`
`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, D.C.
`
`Before The Honorable Cameron R. Elliot
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN ELECTRONIC DEVICES,
`INCLUDING STREAMING PLAYERS,
`TELEVISIONS, SET TOP BOXES,
`REMOTE CONTROLLERS, AND
`COMPONENTS THEREOF
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-1200
`
`RESPONSE OF RESPONDENT ROKU, INC. TO THE
`COMPLAINT OF UNIVERSAL ELECTRONICS INC.
`AND NOTICE OF INVESTIGATION
`
`RESPONDENT:
`ROKU, INC.
`1155 Coleman Avenue
`San Jose, CA 95110
`
`COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT:
`Jonathan D. Baker
`Craig Y. Allison
`DICKINSON WRIGHT RLLP
`800 W. California Avenue, Suite 110
`Sunnyvale, CA 94086
`Steven R. Daniels
`Michael D. Saunders
`DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC
`607 W. 3rd Street, Suite 2500
`Austin, Texas 78701
`Matthew J. Rizzolo
`Brendan McLaughlin
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`2099 Pennsylvania Ave NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`Andrew Thomases
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`1900 University Avenue, 6th Floor
`East Palo Alto, CA 94303
`Matthew R. Shapiro
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`1211 Avenue of the Americas
`New York, NY 10036-8704
`
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 1 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.13, 19 C.F.R § 210.13, Respondent Roku, Inc.
`
`(“Roku”) hereby responds to the Complaint filed by Universal Electronics, Inc. (“UEI” or
`
`“Complainant”) on April 16, 2020, and to the Notice of Investigation issued by the United States
`
`International Trade Commission (“Commission”) on May 18, 2020. As to the Notice of
`
`Investigation, Roku admits that such an investigation exists and that Roku is named as one of the
`
`respondents therein. Roku otherwise denies the existence of the predicates and requirements for
`
`liability under such investigation, and therefore, denies the allegations in the Notice of
`
`Investigation to the extent such allegations exist.
`
`As an initial matter, Roku denies that it has engaged in unfair competition or violated
`
`Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, by importing, selling for importation, or
`
`selling within the United States after importation any device that infringes any valid or
`
`enforceable intellectual property right at issue in this investigation. Roku further denies that any
`
`patent claims at issue in this investigation are valid or enforceable. Roku denies that
`
`Complainant will be able to satisfy its burden to demonstrate infringement of any patent claims
`
`at issue in this Investigation. Roku further denies that a domestic industry as required by Section
`
`337 exists or is in the process of being established. Roku denies that Complainant is entitled to
`
`any of the relief it seeks. Roku further reserves the right to amend or supplement its response
`
`based on additional facts or developments that become available or that arise after the filing of
`
`this Response. Roku responds to the Complaint by admitting only those facts expressly admitted
`
`below and denying all others averred in the Complaint.
`
`For ease of reference, Roku has adopted the headings set forth in the Complaint. To the
`
`extent that such headings themselves contain factual or legal characterizations, however, Roku
`
`denies such characterizations. Also for ease of reference, Roku has repeated the language of the
`
`allegations and assertions from the Complaint before Roku’s answers to such allegations and
`ii
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 2 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`assertions. Except as expressly admitted below, Roku denies all factual and legal
`
`characterizations in such assertions and allegations set forth in the Complaint.
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 3 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`
`I.
`II.
`
`III.
`
`IV.
`
`V.
`
`VI.
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
`COMPLAINANT UEI ........................................................................................................ 8
`A.
`QuickSet .................................................................................................................. 9
`PROPOSED RESPONDENTS ......................................................................................... 12
`A.
`Roku ...................................................................................................................... 12
`B.
`TCL ....................................................................................................................... 13
`C.
`Hisense .................................................................................................................. 17
`D.
`Funai ..................................................................................................................... 20
`THE TECHNOLOGY AND ACCUSED PRODUCTS AT ISSUE ................................. 22
`A.
`The Roku Accused Products ................................................................................. 22
`B.
`The TCL Accused Products .................................................................................. 24
`C.
`The Hisense Accused Products ............................................................................. 28
`D.
`The Funai Accused Products ................................................................................ 30
`THE ASSERTED PATENTS AND NON-TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE
`INVENTIONS PER 19 CFR 210.12(a)(9)(vi) .................................................................. 32
`A.
`Ownership of the Asserted Patents ....................................................................... 32
`B.
`The Mui Patents .................................................................................................... 32
`1.
`U.S. Patent No. 9,911,325......................................................................... 33
`2.
`U.S. Patent No. 7,589,642......................................................................... 35
`The Haughawout Patents ...................................................................................... 37
`1.
`U.S. Patent No. 7,969,514......................................................................... 37
`2.
`U.S. Patent No. 10,600,317....................................................................... 40
`The Arling Patents ................................................................................................ 43
`1.
`U.S. Patent No. 10,593,196....................................................................... 43
`2.
`U.S. Patent No. 9,716,853......................................................................... 46
`Foreign Counterparts of the Asserted Patents ....................................................... 49
`E.
`Licensees Under the Asserted Patents .................................................................. 49
`F.
`THE PROPOSED RESPONDENTS’ UNLAWFUL AND UNFAIR ACTS................... 49
`A.
`Roku ...................................................................................................................... 54
`1.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,911,325 .............................................. 56
`2.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,589,642 .............................................. 57
`3.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,969,514 .............................................. 57
`iv
`
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 4 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,600,317 ............................................ 58
`4.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,593,196 ............................................ 58
`5.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,716,853 .............................................. 59
`6.
`Indirect Infringement Related to Roku TVs ............................................. 59
`7.
`TCL ....................................................................................................................... 62
`1.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,911,325 .............................................. 64
`2.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,589,642 .............................................. 65
`3.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,969,514 .............................................. 65
`4.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,600,317 ............................................ 66
`Hisense .................................................................................................................. 66
`1.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,911,325 .............................................. 68
`2.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,589,642 .............................................. 69
`3.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,969,514 .............................................. 69
`4.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,600,317 ............................................ 70
`Funai ..................................................................................................................... 71
`1.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,911,325 .............................................. 73
`2.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,589,642 .............................................. 73
`3.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,969,514 .............................................. 74
`4.
`Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,600,317 ............................................ 74
`SPECIFIC INSTANCES OF UNFAIR IMPORTATION AND SALE ........................... 75
`A.
`Roku ...................................................................................................................... 75
`B.
`TCL ....................................................................................................................... 80
`C.
`Hisense .................................................................................................................. 82
`D.
`Funai ..................................................................................................................... 83
`VIII. HARMONIZED TARIFF SCHEDULE NUMBERS ....................................................... 85
`IX.
`RELATED LITIGATION ................................................................................................ 85
`A.
`District Court Litigation ........................................................................................ 86
`B.
`Inter Partes Review .............................................................................................. 87
`DOMESTIC INDUSTRY ................................................................................................. 90
`A.
`Technical Prong .................................................................................................... 91
`1.
`Summary of the Domestic Industry Products ........................................... 91
`2.
`The QuickSet Domestic Industry Products ............................................... 92
`3.
`The UEI Domestic Industry Products ....................................................... 98
`v
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`VII.
`
`X.
`
`
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 5 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`
`B.
`
`b)
`
`Economic Prong .................................................................................................. 101
`UEI’s Domestic Investments Relating to Products that Practice the
`1.
`Asserted Patents Investments related to QuickSet Domestic
`Industry Products .................................................................................... 102
`a)
`Investments related to QuickSet Domestic Industry Products .... 102
`i)
`Significant Investment in Plant and Equipment.............. 103
`ii)
`Significant Employment of Labor and Capital ............... 104
`iii)
`Substantial Investments in Engineering, Research, and
`Development ................................................................... 105
`Investments related to the UEI Domestic Industry Products ...... 105
`iv)
`Significant Investment in Plant and Equipment.............. 106
`v)
`Significant Employment of Labor and Capital ............... 107
`vi)
`Substantial Investments in Engineering, Research, and
`Development ................................................................... 108
`UEI’s Licensee Samsung’s Domestic Investments Relating to
`Products that Practice the Asserted Patents ............................................ 108
`a)
`Significant Investment in Plant and Equipment.......................... 110
`b)
`Significant Employment of Labor and Capital ........................... 111
`c)
`Substantial Investments in Engineering, Research, and
`Development ............................................................................... 113
`UEI’s Licensee Sony’s Domestic Investments Relating to Products
`that Practice the Asserted Patents ........................................................... 113
`a)
`Significant Investment in Plant and Equipment.......................... 116
`b)
`Significant Employment of Labor and Capital ........................... 117
`c)
`Substantial Investments in Engineering, Research, and
`Development ............................................................................... 118
`UEI’s Licensee Microsoft’s Domestic Investments Relating to
`Products that Practice the Asserted Patents ............................................ 119
`a)
`Significant Investment in Plant and Equipment.......................... 121
`b)
`Significant Employment of Labor and Capital ........................... 122
`c)
`Substantial Investments in Engineering, Research, and
`Development ............................................................................... 124
`REQUEST FOR RELIEF ............................................................................................... 125
`XI.
`XII. RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF INVESTIGATION ................................................ 126
`XIII. STATEMENT UNDER COMMISSION RULE 210.13(b) ........................................... 128
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`
`
`vi
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 6 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`XIV. ROKU’S AFFIRMATIVE AND OTHER DEFENSES ................................................. 129
`A.
`First Defense (Non-Infringement – U.S. Patent No. 9,911,325) ........................ 130
`B.
`Second Defense (Invalidity – U.S. Patent No. 9,911,325) ................................. 130
`C.
`Third Defense (Non-Infringement – U.S. Patent No. 7,589,642) ....................... 132
`D.
`Fourth Defense (Invalidity – U.S. Patent No. 7,589,642)................................... 133
`E.
`Fifth Defense (Non-Infringement – U.S. Patent No. 7,969,514) ........................ 135
`F.
`Sixth Defense (Invalidity – U.S. Patent No. 7,969,514) ..................................... 135
`G.
`Seventh Defense (Non-Infringement – U.S. Patent No. 10,600,317) ................. 136
`H.
`Eighth Defense (Invalidity – U.S. Patent No. 10,600,317)................................. 137
`I.
`Ninth Defense (Non-Infringement – U.S. Patent No. 10,593,196 ...................... 139
`J.
`Tenth Defense (Invalidity – U.S. Patent No. 10,593,196) .................................. 140
`K.
`Eleventh Defense (Non-Infringement – U.S. Patent No. 9,716,853) ................. 141
`L.
`Twelfth Defense (Invalidity – U.S. Patent No. 9,716,853) ................................. 142
`M.
`Thirteenth Defense (Lack Of Domestic Industry) .............................................. 144
`N.
`Fourteenth Defense (Prosecution History Estoppel/Prosecution Disclaimer) .... 144
`O.
`Fifteenth Defense (Relief Not In Public Interest) ............................................... 145
`P.
`Sixteenth Defense (No Unfair Acts) ................................................................... 145
`Q.
`(Other Defenses) ................................................................................................. 145
`XV. ROKU’S PRAYER FOR RELIEF.................................................................................. 145
`
`
`
`
`vii
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 7 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION2
`
`1.
`
`Universal Electronics Inc. (“UEI” or “Complainant”) files this complaint pursuant
`
`to Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 1337 (“Section 337”), based
`
`on the unlawful importation into the United States, the sale for importation into the United
`
`States, and/or the sale within the United States after importation of certain electronic devices,
`
`including streaming players, televisions, set top boxes, remote controllers, and components
`
`thereof.
`
`Response:
`
`Roku admits that UEI purports to have filed its Complaint under Section
`
`337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 1337. Roku denies engaging in unlawful
`
`importation into the United States, the unlawful sale for importation and/or the unlawful sale
`
`within the United States after importation, of articles covered by valid and enforceable United
`
`States patents owned by UEI. Roku denies that the Roku articles cited in the Complaint as being
`
`accused are covered by U.S. Patent Nos. 9,911,325 (“the ’325 Patent”), 7,589,642 (“the ’642
`
`Patent”), 7,969,514 (“the ’514 Patent”), 10,600,317 (“the ’317 Patent”), 10,593,196 (“the ’196
`
`Patent”), and 9,716,853 (“the ‘’853 Patent”) (collectively, the “Patents-in-Suit”). Roku lacks
`
`knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding the remaining allegations in
`
`Paragraph 1 and, therefore, denies those allegations and averments.
`
`2.
`
`The Proposed Respondents are: (i) Roku, Inc., (“Roku”); (ii) TCL Electronics
`
`Holdings Limited, Shenzhen TCL New Technology Company Limited, TCL King Electrical
`
`Appliances (Huizhou) Company Limited, TTE Technology Inc., TCL Corp., TCL Moka, Int’l
`
`Ltd., TCL Overseas Marketing Ltd., and TCL Industries Holdings Co., Ltd., and TCL Smart
`
`
`2 Roku repeats the headings and allegations set forth in the Complaint in order to simplify
`comparison of the Complaint and this Response. In doing so, Roku makes no admission
`regarding the substance of the heading or any allegation of the Complaint. Unless otherwise
`stated, Roku specifically denies all such allegations.
`1
`
`
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 8 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`Device (Vietnam) Company, Ltd.(collectively, “TCL”); (iii) Hisense Co., Ltd., Hisense
`
`Electronics Manufacturing Company of America Corporation (doing business as Hisense USA
`
`Corp.), Hisense Import & Export Co. Ltd., Qingdao Hisense Electric Co., Ltd., and Hisense
`
`International (HK) Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Hisense”); and (iv) Funai Electric Company, Ltd.,
`
`Funai Corporation, and Funai (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Funai”)3.
`
`Response:
`
`Roku admits that the listed entities are the Proposed Respondents
`
`identified in UEI’s complaint.
`
`3.
`
`The Complaint is directed to the Proposed Respondents’ controllable devices,
`
`including streaming players, televisions, set top boxes, remote controllers, and components
`
`thereof that infringe one or more of: claims of: U.S. Patent Nos. 9,911,325 (the “’325 Patent”),
`
`7,589,642 (the “’642 Patent”), 7,969,514 (the “’514 Patent”), 10,600,317 (the “’317 Patent”),
`
`10,593,196 (the “’196 Patent”), and 9,716,853 (the “’853 Patent”) (collectively, “the Asserted
`
`Patents”). The Roku Accused Products, TCL Accused Products, Hisense Accused Products, and
`
`Funai Accused Products (collectively, “the Accused Products”) include at least the products
`
`listed below:
`
`
`3 Collectively, Roku, TCL, Hisense, and Funai are referred to as the “Proposed Respondents.”
`2
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 9 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`
`
`
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 10 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`
`
`
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 11 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Response:
`
`Roku admits that UEI contends that its Complaint is directed to the
`
`
`
`Respondents’ controllable devices, including streaming players, televisions, set top boxes,
`
`remote controllers, and components thereof, but Roku denies the Roku branded devices
`
`identified in UEI’s complaint infringe any claim of: the ’325 Patent, the ’642 Patent, the ’514
`
`Patent, the ’317 Patent, the ’196 Patent, or the ’853 Patent, which UEI identifies, collectively, as
`
`“the Asserted Patents.” Roku further denies that any products that UEI identifies as TCL
`
`Accused Products, Hisense Accused Products, and Funai Accused Products infringe any claim of
`
`the Asserted Patents based on any Roku technology that may be included in those products.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 12 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`Roku lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief regarding the remaining
`
`allegations contained in Paragraph 3 regarding Respondents other than Roku or any other third
`
`parties and, therefore, denies those allegations.
`
`4.
`
`A complete listing of all of the claims at issue in this investigation, with the
`
`independent claims bolded, is shown in Table 5 below. Table 5 further shows that the Asserted
`
`Patents comprise only three families.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Response:
`
`Roku admits that UEI contends that the claims listed in Table 5 of UEI’s
`
`Complaint are “at issue” in this investigation, but Roku denies that UEI has asserted all of the
`
`listed claims against any Respondent. Roku further denies that it infringes any of the claims in
`
`Table 5 that have actually been asserted against Roku branded products identified in UEI’s
`
`complaint. Roku further denies that any products that UEI identifies as TCL Accused Products,
`
`Hisense Accused Products, and Funai Accused Products infringe any of the claims asserted
`
`against TCL, Hisense, or Funai in Table 5 based on any Roku technology that may be included
`
`in those products. Roku lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief regarding the
`
`allegations contained in Paragraph 4 regarding Respondents other than Roku or any other third
`
`parties and, therefore, denies those allegations. To the extent that any other aspect of the TCL
`
`Accused Products, Hisense Accused Products, and Funai Accused Products are alleged to
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 13 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`infringe in a manner that does not involve or implicate Roku technology, Roku responds that it
`
`lacks the information sufficient to admit or deny this allegation and therefore denies it.
`
`5.
`
`Upon information and belief, the Accused Products are manufactured and/or sold
`
`for importation into the United States, imported into the United States, and/or sold within the
`
`United States after importation by or on behalf of the Proposed Respondents.
`
`Response:
`
`Roku denies that it has engaged in any action that would constitute
`
`unlawful importation into the United States, sale for importation into the United States, or sale
`
`within the United States after importation Accused Products. Roku admits that some of the Roku
`
`branded products identified in UEI’s complaint are manufactured for importation into the United
`
`States, imported into the United States, and/or sold within the United States after importation.
`
`With respect to the other Respondents, Roku lacks sufficient information to admit or deny the
`
`allegations in this paragraph, and therefore denies it.
`
`6.
`
`An industry as required by 19 U.S.C. §§ 1337(a)(2) and (3) exists in the United
`
`States relating to articles protected by the Asserted Patents.
`
`Response: Denied.
`
`7.
`
`UEI seeks as relief, a permanent limited exclusion order prohibiting entry into the
`
`United States of the Proposed Respondents’ infringing products. UEI also requests permanent
`
`cease and desist orders prohibiting the Proposed Respondents, or their parents, subsidiaries,
`
`related companies, other affiliates, or agents, from importing, admitting or withdrawing from a
`
`foreign trade zone, marketing, advertising, demonstrating, warehousing inventory of,
`
`distributing, offering for sale, selling, transferring (except for exportation), licensing, repairing,
`
`programming, updating their infringing products.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 14 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Response:
`
`Roku admits that UEI seeks the relief as described in this paragraph.
`
`Roku denies that any such relief is warranted.
`
`8.
`
`UEI also requests that the Commission require an appropriate bond for any
`
`activities otherwise covered by the limited exclusion order and/or permanent cease and desist
`
`orders during the Presidential review period.
`
`Response:
`
`Roku admits that UEI seeks the relief as described in this paragraph.
`
`Roku denies that any such relief is warranted.
`
`II.
`
`COMPLAINANT UEI
`
`9.
`
`UEI is a 30-year old public company based in Scottsdale, Arizona. UEI is the
`
`technology leader in home entertainment and home automation control, winning numerous
`
`awards related to universal entertainment control processes and technology. Throughout its 30-
`
`year history, UEI has consistently prioritized investments in research and development that have
`
`allowed it to pioneer, patent, and perfect key technologies in the area of entertainment interaction
`
`and control. For example, UEI was the first to create the pre-programmed universal remote
`
`control, which allows one remote control to command numerous devices. When infrared (“IR”)
`
`technology was the dominant method of controlling televisions and accessories, UEI invested
`
`significant time and resources to develop a device control database that correlated certain IR
`
`control codes with certain brands and devices. As other forms of communication and control
`
`were implemented with TVs and accessories, such as HDMI and WiFi, UEI continued to
`
`innovate and improve how remote controls interface with a range of devices. As a result, UEI
`
`holds over 350 U.S. patents related to TV, home entertainment, and home control technologies
`
`and has many additional patent applications pending in the United States and jurisdictions
`
`throughout the world.
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 15 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Response:
`
`Roku lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding
`
`the allegations and characterizations contained in Paragraph 0 and, therefore, denies those
`
`allegations and averments.
`
`10.
`
`Since beginning in 1986, UEI has compiled an extensive device control code
`
`database that covers over one million individual device functions and approximately 8,600
`
`individual consumer electronic equipment brand names, including virtually all IR controlled set-
`
`top boxes, televisions, audio components, and digital video players, such as, Blu-Ray/DVD and
`
`streaming media players. UEI’s technology also includes other remote controlled home
`
`entertainment devices and home automation control modules, as well as wired Consumer
`
`Electronics Control (“CEC”) and wireless Internet Protocol (“IP”) control protocols commonly
`
`found on many of the latest HDMI and internet connected devices. Many of the world’s leading
`
`consumer electronics OEM brands and subscription broadcasting operators purchase or license
`
`UEI’s control technologies.
`
`Response:
`
`Roku lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding
`
`the allegations and characterizations contained in Paragraph 0 and, therefore, denies those
`
`allegations and averments.
`
`A.
`
`11.
`
`QuickSet
`
`One of UEI’s flagship technologies is QuickSet, a product family dedicated to
`
`simplifying and automating the configuration and control of remote controls and home
`
`entertainment devices. See Exhibits 59-63. The Asserted Patents relate to features incorporated
`
`into the QuickSet product family.
`
`Response:
`
`Roku lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding
`
`the allegations and characterizations contained in Paragraph 0 and, therefore, denies those
`
`allegations and averments.
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 16 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`
`12.
`
`UEI’s proprietary QuickSet software automatically detects, identifies, and enables
`
`the appropriate control commands for home entertainment, automation, and air conditioning
`
`devices in the home. UEI’s libraries are continuously updated with device control codes used in
`
`newly introduced AV and IoT devices. These control codes are captured directly from original
`
`remote-control devices or from the manufacturer’s written specifications to ensure the accuracy
`
`and integrity of the database. UEI’s proprietary QuickSet software and know-how permit UEI to
`
`offer a device control code database that is more robust and efficient than similarly priced
`
`products of UEI’s competitors. UEI’s goal is to provide universal control solutions that require
`
`minimal or no user set-up and deliver consistent and intuitive one-touch control of all connected
`
`content sources and devices. QuickSet may be embedded in an AV device, set-top box, or other
`
`host device, or delivered as a Cloud-based service to enable universal remote setup and control.
`
`See Exhibits 59, 60, 62.
`
`Response:
`
`Roku lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding
`
`the allegations and averments contained in Paragraph 0 and, therefore, denies those allegations
`
`and averments.
`
`13.
`
`QuickSet enables universal device control set-up using automated and guided
`
`onscreen instructions and a wireless two-way communication link between the remote and the
`
`QuickSet enabled device. QuickSet greatly simplifies the universal control set-up process and
`
`can enable other time saving features. QuickSet utilizes data transmitted over HDMI or IP
`
`networks to automatically detect various attributes of the connected device and downloads the
`
`appropriate control codes and functions into the remote control without the need for additional
`
`information from the user. The user does not need to know the brand or model number to set up
`
`the device in the remote.
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1200
`
`UEI Exhibit 2008, Page 17 of 157
`Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., IPR2020-00952
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Response:
`
`Roku lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding
`
`the allegations