Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 105-10 Filed 08/17/23 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:
`7948
`
`EXHIBIT 27
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00446-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 1 of 36 PageID #: 1Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 105-10 Filed 08/17/23 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:
`
`7949
`
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`§
`
`§
`Case No.
`§
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`§
`§
`
`§
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`ONEPLUS TECHNOLOGY (SHENZHEN)
`CO., LTD.,
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff, AGIS Software Development LLC (“AGIS Software” or “Plaintiff”) files this
`
`Complaint against Defendant OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. (“OnePlus” or
`
`“Defendant”) for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271 and alleges as follows:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff AGIS Software 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. AGIS Software is the owner of all right, title, and interest
`
`in and to U.S. Patent Nos. 8,213,970, 9,445,251, 9,467,838, 9,749,829, and 9,820,123 (the
`
`“Patents-in-Suit”).
`
`2.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant is a corporation organized and existing under
`
`the laws of China, with a principal place of business at 18F, Tairan Building, Block C, Tairan 8th
`
`Road, Chegongmiao, Futian District, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518040, China. On information and
`
`belief, Defendant may be served pursuant to the provisions of the Hague Convention. OnePlus is
`
`a leading manufacturer and seller of smartphones in the world and throughout the United States.
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00446-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 10 of 36 PageID #: 10Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 105-10 Filed 08/17/23 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:
`
`7950
`
`Alternatively, Defendant believed there was a high probability that others would infringe the ’970
`
`Patent but remained willfully blind to the infringing nature of others’ actions.
`
`23.
`
`For example, Defendant has indirectly infringed and continues to indirectly infringe
`
`at least claim 10 of the ’970 Patent in the United States because Defendant’s customers use the
`
`Accused Products, including at least the Find My Device (formerly known as Android Device
`
`Manager) Apps and/or services or the Accused Products with the Find My Device Apps and/or
`
`services, alone or in conjunction with additional Accused Products, in accordance with
`
`Defendant’s instructions and thereby directly infringe at least claim 10 of the ’970 Patent in
`
`violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271. Defendant directly and/or indirectly intentionally instructs its
`
`customers to infringe through training videos, demonstrations, brochures, installations and/or user
`
`guides,
`
`such
`
`as
`
`those
`
`located
`
`at
`
`one
`
`or more
`
`of
`
`the
`
`following:
`
`https://service.oneplus.com/content/dam/support/user-
`
`manuals/common/OnePlus_10T_5G_User_Manual_EN.pdf;
`
`https://service.oneplus.com/content/dam/support/user-
`
`manuals/common/OnePlus_9_Pro_User_Manual_EN.pdf;
`
`https://service.oneplus.com/content/dam/support/user-
`
`manuals/common/OnePlus_10_Pro_User_Manual_EN.pdf;
`
`and Defendant’s
`
`agents
`
`and
`
`representatives located within this Judicial District. Defendant is thereby liable for infringement
`
`of the ’970 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Alternatively, Defendant believed there was a high
`
`probability that others would infringe the ’970 Patent but remained willfully blind to the infringing
`
`nature of others’ actions.
`
`24.
`
`For example, Defendant directly infringes and/or indirectly infringes by instructing
`
`its customers to infringe by performing claim 10 of the ’970 Patent, including: a method of
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00446-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 36 of 36 PageID #: 36Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 105-10 Filed 08/17/23 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:
`
`7951
`
`e.
`
`An order awarding AGIS Software treble damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 as a
`
`result of Defendant’s willful and deliberate infringement of the Patents-in-Suit;
`
`f.
`
`Entry of judgment declaring that this case is exceptional and awarding AGIS
`
`Software 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: November 18, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Alfred R. Fabricant
`Alfred R. Fabricant
`NY Bar No. 2219392
`Email: ffabricant@fabricantllp.com
`Peter Lambrianakos
`NY Bar No. 2894392
`Email: plambrianakos@fabricantllp.com
`Vincent J. Rubino, III
`NY Bar No. 4557435
`Email: vrubino@fabricantllp.com
`FABRICANT LLP
`411 Theodore Fremd Avenue,
`Suite 206 South
`Rye, New York 10580
`Telephone: (212) 257-5797
`Facsimile: (212) 257-5796
`
`Justin Kurt Truelove
`Texas Bar No. 24013653
`Email: kurt@truelovelawfirm.com
`TRUELOVE LAW FIRM, PLLC
`100 West Houston Street
`Marshall, Texas 75670
`Telephone: (903) 938-8321
`Facsimile: (903) 215-8510
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC
`
`
`
`36
`
`