`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`TYLER DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO.
`
`PATENT CASE
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`CHRIMAR SYSTEMS, INC., D/B/A
`CMS TECHNOLOGIES AND
`CHRIMAR HOLDING COMPANY, LLC ,
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`DELL INC. AND
`AEROHIVE NETWORKS, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs Chrimar Systems Inc. d/b/a CMS Technologies (“Chrimar”) and Chrimar
`
`Holding Company, LLC (“Holding”) file this Original Complaint (“the Complaint”) for
`
`infringement of United States Patent Nos. 8,155,012 (“the ’012 Patent”), 8,942,107 (“the ’107
`
`Patent”), 8,902,760 (“the ’760 Patent”), and 9,019,838 (“the ’838 Patent”), collectively the
`
`“Patents-in-Suit.”
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Chrimar is a Michigan corporation with a place of business located at 36528 Grand River
`
`Avenue, Suite A-1, Farmington Hills, Michigan 48335.
`
`2.
`
`Holding is a Texas limited liability company with a place of business located at 911 NW
`
`Loop 281, Suite 211-14, Longview, Texas 75604.
`
`3.
`
`Chrimar and Holding are collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs” or “CMS.”
`
`CHRIMAR V. DELL & AEROHIVE – ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
`
`PAGE 1
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2090-1
`IPR2016-01758 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Case 6:15-cv-00639 Document 1 Filed 07/01/15 Page 2 of 9 PageID #: 2
`
`4.
`
`Dell Inc. (“Dell”) is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located at
`
`One Dell Way, Round Rock, Texas 78682. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Dell.
`
`5.
`
`Aerohive Networks, Inc. (“Aerohive”) is a Delaware corporation with its principal place
`
`of business located at 330 Gibraltar Drive, Sunnyvale, California 94089. This Court has personal
`
`jurisdiction over Aerohive.
`
`6.
`
`Dell and Aerohive are collectively referred to as “Defendants.”
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b).
`
`10.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because Defendants have engaged
`
`in continuous and systematic activities in the state of Texas, including in this district.
`
`PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`11.
`
`Chrimar is the owner and assignee of the ’012 Patent, entitled “System and Method for
`
`Adapting a Piece of Terminal Equipment” and Holding is the exclusive licensee of the ’012
`
`Patent. CMS owns all substantial rights in the ’012 Patent. A true and correct copy of the ’012
`
`Patent is attached as Exhibit A.
`
`12.
`
`The ’012 Patent is valid, enforceable, and was duly issued in full compliance with Title
`
`35 of the United States Code.
`
`13.
`
`Chrimar is the owner and assignee of the ’107 Patent, entitled “Piece of Ethernet
`
`Terminal Equipment” and Holding is the exclusive licensee of the ’107 Patent. CMS owns all
`
`CHRIMAR V. DELL & AEROHIVE – ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
`
`PAGE 2
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2090-2
`IPR2016-01758 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Case 6:15-cv-00639 Document 1 Filed 07/01/15 Page 3 of 9 PageID #: 3
`
`substantial rights in the ’107 Patent. A true and correct copy of the ’107 Patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit B.
`
`14.
`
`The ’107 Patent is valid, enforceable and was duly issued in full compliance with Title 35
`
`of the United States Code.
`
`15.
`
`Chrimar is the owner and assignee of the ’760 Patent, entitled “Network System and
`
`Optional Tethers” and Holding is the exclusive licensee of the ’760 Patent. CMS owns all
`
`substantial rights in the ’760 Patent. A true and correct copy of the ’760 Patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit C.
`
`16.
`
`The ’760 Patent is valid, enforceable and was duly issued in full compliance with Title 35
`
`of the United States Code.
`
`17.
`
`Chrimar is the owner and assignee of the ’838 Patent, entitled “Central Piece of Network
`
`Equipment” and Holding is the exclusive licensee of the ’838 Patent. CMS owns all substantial
`
`rights in the ’838 Patent. A true and correct copy of the ’838 Patent is attached as Exhibit D.
`
`18.
`
`The ’838 Patent is valid, enforceable and was duly issued in full compliance with Title 35
`
`of the United States Code.
`
`DEFENDANTS’ ACCUSED PRODUCTS
`
`19.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendants make, use, offer to sell, sell, and/or import
`
`Power over Ethernet (“PoE”) powered devices (“PDs”) that comply with and/or are compatible
`
`with IEEE 802.3af and/or 802.3at. Such products include, but are not limited to, wireless access
`
`points such as the AP330 and PoE IP cameras, collectively the “Accused PD Products.”
`
`20.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendants make, use, offer to sell, sells, and/or import PoE
`
`power sourcing equipment (“PSEs”) that comply with and/or are compatible with IEEE 802.3af
`
`CHRIMAR V. DELL & AEROHIVE – ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
`
`PAGE 3
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2090-3
`IPR2016-01758 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Case 6:15-cv-00639 Document 1 Filed 07/01/15 Page 4 of 9 PageID #: 4
`
`and/or 802.3at. Such products include, but are not limited to, PoE switches such as the N3000
`
`Series Switch, collectively the “Accused PSE Products.”
`
`21.
`
`The Accused PD Products and the Accused PSE Products are collectively the “Accused
`
`Products.”
`
`22.
`
`Upon information and belief, the Accused Products are offered for sale and sold
`
`throughout the United States, including within the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`23.
`
`Defendants have purposefully and voluntarily placed the Accused Products into the
`
`stream of commerce with the expectation that these products will be purchased and used by end
`
`users in the United States, including end users in the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`24.
`
`Defendants provide direct and indirect support concerning the Accused Products to end
`
`users, including end users within the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`COUNT I
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,155,012
`
`CMS incorporates paragraphs 1 through 244 herein by reference.
`
`Defendants have and continue to directly infringe the ’012 Patent in violation of 35
`
`25.
`
`26.
`
`U.S.C. § 271(a) by making, using, offering for sale, selling, and/or importing into the United
`
`States the Accused PD Products.
`
`27.
`
`Defendants have and continue to indirectly infringe the ’012 Patent in violation of 35
`
`U.S.C. § 271(b) by inducing its partners, customers, distributors, and/or end users to use, offer
`
`for sale, and sell the Accused PD Products, and therefore Defendants induce others to directly
`
`infringe the ’012 Patent.
`
`28.
`
`End users that use the Accused PD Products directly infringe the ’012 Patent.
`
`CHRIMAR V. DELL & AEROHIVE – ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
`
`PAGE 4
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2090-4
`IPR2016-01758 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Case 6:15-cv-00639 Document 1 Filed 07/01/15 Page 5 of 9 PageID #: 5
`
`29.
`
`Defendants have been on notice of the ’012 Patent since at least as early as the filing date
`
`of this Complaint.
`
`30.
`
`CMS has been damaged as a result of Defendants’ infringing conduct described in this
`
`Count.
`
`COUNT II
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,942,107
`
`CMS incorporates paragraphs 1 through 30 herein by reference.
`
`Defendants have and continue to directly infringe the ’107 Patent in violation of 35
`
`31.
`
`32.
`
`U.S.C. § 271(a) by making, using, offering for sale, selling, and/or importing into the United
`
`States the Accused PD Products.
`
`33.
`
`Defendants have and continue to indirectly infringe the ’107 Patent in violation of 35
`
`U.S.C. § 271(b) by inducing its partners, customers, distributors, and/or end users to use, offer
`
`for sale, and sell the Accused PD Products, and therefore Defendants induce others to directly
`
`infringe the ’107 Patent.
`
`34.
`
`35.
`
`End users that use the Accused PD Products directly infringe the ’107 Patent.
`
`Defendants have been on notice of the ’107 Patent since at least as early as the filing date
`
`of this Complaint.
`
`36.
`
`CMS has been damaged as a result of Defendants’ infringing conduct described in this
`
`Count.
`
`
`
`
`
`CHRIMAR V. DELL & AEROHIVE – ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
`
`PAGE 5
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2090-5
`IPR2016-01758 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Case 6:15-cv-00639 Document 1 Filed 07/01/15 Page 6 of 9 PageID #: 6
`
`COUNT III
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,902,760
`
`CMS incorporates paragraphs 1 through 36 herein by reference.
`
`Defendants have and continue to directly infringe the ’760 Patent in violation of 35
`
`37.
`
`38.
`
`U.S.C. § 271(a) by making, using, offering for sale, selling, and/or importing into the United
`
`States the Accused Products.
`
`39.
`
`Defendants have and continue to indirectly infringe the ’760 Patent in violation of 35
`
`U.S.C. § 271(b) by inducing its partners, customers, distributors, and/or end users to use, offer
`
`for sale, and sell the Accused Products, and therefore Defendants induce others to directly
`
`infringe the ’760 Patent.
`
`40.
`
`Defendants have and continue to indirectly infringe the ’760 Patent in violation of 35
`
`U.S.C. § 271(c) by offering to sell, selling, and/or importing the Accused Products into the
`
`United States.
`
`41.
`
`The Accused PD Products and/or Accused PSE Products are components of a patented
`
`machine, manufacture, combination, or system, constitute a material part of the invention as
`
`claimed in the ’760 Patent, and Defendants know the same to be especially made or especially
`
`adapted for use in a manner that infringes one or more claims of the ’760 Patent.
`
`42.
`
`The Accused Products are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for
`
`substantial noninfringing use.
`
`43.
`
`44.
`
`End users that use the Accused Products directly infringe the ’760 Patent.
`
`Defendants have been on notice of the ’760 Patent since at least as early as the filing date
`
`of this Complaint.
`
`CHRIMAR V. DELL & AEROHIVE – ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
`
`PAGE 6
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2090-6
`IPR2016-01758 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Case 6:15-cv-00639 Document 1 Filed 07/01/15 Page 7 of 9 PageID #: 7
`
`45.
`
`CMS has been damaged as a result of Defendants’ infringing conduct described in this
`
`Count.
`
`46.
`
`47.
`
`COUNT IV
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,019,838
`
`CMS incorporates paragraphs 1 through 45 herein by reference.
`
`Defendants have and continue to directly infringe the ’838 Patent in violation of 35
`
`U.S.C. § 271(a) by making, using, offering for sale, selling, and/or importing into the United
`
`States the Accused PSE Products.
`
`48.
`
`Defendants have and continue to indirectly infringe the ’838 Patent in violation of 35
`
`U.S.C. § 271(b) by inducing its partners, customers, distributors, and/or end users to use, offer
`
`for sale, and sell the Accused PSE Products, and therefore Defendants induce others to directly
`
`infringe the ’838 Patent.
`
`49.
`
`50.
`
`End users that use the Accused PSE Products directly infringe the ’838 Patent.
`
`Defendants have been on notice of the ’838 Patent since at least as early as the filing date
`
`of this Complaint.
`
`51.
`
`CMS has been damaged as a result of Defendants’ infringing conduct described in this
`
`Count.
`
`ADDITIONAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`52.
`
`CMS has complied with 35 U.S.C. § 287.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`
`
`CMS hereby requests a trial by jury pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil
`
`Procedure.
`
`CHRIMAR V. DELL & AEROHIVE – ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
`
`PAGE 7
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2090-7
`IPR2016-01758 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Case 6:15-cv-00639 Document 1 Filed 07/01/15 Page 8 of 9 PageID #: 8
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`
`
`CMS requests that this Court find in its favor and against Defendants, and that this Court
`
`grant CMS the following relief:
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`Enter judgment that Defendants have infringed the Patents-in-Suit;
`
`Award Plaintiffs damages in an amount adequate to compensate Plaintiffs for
`
`Defendants’ infringement of the Patents-in-Suit, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty in
`
`accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`c.
`
`Award Plaintiffs pre-judgment and post-judgment interest to the full extent
`
`allowed under the law, as well as their costs;
`
`d.
`
`Order Defendants to pay a reasonable royalty for each future infringement of the
`
`Patents-in-Suit;
`
`e.
`
`Declare that this is an exceptional case and award Plaintiffs their reasonable
`
`attorneys’ fees incurred in this action;
`
`f.
`
`Award such other relief as the Court may deem appropriate and just under the
`
`circumstances.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CHRIMAR V. DELL & AEROHIVE – ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
`
`PAGE 8
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2090-8
`IPR2016-01758 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Case 6:15-cv-00639 Document 1 Filed 07/01/15 Page 9 of 9 PageID #: 9
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Justin S. Cohen
`Justin S. Cohen
` Texas State Bar No. 24078356
` Justin.Cohen@tklaw.com
`Richard L. Wynne, Jr.
` Texas State Bar No. 24003214
` Richard.Wynne@tklaw.com
`
`THOMPSON & KNIGHT LLP
`One Arts Plaza
`1722 Routh St., Suite 1500
`Dallas, Texas 75201
`214.969.1211
`214.880.1599 (Fax)
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
`CHRIMAR SYSTEMS, INC. D/B/A CMS
`TECHNOLOGIES and CHRIMAR HOLDING
`COMPANY, LLC
`
`
`Dated: July 1, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CHRIMAR V. DELL & AEROHIVE – ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
`
`PAGE 9
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2090-9
`IPR2016-01758 USPN 9,019,838