Case 2:15-cv-01278-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 10/02/15 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 193
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 2:15-cv-01278-JRG-RSP
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`
`
`
`BLITZSAFE TEXAS, LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA,
`INC. and VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF
`AMERICA CHATTANOOGA
`OPERATIONS, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Defendants.
`
`PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`
`Plaintiff, Blitzsafe Texas, LLC, files this First Amended Complaint against Defendants,
`
`Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. and Volkswagen Group of America Chattanooga
`
`Operations, LLC (“Defendants”), for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271 and alleges as
`
`follows:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff, Blitzsafe Texas LLC (“Blitzsafe”), is a limited liability company
`
`organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas, and maintains its principal place of
`
`business at 100 W. Houston Street, Marshall, Texas 75670. Blitzsafe sells automotive interface
`
`products that allow the end user to connect a third-party external audio device or multimedia
`
`device to a car stereo in order to play the content on the device through the car stereo system and
`
`speakers. Blitzsafe sells its products throughout the United States including in this judicial
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-01278-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 10/02/15 Page 2 of 11 PageID #: 194
`
`district. Blitzsafe is the owner of all right title and interest in and to U.S. Patent No. 7,489,786
`
`and U.S. Patent No. 8,155,342.
`
`2.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.
`
`(“Volkswagen America”) is a New Jersey corporation with a place of business at 2200 Ferdinand
`
`Porsche Drive, Herndon, Virginia 20171.
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Volkswagen Group of America
`
`Chattanooga Operations, LLC is a Tennessee limited liability company with a place of business
`
`at 8001 Volkswagen Drive, Chattanooga, Tennessee 37421.
`
`JURISDICTION
`
`4.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the
`
`United States, 35 U.S.C. §§ 1, et seq. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28
`
`U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`5.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants. Defendants conduct
`
`business and have committed acts of patent infringement and/or have induced acts of patent
`
`infringement by others in this district and/or have contributed to patent infringement by others in
`
`this judicial district, the State of Texas, and elsewhere in the United States.
`
`6.
`
`Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b), 1391(c) and
`
`1400(b) because, among other things, Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this
`
`district, Defendants have regularly conducted business in this judicial district, and certain of the
`
`acts complained of herein occurred in this judicial district.
`
`PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`7.
`
`On February 10, 2009, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and
`
`legally issued U.S. Patent No. 7,489,786 (the “’786 Patent”) entitled “Audio Device Integration
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-01278-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 10/02/15 Page 3 of 11 PageID #: 195
`
`System.” A true and correct copy of the ’786 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Blitzsafe is
`
`the sole and rightful owner of all rights in the ’786 patent, including the right to sue for past
`
`infringement.
`
`8.
`
`On April 10, 2012, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and
`
`legally issued U.S. Patent No. 8,155,342 (the “’342 Patent”) entitled “Multimedia Device
`
`Integration System.” A true and correct copy of the ’342 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
`
`Blitzsafe is the sole and rightful owner of all rights in the ’342 patent, including the right to sue
`
`for past infringement.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`9.
`
`The patents-in-suit generally cover systems for integrating third-party audio
`
`devices and multimedia devices with a car stereo.
`
`10.
`
`Defendants manufacture, import and/or sell an audio and multimedia integration
`
`system, which Defendants generally refer to as an “infotainment” system, in Volkswagen-
`
`branded vehicles made in or imported into the United States since at least approximately 2012.
`
`11.
`
`Defendant manufacture, import and/or sell an audio and multimedia integration
`
`system, called Multi Media Interface™ or MMI, that has been installed in Audi-branded vehicles
`
`made in or imported into the United States since at least approximately 2008.
`
`12.
`
`The Volkswagen infotainment system and MMI support the integration of third-
`
`party external audio devices, such as MP3 players, with the car radio. The Volkswagen
`
`infotainment system and MMI permit an end user to connect a third-party external audio or
`
`multimedia device to the car radio by wire, such as through a USB port or auxiliary port, or
`
`wirelessly, such as through Bluetooth. Once connected, the end user may control the third-party
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-01278-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 10/02/15 Page 4 of 11 PageID #: 196
`
`external audio device using the car radio’s controls, and the audio from the external audio device
`
`may be played through the car radio and speakers.
`
`COUNT I
`(Infringement of the ’786 Patent)
`
`13.
`
`14.
`
`Paragraphs 1 through 12 are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
`
`Blitzsafe has not licensed or otherwise authorized Defendants to make, use, offer
`
`for sale, sell, or import any products that embody the inventions of the ’786 Patent.
`
`15.
`
`Defendants have and continue to directly infringe one or more claims of the ’786
`
`patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, offering to sell,
`
`selling and/or importing into the United States infringing audio and multimedia integration
`
`systems, including the Volkswagen infotainment system and MMI audio and multimedia
`
`integration system, without authority and in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`16.
`
`Defendants have and continue to indirectly infringe one or more claims of the
`
`’786 Patent by knowingly and intentionally inducing others to directly infringe, either literally or
`
`under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, offering to sell, selling and/or importing into
`
`the United States infringing audio and multimedia integration systems, including the
`
`Volkswagen infotainment system and MMI. For example, Defendants, with knowledge that the
`
`Volkswagen infotainment system and MMI infringe the ’786 Patent at least as of the date of this
`
`Complaint, knowingly and intentionally induced, and continue to knowingly and intentionally
`
`induce, direct infringement of the ’786 patent by providing the Volkswagen infotainment system
`
`and MMI product manuals that instruct end users how to use the Volkswagen infotainment
`
`system and MMI, including specifically how to connect their external third-party audio and
`
`multimedia devices to the car stereo. Defendants induced infringement by others, including end
`
`users, with the intent to cause infringing acts by others or, in the alternative, with the belief that
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-01278-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 10/02/15 Page 5 of 11 PageID #: 197
`
`there was a high probability that others, including end users, infringe the ’786 Patent, but while
`
`remaining willfully blind to the infringement.
`
`17.
`
`Defendants have and continue to indirectly infringe one or more claims of the
`
`’786 Patent by contributing to the direct infringement, either literally or under the doctrine of
`
`equivalents, by others, including end users, by offering to sell, selling and/or importing into the
`
`United States infringing audio and multimedia integration systems, including the Volkswagen
`
`infotainment system and MMI, with the knowledge, at least as of the date of this Complaint, that
`
`the audio and multimedia integration systems, including the Volkswagen infotainment system
`
`and MMI, contain components that constitute a material part of the inventions claimed in the
`
`’786 Patent. Such components include, for example, interfaces that permit an end user to use a
`
`car radio’s controls to control an external third party audio device. Defendants know that these
`
`components are especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of the ’786
`
`Patent and that these components are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for
`
`substantial non-infringing use. Alternatively, Defendants believed there was a high probability
`
`that others would infringe the ’786 Patent but remained willfully blind to the infringing nature of
`
`others’ actions.
`
`18.
`
`Blitzsafe has suffered damages as a result of Defendants’ direct and indirect
`
`infringement of the ’786 patent in an amount to be proved at trial.
`
`19.
`
`Blitzsafe has suffered, and will continue to suffer, irreparable harm as a result of
`
`Defendants’ infringement of the ’786 patent, for which there is no adequate remedy at law,
`
`unless Defendants’ infringement is enjoined by this Court.
`
`20.
`
`Defendants’ infringement of the ’786 patent has been and continued to be willful.
`
`Defendants knew or should have known of the patent application that issued as the ’786 patent at
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-01278-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 10/02/15 Page 6 of 11 PageID #: 198
`
`least as early as 2003, when Blitzsafe of America, Inc. (“Blitzsafe of America”) provided audio
`
`integration systems to Defendant Volkswagen America in Palo Alto, California, and informed
`
`Volkswagen America that it had filed a patent application covering the technology in its audio
`
`integration systems. Upon information and belief, Volkswagen America had not developed its
`
`own audio integration system as of 2003, and installed the audio integration systems provided by
`
`Blitzsafe of America in Volkswagen cars for testing purposes. Moreover, in 2003, Blitzsafe of
`
`America provided sample audio integration systems to Volkswagen de México, which then
`
`requested a proposal for Blitzsafe of America to provide additional sample audio integration
`
`systems that would permit an end user of a Volkswagen radio to connect to and control an
`
`external CD changer and iPod. Blitzsafe of America informed Volkswagen de México that it
`
`had filed a patent application covering the technology in its audio integration systems.
`
`Defendants knew or should have known of the ’786 patent upon its issuance given that
`
`Defendant Volkswagen America and Volkswagen de México had been informed of the pending
`
`patent application and Defendants ultimately incorporated Plaintiff’s technology into their audio
`
`and multimedia integration systems. Defendants have committed and continue to commit acts of
`
`infringement despite an objectively high likelihood that its actions constituted infringement of at
`
`least one valid and enforceable claim of the ’786 patent, and Defendants actually knew or should
`
`have known that their actions constituted an unjustifiably high risk of infringement of at least
`
`one valid and enforceable claim of the ’786 Patent. Defendants’ infringement of the ’786 Patent
`
`has been and continues to be willful, entitling Blitzsafe to an award of treble damages,
`
`reasonable attorney fees, and costs in bringing this action.
`
`COUNT II
`(Infringement of the ’342 Patent)
`
`21.
`
`Paragraphs 1 through 12 are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-01278-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 10/02/15 Page 7 of 11 PageID #: 199
`
`22.
`
`Blitzsafe has not licensed or otherwise authorized Defendants to make, use, offer
`
`for sale, sell, or import any products that embody the inventions of the ’342 Patent.
`
`23.
`
`Defendants have and continue to directly infringe one or more claims of the ’342
`
`patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, offering to sell,
`
`selling and/or importing into the United States infringing audio and multimedia integration
`
`systems, including the Volkswagen infotainment system and MMI audio and multimedia
`
`integration systems, without authority and in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`24.
`
`Defendants have and continue to indirectly infringe one or more claims of the
`
`’342 Patent by knowingly and intentionally inducing others to directly infringe, either literally or
`
`under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, offering to sell, selling and/or importing into
`
`the United States infringing audio and multimedia integration systems, including the
`
`Volkswagen infotainment system and MMI. For example, Defendants, with knowledge that
`
`Volkswagen infotainment system and MMI infringe the ’342 Patent at least as of the date of this
`
`Complaint, knowingly and intentionally induced, and continue to knowingly and intentionally
`
`induce, direct infringement of the ’342 patent by providing the Volkswagen infotainment system
`
`and MMI product manuals that instruct end users how to use the Volkswagen infotainment
`
`system and MMI, including specifically how to connect their external third-party audio and
`
`multimedia devices to the car stereo. Defendants induced infringement by others, including end
`
`users, with the intent to cause infringing acts by others or, in the alternative, with the belief that
`
`there was a high probability that others, including end users, infringe the ’342 Patent, but while
`
`remaining willfully blind to the infringement.
`
`25.
`
`Defendants have and continue to indirectly infringe one or more claims of the
`
`’342 Patent by contributing to the direct infringement, either literally or under the doctrine of
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-01278-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 10/02/15 Page 8 of 11 PageID #: 200
`
`equivalents, by others, including end users, by offering to sell, selling and/or importing into the
`
`United States infringing audio and multimedia integration systems, including the Volkswagen
`
`infotainment system and MMI, with the knowledge, at least as of the date of this Complaint, that
`
`the audio and multimedia integration systems, including the Volkswagen infotainment system
`
`and MMI contain components that constitute a material part of the inventions claimed in the ’342
`
`Patent. Such components include, for example, interfaces that permit an end user to use a car
`
`radio’s controls to control an external third-party audio device. Defendants know that these
`
`components are especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of the ’342
`
`Patent and that these components are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for
`
`substantial non-infringing use. Alternatively, Defendants believed there was a high probability
`
`that others would infringe the ’342 Patent but remained willfully blind to the infringing nature of
`
`others’ actions.
`
`26.
`
`Blitzsafe has suffered damages as a result of Defendants’ direct and indirect
`
`infringement of the ’342 patent in an amount to be proved at trial.
`
`27.
`
`Blitzsafe has suffered, and will continue to suffer, irreparable harm as a result of
`
`Defendants’ infringement of the ’342 patent, for which there is no adequate remedy at law,
`
`unless Defendants’ infringement is enjoined by this Court.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Plaintiff hereby demands a jury for all issues so triable.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Blitzsafe prays for relief against Defendants as follows:
`
`a.
`
`Entry of judgment declaring that Defendants have directly and/or indirectly
`
`infringed one or more claims of each of the patents-in-suit;
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-01278-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 10/02/15 Page 9 of 11 PageID #: 201
`
`b.
`
`Entry of judgment declaring that Defendants’ infringement of the ’786 patent has
`
`been willful and deliberate;
`
`c.
`
`An order pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283 permanently enjoining Defendants, their
`
`officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and those persons in active concert or
`
`participation with them, from further acts of infringement of the patents-in-suit;
`
`d.
`
`An order awarding damages sufficient to compensate Blitzsafe for Defendants’
`
`infringement of the patents-in-suit, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty, together with
`
`interest and costs;
`
`e.
`
`An order awarding Blitzsafe treble damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 as a result of
`
`Defendants’ willful and deliberate infringement of the ’786 patent;
`
`f.
`
`Entry of judgment declaring that this case is exceptional and awarding Blitzsafe
`
`its costs and reasonable attorney fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285; and
`
`g.
`
`Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
`
`Dated: October 2, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`BROWN RUDNICK LLP
`
`_/s/ Alfred R. Fabricant______
`Alfred R. Fabricant
`Texas Bar No. 2219392
`Email: afabricant@brownrudnick.com
`Peter Lambrianakos
`Texas Bar No. 2894392
`Email: plambrianakos@brownrudnick.com
`Lawrence C. Drucker
`Email: ldrucker@brownrudnick.com
`Bryan N. DeMatteo
`Email: bdematteo@brownrudnick.com
`BROWN RUDNICK LLP
`7 Times Square
`New York, NY 10036
`Telephone: (212) 209-4800
`
`
`9
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-01278-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 10/02/15 Page 10 of 11 PageID #: 202
`
`Samuel F. Baxter
`Texas State Bar No. 01938000
`sbaxter@mckoolsmith.com
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`104 E. Houston Street, Suite 300
`Marshall, Texas 75670
`Telephone: (903) 923-9000
`Facsimile: (903) 923-9099
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF,
`BLITZSAFE TEXAS, LLC
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Case 2:15-cv-01278-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 10/02/15 Page 11 of 11 PageID #: 203
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in
`
`compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a). As such, this document was served on all counsel who
`
`have consented to electronic service on this the 2nd day of October, 2015. Local Rule CV-
`
`5(a)(3)(A).
`
`
`
`
`
`_/s/ Alfred R. Fabricant_______
` Alfred R. Fabricant
`
`11