Case 2:14-cv-01165-JRG Document 22 Filed 03/30/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 74
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`Civil Action No. 2:14-cv-1165
`
`
`
`Judge: Hon. Rodney Gilstrap
`
`
`
`Jury Trial Demanded
`
`
`
`'
`'
`'
`'
`'
`'
`'
`'
`'
`'
`'
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`KONINKLIJKE KPN N.V.
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS
`AMERICA LLP, SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
`CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
`AMERICA, INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff, Koninklijke KPN N.V. (hereafter “KPN”), files this First Amended Complaint
`
`against Samsung Telecommunications America LLP, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., and Samsung
`
`Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants” or “Samsung”), and alleges as follows:
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`1.
`
`KPN’s extensive research and development efforts have led to hundreds of issued
`
`patents in the United States and across the world. These patents have in turn been licensed by
`
`leading global telecommunications companies, including many of Samsung’s mobile technology
`
`competitors.
`
`2.
`
`Despite more than two years of negotiations involving senior members of both
`
`companies, Samsung has refused to license, on mutually agreeable terms, KPN’s patents, including
`
`those described herein. KPN therefore files this suit against Samsung seeking the Court’s protection
`
`of KPN’s valuable intellectual property rights.
`
`
`
`3641276v1/014360
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1009, p. 1
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01165-JRG Document 22 Filed 03/30/15 Page 2 of 12 PageID #: 75
`
`PARTIES
`
`3.
`
`KPN is a telecommunications (including fixed, mobile, television and internet) and
`
`ICT solution provider headquartered at Maanplein 55, NL-2516 CK, The Hague, the Netherlands.
`
`4.
`
`Samsung Telecommunications America LLP (“STA”), is upon information and belief
`
`a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business at 1301 East Lookout
`
`Drive, Richardson, Texas 75082. STA can be served with process by serving Corporation Service
`
`Company DBA CSC – Lawyers Incorporating Service Company, 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620,
`
`Austin, Texas 78701-3218.
`
`5.
`
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (“SEC”), is upon information and belief a Korean
`
`corporation with its principal place of business at 416, Maetan 3-dong, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon-si,
`
`Gyeonggi-do 443-742, South Korea. SEC can be served with process by serving in accordance with
`
`the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents, in
`
`accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f).
`
`6.
`
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“SEA”), is upon information and belief a New
`
`York corporation with its principal place of business at 85 Challenger Road, Ridgefield Park, New
`
`Jersey 07660. STA, SEC, and SEA are referred to herein as “Samsung.”
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`7.
`
`This is a civil action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the
`
`United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case under
`
`28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`8.
`
`Venue is proper in this federal district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b)
`
`because Defendants have done business in this District, have committed acts of infringement in this
`
`District, and continue to commit acts of infringement in this District, entitling KPN to relief.
`2
`
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1009, p. 2
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01165-JRG Document 22 Filed 03/30/15 Page 3 of 12 PageID #: 76
`
`THE ASSERTED PATENTS
`
`9.
`
`This lawsuit asserts causes of action for infringement of United States Patent Nos.
`
`5,930,250, 6,212,662, and 8,886,772 (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”).
`
`10.
`
`On July 27, 1999, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally issued U.S.
`
`Patent No. 5,930,250 (“the ‘250 patent”) entitled, “Communication System for Interactive Services
`
`with a Packet Switching Interaction Channel Over a Narrow-Band Circuit Switching Network, as
`
`well as a Device for Application in Such a Communication System.” Following a request for
`
`reexamination made on September 28, 2012, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued an Ex
`
`Parte Reexamination Certificate for the ‘250 patent on September 16, 2013. KPN is the owner by
`
`assignment of the ‘250 Patent and holds all right, title and interest to the ‘250 patent. A true and
`
`correct copy of the ‘250 patent, along with the reexamination certificate, is attached as Exhibit A.
`
`11.
`
`On April 3, 2001, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally issued U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,212,662 (“the ‘662 patent”) entitled, “Method and Devices for the Transmission of
`
`Data With the Transmission Error Checking.” KPN is the owner by assignment of the ‘662 patent
`
`and holds all right, title and interest to the ‘662 patent. A true and correct copy of the ‘662 patent is
`
`attached as Exhibit B.
`
`12.
`
`On November 11, 2014, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally
`
`issued U.S. Patent No. 8,886,772 (“the ’772 patent”) entitled, “Method and System for Remote
`
`Device Management.” KPN is the owner by assignment of the ’772 patent and holds all right, title
`
`and interest to the ’772 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’772 patent is attached as Exhibit C.
`
`13.
`
`KPN is the exclusive owner of all rights, title, and interest in the Asserted Patents,
`
`including the right to bring this suit for injunctive relief and damages, and including the right to sue
`
`
`
`3
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1009, p. 3
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01165-JRG Document 22 Filed 03/30/15 Page 4 of 12 PageID #: 77
`
`for and recover all past, present and future damages for infringement of the Asserted Patents. The
`
`Asserted Patents are valid and enforceable.
`
`14.
`
`Upon information and belief, Samsung has had knowledge of and notice of one or
`
`more of the Asserted Patents, and of its infringement, prior to the filing of this lawsuit in connection
`
`with licensing negotiations that have taken place between the parties, and has engaged in the
`
`activities detailed below despite an objective likelihood that its actions constituted infringement of a
`
`valid patent. Samsung has also received notice of the Asserted Patents and of its infringement with
`
`the filing of the Complaint for Patent Infringement in this action.
`
`COUNT 1
`
`(Samsung’s Infringement of the ‘250 Patent)
`
`15.
`
`KPN repeats and re-alleges the allegations in the preceding paragraphs as if fully set
`
`forth herein.
`
`16.
`
`Samsung has infringed and continues to infringe the ‘250 Patent under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 271, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, selling, and/or offering for
`
`sale in the United States, and/or importing into the United States, infringing products without
`
`authorization by KPN.
`
`17.
`
`Samsung directly infringed and continues to directly infringe one or more claims of
`
`the ‘250 Patent by importing, offering to sell, selling, or using products or methods that infringe the
`
`‘250 Patent, including but not limited to the Samsung Galaxy S4 and S5 and related Samsung
`
`Communication Devices, products incorporating the same or similar Multimedia Messaging Service
`
`technology, and infrastructure incorporating the same or similar technology (hereafter “the ‘250
`
`Accused Products”). Samsung has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe one or more
`
`
`
`4
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1009, p. 4
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01165-JRG Document 22 Filed 03/30/15 Page 5 of 12 PageID #: 78
`
`of the claims of the ‘250 Patent by making, using, offering to sell, selling, or importing the ‘250
`
`Accused Products.
`
`18.
`
`In addition to the foregoing and/or in the alternative, Samsung indirectly infringes the
`
`‘250 Patent by inducing and contributing to infringement by others, including but not limited to
`
`OEMs, partners, service providers, manufacturers, importers, resellers, customers, and/or end users,
`
`in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(b), in this District and elsewhere in the United States. Samsung
`
`is actively, knowingly, and intentionally inducing infringement of the ‘250 Patent by practicing the
`
`methods set forth therein and by selling, offering to sell and/or importing into the United States the
`
`‘250 Accused Products; with the knowledge and specific intent that third parties, such as those
`
`described above, will continue to, either alone or in combination with Samsung, practice the
`
`patented methods, and use, sell, offer for sale, and/or import the ‘250 Accused Products supplied by
`
`Samsung to infringe the ‘250 Patent; and with the knowledge and specific intent to encourage and
`
`facilitate the infringement through the dissemination of the ‘250 Accused Products and/or the
`
`creation and dissemination of promotional and marketing materials, supporting materials,
`
`instructions, product manuals, and/or technical information relating to the ‘250 Accused Products
`
`and infringing uses thereof.
`
`19.
`
`In addition to the foregoing and/or in the alternative, Samsung has knowingly
`
`contributed to the infringement of one or more claims of the ‘250 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c).
`
`Samsung is actively, knowingly and intentionally contributing to the infringement of the ‘250 Patent
`
`by selling, offering to sell, and/or importing into the United States, the ‘250 Accused Products, with
`
`the knowledge that they are especially designed or adapted to operate in a manner that infringes the
`
`‘250 Patent; with the knowledge that third parties, including those set forth above, will continue to,
`
`either alone or in combination with Samsung, infringe the claims of the ‘250 patent, and with the
`5
`
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1009, p. 5
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01165-JRG Document 22 Filed 03/30/15 Page 6 of 12 PageID #: 79
`
`knowledge that the infringing technology in the ‘250 Accused Products is not a staple article of
`
`commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
`
`20.
`
`Samsung’s acts of infringement have caused damage to KPN, and KPN is entitled to
`
`recover from Samsung the damages it has sustained as a result of Samsung’s wrongful acts in an
`
`amount subject to proof at trial.
`
`21.
`
`Samsung’s infringement of KPN’s exclusive rights under the ‘250 Patent has caused
`
`KPN irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless the infringement is
`
`enjoined by this Court.
`
`COUNT 2
`
`(Samsung’s infringement of the ‘662 Patent)
`
`22.
`
`KPN repeats and re-alleges the allegations in paragraphs 1-14 as if fully set forth
`
`herein.
`
`23.
`
`Samsung has infringed and continues to infringe the ‘662 Patent under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 271, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, selling, and/or offering for
`
`sale in the United States, and/or importing into the United States, infringing products without
`
`authorization by KPN.
`
`24.
`
`Samsung directly infringed and continues to directly infringe one or more claims of
`
`the ‘662 Patent by importing, offering to sell, selling, or using products or methods that infringe the
`
`‘662 Patent, including but not limited to the Samsung Galaxy S4 and S5 and related Samsung
`
`Communication Devices as well as infrastructure incorporating the same or similar technology
`
`(hereafter “the ‘662 Accused Products”). Samsung has directly infringed and continues to directly
`
`infringe one or more of the claims of the ‘662 Patent by making, using, offering to sell, selling, or
`
`importing the ‘662 Accused Products.
`
`
`6
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1009, p. 6
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01165-JRG Document 22 Filed 03/30/15 Page 7 of 12 PageID #: 80
`
`25.
`
`In addition to the foregoing and/or in the alternative, Samsung indirectly infringes the
`
`‘662 Patent by inducing and contributing to infringement by others, including but not limited to
`
`OEMs, partners, service providers, manufacturers, importers, resellers, customers, and/or end users,
`
`in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(b), in this District and elsewhere in the United States. Samsung
`
`is actively, knowingly, and intentionally inducing infringement of the ‘662 Patent by practicing the
`
`methods set forth therein and by selling, offering to sell and/or importing into the United States the
`
`‘662 Accused Products; with the knowledge and specific intent that third parties, such as those
`
`described above, will continue to, either alone or in combination with Samsung, practice the
`
`patented methods, and use, sell, offer for sale, and/or import the ‘662 Accused Products supplied by
`
`Samsung to infringe the ‘662 Patent; and with the knowledge and specific intent to encourage and
`
`facilitate the infringement through the dissemination of the ‘662 Accused Products and/or the
`
`creation and dissemination of promotional and marketing materials, supporting materials,
`
`instructions, product manuals, and/or technical information relating to the ‘662 Accused Products
`
`and infringing uses thereof.
`
`26.
`
`In addition to the foregoing and/or in the alternative, Samsung has knowingly
`
`contributed to the infringement of one or more claims of the ‘662 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c).
`
`Samsung is actively, knowingly and intentionally contributing to the infringement of the ‘662 Patent
`
`by selling, offering to sell, and/or importing into the United States, the ‘662 Accused Products, with
`
`the knowledge that they are especially designed or adapted to operate in a manner that infringes the
`
`‘662 Patent; with the knowledge that third parties, including those set forth above, will continue to,
`
`either alone or in combination with Samsung, infringe the claims of the ‘662 patent, and with the
`
`knowledge that the infringing technology in the ‘662 Accused Products is not a staple article of
`
`commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
`7
`
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1009, p. 7
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01165-JRG Document 22 Filed 03/30/15 Page 8 of 12 PageID #: 81
`
`27.
`
`Samsung’s acts of infringement have caused damage to KPN, and KPN is entitled to
`
`recover from Samsung the damages it has sustained as a result of Samsung’s wrongful acts in an
`
`amount subject to proof at trial.
`
`28.
`
`Samsung’s infringement of KPN’s exclusive rights under the ‘662 Patent has caused
`
`KPN irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless the infringement is
`
`enjoined by this Court.
`
`COUNT 3
`
`(Samsung’s Infringement of the ‘772 Patent)
`
`29.
`
`KPN repeats and re-alleges the allegations in paragraphs 1-14 as if fully set forth
`
`herein.
`
`30.
`
`Samsung has infringed and continues to infringe the ‘772 Patent under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 271, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, selling, and/or offering for
`
`sale in the United States, and/or importing into the United States, infringing products without
`
`authorization by KPN.
`
`31.
`
`Samsung directly infringed and continues to directly infringe one or more claims of
`
`the ‘772 Patent by importing, offering to sell, selling, or using products or methods that infringe the
`
`‘772 Patent, including but not limited to the Samsung SmartThings home automation system and
`
`related communication devices, as well as products incorporating the same or similar remote device
`
`management technology, and infrastructure incorporating the same or similar technology (hereafter
`
`“the ‘772 Accused Products”). Samsung has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe
`
`one or more of the claims of the ‘772 Patent by making, using, offering to sell, selling, or importing
`
`the ‘772 Accused Products.
`
`
`
`8
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1009, p. 8
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01165-JRG Document 22 Filed 03/30/15 Page 9 of 12 PageID #: 82
`
`32.
`
`In addition to the foregoing and/or in the alternative, Samsung indirectly infringes the
`
`‘772 Patent by inducing and contributing to infringement by others, including but not limited to
`
`OEMs, partners, service providers, manufacturers, importers, resellers, customers, and/or end users,
`
`in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(b), in this District and elsewhere in the United States. Samsung
`
`is actively, knowingly, and intentionally inducing infringement of the ‘772 Patent by practicing the
`
`methods set forth therein and by selling, offering to sell and/or importing into the United States the
`
`‘772 Accused Products; with the knowledge and specific intent that third parties, such as those
`
`described above, will continue to, either alone or in combination with Samsung, practice the
`
`patented methods, and use, sell, offer for sale, and/or import the ‘772 Accused Products supplied by
`
`Samsung to infringe the ‘772 Patent; and with the knowledge and specific intent to encourage and
`
`facilitate the infringement through the dissemination of the ‘772 Accused Products and/or the
`
`creation and dissemination of promotional and marketing materials, supporting materials,
`
`instructions, product manuals, and/or technical information relating to the ‘772 Accused Products
`
`and infringing uses thereof.
`
`33.
`
`In addition to the foregoing and/or in the alternative, Samsung has knowingly
`
`contributed to the infringement of one or more claims of the ‘772 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c).
`
`Samsung is actively, knowingly and intentionally contributing to the infringement of the ‘772 Patent
`
`by selling, offering to sell, and/or importing into the United States, the ‘772 Accused Products, with
`
`the knowledge that they are especially designed or adapted to operate in a manner that infringes the
`
`‘772 Patent; with the knowledge that third parties, including those set forth above, will continue to,
`
`either alone or in combination with Samsung, infringe the claims of the ‘772 patent, and with the
`
`knowledge that the infringing technology in the ‘772 Accused Products is not a staple article of
`
`commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
`9
`
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1009, p. 9
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01165-JRG Document 22 Filed 03/30/15 Page 10 of 12 PageID #: 83
`
`34.
`
`Samsung’s acts of infringement have caused damage to KPN, and KPN is entitled to
`
`recover from Samsung the damages it has sustained as a result of Samsung’s wrongful acts in an
`
`amount subject to proof at trial.
`
`35.
`
`Samsung’s infringement of KPN’s exclusive rights under the ‘772 Patent has caused
`
`KPN irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless the infringement is
`
`enjoined by this Court.
`
`
`
`
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`36.
`
`KPN hereby demands a jury trial for all issues so triable.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, KPN prays for judgment as follows:
`
`A.
`
`Declaring that Samsung has infringed the Asserted Patents, contributed to
`
`infringement of the Asserted Patents, and/or induced infringement of the Asserted Patents;
`
`B.
`
`Awarding damages arising out of Samsung’s infringement of the Asserted Patents,
`
`including enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 and a compulsory future royalty until
`
`expiration of the Asserted Patents, to KPN, together with prejudgment and post-judgment interest, in
`
`an amount according to proof;
`
`C.
`
`Permanently enjoining pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283 Samsung, its officers, agents, and
`
`employees, and those persons in active concert or participating with any of them, and its successors
`
`and assigns, from infringement, inducement of infringement, and contributory infringement of the
`
`Asserted Patents, including but not limited to making, using, selling and/or offering for sale within
`
`the United States or importing into the United States, any devices, products, software, or methods
`
`that infringe the Asserted Patents before the expiration of the Asserted Patents;
`
`
`
`10
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1009, p. 10
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01165-JRG Document 22 Filed 03/30/15 Page 11 of 12 PageID #: 84
`
`D.
`
`Awarding attorneys’ fees to KPN pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285 or as otherwise
`
`permitted by law;
`
`E.
`
`Awarding such other costs and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`SUSMAN GODFREY, L.L.P.
`
`
`
`/s/ Lexie White
`Lexie G. White
`State Bar No. 24048876
`lwhite@susmangodfrey.com
`SUSMAN GODFREY, L.L.P.
`1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5100
`Houston, Texas 77002
`Telephone: (713) 651-9366
`Facsimile: (713) 654-6666
`
`Attorney-in-charge for Plaintiff
`
`
`Stephen D. Susman
`State Bar No. 19521000
`ssusman@susmangodfrey.com
`Adam T. Hockensmith
`State Bar No. 24083184
`ahockensmith@susmangodfrey.com
`Jeffrey S. David
`State Bar No. 24053171
`jdavid@susmangodfrey.com
`SUSMAN GODFREY, L.L.P.
`1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5100
`Houston, Texas 77002
`Telephone: (713) 651-9366
`Facsimile: (713) 654-6666
`
`T. John Ward, Jr.
`State Bar No. 00794818
`jw@wsfirm.com
`Claire Abernathy Henry
`State Bar No. 24053063
`claire@wsfirm.com
`WARD & SMITH LAW FIRM
`PO Box 1231
`
`
`11
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1009, p. 11
`
`

`
`Case 2:14-cv-01165-JRG Document 22 Filed 03/30/15 Page 12 of 12 PageID #: 85
`
`Longview, Texas 75606
`Telephone: (903) 757-6400
`Facsimile: (903) 757-2323
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic
`
`service are being served this 30th day of March, 2015 with a copy of this document via the
`Court’s CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3).
`
`
`/s/ Lexie White
`Lexie G. White
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`Samsung, Exh. 1009, p. 12