UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`XR COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, dba
`VIVATO TECHNOLOGIES,
`
`v.
`
`APPLE, INC.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`
`Case No.
`
`6:21-cv-620
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AGAINST
`APPLE, INC.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the United States
`
`of America, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., in which Plaintiff XR Communications LLC d/b/a Vivato
`
`Technologies (“Plaintiff” or “Vivato”) makes the following allegations against Defendant Apple,
`
`Inc. (“Defendant”):
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`This complaint arises from Defendant’s unlawful infringement of the following
`
`United States patent owned by Vivato, which generally relates to wireless communications
`
`technology: United States Patent No. 10,715,235 (the “’235 Patent”) (collectively, the “Asserted
`
`Patent”).
`
`2.
`
`Countless electronic devices today connect to the Internet wirelessly. Beyond just
`
`connecting our devices together, wireless networks have become an inseparable part of our lives
`
`in our homes, our offices, and our neighborhood coffee shops. In even our most crowded spaces,
`
`today’s wireless technology allows all of us to communicate with each other, on our own devices,
`
`1
`
`EXHIBIT 1004
`
`

`

`
`
`at virtually the same time. Our connected world would be unrecognizable without the ubiquity of
`
`sophisticated wireless networking technology.
`
`3.
`
`Just a few decades ago, wireless technology of this kind could only be found in
`
`science fiction. The underlying science behind wireless communications can be traced back to the
`
`development of “wireless telegraphy” in the nineteenth century. Guglielmo Marconi is credited
`
`with developing the first practical radio, and in 1896, Guglielmo Marconi was awarded British
`
`patent 12039, Improvements in transmitting electrical impulses and signals and in apparatus
`
`there-for, the first patent to issue for a Herzian wave-based wireless telegraphic system. Marconi
`
`would go on to win the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1909 for his contributions to the field.
`
`4.
`
`One of Marconi’s preeminent contemporaries was Dr. Karl Ferdinand Braun, who
`
`shared the 1909 Nobel Prize in Physics with Marconi. In his Nobel lecture dated December 11,
`
`1909, Braun explained that he was inspired to work on wireless technology by Marconi’s own
`
`experiments. Braun had observed that the signal strength in Marconi’s radio was limited beyond a
`
`certain distance, and wondered why increasing the voltage on Marconi’s radio did not result in a
`
`stronger transmission at greater distances. Braun thus dedicated himself to developing wireless
`
`devices with a stronger, more effective transmission capability.
`
`5.
`
`In 1905, Braun invented the first phased array antenna. This phased array antenna
`
`featured three antennas carefully positioned relative to one another with a specific phase
`
`relationship so that the radio waves output from each antenna could add together to increase
`
`radiation in a desired direction. This design allowed Braun’s phased array antenna to transmit a
`
`directed signal.
`
`6.
`
`Building on the fundamental breakthrough that radio transmissions can be directed
`
`according to a specific radiation pattern through the use of a phased array antenna, directed
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`
`
`wireless communication technology has developed many applications over the years. Braun’s
`
`invention of the phased array antenna led to the development of radar, smart antennas, and,
`
`eventually, to a technology known as “MIMO,” or “multiple-input, multiple-output,” which would
`
`ultimately allow a single radio channel to receive and transmit multiple data signals
`
`simultaneously. Along the way, engineers have worked tirelessly to overcome limitations and
`
`roadblocks directed wireless communication technology.
`
`7.
`
`At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the vast majority of wireless networks
`
`still did not yet take advantage of directed wireless communications. Instead, “omnidirectional”
`
`access points were ubiquitous. Omnidirectional access points transmit radio waves uniformly
`
`around the access point in every direction and do not steer the signal in particular directions.
`
`Omnidirectional antennas access points do typically achieve 360 degrees of coverage around the
`
`access point, but with a reduced coverage distance. Omnidirectional access points also lack
`
`sophisticated approaches to overcome certain types of interference in the environment. As only
`
`one example, the presence of solid obstructions, such as a concrete wall, ceiling, or pillar, can limit
`
`signal penetration. As another example, interference arises when radio waves are reflected,
`
`refracted, or diffracted based on obstacles present between the transmitter and receiver. The
`
`multiple paths that radio waves can travel between the transmitter and receiver often result in signal
`
`interference that decreases performance, and omnidirectional access points lack advanced
`
`solutions to overcome these “multipath” effects.
`
`8.
`
`Moving from omnidirectional networks to modern networks has required an
`
`additional series of advancements that harness the capabilities of directed wireless technology.
`
`These advancements range from conceiving various ways to steer and modify radiation patterns,
`
`to enhancing the transmission signal power in a desired direction, to suppressing radiation in
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`
`
`undesired directions, to minimizing signal “noise,” and then applying these new approaches into
`
`communications networks with multiple, heterogenous transmitters and receivers.
`
`9.
`
`Harnessing the capabilities of directed wireless technology resulted in a significant
`
`leap forward in the signal strength, reliability, concurrent users, and/or data transmission capability
`
`of a wireless network. One of the fundamental building blocks of this latest transition was the
`
`development of improvements to MIMO and “beamforming,” which are the subject matter of
`
`patents in this infringement action. The patents in this action resulted from the investment of tens
`
`of millions of dollars and years of tireless effort by a group of engineers who built a technology
`
`company slightly ahead of its time. Their patented innovations laid the groundwork for today’s
`
`networks, and are infringed by Defendant’s accused products.
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`
`
`PARTIES
`
`10.
`
`Plaintiff XR Communications, LLC, d/b/a Vivato Technologies (“Vivato” or
`
`“Plaintiff”) is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of
`
`Delaware with its principal place of business at 2809 Ocean Front Walk, Venice, California 90291.
`
`Vivato is the sole owner by assignment of all right, title, and interest in each Asserted Patent.
`
`11.
`
`Vivato was founded in 2000 as a $80+ million venture-backed company with
`
`several key innovators in the wireless communication field including Siavash Alamouti, Ken Biba,
`
`William Crilly, James Brennan, Edward Casas, and Vahid Tarokh, among many others. At that
`
`time, and as remains the case today, “Wi-Fi” or “802.11” had become the ubiquitous means of
`
`wireless connection to the Internet, integrated into hundreds of millions of mobile devices globally.
`
`Vivato was founded to leverage its talent to generate intellectual property and deliver Wi-Fi/802.11
`
`wireless connectivity solutions to service the growing demand for bandwidth.
`
`12.
`
`Vivato has accomplished significant innovations in the field of wireless
`
`communications technology. One area of focus at Vivato was the development of advanced
`
`wireless systems with sophisticated antenna designs to improve wireless speed, coverage, and
`
`reliability. Vivato also focused on designing wireless systems that maximize the efficient use of
`
`spectrum and wireless resources for large numbers of connected mobile devices.
`
`13.
`
`Among many fundamental breakthroughs achieved by Vivato are inventions that
`
`allow for intelligent and adaptive beamforming based on up-to-date information about the wireless
`
`medium. Through these and many other inventions, Vivato’s engineers pioneered a wireless
`
`technology that provides for simultaneous transmission and reception, a significant leap forward
`
`over conventional wireless technology.
`
`14.
`
`Over the years, Vivato has developed proven technology, with over 400
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`
`
`deployments globally, including private, public and government, and it has become a recognized
`
`provider of extended range Wi-Fi network infrastructure solutions. Vivato's wireless base stations
`
`integrate beamforming phased array antenna design with packet steering technology to deliver
`
`high-bandwidth extended range connections to serve multiple users and multiple devices.
`
`15.
`
`Vivato’s patent portfolio includes over 17 issued patents and pending patent
`
`applications. The patents at issue in this case are directed to specific aspects of wireless
`
`communication, including adaptively steered antenna technology and beam switching technology.
`
`16.
`
`Defendant Apple, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Apple”) is publicly traded corporation
`
`organized under the laws of the State of California with a principal place of business at One Apple
`
`Park Way, Cupertino, CA 95014. Apple, Inc. designs and manufactures, among other things, Wi-
`
`Fi-compatible products and systems. Defendant designs and manufactures and/or has
`
`manufactured on its behalf abroad certain Accused Products that are then sold for importation into
`
`the United States, imported into the United States, and/or sold, offered for sale, and/or used within
`
`the United States after importation. Apple may be served with process through its registered agent
`
`CT Corporation System at 818 West Seventh Street, Suite 930, Los Angeles, CA 90017. Apple,
`
`Inc. is registered to do business in the State of Texas. By registering to conduct business in Texas
`
`and by having facilities where it regularly conducts business in this District, Apple has a permanent
`
`and continuous presence in Texas and a regular and established place of business in the Western
`
`District of Texas.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`17.
`
`This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United
`
`States Code § 1, et seq, including 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, 281, 283, 284, and 285. This Court has original
`
`subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`
`
`18.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant in this action because
`
`Defendant has committed acts within this District giving rise to this action, and has established
`
`minimum contacts with this forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over Defendant would not
`
`offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Defendant, directly and/or through
`
`subsidiaries or intermediaries, has committed and continues to commit acts of infringement in this
`
`District by, among other things, importing, offering to sell, and selling products that infringe the
`
`asserted patents, and inducing others to infringe the asserted patents in this District. Defendant is
`
`directly and through intermediaries making, using, selling, offering for sale, distributing,
`
`advertising, promoting, and otherwise commercializing its infringing products in this District.
`
`Defendants regularly conducts and solicits business in, engages in other persistent courses of
`
`conduct in, and/or derives substantial revenue from goods and services provided to the residents
`
`of this District and the State of Texas. Apple is subject to jurisdiction pursuant to due process
`
`and/or the Texas Long Arm Statute due to its substantial business in this State and District
`
`including at least its infringing activities, regularly doing or soliciting business at its Austin
`
`facilities, and engaging in persistent conduct and deriving substantial revenues from goods and
`
`services provided to residents in the State of Texas including the Western District of Texas.
`
`19.
`
`Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), (c), (d), and
`
`1400(b) because Apple has a permanent and continuous presence in, has committed acts of
`
`infringement in, and maintains regular and established places of business in this district. Apple has
`
`committed acts of direct and indirect infringement in this judicial district including using and
`
`purposefully transacting business involving the Accused Products in this judicial district such as
`
`by sales to one or more customers in the State of Texas including in the Western District of Texas,
`
`and maintaining regular and established places of business in this district. For example, Apple
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`
`
`maintains regular and established places of business at 12545 Riata Vista Cir., Austin, Texas
`
`78727; 12801 Delcour Dr., Austin, Texas 78727; and 3121 Palm Way, Austin, Texas 78758.1
`
`Apple has also posted job listings for Standards Engineer and HomePod Systems QA in Austin,
`
`Texas, which are jobs that concern the implementation of the inventions contained in the Asserted
`
`Patents including with respect to “Wi-Fi.”2
`
`COUNT I
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 10,715,235
`
`20.
`
`Vivato realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully
`
`set forth herein.
`
`21.
`
`On July 14, 2020, United States Patent No. 10,715,235 duly and legally issued for
`
`inventions entitled “Directed Wireless Communication.” Vivato owns the ’235 Patent and holds
`
`the right to sue and recover damages for infringement thereof. A copy of the ’235 Patent is attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit A.
`
`22.
`
`Defendant has directly infringed and continue to directly infringe numerous claims
`
`of the ’235 Patent, including at least claim 8, by manufacturing, using, selling, offering to sell,
`
`and/or importing into the United States certain products supporting MIMO and/or MU-MIMO
`
`technologies (e.g., Defendant’s Apple TV 4K, iPhones supporting MIMO including iPhone 12 Pro
`
`Max, iPhone 12 Pro, iPhone 12, iPhone 12 mini, iPhone SE (2nd Generation), iPhone 11 Pro Max,
`
`iPhone 11 Pro, iPhone 11, , iPhone XS, XR, iPhone X, iPhone 8 Plus, iPhone 8, iPhone 7 Plus,
`
`
`1 See, e.g., https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2019/11/apple-expands-in-austin/;
`https://www.google.com/maps/place/Apple+Inc./@30.4324406,-
`97.7359733,15z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x5852421ec4ac410c!8m2!3d30.4322558!4d-
`97.7359386; https://www.apple.com/retail/domainnorthside/.
`2 See, e.g., https://jobs.apple.com/en-us/details/200216490/standards-engineer?team=SFTWR;
`https://jobs.apple.com/en-us/details/200252168/homepod-systems-qa?team=HRDWR.
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`
`
`iPhone 7, iPhone 6s Plus, iPhone 6s; iPads supporting MIMO including iPad Pro 12.9-in (5th
`
`generation), iPad Pro 12.9-in (4th generation), iPad Pro 12.9-in (3rd generation), iPad Pro 12.9-
`
`in (2nd generation), iPad Pro 12.9-in (1st generation), iPad Pro 11-in (2nd generation), iPad
`
`Pro 11-in (3rd generation), iPad Pro 11-in (1st generation), iPad Air (4th generation), iPad (8th
`
`generation), iPad mini (5th generation), iPad Pro 10.5-in, iPad Pro 9.7-in, iPad Air (3rd
`
`generation), iPad Air 2, iPad Air (1st generation), iPad (7th generation), iPad (6th generation),
`
`iPad (5th generation), iPad mini 4, iPad mini 3, iPad mini 2; MacBooks supporting MIMO
`
`including models advertised as IEEE 802.11ax compatible such as MacBook Air (M1, 2020),
`
`MacBook Pro 13-in (M1, 2020), iMac 24-in (M1, Two ports, 2021), iMac 24-in (M1, Four ports,
`
`2021), Mac mini (M1, 2020); MacBooks supporting MIMO including models advertised as IEEE
`
`802.11ac compatible including MacBook Pro 16-in, MacBook Air (Retina, 2020), MacBook Air
`
`(2017), MacBook Pro 13-in (Two Thunderbolt 2020), MacBook Pro 13-in (Four Thunderbolt
`
`2020), MacBook Pro 13-in (Two Thunderbolt 2016), iMac 21.5-in, iMac 21.5-in (4K Retina),
`
`iMac 27-in (5K Retina), iMac Pro, Mac mini (2018), Mac Pro) (collectively, the “’235 Accused
`
`Products”). Defendant is liable for infringement of the ’235 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`23.
`
`The ’235 Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of numerous claims of
`
`the ’235 Patent, including Claim 8. The following paragraphs compare limitations of Claim 8 to
`
`an exemplary Accused Product, the Apple iPhone XS Max. See, e.g., Compare iPhone models,
`
`Apple iPhone XS Max.3 Like the Apple iPhone XS Max, each Accused Product supports MU-
`
`MIMO technology, such as the Apple iPad Pro 12.9-in. See, e.g., Apple iPad Pro 12.9-in (5th
`
`
`3 Compare iPhone models, iPhone XS Max, iPhone 12, and iPhone 12 mini, available at
`https://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/?modelList=iphoneXSmax,iphone12,iphone12mini.
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`
`
`generation) Data Sheet.4
`
`24.
`
`Each ’235 Accused Product performs a method for use in a wireless
`
`communications system, the method comprising receiving a first signal transmission from a remote
`
`station via a first antenna element of an antenna and a second signal transmission from the remote
`
`station via a second antenna element of the antenna simultaneously, wherein the first signal
`
`transmission and the second signal transmission comprise electromagnetic signals comprising one
`
`or more transmission peaks and one or more transmission nulls. For example, as with each ’235
`
`Accused Product, the Apple iPhone XS Max receives a first signal transmission from a remote
`
`station, such as a Wi-Fi Access Point, via a first antenna element of an antenna and a second signal
`
`transmission from the remote station via a second antenna element of the antenna simultaneously,
`
`such as when the Apple iPhone XS Max receives first and second signals with its first and second
`
`antenna elements that contain training fields of a null data packet used for MU-MIMO sounding
`
`and channel estimation procedures. See, e.g., Compare iPhone models, iPhone XS Max (Wireless
`
`technology includes “Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac) with MIMO”; Chip includes “A12 Bionic chip; Second-
`
`generation Neural Engine”). See, e.g., Apple iPad Pro 12.9-in Data Sheet (“802.11ax Wi-Fi 6;
`
`simultaneous dual band (2.4 GHz and 5GHz; HT80 with MIMO”; Chip includes “Apple M1 chip,
`
`8-core CPU with 4 performance cores and 4 efficiency cores, 8-core GPU, 16-core Neural
`
`Engine”). See, e.g., IEEE 802.11ac Standard Clause 9.31.5.1 (“Transmit beamforming and DL-
`
`MU-MIMO require knowledge of the channel state to compute a steering matrix that is applied to
`
`the transmitted signal to optimize reception at one or more receivers. The STA transmitting using
`
`the steering matrix is called the VHT beamformer and a STA for which reception is optimized is
`
`
`4 Apple iPad Pro 12.9-in Data Sheet on www.apple.com including “Tech Specs” available at
`https://www.apple.com/ipad-pro/ and https://www.apple.com/ipad-pro/specs/.
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`
`
`called a VHT beamformee. An explicit feedback mechanism is used where the VHT beamformee
`
`directly measures the channel from the training symbols transmitted by the VHT beamformer and
`
`sends back a transformed estimate of the channel state to the VHT beamformer. The VHT
`
`beamformer then uses this estimate, perhaps combining estimates from multiple VHT
`
`beamformees, to derive the steering matrix.”); See, e.g., 802.11ac Standard Clause 9.31.5.2 (“A
`
`VHT beamformer shall initiate a sounding feedback sequence by transmitting a VHT NDP
`
`Announcement frame followed by a VHT NDP after a SIFS. The VHT beamformer shall include
`
`in the VHT NDP Announcement frame one STA Info field for each VHT beamformee that is
`
`expected to prepare VHT Compressed Beamforming feedback and shall identify the VHT
`
`beamformee by including the VHT beamformee’s AID in the AID subfield of the STA Info field.
`
`The VHT NDP Announcement frame shall include at least one STA Info field.”); id. (“A non-AP
`
`VHT beamformee that receives a VHT NDP Announcement frame… shall transmit its VHT
`
`Compressed Beamforming feedback a SIFS after receiving a Beamforming Report Poll with RA
`
`matching its MAC address and a non-bandwidth signaling TA obtained from the TA field
`
`matching the MAC address of the VHT beamformer.”); id. Clause 8.5.23.2 (defining format and
`
`subfields within the VHT Compressed Beamforming frame); id. Clause 8.4.1.48 (including Tables
`
`8-53(d)-(h)) (“Each SNR value per tone in stream i (before being averaged) corresponds to the
`
`SNR associated with the column i of the beamforming feedback matrix V determined at the
`
`beamformee”); id. Clause 8.4.1.49 (including Table 8-53i – MU Exclusive Beamforming Report
`
`information); id. Clauses 8.4.1.24, 9.31.5.1, 9.31.5.2; id. Clauses 22.3.4.6(d), 22.3.4.7(e),
`
`22.3.4.8(l), 22.3.4.9.1(m), 22.3.4.9.2(m), 22.3.4.10.4(a) (“Spatial mapping: Apply the Q matrix as
`
`described in 22.3.10.11.1.”); id. Clause 22.3.10.11.1; IEEE 802.11-2012 Standard Clause
`
`20.3.12.3.6; 802.11ac Standard Clauses 8.4.1.24, 9.31.5.1, 9.31.5.2; id. Clause 22.3.11.1:
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`
`
`; id. Clause 22.3.11.2:
`
`
`
`
`
`25.
`
`Each ’235 Accused Product performs a method for use in a wireless
`
`communications system, the method comprising determining first signal information for the first
`
`signal transmission and determining second signal information for the second signal transmission,
`
`wherein the second signal information is different than the first signal information. For example,
`
`as with each ’235 Accused Product, the Apple iPhone XS Max determines different signal
`
`information for the first signal transmission than it does for the second signal transmission, by
`
`using the training fields of a null data packet for MU-MIMO sounding and channel estimation to
`
`determine the parameters in the beamforming feedback matrix. See, e.g., Compare iPhone models,
`
`iPhone XS Max (Wireless technology includes “Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac) with MIMO”; Chip includes
`
`“A12 Bionic chip; Second-generation Neural Engine”). See, e.g., Apple iPad Pro 12.9-in Data
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`
`
`Sheet (“802.11ax Wi-Fi 6; simultaneous dual band (2.4 GHz and 5GHz; HT80 with MIMO”; Chip
`
`includes “Apple M1 chip, 8-core CPU with 4 performance cores and 4 efficiency cores, 8-core
`
`GPU, 16-core Neural Engine”). See, e.g., IEEE 802.11ac Standard Clause 9.31.5.1 (“Transmit
`
`beamforming and DL-MU-MIMO require knowledge of the channel state to compute a steering
`
`matrix that is applied to the transmitted signal to optimize reception at one or more receivers. The
`
`STA transmitting using the steering matrix is called the VHT beamformer and a STA for which
`
`reception is optimized is called a VHT beamformee. An explicit feedback mechanism is used
`
`where the VHT beamformee directly measures the channel from the training symbols transmitted
`
`by the VHT beamformer and sends back a transformed estimate of the channel state to the VHT
`
`beamformer. The VHT beamformer then uses this estimate, perhaps combining estimates from
`
`multiple VHT beamformees, to derive the steering matrix.”); See, e.g., 802.11ac Standard Clause
`
`9.31.5.2 (“A VHT beamformer shall initiate a sounding feedback sequence by transmitting a VHT
`
`NDP Announcement frame followed by a VHT NDP after a SIFS. The VHT beamformer shall
`
`include in the VHT NDP Announcement frame one STA Info field for each VHT beamformee that
`
`is expected to prepare VHT Compressed Beamforming feedback and shall identify the VHT
`
`beamformee by including the VHT beamformee’s AID in the AID subfield of the STA Info field.
`
`The VHT NDP Announcement frame shall include at least one STA Info field.”); id. (“A non-AP
`
`VHT beamformee that receives a VHT NDP Announcement frame… shall transmit its VHT
`
`Compressed Beamforming feedback a SIFS after receiving a Beamforming Report Poll with RA
`
`matching its MAC address and a non-bandwidth signaling TA obtained from the TA field
`
`matching the MAC address of the VHT beamformer.”); id. Clause 8.5.23.2 (defining format and
`
`subfields within the VHT Compressed Beamforming frame); id. Clause 8.4.1.48 (including Tables
`
`8-53(d)-(h)) (“Each SNR value per tone in stream i (before being averaged) corresponds to the
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`
`
`SNR associated with the column i of the beamforming feedback matrix V determined at the
`
`beamformee”); id. Clause 8.4.1.49 (including Table 8-53i – MU Exclusive Beamforming Report
`
`information); id. Clauses 8.4.1.24, 9.31.5.1, 9.31.5.2; id. Clauses 22.3.4.6(d), 22.3.4.7(e),
`
`22.3.4.8(l), 22.3.4.9.1(m), 22.3.4.9.2(m), 22.3.4.10.4(a) (“Spatial mapping: Apply the Q matrix as
`
`described in 22.3.10.11.1.”); id. Clause 22.3.10.11.1; IEEE 802.11-2012 Standard Clause
`
`20.3.12.3.6; 802.11ac Standard Clauses 8.4.1.24, 9.31.5.1, 9.31.5.2; id. Clause 22.3.11.1:
`
`; id. Clause 22.3.11.2:
`
`
`
`
`
`26.
`
`Each ’235 Accused Product performs a method for use in a wireless
`
`communications system, the method comprising determining a set of weighting values based on
`
`the first signal information and the second signal information, wherein the set of weighting values
`
`is configured to be used by the remote station to construct one or more beam-formed transmission
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`
`
`signals, and transmitting to the remote station a third signal comprising content based on the set of
`
`weighting values. For example, as with each ’235 Accused Product, the Apple iPhone XS Max
`
`determines a set of weighting values based on the first signal information and the second signal
`
`information, wherein the set of weighting values is configured to be used by the remote station to
`
`construct one or more beam-formed transmission signals, and transmits to the remote station a
`
`third signal comprising content based on the set of weighting values, by determining the
`
`parameters of the beamforming feedback matrix, which include weighting values configured to be
`
`used by the remote station (e.g., a Wi-Fi access point) to construct one or more beamformed
`
`transmission signals, and transmitting to the remote station (e.g., a Wi-Fi access point) a signal
`
`that includes the beamforming feedback matrix. See, e.g., Compare iPhone models, iPhone XS
`
`Max (Wireless technology includes “Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac) with MIMO”; Chip includes “A12 Bionic
`
`chip; Second-generation Neural Engine”). See, e.g., Apple iPad Pro 12.9-in Data Sheet (“802.11ax
`
`Wi-Fi 6; simultaneous dual band (2.4 GHz and 5GHz; HT80 with MIMO”; Chip includes “Apple
`
`M1 chip, 8-core CPU with 4 performance cores and 4 efficiency cores, 8-core GPU, 16-core Neural
`
`Engine”). See, e.g., IEEE 802.11ac Standard Clause 9.31.5.1 (“Transmit beamforming and DL-
`
`MU-MIMO require knowledge of the channel state to compute a steering matrix that is applied to
`
`the transmitted signal to optimize reception at one or more receivers. The STA transmitting using
`
`the steering matrix is called the VHT beamformer and a STA for which reception is optimized is
`
`called a VHT beamformee. An explicit feedback mechanism is used where the VHT beamformee
`
`directly measures the channel from the training symbols transmitted by the VHT beamformer and
`
`sends back a transformed estimate of the channel state to the VHT beamformer. The VHT
`
`beamformer then uses this estimate, perhaps combining estimates from multiple VHT
`
`beamformees, to derive the steering matrix.”); See, e.g., 802.11ac Standard Clause 9.31.5.2 (“A
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`
`
`VHT beamformer shall initiate a sounding feedback sequence by transmitting a VHT NDP
`
`Announcement frame followed by a VHT NDP after a SIFS. The VHT beamformer shall include
`
`in the VHT NDP Announcement frame one STA Info field for each VHT beamformee that is
`
`expected to prepare VHT Compressed Beamforming feedback and shall identify the VHT
`
`beamformee by including the VHT beamformee’s AID in the AID subfield of the STA Info field.
`
`The VHT NDP Announcement frame shall include at least one STA Info field.”); id. (“A non-AP
`
`VHT beamformee that receives a VHT NDP Announcement frame… shall transmit its VHT
`
`Compressed Beamforming feedback a SIFS after receiving a Beamforming Report Poll with RA
`
`matching its MAC address and a non-bandwidth signaling TA obtained from the TA field
`
`matching the MAC address of the VHT beamformer.”); id. Clause 8.5.23.2 (defining format and
`
`subfields within the VHT Compressed Beamforming frame); id. Clause 8.4.1.48 (including Tables
`
`8-53(d)-(h)) (“Each SNR value per tone in stream i (before being averaged) corresponds to the
`
`SNR associated with the column i of the beamforming feedback matrix V determined at the
`
`beamformee”); id. Clause 8.4.1.49 (including Table 8-53i – MU Exclusive Beamforming Report
`
`information); id. Clauses 8.4.1.24, 9.31.5.1, 9.31.5.2; id. Clauses 22.3.4.6(d), 22.3.4.7(e),
`
`22.3.4.8(l), 22.3.4.9.1(m), 22.3.4.9.2(m), 22.3.4.10.4(a) (“Spatial mapping: Apply the Q matrix as
`
`described in 22.3.10.11.1.”); id. Clause 22.3.10.11.1; IEEE 802.11-2012 Standard Clause
`
`20.3.12.3.6; 802.11ac Standard Clauses 8.4.1.24, 9.31.5.1, 9.31.5.2; id. Clause 22.3.11.1:
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`
`
`; id. Clause 22.3.11.2:
`
`27.
`
`Defendant also has been and is now knowingly and intentionally inducing
`
`infringement of at least claim 8 of the ’235 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Through at
`
`least the filing and service of this Complaint, Defendant has had knowledge of the ’235 Patent and
`
`the infringing nature of the ’235 Accused Products.
`
`28.
`
`Despite this knowledge of the ’235 Patent, Defendant continues to actively
`
`encourage and instruct its customers and end users (for example, through user manuals and online
`
`instruction materials on its website) to use the ’235 Accused Products in ways that directly infringe
`
`the ’235 Patent. For example, Defendant’s websites provided, and continues to provide,
`
`instructions for using the ’235 Accused Products on wireless communications systems, to utilize
`
`their 802.11ac and/or 802.11ax beamforming and/or MU-MIMO functionalities. Defendant does
`
`so knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit these infringing acts.
`
`Defendant also continue to make, use, offer for sale, sell, and/or import the ’235 Accused Products,
`
`despite its knowledge of the ’235 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and inducing its
`
`customers to infringe the ’235 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary use of the ’235
`
`Accused Products. Defendant also knows or was willfully blind that its actions would induce direct
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`

`
`
`infringement by others and intended that its actions would induce direct infringement by others.
`
`Accordingly, a reasonable inference is that Defendant specifically intended for others, such as its
`
`customers, to directly infringe one or more claims of Vivato’s ’235 Patent in the United States
`
`because Defendants had knowledge of the ’235 Patent and actively induced others (e.g., its
`
`customers) to directly infringe the ’235 Patent.
`
`29.
`
`Defendants also contributorily infringe under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) by making, using,
`
`selling, offering to sell, and/or importing the ’235 Accused Products, knowing they constitute a
`
`material part of the invention, are especially made or adapted for use in infringing, and that they
`
`are not staple articles of commerce capable of substantial non-infringing use.
`
`30.
`
`By making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing into the United States
`
`the ’235 Accused Products, Defendants have injured Vivato and is liable for infringement of
`
`the ’235 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`31.
`
`Defendant also infringes numerous additional claims of the ’235 Patent, including
`
`Claim 12, for example, directly and through inducing infringement, for similar reasons as
`
`explained above with respect to Claim 8.
`
`32.
`
`33.
`
`Vivato’s ’235 Patent is valid and enforceable.
`
`Vivato has complied with 35 U.S.C. § 287 where applicable (i.e., as to non-method
`
`claims) because there are no unmarked patented articles subject to a duty to mark.
`
`34.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s infringement of the ’235 Patent, Defendant has damaged
`
`Vivato, and Vivato is entitled to monetary damages in an amount to be determined at trial that is
`
`adequate to compensate for Defendant’s infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable
`
`royalty for the use made of the invention by Defendant, together with interest and costs as fixed
`
`by the Court.
`
`
`
`18
`
`

`

`
`
`35.
`
`Defendant’s infringing activities have injured and will continue to injure Vivato,
`
`unless and until this Court enters an injunction prohibiting further infringement of the ’235 Patent,
`
`and, specifically, enjoining further manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offers for sale that
`
`come within the scope of the patent claims.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Vivato respectfully requests that this Court enter:
`