Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 203
`
` IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`IMPLICIT, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`SONOS, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`C.A. No. 17-cv-259-LPS-CJB
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff Implicit, LLC (“Implicit”), for its First Amended Complaint against Defendant
`
`Sonos, Inc. (“Sonos” or “Defendant”), upon information and belief, states and alleges as follows:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This is a civil action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the
`
`United States, Title 35 of the United States Code.
`
`2.
`
`As set forth in more detail below, Defendant has been infringing United States
`
`Patent Nos. 7,391,791 (the “’791 Patent”) and 8,942,252 (the “’252 Patent”) (collectively, the
`
`“Patents-in-Suit”), and continue to do so through the present date.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`3.
`
`Implicit is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of
`
`Texas with its principal place of business in Texas.
`
`4.
`
`Upon information and belief, Sonos is a Delaware corporation with its principal
`
`place of business at 419 State St., Santa Barbara, California 93101; and can be served with
`
`process by serving its registered agent for service of process in the state of Delaware, The
`
`Corporation Trust Company, Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington,
`
`Delaware 19801.
`
`5.
`
`Unless specifically stated otherwise, the acts complained of herein were
`
`committed by, on behalf of, and/or for the benefit of Sonos.
`
`
`PAGE 1 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 16 PageID #: 204
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`6.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and
`
`1338(a).
`
`7.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Sonos because (a) it has committed the
`
`acts of patent infringement complained of herein, including but not limited to offering for sale or
`
`selling infringing products embodying Implicit’s patented invention, in this State and this
`
`District; (b) it has directed its acts of infringement and the other unlawful acts complained of
`
`herein at this State and this District; and (c) it is a Delaware corporation.
`
`8.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant for the additional reason that
`
`it has engaged in systematic and continuous contacts with this State and this District by, inter
`
`alia, regularly conducting and soliciting business in this State and this District, being
`
`incorporated in this State, and/or deriving substantial revenue from products and/or services
`
`provided to persons in this State and this District.
`
`9.
`
`Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because a substantial
`
`part of the acts complained of herein occurred in this District, Defendant transacts business in
`
`this District, Defendant resides in this District by way of its incorporation in this District, and/or
`
`the property that is the subject of this action is situated in this District.
`
`10.
`
`Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(c)-(d) and 1400(b)
`
`because (i) Defendant resides in this District by way of its incorporation in this District; and/or
`
`(ii) Defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of
`
`business in this District.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`11. While the precise limitations of the claimed inventions of the Patents-in-Suit are
`
`set forth in the claims thereof themselves, the Patents-in-Suit generally disclose a particular
`
`method for ensuring the playback of various types of media occurs synchronously across
`
`different rendering devices. The claimed methods provide the means to achieve consistent and
`
`accurate synchronization in situations where synchronization was traditionally difficult, e.g.,
`
`- 2 -
`
`PAGE 2 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 3 of 16 PageID #: 205
`
`
`
`when the various rendering devices have different or multiple time domains, which can cause the
`
`rendering devices to “drift” out of sync. The claimed methods can for example be used to
`
`achieve synchronization between a television and home theater speakers so that the audio output
`
`by the speakers is in sync with the video displayed on the television, i.e. ensuring there are no
`
`lip-sync issues with the dialog on screen. As another example, the claimed methods can be used
`
`to ensure that when multiple speakers are playing the same audio source, the speakers play back
`
`the audio in sync with one another so that the listener does not hear any “echo” or “lag” between
`
`the rendering of the audio signal at one speaker or speakers as compared to the other(s). The
`
`Patents-in-Suit achieve this improved result by designating one of the rendering devices as a
`
`master device that will share rendering information with one or more slave devices. Based on
`
`this information from the master, the rendering at the slave device is adjusted such that it remains
`
`in sync with the rendering at the master.
`12.
`
`The original assignee of the Patents-in-Suit, Implicit Networks, Inc., was founded
`
`in 1996 in Bellevue, Washington by one of the co-inventors of the Patents-in-Suit: Mr. Edward
`
`Balassanian. Mr. Balassanian currently serves as the Manager of Plaintiff Implicit. Implicit
`
`
`
`provides software platforms and products that enable original equipment manufacturers
`
`(“OEMs”) and independent software vendors (“ISVs”) to build applications for networks. Its
`
`products include Strongs OS, which enables OEMs and ISVs to build, deploy, and manage
`
`applications in the network and on devices that access the networks; and RADkit, a toolkit
`
`designed specifically to build applications for network infrastructure and for devices that access
`
`the network.
`13.
`
`Implicit developed and included synchronization technology in its Strings OS
`
`product to playback audio and video at IP-based speakers and displays such that the audio and
`
`video information sent to the IP devices would be rendered in sync with the other devices.
`
`Implicit’s synchronization technology was used by Intel Corporation in its pioneering Intel Web
`
`Tablet and Intel Audio Port (a device that allowed an analog speaker to be used as an IP-based
`
`speaker). Motorola similarly deployed Implicit’s synchronization technology as part of its
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`PAGE 3 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 4 of 16 PageID #: 206
`
`
`
`Stereo Relay product. As one additional example, Implicit’s synchronization technology was
`
`used in Thomson’s Set-top Box, leading to a best-in-show award at the Consumer Electronics
`
`Show.
`
`14.
`
`Sonos provides software, hardware, and services directed to synchronizing the
`
`rendering of content at various rendering devices on a network.
`15.
`
`For example, as described on Sonos’s website, Sonos makes, uses, sells, and
`
`deploys a wireless home sound system that allow the grouping of speaking so that the speakers
`
`will “play the same music in sync” “and continue to play in sync with each other until you
`ungroup the speakers using the Sonos app.”1 Sonos’s products utilize a proprietary dedicated
`wireless mesh network called SonosNet to achieve this functionality, as illustrated and described
`
`below.
`
`
`
`
`1 https://sonos.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4002/kw/sync/session/L3RpbWUvMTQ4M
`TMwMzk1OS9zaWQvZlVzam5hWk1POGQlN0U5N056N1p4bWVqVTJwWk43QWx3VTlrNk
`xzUmRMWndLZHQ4WUdkWHpDdkRfS2QzOWtpNGxONjNNR3V4ZG40UFFSQzV2UmZv
`UzVmTVhkUkFyREh1c3dnZDhxb2JYJTdFdXZGYnM1bzRHY3JtdEFfQSUyMSUyMQ%3D
`%3D (last visited October 3, 2017).
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`PAGE 4 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 5 of 16 PageID #: 207
`
`
`
`http://musicpartners.sonos.com/sites/default/files/Sonos System Overview.pdf at 7 (last accessed
`
`October 3, 2017).
`16. When multiple Sonos devices are thus “grouped” together, one such device acts
`
`as the master or coordinator device and other device(s) act as slave device(s). In this
`
`
`
`configuration, the master device alone receives audio information from the audio source and is
`
`responsible for sending that audio information along to the slave device(s), as set forth below.
`
`Id. at 10.
`17.
`
`Upon information and belief, when first plugged in and connected to a network,
`
`each Sonos device will perform an NTP sync with a remote server in order to synchronize the
`
`device’s local date/time to the correct date/time.
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`PAGE 5 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 6 of 16 PageID #: 208
`
`
`
`18.
`
`Upon information and belief, in a “grouped” configuration, in addition to sending
`
`audio data to slave devices, the master Sonos device also sends timing information to slave
`
`devices. Specifically, upon information and belief, approximately every 30 seconds, each slave
`
`Sonos device requests and then receives time synchronization information from the master Sonos
`
`device in the form of an SNTP poll from the slave device to the master and an SNTP
`
`synchronization message sent from the master to the slave.
`19.
`
`Upon information and belief, other than as set forth in the preceding paragraphs,
`
`communication between the master Sonos device and any slave Sonos device(s) (including
`
`without limitation of audio data and any additional synchronization data other than the SNTP
`
`communications set forth above) is encrypted using proprietary Sonos encryption and/or
`
`encryption keys such that, without access to proprietary Sonos information, one cannot
`
`determine the exact contents of any such communications.
`20.
`
`Upon information and belief, Sonos implements contractual protections in the
`
`form of license agreements and others terms of service with its customers to preclude the
`unauthorized reproduction, distribution, and/or modification of its software.2
`21.
`Upon information and belief, Sonos implements technical protections to thwart
`
`
`
`customers who would circumvent the intended operation of Sonos’s products.
`
`COUNT I – INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’791 PATENT
`
`22.
`
`Implicit re-alleges and incorporates the allegations of the preceding paragraphs of
`
`this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
`23.
`
`Implicit is the assignee and owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the ’791
`
`Patent, which was issued on June 24, 2008. A true and correct copy of the ’791 Patent is
`
`attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`24.
`
`The ’791 Patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`
`2 See, e.g., https://consumerist.com/2017/08/23/sonos-holds-software-updates-hostage-if-you-
`dont-sign-new-privacy-agreement.
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`PAGE 6 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 7 of 16 PageID #: 209
`
`
`
`25.
`
`The ’791 Patent addresses an invention for synchronizing content rendering. This
`
`disclosed innovation synchronizes the rendering of content at various rendering devices by each
`
`slave rendering device adjusting the rendering of its content to keep it in synchronization with
`
`the rendering of that same content at a master rendering device.
`26.
`
`Implicit has the exclusive right to make, use, sell, and offer to sell any product
`
`embodying the ’791 Patent throughout the United States, and to import any product embodying
`
`the ’791 Patent into the United States.
`27.
`
`Implicit has commercially exploited the ’791 Patent by making, marketing,
`
`selling, and using products covered by the ’791 Patent, as well as licensing technology to others
`
`that implemented the inventions of the ’791 Patent, including in products based on the Strings
`
`OS product.
`28.
`
`Sonos has had knowledge of Implicit, the ’791 Patent, Strings OS-based products
`
`embodying the ’791 Patent, and Implicit’s allegations of Sonos’s infringement of the ’791 Patent
`
`at least as early as the filing of the Original Complaint [D.I. 1] in this action.
`29.
`
`As set forth in the following Paragraph Nos. 30–37, Defendant has been, and is
`
`
`
`currently, directly infringing at least claim 1 of the ’791 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. §
`
`271(a), literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least by using its wireless audio/video
`
`products supporting synchronized playback, including without limitation SonosNet, One,
`
`PLAY:1, PLAY:3, PLAY:5, PLAYBASE, PLAYBAR, SUB, CONNECT, CONNECT:AMP,
`
`associated software and applications, and all reasonably similar Sonos products (the “Accused
`
`Products”). For example, upon information and belief, when Sonos tests the Accused Products,
`
`it uses Accused Products it owns and controls in a configuration including multiple speakers
`
`playing audio from a single audio source in synchronization with one another (an “Infringing
`
`Configuration”), and thus infringes claim 1 of the ’791 Patent.
`30. When the Accused Products are used in an Infringing Configuration, the
`
`owner/controller of the Accused Products performs a method for synchronizing a rendering of a
`
`content provided by a source at one or more devices which are nodes of a network, the content
`
`- 7 -
`
`
`PAGE 7 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 8 of 16 PageID #: 210
`
`
`
`having a rendering time. Specifically, the content provided by a source is the audio being played
`
`on the speakers, which comes from a single audio source; the rendering of that audio is
`
`synchronized at multiple speakers, which are nodes of a network; and the audio content
`
`necessarily has a rendering time, being the time at which it is rendered.
`31. When the Accused Products are used in an Infringing Configuration, the
`
`owner/controller of the Accused Products designates one device as a master device, that master
`
`device having a master device time and a master rendering time. Specifically, one of the
`
`speakers is designated as the master or coordinating speaker by the audio source; that master or
`
`coordinating speaker has a device time (for example, the master speaker must have its own
`
`device time in order to synchronize that time with an NTP server) and necessarily has a master
`
`rendering time (because it necessarily renders the audio content at that rendering time).
`32. When the Accused Products are used in an Infringing Configuration, the
`
`owner/controller of the Accused Products designates remaining devices among the one or more
`
`devices as slave devices, where each slave device has a slave device time and a slave rendering
`
`time. Specifically, when the audio source designates one speaker as the master or coordinating
`
`
`
`speaker, it designates all others as slave speakers; each slave speaker has a device time (for
`
`example, the slave speaker(s) must have its/their own device time in order to synchronize that
`
`time with an NTP server) and necessarily has a slave rendering time (because it necessarily
`
`renders the audio content at that rendering time).
`33. When the Accused Products are used in an Infringing Configuration, the
`
`owner/controller of the Accused Products receives the content for rendering by the master and at
`
`least one slave device. Specifically, the audio source sends the audio content to the master or
`
`coordinating speaker, which then sends that audio content to all slave devices.
`34.
`
`Upon information and belief, when the Accused Products are used in an
`
`Infringing Configuration, the owner/controller of the Accused Products sends from the master
`
`device to at least one slave device an indication of when the master device renders content
`
`corresponding to the master rendering time. Specifically, the master or coordinating speaker
`
`- 8 -
`
`
`PAGE 8 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 9 of 16 PageID #: 211
`
`
`
`sends SNTP sync data to the slave speaker(s); furthermore, upon information and belief, the
`
`master or coordinating speaker sends additional time synchronization messages to the slave
`
`speaker(s) that is encrypted using proprietary Sonos encryption and thus cannot be determined
`
`without access to Sonos proprietary information.
`35.
`
`Upon information and belief, when the Accused Products are used in an
`
`Infringing Configuration, the owner/controller of the Accused Products determines a master
`
`device time domain, a slave device time domain, and a source time domain. Specifically, upon
`
`information and belief, the master Sonos speaker, slave Sonos speaker(s), and audio source each
`
`necessarily must have its own time domain (based on for example the internal clock of the
`
`processor, chipset, or otherwise used in those devices); and upon information and belief, the
`
`Accused Products necessarily must determine those time domains in order to properly
`
`synchronize audio playback on multiple speakers.
`36.
`
`Upon information and belief, when the Accused Products are used in an
`
`Infringing Configuration, the owner/controller of the Accused Products determines whether a
`
`time domain differential exists between the master rendering time and the slave rendering time.
`
`
`
`Specifically, upon information and belief, the SNTP sync data and/or additional time
`
`synchronization messages referred to in the preceding Paragraphs are used to determine the time
`
`domain differential between the rendering times of the master and slave speakers.
`37. When the Accused Products are used in an Infringing Configuration, the
`
`owner/controller of the Accused Products adjusts, based on the received indication, the rendering
`
`of content at the slave speaker(s) within the slave device time domain and in proportion to the
`
`time domain differential when present to account for variation between when the master device
`
`and the at least one slave device to render content that should be rendered at the same time.
`
`Specifically, upon information and belief, the SNTP sync data and/or additional time
`
`synchronization messages referred to in the preceding Paragraphs, as well as the computed time
`
`domain differential referred to in the preceding Paragraph, are used by the slave speaker(s) to
`
`- 9 -
`
`
`PAGE 9 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 10 of 16 PageID #: 212
`
`
`adjust the timing of its/their playback in order to more closely synchronize the playback of
`
`content that is intended to be played by in synchronization.
`38.
`
`Defendant will, on information and belief, continue to directly infringe the ’791
`
`Patent unless enjoined.
`39.
`
`Defendant actively encourages its customers to use Defendant’s Accused
`
`Products in an infringing manner (e.g., in an Infringing Configuration). For example,
`
`Defendant’s website is replete with written directions, screenshots, and videos instructing users
`on how to use the Accused Products in an infringing manner and in an Infringing Configuration.3
`40.
`Defendant’s acts thus constitute active inducement of patent infringement in
`
`violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
`41.
`
`Upon information and belief, and particularly by way of the detailed
`
`documentation instructing users on how to use the Accused Products in an infringing manner,
`
`Defendant has encouraged this infringement with knowledge of the ’791 Patent and with a
`
`specific intent to cause its customers and distributors to infringe.
`42.
`As just one example, Inspirato uses Sonos’s Accused Products in an infringing
`manner—in an Infringing Configuration—as set forth above and is thus a direct infringer.4
`Sonos induces Inspirato’s infringement as set forth herein.
`43.
`
`Defendant will, on information and belief, continue to induce infringement of the
`
`’791 Patent unless enjoined.
`44.
`
`Defendant’s direct infringement and inducement of infringement have irreparably
`
`harmed Implicit.
`45.
`
`Defendant will, on information and belief, continue to irreparably harm Implicit
`
`unless enjoined.
`
`
`3 See, e.g., supra ¶¶ 15–16; https://sonos.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4002/~/how-to-
`group-rooms-in-the-sonos-app.
`4 See https://www.inspirato.com/benefits/partner-programs#sonos.
`
`- 10 -
`
`
`
`
`PAGE 10 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 11 of 16 PageID #: 213
`
`
`46.
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, Implicit is entitled to damages adequate to
`
`compensate for the infringement but in no event less than a reasonable royalty.
`47.
`
`Defendant’s infringement has been and is willful and, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §
`
`284, Implicit is entitled to treble damages.
`48.
`
`This case is “exceptional” within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285, and Implicit is
`
`entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees.
`
`COUNT II – INFRINGEMENT OF THE ‘252 PATENT
`
`49.
`
`Implicit re-alleges and incorporates the allegations of the preceding paragraphs of
`
`this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
`50.
`
`Implicit is the assignee and owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the ’252
`
`Patent, which was issued on January 27, 2015. A true and correct copy of the ’252 Patent is
`
`attached hereto as Exhibit B.
`51.
`52.
`
`The ’252 Patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`The ’252 Patent addresses an invention for synchronizing content rendering. This
`
`
`
`disclosed innovation synchronizes the rendering of content at various rendering devices by each
`
`slave rendering device adjusting the rendering of its content to keep it in synchronization with
`
`the rendering of that same content at a master rendering device.
`53.
`
`Implicit has the exclusive right to make, use, sell, and offer to sell any product
`
`embodying the ’252 Patent throughout the United States, and to import any product embodying
`
`the ’252 Patent into the United States.
`54.
`
`Implicit has commercially exploited the ’252 Patent by making, marketing,
`
`selling, and using products covered by the ’252 Patent, as well as licensing technology to others
`
`that implemented the inventions of the ’252 Patent, including in products based on the Strings
`
`OS product.
`55.
`
` Sonos has had knowledge of Implicit, the ’252 Patent, Strings OS-based
`
`products embodying the ’252 Patent, and Implicit’s allegations of Sonos’s infringement of the
`
`’252 Patent at least as early as the filing of the Original Complaint [D.I. 1] in this action.
`
`- 11 -
`
`
`PAGE 11 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 12 of 16 PageID #: 214
`
`
`56.
`
`As set forth in the following Paragraph Nos. 57–60, Defendant has been, and is
`
`currently, directly infringing at least claim 11 of the ’252 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. §
`
`271(a), literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least by using its wireless audio/video
`
`products supporting synchronized playback, including without limitation SonosNet, One,
`
`PLAY:1, PLAY:3, PLAY:5, PLAYBASE, PLAYBAR, SUB, CONNECT, CONNECT:AMP,
`
`associated software and applications, and all reasonably similar Sonos products (the “Accused
`
`Products”). For example, upon information and belief, when Sonos tests the Accused Products,
`
`it uses Accused Products it owns and controls in an “Infringing Configuration”, and thus
`
`infringes claim 11 of the ’252 Patent.
`57. When the Accused Products are used in an Infringing Configuration, the
`
`owner/controller of the Accused Products receives, at a slave device, a particular content stream.
`
`Specifically, the content stream provided is the audio being played on the speakers; the audio
`
`source sends the audio content to the master or coordinating speaker, which then sends that audio
`
`content to all slave devices.
`58.
`
`Upon information and belief, when the Accused Products are used in an
`
`Infringing Configuration, the owner/controller of the Accused Products receives, at the slave
`
`device from a master rendering device, a plurality of master rendering times indicative of the
`
`status of rendering a different content stream at the master rendering device. Specifically, the
`
`master or coordinating speaker sends SNTP sync data to the slave speaker(s); furthermore, upon
`
`information and belief, the master or coordinating speaker sends additional time synchronization
`
`messages to the slave speaker(s) that is encrypted using proprietary Sonos encryption and thus
`
`cannot be determined without access to Sonos proprietary information. Upon information and
`
`belief, this SNTP sync data and/or these additional time synchronization messages constitute
`
`master rendering times indicate the status of the master or coordinating speaker’s rendering of its
`
`own copy (a different content stream) of the same piece of audio.
`59.
`
`Upon information and belief, when the Accused Products are used in an
`
`Infringing Configuration, the owner/controller of the Accused Products determines at the slave
`
`- 12 -
`
`
`
`
`PAGE 12 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 13 of 16 PageID #: 215
`
`
`device a smoothed rendering time differential that exists between the master rendering device
`
`and the slave device, wherein the determining is based on calculations using the plurality of
`
`master rendering times and a plurality of slave rendering times corresponding to rendering the
`
`particular content stream at the slave device. Specifically, upon information and belief, the
`
`SNTP sync data and/or additional time synchronization messages referred to in the preceding
`
`Paragraphs are used by the slave speaker(s), along with slave rendering times computed at the
`
`slave speaker(s), to determine a smoothed rendering time differential that will be used to
`
`synchronize playback between the master speaker and slave speaker(s).
`60.
`
`Upon information and belief, when the Accused Products are used in an
`
`Infringing Configuration, based on the smoothed rendering time differential, the owner/controller
`
`of the Accused Products renders at the slave device the particular content stream synchronously
`
`with the master rendering device rendering the different content stream. Specifically, upon
`
`information and belief, the determined smoothed rendering time differential referred to in the
`
`preceding Paragraphs is used to render at the slave speaker its audio stream in synchronization
`
`
`
`with the master speaker’s rendering of its own audio stream.
`61.
`
`Defendant will, on information and belief, continue to directly infringe the ’252
`
`Patent unless enjoined.
`62.
`
`Defendant actively encourages its customers to use Defendant’s Accused
`
`Products in an infringing manner (e.g., in an Infringing Configuration). For example,
`
`Defendant’s website is replete with written directions, screenshots, and videos instructing users
`on how to use the Accused Products in an infringing manner and in an Infringing Configuration.5
`63.
`Defendant’s acts thus constitute active inducement of patent infringement in
`
`violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
`64.
`
`Upon information and belief, and particularly by way of the detailed
`
`documentation instructing users on how to use the Accused Products in an infringing manner,
`
`5 See, e.g., supra ¶¶ 15–16; https://sonos.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4002/~/how-to-
`group-rooms-in-the-sonos-app.
`
`- 13 -
`
`
`PAGE 13 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 14 of 16 PageID #: 216
`
`
`Defendant has encouraged this infringement with knowledge of the ’252 Patent and with a
`
`specific intent to cause its customers and distributors to infringe.
`65.
`As just one example, Inspirato uses Sonos’s Accused Products in an infringing
`manner—in an Infringing Configuration—as set forth above and is thus a direct infringer.6
`Sonos induces Inspirato’s infringement as set forth herein.
`66.
`
`Defendant will, on information and belief, continue to induce infringement of the
`
`’252 Patent unless enjoined.
`67.
`
`Defendant’s direct infringement and inducement of infringement have irreparably
`
`harmed Implicit.
`68.
`
`Defendant will, on information and belief, continue to irreparably harm Implicit
`
`unless enjoined.
`69.
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, Implicit is entitled to damages adequate to
`
`compensate for the infringement but in no event less than a reasonable royalty.
`70.
`
`Defendant’s infringement has been and is willful and, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §
`
`
`
`284, Implicit is entitled to treble damages.
`71.
`
`This case is “exceptional” within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285, and Implicit is
`
`entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Implicit hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable under Federal Rule of Civil
`
`Procedure 38(b).
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Implicit respectfully requests that this Court:
`A.
`
`Find that United States Patent No. 7,391,791 is valid and enforceable against
`
`Defendant;
`
`
`6 See https://www.inspirato.com/benefits/partner-programs#sonos.
`
`- 14 -
`
`
`PAGE 14 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 15 of 16 PageID #: 217
`
`
`B.
`
`Find that Defendant has infringed and is infringing United States Patent No.
`
`7,391,791;
`
`C.
`
`Permanently enjoin Defendant, its officers, agents, servants, employees, and those
`
`persons acting in active concert or in participation therewith from infringing
`
`United States Patent No. 7,391,791;
`
`D.
`
`Award Implicit damages sufficient to compensate it for Defendant’s past and
`
`future infringement of United States Patent No. 7,391,791, together with costs and
`
`prejudgment and postjudgment interest, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`Find that United States Patent No. 8,842,252 is valid and enforceable against
`
`Defendant;
`
`Find that Defendant has infringed and are infringing United States Patent No.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`8,942,252;
`
`G.
`
`Permanently enjoin Defendant, its officers, agents, servants, employees, and those
`
`persons acting in active concert or in participation therewith from infringing
`
`
`
`H.
`
`Award Implicit damages sufficient to compensate it for Defendant’s past and
`
`United States Patent No. 8,942,252;
`
`future infringement of United States Patent No. 8,942,252, together with costs and
`
`I.
`J.
`
`prejudgment and postjudgment interest, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`Order an accounting of damages from Defendant’s infringement;
`
`Award Implicit enhanced damages, up to and including trebling Implicit’s
`
`damages, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, for Defendant’s willful infringement of the
`
`Patents-in-Suit;
`
`K.
`
`Award Implicit its reasonable attorney fees and costs of suit pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 285 due to the exceptional nature of this case, or as otherwise permitted by law;
`
`and
`
`L.
`
`Award Implicit such other or additional relief as the Court deems just and proper.
`
`
`
`- 15 -
`
`
`PAGE 15 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34 Filed 10/06/17 Page 16 of 16 PageID #: 218
`
`
`Dated: October 6, 2017
`
`Of Counsel:
`
`Benjamin L. Singer
`Adam S. Cashman
`James Hopenfeld
`Walter C. Pfeffer
`Evan N. Budaj
`Singer / Bea LLP
`601 Montgomery Street, Suite 1950
`San Francisco, California 94111
`(415) 500-6080
`bsinger@singerbea.com
`acashman@singerbea.com
`jhopenfeld@singerbea.com
`wpfeffer@singerbea.com
`ebudaj@singerbea.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`FARNAN LLP
`
`
`/s/ Michael J. Farnan
`Brian E. Farnan (Bar No. 4089)
`Michael J. Farnan (Bar No. 5165)
`919 N. Market St., 12th Floor
`Wilmington, DE 19806
`(302) 777-0300
`(302) 777-0301 (fax)
`bfarnan@farnanlaw.com
`mfarnan@farnanlaw.com
`
`
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`IMPLICIT, LLC
`
`
`
`- 16 -
`
`
`PAGE 16 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 219
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`
`PAGE 17 OF 51
`
`SONOS EXHIBIT 1003
`IPR of U.S. Pat. No. 8,942,252
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00259-LPS Document 34-1 Filed 10/06/17 Page 2 of 17 PageID #: 22