maintaining Defendant's user environment without
`
`payment, on April 9, 2013, Defendant was notified that the contract would be terminated if
`
`payment was not received by April 15, 2013.
`
`18. (cid:9)
`
`On April 15, 2013, Defendant stated that it wanted to cancel the Services
`
`Agreement and avoid ful l payment. Defendant sent a payment amount for a portion of the total
`
`outstanding, and the Services Agreement was terminated.
`
`1.9. (cid:9)
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant has used the knowledge acquired through
`
`its prolonged use of Yodlee's technology, including Yodlee's technical documentation,
`
`developer resources, and aggregation platform, to develop coinpeting software and services that
`
`also infi-inge the Asserted Patents. Upon information and belief, by leveraging its infringing
`
`software and services, Defendant has managed to raise at least $2.8 million in funding as of
`
`September 2013.
`
`20. Upon information and belief, Defendant has sold and offered for sale and
`
`continues to sell and offer for sale use of its software and services in the United States, including
`
`in Delaware. Defendant instructs its customers on how to use and access its software and
`
`services from publicly available documentation on its website. Defendant encourages its
`
`customers to visit its developer page which provides code and support helpful to use and access
`
`its software and services.
`
`21. Upon information and belief, Defendant has used and continues to use its
`
`software and services in the United States, including in Delaware, to provide account
`
`aggregation and personal financial management services to its customers.
`
`22. Upon information and belief, Defendant has knowledge of the Asserted Patents by
`
`at least the date of this Complaint. Upon information and belief, at least Plaid founders Zach
`
`5
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 9
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 6 of 21 PagelD #: 6
`
`Perret and William Hockey were aware since 2012 that Yodlee had issued and pending patents
`
`relating to its account aggregation and personal financial management technology.
`
`PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`23.
`
`The '077 patent, titled "Server-Side Web Summary Generation and Presentation,"
`
`issued on March 6, 2001. A copy of the '077 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`
`24.
`
`The '783 patent, titled "Apparatus and Methods for Automated Aggregation and
`
`Delivery of and Transactions Involving Electronic Personal Information or Data," issued on
`
`November 13, 2001. A copy of the '783 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
`
`25.
`
`The '451 patent, titled "System for Completing a Multi-Component Task Initiated
`
`by a Client Involving Web Sites without Requiring Interaction fi-om the Client," issued on
`
`January 21, 2003. A copy of the '451 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit C.
`
`26.
`
`The ' 548 patent, titled "Method and Apparatus for Restructuring of Personalized
`
`Data for Transmission froin a Data Network to Connected and Portable Network Appliances,"
`
`issued August 28, 2007. A copy of the ' 548 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit D.
`
`27.
`
`The ' 520 patent, titled "Method and Apparatus for Restructuring of Personalized
`
`Data for Transmission from a Data Network to Connected and Portable Network Appliances,"
`
`issued September 9, 2008. A copy of the '520 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit E.
`
`28.
`
`The '535 patent, titled "Categorization of Summarized Information," issued July
`
`6, 2010. A copy of the '535 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit F.
`
`29.
`
`The '515 patent, titled "Categorization of Summarized Information," issued
`
`September 11, 2012. A copy of the ' 515 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
`
`0
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 10
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 7 of 21 PagelD #: 7
`
`30_ (cid:9)
`
`The Asserted Patents have been assigned to Yodlee and Yodlee is the owner of all
`
`right, title, and interest in and to those patents, including the right to sue, enforce, and recover all
`
`damages, past and future, for all infringements.
`
`31. Yodlee has incurred substantial effoi-t and expenses to develop the technologies
`
`leading to the Asserted Patents.
`
`COUNTI
`PATENT INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,199,077
`
`32.
`
`The allegations of paragraphs 1-31 are incorporated as though fully set forth
`
`herein.
`
`33.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant had knowledge of the '077 patent at least
`
`as of the filing of this Complaint.
`
`34. Upon information and belief, various employees of Defendant, including at least
`
`founders Zach Perret and William Hockey, have been aware that Yodlee's aggregation and
`
`personal financial management technology was the subject of numerous patents since 2012.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant and at least its founders Zach Perret and William
`
`Hockey used their access to Yodlee's confidential services and product documentation through
`
`the NDA, Evaluation Agreement, and Services Agreement to learn how to implement the
`
`patented teclinology, and then proceeded to terminate their Services Agreement so that
`
`Defendant could offer competing software and services based upon the patented technology.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant has acted and continues to act with specific intent to
`
`cause infringement of the '077 patent.
`
`35. Defendant's software and services are not staple articles of commerce and have
`
`no substantial uses other than to practice the '077 patent. Upon information and belief,
`
`7
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 11
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 8 of 21 PagelD #: 8
`
`Defendant has acted and continues to act with specific intent to contribute to infringement of the
`
`' 077 patent.
`
`36. Upon information and belief, Defendant has been and is now infringing, inducing
`
`infringement, and contributing to the infringement of the '077 patent by making, using, selling,
`
`and/or offering to sell, without authority, software and services covered by one or more claims of
`
`the '077 patent, and/or contributing to or inducing the same by third parties, all to the injury of
`
`Yodlee.
`
`37. Defendant's acts of infringement have injured and damaged Yodlee, and such acts
`
`wil.l continue to cause Yodlee to suffer damages.
`
`38. Defendant's acts of infringement have been conducted with knowledge that the
`
`technology Defendant derived from Yodlee was protected by the Asserted Patents. Thus,
`
`Defendant acted with an objectively high likelihood that its services infringe Yodlee's valid
`
`patents, and that risk wa,s known by Defendant at least by Defendant's review of Yodlee's
`
`technical documents, and by Defendant's use of the patented technology under the NDA,
`
`Evaluation Agreeinent, and Services Agreement. Defendant's acts of infringement have been,
`
`and continue to be, willfitl so as to warrant the enhancement of damages awarded as a result of
`
`its infringement.
`
`39. Defendant's infringement has caused irreparable injury to Yodlee and will
`
`continue to cause irreparable injury until Defendant is enjoined from further infringement by this
`
`Court.
`
`herein.
`
`COUNT II
`PATENT INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,317,783
`
`40.
`
`The allegations of paragraphs 1-39 are incorporated as though fully set forth
`
`8_
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 12
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 9 of 21 PagelD #: 9
`
`41.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant had knowledge of the '783 patent at least
`
`as of the filing of this Complaint.
`
`42.
`
`Upon information and belief, various employees of Defendant, including at least
`
`founders Zach Perret and William Hockey, have been aware that Yodlee's aggregation and
`
`personal financial management technology was t11e subject of numerous patents since 2012.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant and at least its founders Zach Perret and William
`
`Hockey used their access to Yodlee's confidential services and product documentation through
`
`the NDA, Evaluation Agreement, and Services Agreement to learn how to implement the
`
`patented technology, and then proceeded to terminate their Services Agreement so that
`
`Defendant could offer competing software and services based upon the patented technology.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant has acted and continues to act with specific intent to
`
`cause infringement of the '783 patent.
`
`43.
`
`Defendant's so$ware and services are not staple articles of commerce and have
`
`no substantial uses other than to practice the'783 patent. Upon information and belief,
`
`Defendant has acted and continues to act with specific intent to contribute to infringement of the
`
`'783 patent.
`
`44. Upon information and belief, Defendant has been and is now infringing, inducing
`
`infringement, and contributing to the infringement of the '783 patent by making, using, selling,
`
`and/or offering to sell, without authority, soflware and services covered by one or more claims of
`
`the '783 patent, and/or contributing to or inducing the same by third parties, all to the injury of
`
`Yodlee.
`
`45.
`
`Defendant's acts of infringement have injured and damaged Yodlee, and such acts
`
`will continue to cause Yodlee to suffer damages.
`
`9
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 13
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 10 of 21 PagelD #: 10
`
`46.
`
`Defendant's acts of infringement have been conducted with knowledge that the
`
`technology Defendant derived from Yodlee was protected by the Asserted Patents. Thus,
`
`Defendant acted with an objectivety high likelihood that its services infi-inge Yodlee's valid
`
`patents, and that risk was known by Defendant at least by Defendant's review of Yodlee's
`
`technical documents, and by Defendant's use of the patented technology under the NDA,
`
`Evaluation Agreement, and Services Agreement. Defendant's acts of infringement have been,
`
`atnd continue to be, willful so as to warrant the enhancement of damages awarded as a result of
`
`its infi•ingement.
`
`47. Defendant's infringement has caused irreparable injury to Yodlee and will
`
`continue to cause irreparable injury until Defendant is enjoined from further infringement by this
`
`Court.
`
`herein.
`
`COUNT III
`PATENT INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,510,451
`
`48.
`
`The allegations of paragraphs 1-47 are incorporated as though fully set forth
`
`49. Upon information and belief, Defendant had knowledge of the '451 patent at least
`
`as of the filing of this Complaint.
`
`50. Upon information and belief, various employees of Defendant, including at least
`
`founders Zach Perret and William Hockey, have been aware that Yodlee's aggregation and
`
`personal financial management technology was the subject of numerous patents since 2012.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant and at least its founders Zach Perret and William
`
`Hockey used their access to Yodlee's confidential services and product documentation through
`
`the NDA, Evaluation Agreement, and Services Agreement to learn how to implement the
`
`patented technology, and then proceeded to terminate their Services Agreement so that
`
`10
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 14
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 11 of 21 Page1D #: 11
`
`Defendant could offer competing software and services based upon the patented technology.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant lias acted and continues to act with specific intent to
`
`cause iiifringement of the '451 patent.
`
`51. Defendant's software and services are not staple articles of commerce and have
`
`no substantial uses other than to practice the '451 patent. Upon information and belief,
`
`Defendant has acted and continues to act with specific intent to contribute to infringement of the
`
`'451 patent.
`
`52.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant has been and is now infringing, inducing
`
`infringement, and contributing to the infringement of the '451 patent by making, using, selling,
`
`and/or offering to sell, without authority, software and services covered by one or more claims of
`
`the '451 patent, and/or contributing to or inducing the same by third parties, all to the injury of
`
`Yodlee.
`
`53. Defendant's acts of infringement have injured and damaged Yodlee, and such acts
`
`will continue to cause Yodlee to suffer damages.
`
`54. Defendant's acts of infringement have been conducted with knowledge that the
`
`technology Defendant derived from Yodlee was protected by the Asserted Patents. Thus,
`
`Defendant acted with an objectively high likelihood that its services infringe Yodlee's valid
`
`patents, and that risk was known by Defendant at least by Defendant's review of Yodlee's
`
`technical documents, and by Defendant's use of the patented technology under the NDA,
`
`Evaluation Agreement, and Services Agreement. Defendant's acts of infringement have been,
`
`and continue to be, willful so as to warrant the enhancement of damages awarded as a result of
`
`its infringement.
`
`11
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 15
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 12 of 21 PagelD +: 12
`
`55. Defendant's infi-ingement has caused irreparable injury to Yodlee and will
`
`continue to cause irreparable injury until Defendant is enjoined fi-om further infringement by this
`
`Court.
`
`herein.
`
`COUNTIV
`PATENT IlVFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,263,548
`
`56.
`
`The allegations of paragraphs 1-55 are incorporated as though fully set foi-th
`
`57. Upon information and belief, Defendant had knowledge of the '548 patent at least
`
`as of the filing of this Complaint.
`
`58. Upon information and belief, various employees of Defendant, including at least
`
`founders Zach Perret and William Hockey, have been aware that Yodlee's aggregation and
`
`personal financial management technology was the subject of numerous patents since 2012.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant and at least its founders Zach Perret and William
`
`Hockey used their access to Yodlee's confidential services and product documentation through
`
`the NDA, Evaluation Agreement, and Services Agreement to learn how to implement the
`
`patented technology, and then proceeded to terminate their Services Agreement so that
`
`, (cid:9)
`
`Defendant could offer competing software and services based upon the patented technology.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant has acted and continues to act with specific intent to
`
`cause infringement of the '548 patent.
`
`59. Defendant's software and services are not staple articles of commerce and have no
`
`substantial uses other than to practice the '548 patent. Upon information and belief, Defendant
`
`has acted and continues to act with specific intent to contribute to infringement of the ' 548
`
`patent.
`
`12
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 16
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 13 of 21 PagelD #: 13
`
`60.
`
`Upon infoi-mation and belief, Defendant has been and is now infi-inging, inducing
`
`infringement, and contributing to the infi•ingement of the '548 patent by making, using, selling,
`
`and/or offering to sell, without authority, software and services covered by one or more claims of
`
`the '548 patent, and/or contributing to or inducing the same by third parties, all to the injury of
`
`Yodlee.
`
`61.
`
`Defendant's acts of infringement have injured and damaged Yodlee, and such acts
`
`will continue to cause Yodlee to suffer damages.
`
`62. Defendant's acts of infringeinent have been conducted with knowledge that the
`
`technology Defendant derived from Yodlee was protected by the Asserted Patents. Tllus,
`
`Defendant acted with an objectively high likelihood that its services infringe Yodlee's valid
`
`patents, and that risk was known by Defendant at least by Defendant's review of Yodlee's
`
`technical documents, and by Defendant's use of the patented technology under the NDA,
`
`Evaluation Agreement, and Services Agreement. Defendant's acts of infringement have been,
`
`and continue to be, willful so as to warrant the enhancement of damages awarded as a result of
`
`its infi•ingement.
`
`63.
`
`Defendant's infringement has caused irreparable injury to Yodlee and will
`
`continue to cause irreparable injury until Defendant is enjoined from further infringement by this
`
`Court.
`
`herein.
`
`COUNT V
`PATENT INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,424,520
`
`64.
`
`The allegations of paragraphs 1-63 are incorporated as though fully set forth
`
`65.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant had knowledge of the '520 patent at least
`
`as of the filing of this Complaint.
`
`13
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 17
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 14 of 21 PagelD #: 14
`
`66.
`
`Upon information and belief, various employees of Defendant, including at least
`
`founders Zach Perret and William Hockey, have been aware that Yodlee's aggregation and
`
`personal financial management technology was the subject of numerous patents since 2012.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant and at least its founders Zach Perret and William
`
`Hockey used their access to Yodlee's confidential services and product documentation through
`
`the NDA, Evaluation Agreement, and Services Agreement to learn. how to implement the
`
`patented technology, and then proceeded to terminate their Services Agreement so that
`
`Defendant could offer competing software and services based upon the patented technology.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant has acted and continues to act with specific intent to
`
`cause infi-ingement of the ' 520 patent.
`
`67. Defendant's software and services are not staple articles of commerce and have no
`
`substantial uses other than to practice the '520 patent. Upon information and belief, Defendant
`
`has acted and continues to act with specific intent to contribute to infringement of the ' 520
`
`patent.
`
`68. Upon information and belief, Defendant has been and is now infringing, inducing
`
`infringement, and contributing to the infringement of the '520 patent by making, using, selling,
`
`and/or offering to sell, without authority, software and services covered by one or more claims of
`
`the '520 patent, and/or contributing to or inducing the same by third parties, all to the injury of
`
`Yodlee.
`
`69. Defendant's acts of infringement have injured and damaged Yodlee, and such acts
`
`will continue to cause Yodlee to suffer damages.
`
`70. Defendant's acts of infringement have been conducted with knowledge that the
`
`technology Defendant derived from Yodlee was protected by the Asserted Patents. Thus,
`
`14
`
`Ex. 1002 Page 18
`
`
`
`Case 1:14-cv-01445-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/01/14 Page 15 of 21 PagelD #: 15
`
`Defendant acted with an objectively high likelillood that its services infringe Yodlee's valid
`
`patents, and that risk was known by Defendant at least by Defendant's i-eview of Yodlee's
`
`technical documents, and by Defendant's use of the patented technology under the NDA,
`
`Evaluation Agreement, and Services Agreement. Defendant's acts of infringement have been,
`
`and continue to be, willful so as to warrant the enhancement of damages awarded as a result of
`
`its infringenient.
`
`71. Defendant's infringement has caused irreparable injury to Yodlee and will
`
`continue to cause irreparable injury until Defendant is enjoined from further infringement by this
`
`Court.
`
`herein.
`
`COUNT VI
`PATENT INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,752,535
`
`72.
`
`The allegations of paragraphs 1-71. are incorporated as though fully set forth
`
`73. Upon information and belief, Defendant had knowledge of the '535 patent at least
`
`as of the filing of this Complaint.
`
`74. Upon information and belief, various employees of Defendant, including at least
`
`founders Zach Perret and William Hockey, have been aware that Yodlee's aggregation and
`
`personal financial management technology was the subject of numerous patents since 2012.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant and at least its founders Zach Perret and William
`
`Hockey used their access to Yodlee's confidential services and product documentation through
`
`the NDA, Eva