`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`
`§
`
`§
`
`§
`
`§
`
`§
`
`§
`
`§
`
`§
`
`§
`
`§
`
`§
`
`§
`
`Civil Action No. 2:16-cv-395
`
`PATENT CASE
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNILOC USA, INC. and
`UNILOC LUXEMBOURG, S.A.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`GOG LTD.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs, Uniloc USA, Inc. and Uniloc Luxembourg, S.A. (together “Uniloc”), as and
`
`for their complaint against defendant, GOG Ltd. (“GOG”), allege as follows:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Uniloc USA, Inc. (“Uniloc USA”) is a Texas corporation having a principal place
`
`of business at Legacy Town Center I, Suite 380, 7160 Dallas Parkway, Plano Texas 75024.
`
`Uniloc also maintains a place of business at 102 N. College, Suite 603, Tyler, Texas 75702.
`
`2.
`
`Uniloc Luxembourg S.A. (“Uniloc Luxembourg”) is a Luxembourg public limited
`
`liability company having a principal place of business at 15, Rue Edward Steichen, 4th Floor, L-
`
`2540, Luxembourg (R.C.S. Luxembourg B159161).
`
`3.
`
`Uniloc Luxembourg owns a number of patents in the field of application
`
`management in a computer network.
`
`4.
`
`Upon information and belief, GOG is a limited liability company organized and
`
`existing under the laws of the Republic of Cyprus having a principal place of business in
`
`06096768
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:16-cv-00395-RWS Document 1 Filed 04/12/16 Page 2 of 10 PageID #: 2
`
`Nicosia, Cyprus and offering its products and services, including those accused herein of
`
`infringement, to customers and/or potential customers located in Texas and in the judicial
`
`Eastern District of Texas.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`5.
`
`Uniloc brings this action for patent infringement under the patent laws of the
`
`United States, 35 U.S.C. § 271 et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28
`
`U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338(a) and 1367.
`
`6.
`
`Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(c) and
`
`1400(b). Upon information and belief, GOG is deemed to reside in this judicial district, has
`
`committed acts of infringement in this judicial district, and/or has purposely transacted business
`
`involving the accused products in this judicial district, including sales to one or more customers
`
`in Texas.
`
`7.
`
`GOG is subject to this Court’s jurisdiction pursuant to due process and/or the
`
`Texas Long Arm Statute due at least to its substantial business in this State and judicial district,
`
`including: (A) at least part of its past infringing activities, (B) regularly doing or soliciting
`
`business in Texas and/or (C) engaging in persistent conduct and/or deriving substantial revenue
`
`from goods and services provided to customers in Texas.
`
`COUNT I
`(INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,510,466)
`
`Uniloc incorporates paragraphs 1-7 above by reference.
`
`Uniloc Luxembourg is the owner, by assignment, of U.S. Patent No. 6,510,466
`
`
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`(“the ’466 Patent”), entitled METHODS, SYSTEMS AND COMPUTER PROGRAM
`
`PRODUCTS FOR CENTRALIZED MANAGEMENT OF APPLICATION PROGRAMS ON A
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:16-cv-00395-RWS Document 1 Filed 04/12/16 Page 3 of 10 PageID #: 3
`
`NETWORK that issued on January 21, 2003. A true and correct copy of the ’466 Patent is
`
`attached as Exhibit A hereto.
`
`10.
`
`Uniloc USA is the exclusive licensee of the ’466 Patent with ownership of all
`
`substantial rights therein, including the right to grant sublicenses, to exclude others, and to
`
`enforce, sue and recover past damages for the infringement thereof.
`
`11.
`
`Upon information and belief, the following describes, at least in part, how GOG’s
`
`application software licensing and distribution system works:
`
`12.
`
`Upon information and belief, the following describes, at least in part, how GOG’s
`
`application software licensing and distribution system works:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:16-cv-00395-RWS Document 1 Filed 04/12/16 Page 4 of 10 PageID #: 4
`
`13.
`
`Upon information and belief, the following describes, at least in part, how GOG’s
`
`application software licensing and distribution system works:
`
`
`
`14.
`
`Upon information and belief, the following describes, at least in part, how GOG’s
`
`application software licensing and distribution system works:
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 2:16-cv-00395-RWS Document 1 Filed 04/12/16 Page 5 of 10 PageID #: 5
`
`
`
`15.
`
`Upon information and belief, the following describes, at least in part, how GOG’s
`
`application software licensing and distribution system works:
`
`
`
`
`
`16.
`
`Upon information and belief, the following describes, at least in part, how GOG’s
`
`
`
`application software licensing and distribution system works:
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 2:16-cv-00395-RWS Document 1 Filed 04/12/16 Page 6 of 10 PageID #: 6
`
`
`
`17.
`
`Upon information and belief, the following describes, at least in part, how GOG’s
`
`application software licensing and distribution system works:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`18.
`
`GOG has directly infringed, and continues to directly infringe one or more claims
`
`of the ’466 Patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas, including at least Claims 1, 2,
`
`7, 8, 15, 22 and 23 literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, by or through making,
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 2:16-cv-00395-RWS Document 1 Filed 04/12/16 Page 7 of 10 PageID #: 7
`
`using, importing, offering for sale and/or selling its application software licensing and
`
`distribution system during the pendency of the ’466 Patent which software and associated
`
`backend server architecture inter alia allows for installing application programs on a server,
`
`receiving a login request, establishing a user desktop, receiving a selection of one or more
`
`programs displayed in the user desktop and providing a program for execution.
`
`19.
`
`In addition, should GOG’s application software licensing and distribution system
`
`be found to not literally infringe the asserted claims of the ’466 Patent, GOG’s accused system
`
`would nevertheless infringe the asserted claims of the ’466 Patent. More specifically, the
`
`accused software/system performs substantially the same function (making computer games
`
`available for digital download/management), in substantially the same way (via a client/server
`
`environment), to yield substantially the same result (providing authorized games to a client for
`
`execution). GOG would thus be liable for direct infringement under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`20.
`
`GOG may have infringed the ’466 Patent through other software utilizing the
`
`same or reasonably similar functionality, including other versions of its application software
`
`licensing and distribution system. Uniloc reserves the right to discover and pursue all such
`
`additional infringing software.
`
`21.
`
`Uniloc has been damaged, reparably and irreparably, by GOG’s infringement of
`
`the ’466 Patent and such damage will continue unless and until GOG is enjoined.
`
`COUNT II
`(INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,728,766)
`
`Uniloc incorporates paragraphs 1-21 above by reference.
`
`Uniloc Luxembourg is the owner, by assignment, of U.S. Patent No. 6,728,766
`
`
`
`22.
`
`23.
`
`(“the ’766 Patent”), entitled METHODS, SYSTEMS AND COMPUTER PROGRAM
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 2:16-cv-00395-RWS Document 1 Filed 04/12/16 Page 8 of 10 PageID #: 8
`
`PRODUCTS FOR LICENSE USE MANAGEMENT ON A NETWORK that issued on April 27,
`
`2004. A true and correct copy of the ’766 Patent is attached as Exhibit B hereto.
`
`24.
`
`Uniloc USA is the exclusive licensee of the ’766 Patent with ownership of all
`
`substantial rights therein, including the right to grant sublicenses, to exclude others, and to
`
`enforce, sue and recover past damages for the infringement thereof.
`
`25.
`
`GOG has directly infringed, and continues to directly infringe one or more claims
`
`of the ’766 Patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas, including at least Claims 1, 3,
`
`7, 9, 13 and 15, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, by or through making, using,
`
`importing, offering for sale and/or selling its application software distribution system during the
`
`pendency of the ’766 Patent which software and associated backend server architecture inter alia
`
`allow for maintaining user policy based license management information for application
`
`programs at a server, receiving a request for a license at the server, determining license
`
`availability based on the policy information, and providing an indication of availability or
`
`unavailability.
`
`26.
`
`In addition, should its application software distribution system be found to not
`
`literally infringe the asserted claims of the ’766 Patent, GOG’s accused product would
`
`nevertheless infringe the asserted claims of the ’766 Patent. More specifically, the accused
`
`application software distribution system performs substantially the same function (managing
`
`licenses for authorized computer games based on user policy information), in substantially the
`
`same way (via a client/server environment), to yield substantially the same result (providing
`
`authorized games to a client). GOG would thus be liable for direct infringement under the
`
`doctrine of equivalents.
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 2:16-cv-00395-RWS Document 1 Filed 04/12/16 Page 9 of 10 PageID #: 9
`
`27.
`
`GOG may have infringed the ’766 Patent through other software utilizing the
`
`same or reasonably similar functionality, including other versions of its application software
`
`distribution system. Uniloc reserves the right to discover and pursue all such additional
`
`infringing software.
`
`28.
`
`Uniloc has been damaged, reparably and irreparably, by GOG’s infringement of
`
`the ’766 Patent and such damage will continue unless and until GOG is enjoined.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Uniloc requests that the Court enter judgment against GOG as follows:
`
`(A)
`
`(B)
`
`that GOG has infringed the ’466 Patent and the ’766 Patent;
`
`awarding Uniloc its damages suffered as a result of GOG’s infringement of the
`
`’466 Patent and the ’766 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`
`
`(C)
`
`enjoining GOG, its officers, directors, agents, servants, affiliates, employees,
`
`divisions, branches, subsidiaries and parents, and all others acting in concert or privity with it
`
`from infringing the ’466 Patent and the ’766 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283;
`
`awarding Uniloc its costs, attorneys’ fees, expenses and interest, and
`
`granting Uniloc such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and
`
`
`
`
`
`(D)
`
`(E)
`
`proper.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`Uniloc hereby demands trial by jury on all issues so triable pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38.
`
`
`Dated: April 12, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Craig Tadlock
`Craig Tadlock
`Texas State Bar No. 00791766
`Keith Smiley
`Texas State Bar No. 24067869
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 2:16-cv-00395-RWS Document 1 Filed 04/12/16 Page 10 of 10 PageID #: 10
`
`TADLOCK LAW FIRM PLLC
`2701 Dallas Parkway, Suite 360
`Plano, TX 75093
`Tel: (903) 730-6789
`Email: craig@tadlocklawfirm.com
`Email: keith@tadlocklawfirm.com
`
`Paul J. Hayes
`Kevin Gannon
`CESARI AND MCKENNA, LLP
`88 Black Falcon Ave
`Suite 271
`Boston, MA 02110
`Telephone: (617) 951-2500
`Facsimile: (617) 951-3927
`Email: pjh@c-m.com
`Email: ktg@c-m.com
`
`
`
`
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR THE PLAINTIFFS
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`