Case 4:17-cv-05941-YGR Document 53 Filed 03/02/18 Page 1 of 15
`
`
`
`
` John J. Edmonds (State Bar No. 274200)
`
`jedmonds@ip-lit.com
`COLLINS EDMONDS
`Collins Edmonds Schlather & Tower, PLLC
`355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450
`Los Angeles, California 90071
`Telephone: (213) 973-7846
`Facsimile: (213) 835-6996
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff,
`CELLSPIN SOFT INC.
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`OAKLAND
`Case No. 4:17-cv-05941
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.
`9,258,6981
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Original Complaint Filed: October 16, 2017
`Judge: Honorable Yvonne G. Rogers
`
`CELLSPIN SOFT, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`PANASONIC CORPORATION OF
`NORTH AMERICA,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`1. This is a patent infringement action to stop Defendant’s infringement of United States
`Patent No. 9,258,698 entitled “Automatic Multimedia Upload for Publishing Data and
`Multimedia Content” (the “‘698 patent” or “Patent-in-Suit”).
`THE PARTIES
`2. Plaintiff, Cellspin Soft, Inc. (“Cellspin”), is a California corporation with an office and
`
`
`1 Cellspin files this Amended Complaint pursuant to the Court’s very recent February 27th
`Order approving the parties’ stipulation that pleadings in this case may be “amended, without
`the need for leave of Court, up to, and including June 5, 2018,” and pursuant to very recent
`decisions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit -- see, e.g., Automated Tracking
`Solutions, LLC v. The Coca-Cola Co., 2018 WL 935455 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 16, 2018) – concerning
`the significance of pled facts in connection with the evaluation of motions brought under 35
`U.S.C. § 101. Cellspin is mindful of the fact that § 101 motions (briefed prior to these recent
`decisions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) are currently pending and set for
`hearing. Cellspin hereby stipulates and agrees that Defendants need not re-file their § 101
`motions and that the filing of this Amended Complaint does not render moot such pending
`motions, and Cellspin is fully prepared to have all relevant matters heard at the Court’s
`upcoming hearing § 101 motions.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`GoPro/Garmin
`EX. 1019, Page 001
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-05941-YGR Document 53 Filed 03/02/18 Page 2 of 15
`
`
`
`
`place business at 1410 Mercy Street, Mountain View, California 94041.
`3. Upon information and belief, Defendant, Panasonic Corporation of North America
`(“Panasonic”), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware,
`with its principal place of business at One Panasonic Way, Secaucus, New Jersey 07094.
`Panasonic has already been served with process and is being served with this Amended
`Complaint via ECF.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`4. This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.,
`including 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, 281, 283, and 284. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over
`this case for patent infringement, including pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`5. Plaintiff is the assignee of the Patent-in-Suit with all right, title and interest to bring the
`claims herein comprising those for past and present infringement, including to recover
`damages therefor.
`6. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Panasonic, including because Panasonic has
`minimum contacts within the State of California; Panasonic has purposefully availed itself of
`the privileges of conducting business in the State of California; Panasonic regularly conducts
`business within the State of California; and Plaintiff’s cause of action arises directly from
`Panasonic’s business contacts and other activities in the State of California, including at least
`by virtue of Panasonic’s infringing methods and products, which are at least practiced, made,
`used, offered for sale, and sold in the State of California. Panasonic is subject to this Court’s
`specific and general personal jurisdiction, pursuant to due process and the California Long
`Arm Statute, due at least to its continuous and systematic business contacts in California.
`Further, on information and belief, Panasonic is subject to the Court’s specific jurisdiction,
`including because Panasonic has committed patent infringement in the State of California,
`including as detailed herein. In addition, Panasonic induces infringement of the Patent-in-Suit
`by customers and/or infringing users located in California. Further, on information and belief,
`Panasonic regularly conducts and/or solicits business, engages in other persistent courses of
`conduct, and/or derives substantial revenue from goods and services provided to persons
`
`[AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,258,698
`
`
`
`
`
`P a g e 2 | 15
`Case No.: 4:17-cv-05941-YGR
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`GoPro/Garmin
`EX. 1019, Page 002
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-05941-YGR Document 53 Filed 03/02/18 Page 3 of 15
`
`
`
`
`and/or entities in California.
`7. Upon information and belief, Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
`1391 and 1400(b), including in view of Panasonic has at least one regular and established place
`of business, including Panasonic Kiosks, in this District and in California, and at least some
`of its infringement of the patent-in-suit occurs in this District and in California.
`THE PATENT-IN-SUIT
`8. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates herein the allegations in the above paragraphs.
`9. The claims of the Patent-in-Suit, including the asserted claims, when viewed as a whole,
`including as an ordered combination, are not merely the recitation of well-understood, routine,
`or conventional technologies or components. The claimed inventions were not well-known,
`routine, or conventional at the time of the invention, over ten years ago, and represent specific
`improvements over the prior art and prior existing systems and methods.
`10. At the time of the patented inventions, publishing captured data from a data capture
`device to a web service was cumbersome and inefficient.
`11. At the time of the priority date of the Patent-in-Suit (December 2007), the same year the
`world’s first prominent mobile “smartphone” was released, and 6 months before the world’s
`first prominent mobile “app store” (see History of the iPhone on Wikipedia at
`https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_iPhone & App Store (iOS) on Wikipedia at
`https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(iOS)), it was a cumbersome and time consuming
`process to use a data capture device to acquire data, send that data to a mobile device with an
`internet connection, and the mobile device to upload that wirelessly received data to a website,
`especially for large data such as pictures or video data.
`12. The most common and practical way to transfer large data was to physically plug a data
`capture device into, or transfer a memory card from a data capture device to, a computer,
`upload the data on the capture device or memory card to the computer, and further upload the
`data from the computer to a web service. See, e.g., ‘698 at 1:37-54. In the case of using a 2007
`mobile phone, the software on both the data capture device and mobile phone that established
`a paired connection and potentially transferred large data was extremely under developed and
`
`[AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,258,698
`
`
`
`
`
`P a g e 3 | 15
`Case No.: 4:17-cv-05941-YGR
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`GoPro/Garmin
`EX. 1019, Page 003
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-05941-YGR Document 53 Filed 03/02/18 Page 4 of 15
`
`
`
`
`not the intended or foreseeable use of the mobile phone. Further, HTTP transfers of data
`received over the paired wireless connection to web services was non-existent. Mobile phones
`of that time exclusively used SMS,2 MMS,3 or email-based communication methods (such as
`POP3 or IMAP4 to transfer data that was acquired by the mobile phone. It was not until 2009
`or later when the leading tech companies, such as Facebook and Google, started releasing
`HTTP APIs for developers to utilize a HTTP transfer protocol for mobile devices. See
`https://developers.facebook.com/docs/graph-api/changelog/archive;
`http://mashable.com/
`2009/05/19/twitter-share-images/#K9kEHwxammq0. Even in 2009 when Facebook and
`Google HTTP APIs were released, the released HTTP APIs were only used for data that was
`acquired by the mobile phone, and not for the data that was received wirelessly over the secure
`paired connection from a physically separate data capture device. Applying HTTP to a data in
`transit and on intermediary mobile device was not developed until the inventions of the Patent-
`in-Suit.
`13. Including as of the priority date of the Patent-in-Suit, there have been many, albeit vastly
`inferior, means outside of the claimed invention for achieving the ends of acquiring and
`transferring data for publication, including on the Internet. For example, as noted in the
`specification,
`
`Typically, the user would capture an image using a digital camera or a video
`camera, store the image on a memory device of the digital camera, and transfer
`the image to a computing device such as a personal computer (PC). In order to
`transfer the image to the PC, the user would transfer the image off-line to the PC,
`use a cable such as a universal serial bus (USB) or a memory stick and plug the
`cable into the PC. The user would then manually upload the image onto a website
`which takes time and may be inconvenient for the user.
`See, e.g., ‘698/1:38-47. Another inferior method would be to have the capture device simply
`forward data to a mobile device as captured. This example is inferior including because,
`without a paired connection, there is no assurance that the mobile device is capable (e.g., on
`
`2 Short Message Service (SMS) is a text messaging service component of most telephone, World Wide Web,
`and mobile device systems. It uses standardized communication protocols to enable mobile devices to
`exchange short text messages. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS.
`3 Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) is a standard way to send messages that include multimedia content
`to
`and
`from
`a
`mobile
`phone
`over
`a
`cellular
`network.
`See
`https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimedia_Messaging_Service.
`4 See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email#Types.
`
`[AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,258,698
`
`
`
`
`
`P a g e 4 | 15
`Case No.: 4:17-cv-05941-YGR
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`GoPro/Garmin
`EX. 1019, Page 004
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-05941-YGR Document 53 Filed 03/02/18 Page 5 of 15
`
`
`
`
`and sufficiently near) of receiving the data. Such constant and inefficient broadcasting would
`quickly drain the battery of the capture device. Another inferior method for posting data from
`a capture device onto the Internet is to have a capture device with built in mobile wireless
`Internet, for example cellular, capability. As noted in the specification, “[t]he digital data
`capture device is physically separated from the BT enabled mobile device.” See, e.g., ‘698/2:2-
`3. This example is inferior including because, especially at the time of the patent priority date
`in 2007 but also today, it makes the combined apparatus bulky, expensive in terms of hardware,
`and expensive in terms of requiring a user to purchase an extra and/or separate cellular service
`for the data capture device.
`14. Prior art methods for posting data from a data capture device onto the Internet were
`inferior. Back at the time of invention, capture devices such as cameras had only rudimentary
`wireless capabilities as exemplified by the U.S. Patent Application No. 2003/015,796 to
`Kennedy (“Kennedy”) and ancillary prior art addressed extensively during prosecution of
`certain Patent-in-Suit and related patents. As noted by the inventors during prosecution of the
`‘698 patent, in every day scenarios, the computer attaches a hypertext transfer protocol
`(HTTP)_header and user ID to the data generated by the computer (“native data”), and the
`existing home wireless routers did not apply website user information or apply HTTP to the
`data sent over the wireless network from the computer to the home wireless router. However,
`the claimed invention improves and builds on this, including because the claimed mobile
`device is configured to send a HTTP request comprising the website user information and the
`non-native data, such that the mobile device is acting as more than just a normal home wireless
`router. According to the inventors, the wireless pairing established is therefore very important
`for the transfer of non-native data that is acquired by a physically separate device and then
`transferred to the mobile device over the trusted paired wireless connection.
`15. Including at the time of the invention, data capture devices posed a number of specific
`challenges associated with publishing data to a web service from a capture device using a
`mobile device. The process to transfer new data from a data capture device to a web service
`was cumbersome and time consuming for the user. Further, data capture devices typically
`
`[AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,258,698
`
`
`
`
`
`P a g e 5 | 15
`Case No.: 4:17-cv-05941-YGR
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`GoPro/Garmin
`EX. 1019, Page 005
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-05941-YGR Document 53 Filed 03/02/18 Page 6 of 15
`
`
`
`
`house small batteries, so users would be obligated to constantly charge batteries. The
`technology embodied in the Patent-in-Suit solved these, and other, problems. The claimed
`inventions comprise superior ways to achieve the ends of uploading data to the Internet via a
`mobile device. The claimed processes of the asserted claims seamlessly transfer data from a
`data capture device to a web service with little to no user intervention using a mobile device
`with a wireless internet connection as the center piece doing most of the heavy lifting. Making
`changes to the data in transit, at the mobile device, and not at the data capture device where
`the data originated from, results in a much-improved user experience making the process much
`easier on the user and improving data capture device battery life. The method of receiving the
`data at the mobile device, attaching user identifying information and HTTP methods to the
`data relieves the data capture device or web service of performing those steps which results in
`a seamless and improved user experience over the previous methods.
`16. Among other things, the inventors of the Patent-in-Suit wanted to post onto the Internet
`content captured while a capture device, such a camera, was capturing data, for example
`photographs, in “real time” situations, for example, when the capture device was in remote
`areas, adverse conditions or on the move. As noted in the specification, “[a] user may need to
`capture and publish data and multimedia content on the Internet in real time.” See, e.g. ,
`‘698/1:37-38. As further noted in the specification, “there is a need for a method and system
`to utilize a digital data capture device in conjunction with a mobile device for automatically
`detecting capture of data and multimedia content, transferring the captured data and
`multimedia content to the mobile device, and publishing the data and multimedia content on
`one or more websites automatically or with minimal user intervention.” See, e.g., ‘698/1:48-
`54. But existing technology offered only unacceptably inferior solutions of posting to the
`Internet content captured from a capture device in “real time” situations.
`17. The claims of the Patent-in-Suit are directed to specific improvements in computer and
`networking functionality and capabilities. Among other things, the claimed inventions
`improve functionality of data capture devices and methods, systems and networks comprising
`those devices. Including as noted in the Patent-in-Suit, the claimed technologies comprise
`
`[AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,258,698
`
`
`
`
`
`P a g e 6 | 15
`Case No.: 4:17-cv-05941-YGR
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`GoPro/Garmin
`EX. 1019, Page 006
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-05941-YGR Document 53 Filed 03/02/18 Page 7 of 15
`
`
`
`
`innovative systems and processes which use less power than those existing at the time, and
`allow for multiple efficiencies resulting in a better user experience and reduced costs. The
`Patent-in-Suit thus provided concrete applications that improved computer and networking
`technology, including for publishing directly to a web service from a data capture device.
`18. Additionally, the inventions of the asserted claims of the Patent-in-Suit comprise
`improvements in improving battery life on the data capture device, including that they reduce
`the processing done by the device and thus reduce battery consumption. Particularly applicable
`to wireless data capture devices small in size, such as petite fitness tracking devices, battery
`life plays a major role in the user experience. The Patent-in-Suit allow for a data capture device
`to be in a low power state to conserve battery life, and send an event notification to the mobile
`device to initiate a higher power consumption state during a brief communication period, and
`then revert back to the lower power consumption state. This saves a tremendous amount of
`power, including because the application on the mobile device, or the Bluetooth client, is
`charged with the majority of listening, rather than the data capture device, or the Bluetooth
`server, which results in much better battery life for the data capture device, including since
`there is “[a] file event listener in the client application 203 [which] listens for the signal from
`the digital data capture device 201. ‘698 at 4:66-5:1 (emphasis added). Similarly, the Patent-
`in-Suit allow for a data capture device to be in a low power state to conserve battery life
`because in certain claimed embodiment the application on the mobile device with the internet
`connection, is charged with polling the data capture device for new data to transfer.
`19. In sum, including as noted above, the claimed technologies of the Patent-in-Suit
`improved, inter alia, prior computer and networking technology, including in connection with:
`
`a. Improving and increasing efficiencies of the claimed inventions, including over
`inferior alternative means for achieving the same or similar ends of uploading
`content, including by reducing or eliminating the cumbersome steps of previous
`methods of data transfer to the Internet and providing the ability to upload or
`transfer the captured data at a time subsequent to the capture of the data where a
`connection to the Internet may not be available to the data capture device. See,
`e.g., ‘698/1:37-54 & 4:55-5:3.
`b. Leveraging the capabilities of mobile devices, including their Internet connection
`capabilities (through use of custom hardware and/or software), including by
`shifting the transfer of data from the data capture device to the mobile device, to
`
`
`
`[AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,258,698
`
`
`
`
`
`P a g e 7 | 15
`Case No.: 4:17-cv-05941-YGR
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`GoPro/Garmin
`EX. 1019, Page 007
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-05941-YGR Document 53 Filed 03/02/18 Page 8 of 15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`greatly enhance the functionality of Internet incapable data capture devices,
`including because the mobile device, with its larger storage, may then store the
`captured data for upload or transfer to the web service via the Internet at a later
`time. See, e.g., ‘698/2:26-34, 5:18-56, 6:2-46, 9:37-60, & 10:10-61.
`c. Uploading captured data from data capture devices to the Internet while avoiding
`the cost, memory usage, complexity, hardware (e.g., cellular antenna), physical
`size, and battery consumption of an Internet accessible mobile device, including
`without the data capture device being capable of wireless Internet connections or
`being capable of communicating in Internet accessible protocols such as HTTP.
`See, e.g., ‘698/2:46-54, 5:4-11, 5:55-6:8, 7:29-33, 7:62-67, 8:23-9:26.
`d. Minimizing power usage by the data capture device, including to minimize the
`need to change batteries or recharge the device. See, e.g., ‘698 at 4:66-5:1.
`e. Using event notification, polling and request/return communication protocols
`over an already paired connection to have the benefits from an efficient or
`automated upload system while conserving resources such as batteries by
`avoiding the data capture device broadcasting captured data when an intermediate
`mobile device is unavailable (e.g., off or out of Bluetooth range) or incapable of
`receiving captured data for uploading to the Internet. See, e.g., ‘698/4:55-5:3 &
`5:12-17.
`f. Applying HTTP in transit and on an intermediary device. See, e.g., ‘698/9:61-
`10:9.
`20. The claimed inventions also provide computer and network efficiency at least because
`they allow data capture devices to have the useful and improved claimed sharing functionality
`without the need to include expensive and battery consuming electronics, cellular antenna,
`paying for separate cellular service, and extra software and data processing required on the
`data capture device. The inventors did more than simply apply current technology to an
`existing problem. Their invention, as embodied in the asserted claims, was a significant
`advancement in mobile data capture and sharing technology. The inventions covered by the
`asserted claims comprise utilization of the mobile Internet to create a novel architecture
`enabling data captured by non-Internet enabled capture devices to quickly, easily and
`automatically be uploaded to the Internet, and more specifically to what is referred to today as
`“the cloud” and “social media.” Additionally, the claimed inventions also improve pairing
`identification, different ways to transfer of new-data between paired devices (event
`notification, polling, mobile initiated request response), and use of HTTP and adding user
`information to the wirelessly received new-data on the intermediary mobile device, when the
`new-data is in transit to the website.
`
`[AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,258,698
`
`
`
`
`
`P a g e 8 | 15
`Case No.: 4:17-cv-05941-YGR
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`GoPro/Garmin
`EX. 1019, Page 008
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-05941-YGR Document 53 Filed 03/02/18 Page 9 of 15
`
`
`
`
`
`21. These noted improvements over the prior art represent meaningful limitations and/or
`inventive concepts based upon the state of the art over a decade ago. Further, including in view
`of these specific improvements, the inventions of the asserted claims, when such claims are
`viewed as a whole and in ordered combination, are not routine, well-understood, conventional,
`generic, existing, commonly used, well known, previously known, typical, and the like over a
`decade ago, including because, until inventions of the asserted claims of the Patent-in-Suit, the
`claimed inventions were not existing or even considered in the field.
`22. The asserted claims, including as a whole and where applicable in ordered combination,
`comprise, inter alia, a non-conventional and non-generic arrangement of communications
`between a data capture device and a Bluetooth enabled mobile device that is a technical
`improvement to the communications between the devices and web services, including those
`improvements noted above.
`23. The claimed inventions are necessarily rooted in computer technology, i.e., portable
`monitoring device technology, and comprise improvement over prior technologies in order to
`overcome the problems, including those noted above, specifically arising in the realm of
`computer networks. The claimed solutions amount to an inventive concept for resolving the
`particular problems and inefficiencies noted above, including in connection publishing data
`from a data capture device to the Internet described.
`COUNT I – INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,258,698
`24. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates herein the allegations in the above paragraphs.
`25. U.S. Patent No. 9,258,698 was duly and legally issued by the USPTO on February 9,
`2016 after full and fair examination. See Exhibit A.
`26. Claims of the ‘698 Patent comprise, generally, methods, devices, systems, and
`computer-readable media comprising digital camera devices having a short-range wireless
`capability to connect with a cellular phone; acquiring new-media after establishing a secure
`wireless connection between the camera and the cellular phone; creating a new-media file
`using the new-media; receiving a data transfer request for the new-media file initiated by a
`mobile software application on the cellular phone over the wireless connection after storing
`
`[AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,258,698
`
`
`
`
`
`P a g e 9 | 15
`Case No.: 4:17-cv-05941-YGR
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`GoPro/Garmin
`EX. 1019, Page 009
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-05941-YGR Document 53 Filed 03/02/18 Page 10 of 15
`
`
`
`
`the created new-media file in memory of the camera; and transferring the new-media file to be
`stored on the cellular phone, over the wireless connection, wherein the cellular phone is
`configured to use HTTP to upload the received new-media file along with user information to
`a user media publishing website.
`27. Panasonic has infringed, and is now infringing, the ‘698 patent, including at least claims
`1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20, in this judicial district, the State of
`California, and elsewhere, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271 through actions comprising the
`making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling, without authority from Plaintiff, devices,
`systems, and/or computer-readable media for enabling connection between data capture
`devices and other wireless devices, such as a cellular phone, acquiring new data on the data
`capture device, and transferring the data from Panasonic data capture devices to web servers
`via wireless mobile devices. On information and belief, Panasonic practices, and/or induces
`others to practice, the claimed methods, and/or makes, uses, offers for sale, and/or sells, and/or
`induces others to use, the claimed devices, systems, and computer-readable media, including
`camera and other media devices, including DSLR cameras, point-and-click cameras, digital
`cameras, and other digital media devices, designed to capture digital media, e.g., images,
`photographs, audio, video, etc., including related data such as GPS coordinates, timestamp,
`etc., as specified herein, comprising wireless functionality, with such products comprising the
`DC-FZ80K, DC-GH5KBODY, DC-GH5LK, DC-GX800, DC-GX850K, DC-ZS70, DMC-
`CM1, DMC-FT5, DMC-FT5A, DMC-FT5D, DMC-FX90, DMC-FX90K, DMC-FZ1000,
`DMC-FZ2500, DMC-FZ300K, DMC-G7HK, DMC-G7K, DMC-G85MK, DMC-GF6, DMC-
`GF7, DMC-GH3, DMC-GH4KBODY, DMC-GM1KA, DMC-GX85K, DMC-GX85KS,
`DMC-GX8BODY, DMC-LF1, DMC-LX100, DMC-LX10K, DMC-SZ10, DMC-SZ10K,
`DMC-SZ5, DMC-SZ5K, DMC-SZ8, DMC-SZ9, DMC-TS30, DMC-TS5, DMC-TS6A,
`DMC-TS6D, DMC-TS6R, DMC-TS6Z, DMC-TZ37, DMC-TZ40, DMC-TZ41, DMC-TZ5,
`DMC-TZ55, DMC-TZ56, DMC-TZ57, DMC-TZ58, DMC-TZ60, DMC-TZ70, DMC-ZS100,
`DMC-ZS27, DMC-ZS30, DMC-ZS30S, DMC-ZS30W, DMC-ZS35, DMC-ZS45, DMC-
`ZS45K, DMC-ZS45W, DMC-ZS50, DMC-ZS60, DMC-ZS60K, DMW-SFU1-VLOG, HC-
`
`[AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,258,698
`
`
`
`
`
`P a g e 10 | 15
`Case No.: 4:17-cv-05941-YGR
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`GoPro/Garmin
`EX. 1019, Page 010
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-05941-YGR Document 53 Filed 03/02/18 Page 11 of 15
`
`
`
`
`V250K, HC-V270K, HC-V380K, HC-V520K, HC-V550K, HC-V720K, HC-V750K, HC-
`W580K, HC-W850K, HC-WXF991K, HC-X920K, HX-A1, HX-A100, HX-A1H, HX-A1M,
`HX-A500, HX-WA30, DC-GX9MK, DC-GH5S, DC-ZS200K, and DMC-GX85WK,
`including when used in conjunction with Panasonic mobile applications (including iOS and
`Android versions thereof) comprising Lumix Link and/or Panasonic Image App, including
`when used in conjunction with websites comprising media publishing sites, such as social
`media websites.
`28. Without limitation, the accused Panasonic devices, including software which practices
`said methods, support wireless protocols, including short-range wireless protocols, including
`wireless networking or Bluetooth protocols, comprising transferring data from digital camera
`devices to websites via applications on cellular phones, including via its cameras and other
`media devices. The accused Panasonic devices, systems, computer-readable media, and
`methods comprise the capability to establish a secure wireless connection with a cellular
`phone. Once the connection between the Panasonic device and the cellular phone is
`established, the Panasonic devices acquire new-media (e.g., photos, audio, and/or videos, and
`related data), create a new-media file using the acquired new-media, and transfer the new-
`media file to the cellular phone in response to receiving a data transfer request for the new-
`media file initiated by the Panasonic application on the cellular phone, over the established
`wireless connection, after storing the created new-media file in the memory of the Panasonic
`device. The Panasonic devices transfer the new-media file to the cellular phone so that it is
`stored, over the established wireless connection, wherein the cellular phone is configured to
`use HTTP to upload the received new-media file, along with the user’s account information,
`to a media publishing website for the user, including social media, news, database, or other
`websites. In addition, and in the alternative, to Panasonic’s making, offering for sale, and/or
`selling of the Panasonic devices and applications, upon information and belief, at least through
`Panasonic’s hardware, software, and efforts to test, demonstrate, and otherwise use Panasonic
`devices, Panasonic has used the claimed devices, systems, and computer-readable media via
`at least the use of the Panasonic devices, comprising at least the foregoing steps.
`
`[AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,258,698
`
`
`
`
`
`P a g e 11 | 15
`Case No.: 4:17-cv-05941-YGR
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`GoPro/Garmin
`EX. 1019, Page 011
`
`

`

`Case 4:17-cv-05941-YGR Document 53 Filed 03/02/18 Page 12 of 15
`
`
`
`
`
`29. Panasonic has had notice of its infringement of the ‘698 patent pursuant to notifications
`from Plaintiff comprising letters mailed on June 15, 2017 and August 31, 2017.
`30. Additionally, or in the alternative, Panasonic has induced, and continues to induce,
`infringement of the ‘698 Patent in this judicial district, the State of California, and elsewhere,
`by intentionally inducing direct infringement of the ‘698 Patent, including by knowingly and
`actively aiding or abetting infringement by users, by and through at least instructing and
`encouraging the use of the Panasonic products and software noted above. Such aiding and
`abetting comprises providing devices, software, websites, and/or instructions regarding the use
`and/or operation of the Panasonic devices and applications in an infringing manner, and further
`including providing the accused Panasonic devices and applications to users who, in turn, use
`the claimed devices, systems, and computer-readable media, including as noted above.
`Further, the direct infringement of the claimed methods by users that occurs in connection with
`Panasonic’s applications and/or websites occurs under the direction or control of Panasonic,
`including Panasonic software and hardware, including because user devices perform said steps
`in order to receive the benefits of Panasonic’s mobile application, and/or because Panasonic
`conditions use of its mobile applications upon performance of the remaining method steps.
`Further, the direct infringement by users of the claimed systems provides the user with a direct
`benefit from the use of Panasonic devices and applications. Such induced infringement has
`occurred since Panasonic became aware of the ‘698 Patent,