UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, D.C.
`
`Before the Honorable Cameron R. Elliot
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN WEARABLE ELECTRONIC
`DEVICES WITH ECG
`FUNCTIONALITY AND
`COMPONENTS THEREOF
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`
`RESPONDENT APPLE INC.’S RESPONSE TO THE AMENDED COMPLAINT OF
`ALIVECOR, INC. UNDER SECTION 337 OF THE TARIFF ACT OF 1930,
`AS AMENDED, AND NOTICE OF INVESTIGATION
`
`RESPONDENT
`
`Apple Inc.
`One Apple Park Way
`Cupertino, CA 95014
`Tel: 408-996-1010
`
`COUNSEL FOR APPLE INC.
`
`Benjamin C. Elacqua
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`1221 McKinney Street, Suite 2800
`Houston, TX 77010
`Telephone: (713) 654-5300
`Facsimile: (713) 652-0109
`
`Betty Chen
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`500 Arguello Street
`Suite 500
`Redwood, CA 94063
`Telephone: (650) 839-5070
`Facsimile: (650) 839-5071
`
`Ruffin B. Cordell
`Joseph V. Colaianni Jr.
`Thomas S. Fusco
`Taylor Burgener
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`1000 Maine Avenue, S.W., Suite 1000
`Washington, D.C. 20024
`Telephone: (202) 783-5070
`Facsimile: (202) 783-2331
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 1
`
`

`

`Michael Amon
`Raisa Ahmad
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`12860 El Camino Real, Suite 400
`San Diego, CA 92130
`Telephone: (858) 678-5070
`Facsimile: (858) 678-5099
`
`Katherine H. Reardon
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`7 Times Square
`20th Floor
`New York, NY 10036
`Telephone: (212)765-5070
`Facsimile: (212) 258-2291
`
`Qiuyi Wu
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`One Marina Park Drive
`Boston, MA 02210
`Telephone: (617) 542-5070
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 2
`
`

`

`PREAMBLE
`
`Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 210.13, Respondent Apple Inc. (“Apple” or “Respondent”) by and
`
`through its attorneys, hereby responds to the Amended Complaint Under Section 337 of the Tariff
`
`Act of 1930, (the “Complaint”) filed by AliveCor, Inc. (“AliveCor” or “Complainant”) on April 26,
`
`2021 and to the Notice of Institution of Investigation issued by the United States International
`
`Trade Commission (the “Commission”) on May 20, 2021 (the “Notice”), as published in the Federal
`
`Register on May 26, 2021 (86 Fed. Reg. 28382).
`
`Apple denies that it has engaged in acts of unfair competition in violation of Section 337 by
`
`importing, selling for importation, and/or selling after importation into the United States any
`
`product that infringes, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, directly, indirectly, by
`
`contribution and/or by inducement, any claim of U.S. Patent Nos. 10,595,731 (“the ’731 patent”),
`
`10,638,941 (“the ’941 patent”), and 9,572,499 (“the ’499 patent”) (collectively “the Asserted
`
`Patents”). Apple denies that the claims of the Asserted Patents are valid and enforceable. Except as
`
`specifically admitted herein, Apple denies all of the allegations of the Complaint. To the extent that
`
`any allegations of the Complaint refer to or rely upon information not previously supplied to Apple,
`
`Apple is without information sufficient to admit or deny such allegations, and therefore denies the
`
`same. In responding to the Complaint and Notice of Investigation, Apple has understood “Accused
`
`Products” to mean the products accused of infringement in the Complaint. Moreover, Apple
`
`explicitly reserves the right to take further positions and raise additional defenses as may become
`
`apparent as a result of additional information discovered subsequent to filing this Response, or to
`
`the extent AliveCor modifies its Complaint or contentions.
`
`1
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 3
`
`

`

`RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT
`
`In answer to the allegations set forth in the Complaint, Apple responds as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION1
`
`1.
`
`Apple denies the statements and allegations of Paragraph 1 insofar as they contain
`
`opinions and legal arguments rather than factual assertions and therefore require no response. To
`
`the extent a response is required, Apple admits that AliveCor filed this Complaint pursuant to
`
`Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 1337 (“Section 337”). Apple denies
`
`that it has engaged in unlawful importation, sale for importation into the United States, offer for sale
`
`for importation into the United States, and/or sale within the United States after importation of the
`
`Accused Products. Apple lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding the
`
`truth of any remaining allegations in Paragraph 1 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`2.
`
`Apple denies the statement and allegations of Paragraph 2 insofar as they contain
`
`opinions and legal arguments rather than factual assertions and therefore require no response. To
`
`the extent a response is required, Apple denies that its products infringe in any way any claims of the
`
`Asserted Patents. Apple lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding the
`
`truth of any remaining allegations in Paragraph 2 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`3.
`
`Apple denies the statement and allegations of Paragraph 3 insofar as they contain
`
`opinions and legal arguments rather than factual assertions and therefore require no response. To
`
`the extent a response is required, Apple denies that its products infringe in any way any claims of the
`
`Asserted Patents.
`
`1 Apple has adopted headings in the Complaint for ease of reference. However, to the extent that such
`headings themselves contain factual and legal characterizations, Apple denies such characterizations.
`2
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 4
`
`

`

`4.
`
`Apple denies the statement and allegations of Paragraph 4 insofar as they contain
`
`opinions and legal arguments rather than factual assertions and therefore require no response. To
`
`the extent a response is required, Apple denies that its products infringe in any way any claims of the
`
`Asserted Patents.
`
`5.
`
`Apple denies the statements and allegations contained in Paragraph 5 insofar as they
`
`constitute opinions and legal arguments and therefore require no response. Apple denies that a
`
`domestic industry in the United States exists and/or is in the process of being established with
`
`respect to each of the Asserted Patents, and therefore denies that AliveCor has a domestic industry
`
`as required by 19 U.S.C. § 1337(a)(2)-(3). Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to
`
`form a belief as to the truth of any remaining allegations of Paragraph 5 and, on that basis, denies
`
`them.
`
`6.
`
`Apple denies the statements and allegations of Paragraph 6 insofar as they contain
`
`opinions and legal arguments rather than factual assertions and therefore require no response. To
`
`the extent a response is required, Apple denies that its products are in violation of Section
`
`337(a)(1)(B)(i).
`
`7.
`
`Apple admits that the Apple Watch Series 4, 5, and 6 are manufactured and/or sold
`
`for importation into the United States, imported into the United States, and/or sold after
`
`importation into the United States by or on behalf of Apple.
`
`8.
`
`Apple denies the statements and allegations of Paragraph 8 insofar as they contain
`
`opinions and legal arguments rather than factual assertions and therefore require no response. To
`
`the extent a response is required, Apple denies that AliveCor is entitled to any relief by way of its
`
`Complaint. Apple denies any remaining allegations of Paragraph 8.
`
`3
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 5
`
`

`

`9.
`
`Apple denies the statements and allegations of Paragraph 9 insofar as they contain
`
`opinions and legal arguments rather than factual assertions and therefore require no response. To
`
`the extent a response is required, Apple denies that AliveCor is entitled to any relief by way of its
`
`Complaint. Apple denies any remaining allegations of Paragraph 9.
`
`10.
`
`Apple denies the statements and allegations of Paragraph 10 insofar as they contain
`
`opinions and legal arguments rather than factual assertions and therefore require no response. To
`
`the extent a response is required, Apple denies that AliveCor is entitled to any relief by way of its
`
`Complaint. Apple denies any remaining allegations of Paragraph 10.
`
`II.
`
`PARTIES
`
`A.
`
`11.
`
`AliveCor
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 11 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`12.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 12 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`13.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 13 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`14.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 14 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`15.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 15 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`B.
`
`16.
`
`Apple
`
`Apple admits that it is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of
`
`California. Apple admits that its headquarters and principal place of business is at One Apple Park
`
`4
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 6
`
`

`

`Way, Cupertino, CA 95014. Except as specifically admitted herein, Apple denies the remaining
`
`allegations contained in Paragraph 16.
`
`17.
`
`Apple denies each and every allegation in Paragraph 17.
`
`III.
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`A.
`
`18.
`
`Heart Disease in the United States
`
`Apple admits that heart disease is a serious condition affecting both men and women
`
`in the United States. Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of any remaining allegations of Paragraph 18 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`19.
`
`Apple admits that atrial fibrillation (AFib) is one type of heart arrhythmia. Apple is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any remaining
`
`allegations of Paragraph 19 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`20.
`
`Apple admits that AFib affects millions of Americans. Apple is without knowledge
`
`or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any remaining allegations of Paragraph
`
`20 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`21.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 21 and, on that basis, denies them.2
`
`B.
`
`22.
`
`AliveCor’s Wearable ECG Technology
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 22 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`23.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 23 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`2 No response is needed for footnote one of AliveCor’s Complaint.
`5
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 7
`
`

`

`24.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 24 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`C.
`
`25.
`
`AliveCor’s First Heart Monitor
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 25 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`26.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 26 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`27.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 27 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`28.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 28 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`D.
`
`29.
`
`AliveCor’s KardiaBand and SmartRhythm Application
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 29 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`30.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 30 and, on that basis, denies them.3
`
`31.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 31 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`32.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 32 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`33.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 33 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`3 No response is needed for footnote two of AliveCor’s Complaint.
`6
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 8
`
`

`

`34.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the allegations of Paragraph 34 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`E.
`
`Apple Copies AliveCor’s Technology and Eliminates Competition
`
`35.
`
`Apple admits that Dr. Albert has met with Mr. Jeff Williams and Dr. Mike O’Reilly.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any
`
`remaining allegations in Paragraph 35 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`36.
`
`Apple admits that Dr. Albert has met with Mr. Phil Schiller. To the extent not
`
`specifically and expressly admitted, Apple denies all other allegations and characterizations in
`
`Paragraph 36.
`
`37.
`
`Apple announced features of Apple Watch Series 4, including with ECG app, which
`
`had been granted a de novo classification by the Food & Drug Association in September 2018. To
`
`the extent not specifically and expressly admitted, Apple denies all other allegations and
`
`characterizations in Paragraph 37.
`
`38.
`
`Apple admits that with Apple Watch Series 4, Apple introduced watchOS 5. Apple
`
`denies each and every remaining allegation in Paragraph 38.
`
`39.
`
`Apple denies AliveCor’s characterization of Apple’s products as “copycat ECG
`
`watches.” Apple denies that its changes “compelled AliveCor to pull the KardiaBand product and
`
`SmartRhythm from the market in 2018.” Apple lacks sufficient knowledge or information to admit
`
`or deny any remaining allegations and characterizations of Paragraph 39, and on that basis denies
`
`them.
`
`7
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 9
`
`

`

`F.
`
`AliveCor’s Continuing Investment in KardiaBand and SmartRhythm
`Technology
`
`40.
`
`Apple lacks sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the allegations of
`
`Paragraph 40, and on that basis denies them.
`
`41.
`
`To the extent Paragraph 41 contains conclusions of law, no response is necessary.
`
`Apple lacks sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the allegations of Paragraph 41,
`
`and on that basis denies them.
`
`IV.
`
`THE TECHNOLOGY AND PRODUCTS AT ISSUE
`
`42.
`
`Apple admits that AliveCor describes the category of Accused Products as “Apple
`
`Watches with ECG functionality, and hardware and software components thereof,” pursuant to
`
`Section 210.10(b)(1) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. Apple denies the
`
`statements and allegations of Paragraph 42 insofar as they contain opinions and legal arguments
`
`rather than factual assertions and therefore, require no response. Apple denies any of the Accused
`
`Products infringes in any way any valid and enforceable intellectual property rights asserted in this
`
`Investigation. Apple denies that it has otherwise violated Section 337 in any manner. To the extent
`
`not specifically and expressly admitted, Apple denies all other allegations and characterizations in
`
`Paragraph 42.4
`
`43.
`
`Apple admits that AliveCor describes the technology at issue as relating to “wearable
`
`electronic devices with ECG functionality.” Apple denies the statements and allegations of
`
`Paragraph 43 insofar as they contain opinions and legal arguments rather than factual assertions and
`
`therefore, require no response. Apple denies any of the Accused Products infringes in any way any
`
`valid and enforceable intellectual property rights asserted in this Investigation. Apple denies that it
`
`4 No response is needed for footnote three of AliveCor’s Complaint.
`8
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 10
`
`

`

`has otherwise violated Section 337 in any manner. To the extent not specifically and expressly
`
`admitted, Apple denies all other allegations and characterizations in Paragraph 43.
`
`44.
`
`Apple lacks sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the allegations of
`
`Paragraph 44, and on that basis denies them.
`
`45.
`
`Apple lacks sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the allegations of
`
`Paragraph 45, and on that basis denies them.
`
`46.
`
`Apple lacks sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the allegations of
`
`Paragraph 46, and on that basis denies them.
`
`47.
`
`Apple lacks sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the allegations of
`
`Paragraph 47, and on that basis denies them.
`
`48.
`
`Apple admits that AliveCor has filed an antitrust suit against Apple in the U.S.
`
`District Court of the Northern District of California and a patent infringement suit against Apple in
`
`the U.S. District Court of the Western District of Texas. Apple denies each and every remaining
`
`allegation in Paragraph 48.
`
`V.
`
`THE ASSERTED PATENTS AND NONTECHNICAL DESCRIPTIONS OF
`THE INVENTIONS5
`
`49.
`
`To the extent that Paragraph 49 contains conclusions of law, no response is
`
`necessary. Apple lacks sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the allegations of
`
`Paragraph 49, and on that basis denies them.
`
`5 No response is needed to AliveCor’s statements in footnote four of the Complaint beyond that
`provided in response to the specific allegations in the numbered paragraphs. Regardless of
`AliveCor’s disclaimer in footnote four, Apple reserves the right to use AliveCor’s statements, as
`appropriate, in this litigation.
`
`9
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 11
`
`

`

`50.
`
`To the extent that Paragraph 50 contains conclusions of law, no response is
`
`necessary. Apple lacks sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the allegations of
`
`Paragraph 50, and on that basis denies them.
`
`A.
`
`The ’731 Patent
`
`Identification and Ownership of the ’731 Patent
`
`51.
`
`Apple denies the statements and allegations of Paragraph 51 insofar as they contain
`
`opinions and legal arguments rather than factual assertions and therefore require no response. To
`
`the extent a response is required, Apple admits that the ’731 patent states on its face that it is entitled
`
`“Methods and systems for arrhythmia tracking and scoring,” but denies that it issued on May 5,
`
`2020. Apple admits that the ’731 patent lists David E. Albert, Omar Dawood, Lev Korzinov, Iman
`
`Abuzeid, Nupur Srivastava, Fei Wang, Euan Thomson, and Ravi Gopalakrishnan as inventors.
`
`Apple denies that the ’731 patent issued from U.S. Patent Application No. 16/158,112, filed on
`
`October 28, 2018. Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the expiration date of the ’731 patent. Apple admits that Exhibit 1 purports to be a copy of
`
`the ’731 patent. Apple admits that Exhibit 4 purports to be a copy of the assignments. Apple
`
`admits that Appendix A purports to be a copy of the prosecution history of the ’731 patent. Apple
`
`admits that documents purporting to be copies of each patent and applicable pages of each technical
`
`reference mentioned in the prosecution history of the ’731 patent are attached as Appendix B.
`
`Apple denies any remaining allegations of Paragraph 51.
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the ’731 Patent
`
`52.
`
`Apple denies the statements and allegations contained in Paragraph 52 insofar as
`
`they constitute opinions and legal arguments and therefore require no response. Apple admits that
`
`Exhibit 7 purports to list each foreign patent and pending foreign patent application (not already
`
`10
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 12
`
`

`

`issued as a patent), and each foreign application that has been denied, abandoned or withdrawn
`
`corresponding to the ’731 patent, and indicate the prosecution status of each such application.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any
`
`remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 52 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`Non-Technical Description of the ’731 Patent
`
`53.
`
`To the extent that Paragraph 53 contains conclusions of law, no response is
`
`necessary. Apple lacks sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the allegations of
`
`Paragraph 53, and on that basis denies them.
`
`B.
`
`The ’941 Patent
`
`Identification and Ownership of the ’941 Patent
`
`54.
`
`Apple denies the statements and allegations of Paragraph 54 insofar as they contain
`
`opinions and legal arguments rather than factual assertions and therefore require no response. To
`
`the extent a response is required, Apple admits that the ’941 patent states on its face that it is entitled
`
`“Discordance monitoring” and that it issued on May 5, 2020. Apple admits that the ’941 patent lists
`
`David E. Albert, Omar Dawood, and Ravi Gopalakrishnan. Apple admits that the ’941 patent states
`
`on its face that it issued from U.S. Patent Application No. 16/158,112, filed on October 11, 2018.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`expiration date of the ’941 patent. Apple admits that Exhibit 2 purports to be a copy of the ’941
`
`patent. Apple admits that Exhibit 5 purports to be a copy of the assignments. Apple admits that
`
`Appendix C purports to be a copy of the prosecution history of the ’941 patent. Apple admits that
`
`documents purporting to be copies of each patent and applicable pages of each technical reference
`
`mentioned in the prosecution history of the ’941 patent are attached as Appendix D. Apple denies
`
`any remaining allegations of Paragraph 54.
`
`11
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 13
`
`

`

`Foreign Counterparts to the ’941 Patent
`
`55.
`
`Apple denies the statements and allegations contained in Paragraph 55 insofar as
`
`they constitute opinions and legal arguments and therefore require no response. Apple admits that
`
`Exhibit 7 purports to list each foreign patent and pending foreign patent application (not already
`
`issued as a patent), and each foreign application that has been denied, abandoned or withdrawn
`
`corresponding to the ’941 patent, and indicate the prosecution status of each such application.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any
`
`remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 55 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`Non-Technical Description of the ’941 Patent
`
`56.
`
`To the extent that Paragraph 56 contains conclusions of law, no response is
`
`necessary. Apple lacks sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the allegations of
`
`Paragraph 56, and on that basis denies them.
`
`C.
`
`The ’499 Patent
`
`Identification and Ownership of the ’499 Patent
`
`57.
`
`Apple denies the statements and allegations of Paragraph 57 insofar as they contain
`
`opinions and legal arguments rather than factual assertions and therefore require no response. To
`
`the extent a response is required, Apple admits that the ’499 patent states on its face that it is entitled
`
`“Methods and systems for arrhythmia tracking and scoring” and that it issued on February 21, 2017.
`
`Apple admits that the ’499 patent lists David E. Albert, Omar Dawood, Lev Korzinov, Iman
`
`Abuzeid, Nupur Srivastava, Fei Wang, Euan Thomson, and Ravi Gopalakrishnan as inventors.
`
`Apple admits that the ’499 patent states on its face that it issued from U.S. Patent Application No.
`
`14/730,122, filed on June 3, 2015. Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a
`
`belief as to the truth of the expiration date of the ’499 patent. Apple admits that Exhibit 3 purports
`
`to be a copy of the ’499 patent. Apple admits that Exhibit 6 purports to be a copy of the
`12
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 14
`
`

`

`assignments. Apple admits that Appendix E purports to be a copy of the prosecution history of the
`
`’499 patent. Apple admits that documents purporting to be copies of each patent and applicable
`
`pages of each technical reference mentioned in the prosecution history of the ’499 patent are
`
`attached as Appendix F. Apple denies any remaining allegations of Paragraph 57.
`
`Foreign Counterparts to the ’499 Patent
`
`58.
`
`Apple denies the statements and allegations contained in Paragraph 58 insofar as
`
`they constitute opinions and legal arguments and therefore require no response. Apple admits that
`
`Exhibit 7 purports to list each foreign patent and pending foreign patent application (not already
`
`issued as a patent), and each foreign application that has been denied, abandoned or withdrawn
`
`corresponding to the ’499 patent, and indicate the prosecution status of each such application.
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any
`
`remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 58 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`Non-Technical Description of the ’499 Patent
`
`59.
`
`To the extent that Paragraph 59 contains conclusions of law, no response is
`
`necessary. Apple lacks sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the allegations of
`
`Paragraph 59, and on that basis denies them.
`
`D.
`
`Apple’s Infringement of the Asserted Patents6
`
`Infringement of the ’731 Patent
`
`60.
`
`Apple denies that any Accused Product infringes in any way any claim of any
`
`Asserted Patent, including the ’731 patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`Apple denies each and every remaining allegation contained in Paragraph 60.
`
`6 With respect to footnote eight, Apple denies that any Accused Product infringes in any way, any
`claim of any Asserted Patent.
`
`13
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 15
`
`

`

`61.
`
`Apple denies that it knowingly or intentionally induces infringement of any claim of
`
`any Asserted Patent, including the ’731 patent, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Apple admits that
`
`is has had knowledge of the ’731 patent since December 7, 2020, when AliveCor filed a parallel
`
`action in the Western District of Texas. Apple denies each and every remaining allegation contained
`
`in Paragraph 61.
`
`62.
`
`63.
`
`Apple denies each and every allegation in Paragraph 62.
`
`Apple denies each and every allegation in Paragraph 63.
`
`Infringement of the ’941 Patent
`
`64.
`
`Apple denies that any Accused Product infringes in any way any claim of any
`
`Asserted Patent, including the ’941 patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`Apple denies each and every remaining allegation contained in Paragraph 64.
`
`65.
`
`Apple denies that it knowingly or intentionally induces infringement of any claim of
`
`any Asserted Patent, including the ’941 patent, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Apple admits that
`
`is has had knowledge of the ’941 patent since December 7, 2020, when AliveCor filed a parallel
`
`action in the Western District of Texas. Apple denies each and every remaining allegation contained
`
`in Paragraph 65.
`
`66.
`
`67.
`
`Apple denies each and every allegation in Paragraph 66.
`
`Apple denies each and every allegation in Paragraph 67.
`
`Infringement of the ’499 Patent
`
`68.
`
`Apple denies that any Accused Product infringes in any way any claim of any
`
`Asserted Patent, including the ’499 patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`Apple denies each and every remaining allegation contained in Paragraph 68.
`
`14
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 16
`
`

`

`69.
`
`Apple denies that it knowingly or intentionally induces infringement of any claim of
`
`any Asserted Patent, including the ’499 patent, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Apple admits that
`
`is has had knowledge of the ’499 patent since December 7, 2020, when AliveCor filed a parallel
`
`action in the Western District of Texas. Apple denies each and every remaining allegation contained
`
`in Paragraph 69.
`
`70.
`
`71.
`
`Apple denies each and every allegation in Paragraph 70.
`
`Apple denies each and every allegation in Paragraph 71.
`
`VI.
`
`SPECIFIC INSTANCES OF UNFAIR IMPORTATION AND SALE
`
`72.
`
`To the extent Paragraph 72 contains conclusions of law, no response is necessary.
`
`Apple objects to AliveCor’s definition of Accused Products to the extent it is broader than the
`
`accused products defined in the Complaint. Apple admits that it imports the Accused Products, and
`
`sells the Accused Products. Except as specifically admitted, Apple is currently without knowledge or
`
`information sufficient to form a belief regarding the truth of any remaining allegations in Paragraph
`
`72, and on that basis, denies them.
`
`73.
`
`Apple admits that Exhibit 12 purports to be a receipt from bestbuy.com showing the
`
`purchase of an Apple Watch Series 6 for delivery to an address in the United States. Apple admits
`
`that Exhibit 12 purports to be photographs of the product packaging stating “[a]ssembled in
`
`Vietnam” Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding the truth
`
`of any remaining allegations in Paragraph 73 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`74.
`
`Apple admits that Exhibit 12 purports to be a receipt from bestbuy.com showing the
`
`purchase of an Apple Watch Series 5 for delivery to an address in the United States. Apple admits
`
`that Exhibit 12 purports to be photographs of the product packaging stating “[a]ssembled in China.”
`
`15
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 17
`
`

`

`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding the truth of any
`
`remaining allegations in Paragraph 74 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`75.
`
`Apple admits that Exhibit 12 purports to be a receipt from bestbuy.com showing the
`
`purchase of an Apple Watch Series 4 for delivery to an address in the United States. Apple admits
`
`that Exhibit 12 purports to be photographs of the product packaging stating “[a]ssembled in China.”
`
`Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding the truth of any
`
`remaining allegations in Paragraph 75 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`76.
`
`To the extent that Paragraph 76 implicates legal conclusions, no response is required.
`
`Apple admits that all manufacturers of the Accused Products are located in Asia. Apple admits the
`
`Accused Products are “sold for importation into the United States by or on behalf of Apple.” To
`
`the extent not specifically and expressly admitted, Apple denies all other allegations and
`
`characterizations in Paragraph 76.
`
`A.
`
`77.
`
`Harmonized Tariff Schedule Numbers
`
`The Harmonized Tariff Schedule item number for the Accused Products imported
`
`into the United States is HTSUS 8517.62.0090. Apple is without knowledge or information
`
`sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of the remaining allegations of Paragraph
`
`77 and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`VII. RELATED LITIGATION
`
`78.
`
`Apple admits that, on December 7, 2020, AliveCor filed a patent infringement action
`
`against Apple in the United States District Court of the Western District of Texas, Civil Action No:
`
`6:20-cv-1112, alleging infringement of certain claims of the Asserted Patents. Apple denies that it
`
`has infringed in any way any claim of the Asserted Patents and denies that AliveCor is entitled to any
`
`relief. Apple denies any remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 78.
`
`16
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1266
`Apple Inc.’s Response to the Complaint of AliveCor, Inc.
`
`AliveCor Ex. 2007 - Page 18
`
`

`

`79.
`
`Apple is without knowledge of in