Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 1 of 19 PageID #: 3378
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`LEAD CASE NO. 2:17-cv-514-JRG
`
`v.
`
`MEMBER CASE NO. 2:17-cv-515-JRG
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`Defendant.
`
`DEFENDANT LG ELECTRONICS, INC.’S ANSWER TO
`PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`Defendant LG Electronics, Inc. (“Defendant” or “LG”) answer the Complaint for Patent
`
`Infringement (“Complaint”) of Plaintiff AGIS Software Development, LLC (“AGIS”) as
`
`follows:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
`
`the truth of the allegations in paragraph 1 of the Complaint and therefore denies them.
`
`2.
`
`Defendant admits that LG Electronics Inc. is a South Korean company
`
`headquartered in Seoul, South Korea, with its principal place of business located at LG Twin
`
`Tower 128, Yeoui-daero, yeongdeungpogu, Seoul, Korea. Defendant denies the remaining
`
`allegations in paragraph 2 of the Complaint, and specifically denies that it has committed any
`
`acts of infringement.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`3.
`
`The allegations in paragraph 3 of the Complaint are legal conclusions to which no
`
`answer is required. To the extent any answer is required, Defendant admits that this action
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 2 of 19 PageID #: 3379
`
`involves the United States patent laws, and that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over
`
`patent law claims. Defendant denies any remaining allegations in paragraph 3 of the Complaint.
`
`4.
`
`The allegations in paragraph 4 are legal conclusions to which no answer is
`
`required. To the extent that any answer is required, Defendant denies that it has committed any
`
`acts of infringement in this judicial district or in any other district. Defendant denies any
`
`remaining factual allegations in paragraph 4 of the Complaint and denies that there is personal
`
`jurisdiction over Defendant in this District.
`
`5.
`
`The allegations in paragraph 5 are legal conclusions to which no answer is
`
`required. To the extent that any answer is required, Defendant denies that it has committed any
`
`acts of infringement in this judicial district or in any other district. Defendant further denies that
`
`venue is proper in this District and also denies that venue is convenient in the Eastern District of
`
`Texas for the issues raised in this case. Defendant denies any remaining factual allegations in
`
`paragraph 5 of the Complaint.
`
`PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`6.
`
`Defendant admits that U.S. Patent No. 8,213,970 (“’970 patent”) is entitled,
`
`“Method of Utilizing Forced Alerts for Interactive Remote Communications” and, on its face,
`
`indicates an issue date of July 3, 2012. Defendant admits that Exhibit A to the Complaint is
`
`alleged to be a copy of the ’970 patent. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph
`
`6 of the Complaint.
`
`7.
`
`Defendant admits that U.S. Patent No. 9,408,055 (“’055 patent”) is entitled,
`
`“Method to Provide Ad Hoc and Password Protected Digital and Voice Networks” and, on its
`
`face, indicates an issue date of August, 2, 2016. Defendant admits that Exhibit B to the
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 3 of 19 PageID #: 3380
`
`Complaint is alleged to be a copy of the ’055 patent. Defendant denies the remaining allegations
`
`in paragraph 7 of the Complaint.
`
`8.
`
`Defendant admits that U.S. Patent No. 9,445,251 (“’251 patent”) is entitled,
`
`“Method to Provide Ad Hoc and Password Protected Digital and Voice Networks” and, on its
`
`face, indicates an issue date of September 13, 2016. Defendant admits that Exhibit C to the
`
`Complaint is alleged to be a copy of the ’251 patent. Defendant denies the remaining allegations
`
`in paragraph 8 of the Complaint.
`
`9.
`
`Defendant admits that U.S. Patent No. 9,467,838 (“’838 patent”) is entitled,
`
`“Method to Provide Ad Hoc and Password Protected Digital and Voice Networks” and, on its
`
`face, indicates an issue date of October 11, 2016. Defendant admits that Exhibit D to the
`
`Complaint is alleged to be a copy of the ’838 patent. Defendant denies the remaining allegations
`
`in paragraph 9 of the Complaint.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`10.
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
`
`the truth of the allegations in paragraph 10 of the Complaint, and therefore denies them.
`
`11.
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
`
`the truth of the allegations in paragraph 11 of the Complaint and therefore denies them.
`
`12.
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
`
`the truth of the allegations in paragraph 12 of the Complaint and therefore denies them.
`
`13.
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
`
`the truth of the allegations in paragraph 13 of the Complaint and therefore denies them.
`
`14.
`
`Defendant admits that various parties design products using the Android operating
`
`system from non-party Google LLC, and also admits that Defendant designs certain products
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 4 of 19 PageID #: 3381
`
`utilizing the Android operating system. Defendant is without knowledge or information
`
`sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 14 of the
`
`Complaint and therefore denies them.
`
`15.
`
`Defendant admits that it designs and manufactures Android-based devices,
`
`including those named “LG G Stylo,” “LG G6,” “LG X Venture,” “LG V20,” “LG Phoenix
`
`P505,” “LG G5,” “LG K10,” “LG V10,” “LG Vista 2,” and “LG Escape 2” (collectively,
`
`“Accused Devices”) in South Korea. Defendant admits that Google Mobile Applications that are
`
`available for phones that run the Android operating system include Google Maps, Find My
`
`Device, Hangouts, and Google+. Defendant understands that the factual allegations directed to
`
`the functionality of the Accused Devices rely upon language found in the asserted patents and/or
`
`effectively amount to an allegation of infringement, and, on that basis, Defendant denies them,
`
`and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement. Defendant further denies
`
`that each Accused Product has supported the Google Latitude application, which, on information
`
`and belief, was discontinued prior to the release of certain of the Accused Products. Defendant is
`
`without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining
`
`factual allegations in paragraph 15 of the Complaint and therefore denies them.
`
`COUNT I
`
`(Infringement of the ’970 Patent)
`
`16.
`
`In response to paragraph 16 of the Complaint, Defendant incorporates by
`
`reference its response to the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
`
`17.
`
`Defendant admits that it has not directly entered into a license with Plaintiff
`
`concerning the ’970 patent. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 17 of the
`
`Complaint, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 5 of 19 PageID #: 3382
`
`18.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 18 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`19.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 19 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`20.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 20 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`21.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 21 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`22.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 22 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement or that Plaintiff is entitled to
`
`any damages.
`
`23.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 23 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement or that Plaintiff has suffered
`
`any harm.
`
`24.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 24 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement or that Plaintiff is entitled to
`
`any relief.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 6 of 19 PageID #: 3383
`
`COUNT II
`
`(Infringement of the ’055 Patent)
`
`25.
`
`In response to paragraph 25 of the Complaint, Defendant incorporates by
`
`reference its responses to paragraphs 1 through 15 as if fully set forth herein.
`
`26.
`
`Defendant admits that it has not directly entered into a license with Plaintiff
`
`concerning the ’055 patent. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 26 of the
`
`Complaint, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`27.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 27 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`28.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 28 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`29.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 29 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`30.
`
`Defendant admits that Google Mobile Applications that are available for phones
`
`that run the Android operating system include Google Maps. Defendant understands that the
`
`factual allegations directed to the functionality of the Accused Devices in paragraph 30 rely upon
`
`language found in the asserted patents and/or effectively amount to an allegation of infringement,
`
`and, on that basis, Defendant denies them, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts
`
`of infringement. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 30 of the Complaint,
`
`and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`31.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 31 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 7 of 19 PageID #: 3384
`
`32.
`
`The allegations of paragraph 34 consist of Plaintiff’s characterizations of
`
`webpages found at
`
`https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.messaging&hl=en;
`
`https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.talk&hl=en; and
`
`https://www.blog.google/topics/rcs/delivering-rcs-messaging-android-users-worldwide/, which
`
`have been set forth as the best evidence of the webpages’ contents, and therefore no response is
`
`required. To the extent that any response is required, Defendant denies the allegations in
`
`paragraph 32, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement. Defendant
`
`further understands that the factual allegations directed to the functionality of the Accused
`
`Devices set forth in paragraph 32 rely upon language found in the asserted patents and/or
`
`effectively amount to an allegation of infringement, and, on that basis, Defendant denies them.
`
`Defendant denies any remaining allegations in paragraph 32 of the Complaint.
`
`33.
`
`The allegations of paragraph 33 consist of Plaintiff’s characterizations of the
`
`webpage found at https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/03/location-sharing-finally-returns-to-
`
`google-maps/, which has been set forth as the best evidence of the webpage’s contents, and
`
`therefore no response is required. To the extent that any response is required, Defendant denies
`
`the allegations in paragraph 33, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of
`
`infringement. Defendant further understands that any factual allegations directed to the
`
`functionality of the Accused Devices in paragraph 33 rely upon language found in the asserted
`
`patents and/or effectively amount to an allegation of infringement, and, on that basis, Defendant
`
`denies them. Defendant denies any remaining allegations in paragraph 33 of the Complaint.
`
`34.
`
`The allegations of paragraph 34 consist of Plaintiff’s characterizations of the
`
`webpage found at
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 8 of 19 PageID #: 3385
`
`https://support.google.com/maps/answer/144361?co=GENIE.Platform%3DAndroid&hl=en,
`
`which has been set forth as the best evidence of the webpage’s contents, and therefore no
`
`response is required. To the extent that any response is required, Defendant denies the
`
`allegations in paragraph 34, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of
`
`infringement. Defendant further understands that any factual allegations directed to the
`
`functionality of the Accused Devices in paragraph 34 rely upon language found in the asserted
`
`patents and/or effectively amount to an allegation of infringement, and, on that basis, Defendant
`
`denies them. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 34 of the Complaint.
`
`35.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 35 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement or that Plaintiff is entitled to
`
`any damages.
`
`36.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 36 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement or that Plaintiff has suffered
`
`any harm.
`
`37.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 37 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement or that Plaintiff is entitled to
`
`any relief.
`
`COUNT III
`
`(Infringement of the ’251 Patent)
`
`38.
`
`In response to paragraph 38 of the Complaint, Defendant incorporates by
`
`reference its responses to paragraphs 1 through 15 as if fully set forth herein.
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 9 of 19 PageID #: 3386
`
`39.
`
`Defendant admits that it has not directly entered into a license with Plaintiff
`
`concerning the ’251 patent. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 39 of the
`
`Complaint, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`40.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 40 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`41.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 41 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`42.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 42 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`43.
`
`Defendant admits that Google Mobile Applications that are available for phones
`
`that run the Android operating system include Google Maps. Defendant understands that the
`
`factual allegations directed to the functionality of the Accused Devices in paragraph 43 rely upon
`
`language found in the asserted patents and/or effectively amount to an allegation of infringement,
`
`and, on that basis, Defendant denies them, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts
`
`of infringement. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 43 of the Complaint,
`
`and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`44.
`
`The allegations of paragraph 44 consist of Plaintiff’s characterizations of the
`
`webpages found at https://support.google.com/mail/answer/30970?hl=en;
`
`https://support.google.com/plus/answer/3302509?hl=en&co=GENIE.Platform%3DAndroid&oco
`
`=1, which have been set forth as the best evidence of the webpages’ contents, and therefore no
`
`response is required. To the extent that any response is required, Defendant denies the
`
`allegations in paragraph 44, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of
`
`infringement. Defendant further understands that any factual allegations directed to the
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 10 of 19 PageID #: 3387
`
`functionality of the Accused Devices in paragraph 44 rely upon language found in the asserted
`
`patents and/or effectively amount to an allegation of infringement, and, on that basis, Defendant
`
`denies them. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 44 of the Complaint.
`
`45.
`
`The allegations of paragraph 45 consist of Plaintiff’s characterizations of the
`
`webpage found at https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/android-api/location,
`
`which has been set forth as the best evidence of the webpage’s contents, and therefore no
`
`response is required. To the extent that any response is required, Defendant denies the
`
`allegations in paragraph 45, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of
`
`infringement. Defendant further understands that any factual allegations directed to the
`
`functionality of the Accused Devices in paragraph 45 rely upon language found in the asserted
`
`patents and/or effectively amount to an allegation of infringement, and, on that basis, Defendant
`
`denies them. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 45 of the Complaint.
`
`46.
`
`The allegations of paragraph 46 consist of Plaintiff’s characterizations of the
`
`webpage found at https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/03/location-sharing-finally-returns-to-
`
`google-maps/, which has been set forth as the best evidence of the webpage’s contents, and
`
`therefore no response is required. To the extent that any response is required, Defendant denies
`
`the allegations in paragraph 46, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of
`
`infringement. Defendant further understands that any factual allegations directed to the
`
`functionality of the Accused Devices in paragraph 46 rely upon language found in the asserted
`
`patents and/or effectively amount to an allegation of infringement, and, on that basis, Defendant
`
`denies them. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 46 of the Complaint.
`
`47.
`
`Defendant understands that any factual allegations directed to the functionality of
`
`the Accused Devices in paragraph 47 rely upon language found in the asserted patents and/or
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 11 of 19 PageID #: 3388
`
`effectively amount to an allegation of infringement, and, on that basis, Defendant denies them,
`
`and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement. Defendant denies any
`
`remaining allegations in paragraph 47 of the Complaint.
`
`48.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 48 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement or that Plaintiff is entitled to
`
`any damages.
`
`49.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 49 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement or that Plaintiff has suffered
`
`any harm.
`
`50.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 50 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement or that Plaintiff is entitled to
`
`any relief.
`
`COUNT IV
`
`(Infringement of the ’838 Patent)
`
`51.
`
`In response to paragraph 51 of the Complaint, Defendant incorporates by
`
`reference its responses to paragraphs 1 through 15 as if fully set forth herein.
`
`52.
`
`Defendant admits that it has not directly entered into a license with Plaintiff
`
`concerning the ’838 patent. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 52 of the
`
`Complaint, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`53.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 53 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`54.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 54 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 12 of 19 PageID #: 3389
`
`55.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 55 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`56.
`
`Defendant admits that Google Mobile Applications that are available for phones
`
`that run the Android operating system include Google Maps. Defendant understands that the
`
`factual allegations directed to the functionality of the Accused Devices in paragraph 56 rely upon
`
`language found in the asserted patents and/or effectively amount to an allegation of infringement,
`
`and, on that basis, Defendant denies them, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts
`
`of infringement. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 56 of the Complaint,
`
`and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement.
`
`57.
`
`The allegations of paragraph 57 consist of Plaintiff’s characterizations of the
`
`webpages found at
`
`https://support.google.com/plus/answer/3302509?hl=en&co=GENIE.Platform%3DAndroid&oco
`
`=1; and https://support.google.com/mail/answer/30970?hl=en, which have been set forth as the
`
`best evidence of the webpages’ contents, and therefore no response is required. To the extent
`
`that any response is required, Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 57, and specifically
`
`denies that it has committed any acts of infringement. Defendant further understands that any
`
`factual allegations directed to the functionality of the Accused Devices in paragraph 57 rely upon
`
`language found in the asserted patents and/or effectively amount to an allegation of infringement,
`
`and, on that basis, Defendant denies them. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in
`
`paragraph 57 of the Complaint.
`
`58.
`
`The allegations of paragraph 58 consist of Plaintiff’s characterizations of the
`
`webpage found at https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/android-api/location,
`
`which has been set forth as the best evidence of the webpage’s contents, and therefore no
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 13 of 19 PageID #: 3390
`
`response is required. To the extent that any response is required, Defendant denies the
`
`allegations in paragraph 58, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of
`
`infringement. Defendant further understands that any factual allegations directed to the
`
`functionality of the Accused Devices in paragraph 58 rely upon language found in the asserted
`
`patents and/or effectively amount to an allegation of infringement, and, on that basis, Defendant
`
`denies them. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 58 of the Complaint.
`
`59.
`
`The allegations of paragraph 59 consist of Plaintiff’s characterizations of the
`
`webpage found at https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/03/location-sharing-finally-returns-to-
`
`google-maps/, which has been set forth as the best evidence of the webpage’s contents, and
`
`therefore no response is required. To the extent that any response is required, Defendant denies
`
`the allegations in paragraph 59, and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of
`
`infringement. Defendant further understands that any factual allegations directed to the
`
`functionality of the Accused Devices in paragraph 59 rely upon language found in the asserted
`
`patents and/or effectively amount to an allegation of infringement, and, on that basis, Defendant
`
`denies them. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 59 of the Complaint.
`
`60.
`
`Defendant understands that any factual allegations directed to the functionality of
`
`the Accused Devices in paragraph 60 rely upon language found in the asserted patents and/or
`
`effectively amount to an allegation of infringement, and, on that basis, Defendant denies them,
`
`and specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement. Defendant denies any
`
`remaining allegations in paragraph 60 of the Complaint.
`
`61.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 61 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement or that Plaintiff is entitled to
`
`any damages.
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 14 of 19 PageID #: 3391
`
`62.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 62 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement or that Plaintiff has suffered
`
`any harm.
`
`63.
`
`Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 63 of the Complaint, and
`
`specifically denies that it has committed any acts of infringement or that Plaintiff is entitled to
`
`any relief.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Plaintiff’s demand for a trial by jury for all issues triable to a jury does not state any
`
`allegation, and Defendant is not required to respond. To the extent that any allegations are
`
`included in the demand, Defendant denies these allegations.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`These paragraphs of the Complaint set forth the statement of relief requested by Plaintiff
`
`to which no response is required. Defendant denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any of the
`
`requested relief and denies any allegations therein.
`
`AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
`
`Defendant alleges and asserts the following defenses, affirmative or otherwise, without
`
`assuming any burden of proof that it would not otherwise have. In addition to the affirmative
`
`defenses described below and subject to its responses above, Defendant specifically reserves all
`
`rights to allege additional defenses, affirmative or otherwise, that become known through the
`
`course of discovery.
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 15 of 19 PageID #: 3392
`
`FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM
`
`The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because, inter alia,
`
`the Complaint does not plausibly state a claim of infringement for which relief can be granted.
`
`SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`NON-INFRINGEMENT
`
`Defendant does not infringe and has not infringed (whether directly, contributorily, or by
`
`inducement), either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, any valid and enforceable
`
`claims of the ’970 patent, the ’055 patent, the ’251 patent, and the ’838 patent (“Patents-in-
`
`Suit”).
`
`THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`INVALIDITY
`
`The claims of the Patents-in-Suit are invalid and unenforceable under 35 U.S.C. § 101
`
`because the claims are directed to abstract ideas or other non-statutory subject matter.
`
`The claims of the Patents-in-Suit are invalid and unenforceable under 35 U.S.C. § 102
`
`because the claims lack novelty, and are taught and suggested by the prior art. Defendant
`
`reserves the right to identify and rely upon prior art that may be discovered as discovery
`
`progresses in this action.
`
`The claims of the Patents-in-Suit are invalid and unenforceable under 35 U.S.C. § 103
`
`because the claims are obvious in view of the prior art. Defendant reserves the right to identify
`
`and rely upon prior art that may be discovered as discovery progresses in this action.
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 16 of 19 PageID #: 3393
`
`The claims of the Patents-in-Suit are invalid and unenforceable for failure satisfy the
`
`conditions set forth in 35 U.S.C. § 112, including failure of written description, lack of
`
`enablement, and claim indefiniteness.
`
`FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`BAR TO DAMAGES
`
`Plaintiff’s claims for damages are barred, in whole or in part, under 35 U.S.C. §§ 286,
`
`287 and/or 288. Furthermore, Defendant has not engaged in any conduct entitling Plaintiff to a
`
`finding that this case is exceptional, and Plaintiff is not entitled to enhanced damages, costs,
`
`attorneys’ fees or expenses.
`
`FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`NO INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`Plaintiff’s claim for injunctive relief is barred because any alleged injury to Plaintiff is
`
`not immediate or irreparable, and Plaintiff has an adequate remedy at law for any alleged injury.
`
`Moreover, Plaintiff has no likelihood of success as Defendant does not infringe and has not
`
`infringed the ’970 patent, the ’055 patent, the ’251 patent, and the ’838 patent, each patent of
`
`which is not valid.
`
`SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`PROSECUTION HISTORY ESTOPPEL AND DISCLAIMER
`
`Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, under the doctrine of prosecution history
`
`estoppel due to amendments and/or statements made during prosecution of the ’970 patent, the
`
`’055 patent, the ’251 patent, or the ’838 patent.
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 17 of 19 PageID #: 3394
`
`RESERVATION OF DEFENSES
`
`Defendant reserves all affirmative defenses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(c),
`
`the patent laws, and any other defenses available at law or in equity that now exist or in the
`
`future may be available based on discovery or any other factual investigation concerning this
`
`action
`
`EXCEPTIONAL CASE
`
`On information and belief, this is an exceptional case entitling Defendant to an award of
`
`their attorneys’ fees incurred in connection with defending and prosecuting this action pursuant
`
`to 35 U.S.C. § 285, as a result of, inter alia, Plaintiff’s assertion of the Patents-in-Suit against
`
`Defendant with the knowledge that Defendant does not infringe any valid or enforceable claim of
`
`the Patents-in-Suit and/or that the Patents-in-Suit are invalid and/or unenforceable.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(b), Defendant demands a trial by jury on all issues
`
`so triable.
`
`Dated: October 12, 2018
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted by:
`
`/s/ James S. Blackburn
`Mark Mann
`SBN: 12926150
`mark@themannfirm.com
`G. Blake Thompson
`SBN: 24042033
`blake@themannfirm.com
`MANN TINDEL THOMPSON
`300 West Main Street
`Henderson, Texas 75652
`Tel: 903-657-8540
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 18 of 19 PageID #: 3395
`
`Michael A. Berta
`Michael.berta@arnoldporter.com
`ARNOLD & PORTER
`KAYE SCHOLER LLP
`Three Embarcadero Center
`10th Floor
`San Francisco, CA 94111-4024
`Tel: 415-471-3277
`
`James S. Blackburn
`james.blackburn@arnoldporter.com
`Nicholas H. Lee
`Nicholas.lee@arnoldporter.com
`ARNOLD & PORTER
`KAYE SCHOLER LLP
`777 South Figueroa Street
`44th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90017-5844
`Tel: 213-243-4156
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT LG
`ELECTRONICS, INC.
`
`18
`
`

`

`Case 2:17-cv-00514-JRG Document 83 Filed 10/12/18 Page 19 of 19 PageID #: 3396
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that on October 12, 2018, a true and correct copy of
`
`the foregoing was served to the parties counsel of record via electronic mail pursuant to Local
`
`Rule CV-5(d).
`
`/s/ James S. Blackburn
`
`19
`
`