null / ALL
`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
`
`
`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
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
