Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 85-3 Filed 07/13/23 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 5273
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 85-3 Filed 07/13/23 Page 1 of 7 PagelD #: 5273
`
`EXHIBIT 2
`EXHIBIT 2
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 85-3 Filed 07/13/23 Page 1 of 7 PagelD #: 5273
`
`EXHIBIT 2
`EXHIBIT 2
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 85-3 Filed 07/13/23 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 5274
`Case 2:17-cv-00517-JRG Document 1 Filed 06/21/17 Page 1 of 25 PageID #: 1
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 2:17-cv-517
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`
`Plaintiff, AGIS Software Development LLC (“AGIS Software” or “Plaintiff”) files this
`
`Original Complaint against Defendants ZTE Corporation and ZTE (TX), Inc. (collectively,
`
`“Defendants” or “ZTE”) 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. 9,467,838, 9,445,251, 9,408,055, and 8,213,970 (collectively,
`
`the “patents-in-suit”).
`
`2.
`
`Upon information and belief, ZTE Corporation is a Chinese corporation with its
`
`principal place of business at ZTE Plaza, Keji Road South, Hi-Tech Industrial Park, Nanshan
`
`District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, People’s Republic of China 518057. Upon
`
`information and belief, ZTE Corporation does business in Texas, directly or through
`
`
`
`§§§§§§§§§§§§§
`
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT,
`LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`ZTE CORPORATION AND
`ZTE (TX), INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Defendants.
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 85-3 Filed 07/13/23 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 5275
`Case 2:17-cv-00517-JRG Document 1 Filed 06/21/17 Page 3 of 25 PageID #: 3
`
`
`
`PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`7.
`
`On July 3, 2012, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally
`
`issued U.S. Patent No. 8,213,970 (the “’970 Patent”) entitled “Method of Utilizing Forced Alerts
`
`for Interactive Remote Communications.” A true and correct copy of the ’970 Patent is attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit A.
`
`8.
`
`On August 2, 2016, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and
`
`legally issued U.S. Patent No. 9,408,055 (the “’055 Patent”) entitled “Method to Provide Ad Hoc
`
`and Password Protected Digital and Voice Networks.” A true and correct copy of the ’055
`
`Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
`
`9.
`
`On September 13, 2016, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and
`
`legally issued U.S. Patent No. 9,445,251 (the “’251 Patent”) entitled “Method to Provide Ad Hoc
`
`and Password Protected Digital and Voice Networks.” A true and correct copy of the ’251
`
`Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit C.
`
`10.
`
`On October 11, 2016, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and
`
`legally issued U.S. Patent No. 9,467,838 (the “’838 Patent”) entitled “Method to Provide Ad Hoc
`
`and Password Protected Digital and Voice Networks.” A true and correct copy of the ’838
`
`Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit D.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`11. Malcolm K. “Cap” Beyer, Jr., a graduate of the United States Naval Academy and
`
`a former U.S. Marine, is the CEO of AGIS Software and a named inventor of the AGIS patent
`
`portfolio. Mr. Beyer founded Advanced Ground Information Systems, Inc. (“AGIS, Inc.”)
`
`shortly after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks because he believed that many first-
`
`responder and civilian lives could have been saved through the implementation of a better
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 85-3 Filed 07/13/23 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 5276
`Case 2:17-cv-00517-JRG Document 1 Filed 06/21/17 Page 7 of 25 PageID #: 7
`
`
`
`importing into the United States the infringing Accused Devices, and by instructing users of the
`
`Accused Devices to perform methods claimed in the ’970 Patent. For example, Defendants, with
`
`knowledge that the Accused Devices infringe the ’970 Patent at least as of the date of this
`
`Complaint, actively, knowingly, and intentionally induced, and continue to actively, knowingly,
`
`and intentionally induce direct infringement of the ’970 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 271(b).
`
`21.
`
`For example, Defendants have indirectly infringed and continue to indirectly
`
`infringe at least claim 6 of the ’970 Patent in the United States because Defendants’ customers
`
`use such devices, including at least the Android Device Manager, Find My Device, Google
`
`Maps, Google Messages, Android Messenger, Google Hangouts, Google Plus, and Google
`
`Latitude apps installed on the Accused Devices, in accordance with Defendants’ instructions and
`
`thereby directly infringe at least claim 6 of the ’970 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271. For
`
`example, ZTE 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: www.ztedevice.com, www.zteusa.com,
`
`http://devicehelp.boostmobile.com/document/HowToSetupGuide/Tempo/Boost_Mobile/en/Use_
`
`Android_Device_Manager_with_your_ZTE_Tempo, and ZTE agents and representatives located
`
`within this judicial district. Defendants are thereby liable for infringement of the ’970 Patent
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
`
`22.
`
`For example, ZTE directly and/or indirectly instructs its customers to infringe
`
`through pre-installed applications in the exemplary Accused Devices as shown below.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 85-3 Filed 07/13/23 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 5277
`Case 2:17-cv-00517-JRG Document 1 Filed 06/21/17 Page 20 of 25 PageID #: 20
`
`
`
`56.
`
`For example, Defendants have indirectly infringed and continue to indirectly
`
`infringe at least claim 54 of the ’838 Patent in the United States because Defendants’ customers
`
`use such devices, including at least the Android Device Manager, Find My Device, Google
`
`Maps, Google Messages, Android Messenger, Google Hangouts, Google Plus, and Google
`
`Latitude apps installed on the Accused Devices, in accordance with Defendants’ instructions and
`
`thereby directly infringe at least one claim of the ’838 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`Defendants directly and/or indirectly intentionally instruct their customers to infringe through
`
`training videos, demonstrations, brochures, installations and/or user guides, such as those located
`
`at one or more of the following: www.ztedevice.com, www.zteusa.com, and ZTE agents and
`
`representatives located within this judicial district. Defendants are thereby liable for
`
`infringement of the ’838 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
`
`57.
`
`For example, Defendants’ Accused Devices are pre-installed with at least the
`
`Google Maps app which allows users to share their location, view other users’ locations on a
`
`map, and to communicate with those users via the Google Maps app (as shown below), which is
`
`integrated with Google Messages or Android Messenger and which is also pre-installed on the
`
`Accused Devices.
`
`
`
`20
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 85-3 Filed 07/13/23 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 5278
`Case 2:17-cv-00517-JRG Document 1 Filed 06/21/17 Page 24 of 25 PageID #: 24
`
`
`
`participation with them, from further acts of infringement of the patents-in-suit;
`
`d.
`
`An order awarding damages sufficient to compensate AGIS Software 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 AGIS Software treble damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 as a
`
`result of Defendants’ 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: June 21, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
` /s/ Sam Baxter___________
`Samuel F. Baxter
`Texas State Bar No. 01938000
`sbaxter@mckoolsmith.com
`Jennifer L. Truelove
`Texas State Bar No. 24012906
`jtruelove@mckoolsmith.com
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`104 E. Houston Street, Suite 300
`Marshall, Texas 75670
`Telephone: (903) 923-9000
`Facsimile: (903) 923-9099
`
`Alfred R. Fabricant
`NY Bar No. 2219392
`Email: afabricant@brownrudnick.com
`Peter Lambrianakos
`NY Bar No. 2894392
`Email: plambrianakos@brownrudnick.com
`Vincent J. Rubino, III
`NY Bar No. 4557435
`Email: vrubino@brownrudnick.com
`Alessandra C. Messing
`NY Bar No. 5040019
`
`24
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 85-3 Filed 07/13/23 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 5279
`Case 2:17-cv-00517-JRG Document 1 Filed 06/21/17 Page 25 of 25 PageID #: 25
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Email: amessing@brownrudnick.com
`John A. Rubino
`NY Bar No. 5020797
`Email: jrubino@brownrudnick.com
`BROWN RUDNICK LLP
`7 Times Square
`New York, NY 10036
`Telephone: (212) 209-4800
`Facsimile: (212) 209-4801
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF,
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT
`LLC
`
`25
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
