Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 1 of 13 Page ID #:1
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`M. ELIZABETH DAY (SBN 177125)
`eday@feinday.com
`ROBERT F. KRAMER (SBN 181706)
`rkramer@feinday.com
`DAVID ALBERTI (SBN 220265)
`dalberti@feinday.com
`SAL LIM (SBN 211836)
`slim@feinday.com
`RUSSELL S. TONKOVICH (SBN 233280)
`rtonkovich@feinday.com
`MARC BELLOLI (SBN 244290)
`mbelloli@feinday.com
`JEREMIAH A. ARMSTRONG (SBN 253705)
`jarmstrong@feinday.com
`HONG LIN (SBN 249898)
`hlin@feinday.com
`FEINBERG DAY ALBERTI LIM &
`BELLOLI LLP
`1600 El Camino Real, Suite 280
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`Tel: 650.618.4360
`Fax: 650.618.4368
`
`Attorneys for Uniloc 2017 LLC
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`UNILOC 2017 LLC
`CASE NO. 8:19-cv-00956
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT
`Plaintiff,
`INFRINGEMENT
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`v.
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`Page 1 of 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 2 of 13 Page ID #:2
`
`
`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
`
`Plaintiff Uniloc 2017 LLC (“Uniloc”), by and through the undersigned
`counsel, hereby files this Complaint and makes the following allegations of patent
`infringement relating to U.S. Patent No. 6,467,088 against Defendant Microsoft
`Corporation (“Microsoft”), and alleges as follows upon actual knowledge with
`respect to itself and its own acts and upon information and belief as to all other
`matters:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`This is an action for patent infringement. Uniloc alleges that
`1.
`Microsoft infringes U.S. Patent No. 6,467,088 (the “’088 patent”), a copy of which
`is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`2.
`Uniloc alleges that Microsoft directly and indirectly infringes the ’088
`patent by making, using, offering for sale and selling devices that perform a
`processor-implemented method for controlling the reconfiguration of an electronic
`device, including but not limited to devices that perform Windows Update. Uniloc
`alleges that Microsoft also induces and contributes to the infringement of others.
`Uniloc seeks damages and other relief for Microsoft’s infringement of the ’088
`patent.
`
`Uniloc holds all substantial rights, title and interest in and to the ’088
`
`THE PARTIES
`Uniloc 2017 LLC is a Delaware corporation having places of business
`3.
`at 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801, 620 Newport Center Drive,
`Newport Beach, California 92660 and 102 N. College Avenue, Suite 303, Tyler,
`TX 75702.
`4.
`patent.
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Microsoft is a corporation
`5.
`organized and existing under the laws of the State of Washington, with the
`following places of business in this District: 3 Park Plaza, Suite 1600, Irvine, CA
`92614; 3333 Bristol Street, Suite 1249, Costa Mesa, CA 92626; 578 The Shops at
`-1-
` FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`Page 2 of 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 3 of 13 Page ID #:3
`
`
`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
`
`Mission Viejo, Mission Viejo, CA 92691; 331 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
`90703; 13031 West Jefferson Blvd., Suite 200, Los Angeles, CA 90094; 2140
`Glendale Galleria, JCPenney Court, Glendale, CA 91210; 10250 Santa Monica
`Blvd., Space #1045, Los Angeles, CA 90067; 6600 Topanga Canyon Blvd, Canoga
`Park, CA 91303. Microsoft can be served with process by serving its registered
`agent for service of process in California: Corporation Service Company which
`Will Do Business in California as CSC - Lawyers Incorporating Service, 2710
`Gateway Oaks Dr., Ste. 150, Sacramento, CA 95833.
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`6.
`This action for patent infringement arises under the Patent Laws of the
`United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et. seq. This Court has original jurisdiction under 28
`U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338.
`7.
`This Court has both general and specific jurisdiction over Microsoft
`because Microsoft has committed acts within the Central District of California
`giving rise to this action and has established minimum contacts with this forum
`such that the exercise of jurisdiction over Microsoft would not offend traditional
`notions of fair play and substantial justice. Defendant Microsoft, directly and
`through subsidiaries, intermediaries (including distributors, retailers, franchisees
`and others), has committed and continues to commit acts of patent infringement in
`this District, by, among other things, making, using, testing, selling, licensing,
`importing and/or offering for sale/license products and services that infringe the
`’088 patent.
`8.
`Venue is proper in this district and division under 28 U.S.C. §§
`1391(b)-(d) and 1400(b) because Microsoft has committed acts of infringement in
`the Central District of California and has regular and established places of business
`in the Central District of California.
`COUNT I– INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,467,088
`The allegations of paragraphs 1-8 of this Complaint are incorporated
`2
`--
`
`COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`9.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 3 of 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 4 of 13 Page ID #:4
`
`
`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
`
`by reference as though fully set forth herein.
`10.
`The ’088 patent titled, “Reconfiguration Manager For Controlling
`Upgrades Of Electronic Devices,” issued on October 15, 2002. A copy of the ’088
`patent is attached as Exhibit A.
`11.
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 282, the ’088 patent is presumed valid.
`12. Microsoft makes, uses, offers for sale, and sells in the United States
`and imports into the United States devices that practice a processor-implemented
`method for controlling the reconfiguration of an electronic device, for example,
`Windows Update, as well as computer readable media storing software programs
`(e.g., Windows Update) that when executed implement the method (collectively the
`“Accused Infringing Devices”).
`13. Upon information and belief, the Accused Infringing Devices infringe
`claims 1 and 21 of the ’088 patent in the exemplary manner described below.
`14.
`The Accused Infringing Devices perform a processor-implemented
`method for controlling the reconfiguration of electronic devices (e.g., computers
`that are running a version of Microsoft Windows).
`
`How updating works
`During the updating process, the Windows Update Orchestrator operates in the
`background to scan, download, and install updates. It does this automatically,
`according to your settings, and in a silent manner that doesn’t disrupt your computer
`usage.
`
`3
`--
`COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`Page 4 of 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 5 of 13 Page ID #:5
`
`
`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
`
`Scanning updates
`
`
`
`https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/deployment/update/how-windows-
`update-works
`
`15. The Accused Infringing Devices receive information representative of
`a reconfiguration request relating to the electronic device. For example, the
`information is received when an instance of Windows Update Orchestrator running
`on the electronic device initiates a request for reconfiguration at random intervals to
`avoid overloading the Windows Update server.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`--
`COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`Page 5 of 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 6 of 13 Page ID #:6
`
`
`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
`
`https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/deployment/update/how-windows-update-works
`
`16. Windows Update determines at least one device component required to
`implement the reconfiguration request. “The Windows Update Orchestrator
`determines which updates apply to your computer.” Also, the update offered is
`dependent on, among other things, the OS Architecture. The OS Architecture may
`depend on, for example, whether the processor is capable of 32 or 64 bit operation.
`
`Source: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/deployment/update/how-windows-update-
`works
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`--
`COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`Page 6 of 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 7 of 13 Page ID #:7
`
`
`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
`
`Source: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/deployment/update/windows-update-
`troubleshooting
`
`Source: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/15056/windows-32-64-bit-faq
`17.
`The Accused Infringing Devices compare the determined component
`and information specifying at least one additional component currently
`implemented in the electronic device with at least one of a list of known acceptable
`configurations for the electronic device and a list of known unacceptable
`configurations for the electronic device. In addition to “software” (OS and apps)
`updates, the Accused Infringing Devices perform driver updates that necessarily
`require determining additional components currently implemented in the electronic
`device (e.g., known acceptable configurations). See, for example,
`https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/deployment/update/how-windows-
`update-works.
`18.
`The Accused Infringing Devices can also perform a Product Sync,
`
`6
`--
`COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`Page 7 of 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 8 of 13 Page ID #:8
`
`
`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
`
`where “Attributes based sync, where client provides a list of device, product and
`caller attributes ahead of time to allow service to evaluate applicability in the
`cloud.” See, for example, https://docs.microsoft.com/en-
`us/windows/deployment/update/how-windows-update-works.
`19.
`In the event of specific component incompatibilities, the Windows
`Show/Hide Updates tool is used to create a list of known unacceptable
`configurations for the electronic device.
`
`
`Source: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/3073930/how-to-temporarily-prevent-a-driver-
`update-from-reinstalling-in-window
`
`Source: https://www.groovypost.com/howto/block-windows-10-feature-update-why/
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`--
`COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`Page 8 of 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 9 of 13 Page ID #:9
`
`
`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
`
`The Accused Infringing Devices generate information indicative of an
`20.
`approval or denial of the reconfiguration request based at least in part on the results
`of the comparing step. For example, the Accused Infringing Devices generate an
`update history (e.g. indicative of approval) for updates that are successfully
`installed. This history can be viewed in Windows.
`“Installing updates
`
`When an update is applicable, the “Arbiter” and metadata are downloaded.
`Depending on your Windows Update settings, when downloading is complete, the
`Arbiter will gather details from the device, and compare that with the downloaded
`metadata to create an “action list”.
`The action list describes all the files needed from WU, and what the install
`agent (such as CBS or Setup) should do with them. The action list is provided to the
`install agent along with the payload to begin the installation.”
`https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/deployment/update/how-
`windows-update-works
`
`https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/12373/windows-update-faq
`21. Microsoft has infringed, and continues to infringe, at least claims 1 and
`
`8
`--
`COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`Page 9 of 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 10 of 13 Page ID #:10
`
`
`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
`
`21 of the ’088 patent in the United States, by making, using, offering for sale,
`selling and/or importing the Accused Infringing Devices in violation of 35 U.S.C. §
`271(a).
`22. Microsoft also has infringed, and continues to infringe, at least claim 1
`of the ’088 patent by actively inducing others to use, offer for sale, and sell the
`Accused Infringing Devices. Microsoft’s users, customers, agents or other third
`parties who use those devices in accordance with Microsoft’s instructions infringe
`claim 1 of the ’088 patent, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). Microsoft
`intentionally instructs its customers to infringe through training videos,
`demonstrations, brochures, installation and user guides, such as those located at:
`www.microsoft.com; support.microsoft.com; https://support.microsoft.com/en-
`us/help/12373/windows-update-faq; https://docs.microsoft.com/en-
`us/windows/deployment/update/how-windows-update-works;
`https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/3073930/how-to-temporarily-prevent-a-
`driver-update-from-reinstalling-in-window; and related domains and sub-domains ].
`Microsoft is thereby liable for infringement of the ’088 patent under 35 U.S.C. §
`271(b).
`23. Microsoft also has infringed, and continues to infringe, at least claim 1
`of the ’088 patent by offering to commercially distribute, commercially
`distributing, or importing the Accused Infringing Devices which devices are used in
`practicing the processes, or using the systems, of the ’088 patent, and constitute a
`material part of the invention. Microsoft knows portions of the Accused Infringing
`Devices to be especially made or especially adapted for use in infringement of the
`’088 patent, not a staple article, and not a commodity of commerce suitable for
`substantial noninfringing use. Microsoft is thereby liable for infringement of the
`’088 patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c).
`24. Microsoft is on notice of its infringement of the ’088 patent by virtue
`of a letter from Uniloc to Microsoft dated May 20, 2019. Microsoft knows and/or
`9
`
`--
`
`COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`
`
`
`Page 10 of 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 11 of 13 Page ID #:11
`
`
`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
`
`is willfully blind to the fact that its continued actions actively induce and contribute
`to the infringement of at least claim 1 of the ’088 patent.
`25. Upon information and belief, Microsoft may have infringed and
`continues to infringe the ’088 patent through other software and devices utilizing
`the same or reasonably similar functionality, including other versions of the
`Accused Infringing Devices.
`26. Microsoft’s acts of direct and indirect infringement have caused and
`continue to cause damage to Uniloc and Uniloc is entitled to recover damages
`sustained as a result of Microsoft’s wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at
`trial.
`
`10
`--
`COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`Page 11 of 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 12 of 13 Page ID #:12
`
`
`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
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`WHEREFORE, plaintiff Uniloc 2017 LLC respectfully prays that the Court
`enter judgment in its favor and against Microsoft as follows:
`a.
`A judgment that Microsoft has infringed one or more claims of
`the ’088 patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents directly and/or
`indirectly by inducing infringement and/or by contributory infringement;
`b.
`That this Court find that Microsoft has infringed the ’088 patent
`and award Uniloc its damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 and any royalties
`determined to be appropriate;
`c.
`That this be determined to be an exceptional case under 35
`U.S.C. § 285 and that Uniloc be awarded enhanced damages up to treble damages
`for willful infringement as provided by 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`d.
`That this Court award Uniloc prejudgment and post-judgment
`interest on its damages;
`e.
`That Uniloc be granted its reasonable attorneys’ fees in this
`
`action;
`
`That this Court award Uniloc its costs; and
`f.
`That this Court award Uniloc such other and further relief as the
`g.
`Court deems proper.
`
`11
`--
`COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`Page 12 of 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:19-cv-00956-AG-JDE Document 1 Filed 05/20/19 Page 13 of 13 Page ID #:13
`
`
`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
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`Uniloc hereby demands trial by jury on all issues so triable pursuant to Fed.
`R. Civ. P. 38.
`
`Dated: May 20, 2019
`
`FEINBERG DAY ALBERTI LIM &
`BELLOLI LLP
`
`By: /s/ M. Elizabeth Day
`M. Elizabeth Day
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`Uniloc 2017 LLC
`
`12
`--
`COMPLAINT – CASE NO. 8:19-CV-00956
`
`Page 13 of 13
`
`