Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 1 of 38 PageID #: 1
`
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`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
`
`v.
`
`
`HMD GLOBAL, HMD GLOBAL OY,
`and HMD AMERICA, INC.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff, AGIS Software Development LLC (“AGIS Software” or “Plaintiff”) files this
`
`Complaint against Defendants HMD Global (“HMD Global”), HMD Global OY (“HMD Global
`
`OY”), and HMD America, Inc. (“HMD America”) (collectively, “HMD” or “Defendants”) 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 HMD Global is a company organized and
`
`existing under the laws of Finland, with its principal place of business located at Bertel Jungin
`
`aukio 9, 02600, Espoo, Finland. On information and belief, HMD Global may be served pursuant
`
`to the provisions of the Hague Convention. HMD Global is a leading manufacturer and seller of
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 2 of 38 PageID #: 2
`
`smartphones in the world and throughout the United States. Upon information and belief, HMD
`
`Global does business in Texas, directly or through intermediaries, and offers its products and/or
`
`services, including those accused herein of infringement, to customers and potential customers
`
`located in Texas, including in the Judicial District of the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`3.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant HMD Global OY is a company organized
`
`and existing under the laws of Finland, with its principal place of business located at Bertel Jungin
`
`aukio 9, 02600, Espoo, Finland. On information and belief, HMD Global may be served pursuant
`
`to the provisions of the Hague Convention. HMD Global OY is a leading manufacturer and seller
`
`of smartphones in the world and throughout the United States. Upon information and belief, HMD
`
`Global OY does business in Texas, directly or through intermediaries, and offers its products
`
`and/or services, including those accused herein of infringement, to customers and potential
`
`customers located in Texas, including in the Judicial District of the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`4.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant HMD America is a corporation organized
`
`under the laws of Florida, with its principal place of business at 1200 Brickell Avenue, Suite 510,
`
`Miami, Florida 33131. HMD America is a leading manufacturer and seller of smartphones in the
`
`world and throughout the United States. HMD is registered to transact business in Texas. HMD
`
`America may be served with process through its registered agent InCorp Services, Inc., 815 Brazos
`
`Street, Suite 500, Austin, Texas 78701.
`
`5.
`
`Defendants have authorized sellers and sales representatives that offer and sell
`
`products pertinent to this Complaint through the State of Texas, including in this Judicial District,
`
`and to consumers throughout this Judicial District, such as: Best Buy, 422 West TX-281 Loop,
`
`Suite 100, Longview, Texas 75605; AT&T Store, 1712 East Grand Avenue, Marshall, Texas
`
`75670; Sprint Store, 1806 East End Boulevard North, Suite 100, Marshall, Texas 75670; T-Mobile,
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 3 of 38 PageID #: 3
`
`900 East End Boulevard North, Suite 100, Marshall, Texas 75670; Verizon authorized retailers,
`
`including Russell Cellular, 1111 East Grand Avenue, Marshall, Texas 75670; Victra, 1006 East
`
`End Boulevard North, Marshall, Texas 75670; and Cricket Wireless authorized retailer, 120 East
`
`End Boulevard South, Marshall, Texas 75670.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`6.
`
`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 subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant
`
`to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332, 1338, and 1367.
`
`7.
`
`This Court has specific and personal jurisdiction over Defendants consistent with
`
`the requirements of the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution and the Texas Long
`
`Arm Statute. On information and belief, Defendants have sufficient minimum contacts with the
`
`forum because Defendants transact substantial business in the State of Texas and in this Judicial
`
`District. On information and belief, Defendants have also purposefully and voluntarily placed
`
`their products, including infringing products, into the stream of commerce with the expectation
`
`that they will be purchased and used by customers located in this State. Further, Defendants have,
`
`directly or through subsidiaries or intermediaries, committed and continue to commit acts of patent
`
`infringement in the State of Texas and in this Judicial District as alleged in this Complaint, as
`
`alleged more particularly below.
`
`8.
`
`Venue is proper in this Judicial District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b)
`
`because Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this Judicial District, have committed
`
`acts of patent infringement in this Judicial District, and have regular and established places of
`
`business in this Judicial District. Each Defendant, through its own acts and/or through the acts of
`
`others, makes, uses, sells, and/or offers to sell infringing products within this Judicial District,
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 4 of 38 PageID #: 4
`
`regularly does and solicits business in this Judicial District, and has the requisite minimum contacts
`
`with this Judicial District, such that this venue is a fair and reasonable one. Further, venue is
`
`proper in this Judicial District because HMD Global and HMD Global OY are foreign corporations
`
`formed under the laws of Finland with principal places of business in Finland. Further, upon
`
`information and belief, Defendants have admitted or not contested proper venue in this Judicial
`
`District in other patent infringement actions.
`
`PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`9.
`
`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.” On September 1, 2021, the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office issued an Inter Partes Review Certificate for the ’970 Patent cancelling claims
`
`1 and 3-9. On December 9, 2021, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued an
`
`Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate for the ’970 Patent determining claims 2 and 10 (as amended)
`
`and claims 11-13 to be valid and patentable. A true and correct copy of the ’970 Patent, which
`
`includes the September 1, 2021 Inter Partes Review Certificate and the December 9, 2021
`
`Ex Parte
`
`Reexamination
`
`Certificate,
`
`is
`
`available
`
`at:
`
`https://ppubs.uspto.gov/pubwebapp/external.html?q=8,213,970.pn.&db=USPAT.
`
`10.
`
`On September 13, 2016, the United States 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.” On June 8, 2021, the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office issued an Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate of the ’251 Patent determining
`
`claims 1-35 to be valid and patentable. A true and correct copy of the ’251 Patent, which includes
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 5 of 38 PageID #: 5
`
`the
`
`June
`
`8,
`
`2-21 Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate,
`
`is
`
`available
`
`at:
`
`https://ppubs.uspto.gov/pubwebapp/external.html?q=9,445,251.pn.&db=USPAT.
`
`11.
`
`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.” On May 27, 2021, the United States Patent
`
`and Trademark Office issued an Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate for the ’838 Patent confirming
`
`the validity and patentability of claims 1-84. A true and correct copy of the ’838 Patent, which
`
`includes
`
`the May 27, 2021 Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate,
`
`is available at:
`
`https://ppubs.uspto.gov/pubwebapp/external.html?q=9,467,838.pn.&db=USPAT.
`
`12.
`
`On August 29, 2017, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and
`
`legally issued U.S. Patent No. 9,749,829 (the “’829 Patent”) entitled “Method to Provide Ad Hoc
`
`and Password Protected Digital and Voice Networks.” On August 16, 2021, the United States
`
`Patent and Trademark Office issued an Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate for the ’829 Patent
`
`confirming the validity and patentability of claims 1-68. A true and correct copy of the ’829 Patent,
`
`which includes the August 16, 2021 Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate, is available at:
`
`https://ppubs.uspto.gov/pubwebapp/external.html?q=9,749,829.pn.&db=USPAT.
`
`13.
`
`On November 14, 2017, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and
`
`legally issued U.S. Patent No. 9,820,123 (the “’123 Patent”) entitled “Method to Provide Ad Hoc
`
`and Password Protected Digital and Voice Networks.” On September 24, 2021, the United States
`
`Patent and Trademark Office issued an Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate for the ’123 Patent
`
`confirming the validity and patentability of claims 1-48. A true and correct copy of the ’123 Patent,
`
`which includes the September 24, 2021 Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate, is available at:
`
`https://ppubs.uspto.gov/pubwebapp/external.html?q=9,820,123.pn.&db=USPAT.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 6 of 38 PageID #: 6
`
`14.
`
`AGIS Software is the sole and exclusive owner of all rights, title, and interest in the
`
`Patents-in-Suit, and holds the exclusive right to take all actions necessary to enforce its rights to
`
`the Patents-in-Suit, including the filing of this patent infringement lawsuit. AGIS Software also
`
`has the right to recover all damages for past, present, and future infringement of the Patents-in-
`
`Suit and to seek injunctive relief as appropriate under the law.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`15. 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 Software
`
`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 communication
`
`system. He envisioned and developed a new communication system that would use integrated
`
`software and hardware components on mobile devices to give users situational awareness superior
`
`to systems provided by conventional military and first responder radio systems.
`
`16.
`
`AGIS, Inc. developed prototypes that matured into its LifeRing system. LifeRing
`
`provides first responders, law enforcement, and military personnel with what is essentially a
`
`tactical operations center built into hand-held mobile devices. Using GPS-based location
`
`technology and existing or special-purpose cellular communication networks, LifeRing users can
`
`exchange location, heading, speed, and other information with other members of a group, view
`
`each other’s locations on maps and satellite images, and rapidly communicate and coordinate their
`
`efforts.
`
`17.
`
`AGIS Software licenses its patent portfolio, including the ’970, ’838, ’251, ’829,
`
`and ’123 Patents, to AGIS, Inc. AGIS, Inc. has marked its products accordingly. AGIS Software
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 7 of 38 PageID #: 7
`
`and all previous assignees of the Patents-in-Suit have complied with the requirements of 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 287(a).
`
`18.
`
`Defendants have infringed and are continuing to infringe the Patents-in-Suit by
`
`making, using, selling, offering to sell, distributing, exporting from, and/or importing, and by
`
`actively inducing others to make, use, sell, offer to sell, distribute, export from, and/or import
`
`products that infringe the Patents-in-Suit. Such products include at least the following HMD
`
`mobile devices: Nokia 3, Nokia 5, Nokia 6, Nokia 7, Nokia 8, Nokia 9, Nokia 6.1 Plus, Nokia 7
`
`Plus, Nokia 7.1 Plus, Nokia 7.1, Nokia 5.1 Plus, Nokia 3.1 Plus, Nokia 8 Sirocco, Nokia 3.1, Nokia
`
`5.1, Nokia 9 PureView, Nokia C21 Plus, Nokia C21, Nokia C2 2nd Edition, Nokia G11, Nokia
`
`G21, Nokia X100, Nokia G300, Nokia T20, Nokia C100, Nokia C200, Nokia XR20, Nokia C30,
`
`Nokia C1 2nd Edition, Nokia C20 Plus, Nokia C01 Plus, Nokia X20, Nokia X10, Nokia G20,
`
`Nokia G21, Nokia G10, Nokia C20, Nokia C10, Nokia 1.4, Nokia 5.4, Nokia C1 Plus, Nokia 3.4,
`
`Nokia 2.4, Nokia C3, Nokia C5 Endi, Nokia C2 Tennen, Nokia C2 Tava, Nokia X100 5G, Nokia
`
`G300 5G, Nokia G50, Nokia G20, Nokia G10, Nokia 8 V 5G UW, Nokia 2V Tella, Nokia T20,
`
`Nokia X50, Nokia 10, Nokia 8.3 5G, Nokia GR20 5G, Nokia G50, Nokia G11, and Nokia G21
`
`(collectively, the “Accused Products”).1 The Accused Products infringe each of the Asserted
`
`Patents.
`
`19.
`
`The Accused Products include functionalities that allow users to form and/or join
`
`networks or groups, share and view locations with other users, display symbols corresponding to
`
`locations (including locations of other users) on a map, and communicate with other users via text,
`
`voice, and multimedia-based communication. Additionally, the Accused Products include
`
`
`1 See, e.g., https://www.hmdglobal.com/en-US/business-devices;
`https://www.nokia.com/phones/en_us/smartphones;
`https://www.nokia.com/phones/en_int/nokia-t-20?sku=F20RID1A001.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 8 of 38 PageID #: 8
`
`functionalities to allow users to form and/or join networks or groups. Additionally, the users may
`
`form groups that include their own devices in order to track their own lost or stolen devices, as
`
`shown below; to send and receive communications from their own lost or stolen Accused Products;
`
`and to remotely control the lost or stolen Accused Products. The Accused Products include the
`
`functionalities to display map information, including symbols corresponding with users, entities,
`
`and locations. Additionally, the Accused Products include functionalities to form groups that
`
`include their own devices in order to track, remotely monitor and control, and/or communicate
`
`with other users’ devices.
`
` The Accused Products
`
`include functionalities
`
`to enable
`
`communications, such as voice calls between users. The Accused Products practice the claims of
`
`the Asserted Patents to improve user experiences and to improve Defendants’ position in the
`
`market.
`
`8
`
`

`

`Protect your phone, even if
`you lose it
`
`Device Manager
`
`son rei
`
`id Nexus 5X
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 9 of 38 PageID #: 9
`
`Setup Secure & Erase
`
`
`
`Canada
`
`United States
`
`Mexico
`
`Nokia G50
`
`53%
`
`Play Sound
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 10 of 38 PageID #: 10
`
`COUNT I
`(Infringement of the ’970 Patent)
`
`20.
`
`Paragraphs 1 through 19 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth in
`
`their entireties.
`
`21.
`
`AGIS Software has not licensed or otherwise authorized Defendants to make, use,
`
`offer for sale, sell, distribute, export from, or import any Accused Products and/or products that
`
`embody the inventions of the ’970 Patent.
`
`22.
`
`Defendants infringe, contribute to the infringement of, and/or induce infringement
`
`of the ’970 Patent by making, using, selling, offering for sale, distributing, exporting from, and/or
`
`importing into the United States products and/or methods covered by one or more claims of the
`
`’970 Patent including, but not limited to, the Accused Products.
`
`23.
`
`Defendants have and continue to directly infringe at least claim 10 of the ’970
`
`Patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, selling, offering for
`
`sale, distributing, exporting from, and/or importing into the United States the Accused Products
`
`without authority and in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`24.
`
`Defendants have and continue to indirectly infringe at least claim 10 of the ’970
`
`Patent by actively, knowingly, and intentionally inducing others to directly infringe, either literally
`
`or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, selling, offering for sale, distributing,
`
`exporting from, and/or importing into the United States the Accused Products and by instructing
`
`users of the Accused Products to perform methods claimed in the ’970 Patent. For example,
`
`Defendants, with knowledge that the Accused Products infringe the ’970 Patent at least as of the
`
`date of this Complaint, actively, knowingly, and intentionally induced, and continue to knowingly
`
`and intentionally induce direct infringement of the ’970 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 11 of 38 PageID #: 11
`
`Alternatively, Defendants believed there was a high probability that others would infringe the ’970
`
`Patent but remained willfully blind to the infringing nature of others’ actions.
`
`25.
`
`For example, Defendants have indirectly infringed and continue to indirectly
`
`infringe at least claim 10 of the ’970 Patent in the United States because Defendants’ 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
`
`Defendants’ instructions and thereby directly infringe at least claim 10 of the ’970 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:
`
`https://www.nokia.com/phones/en_int/support/api/pdf/nokia-g50-user-guide;
`
`https://www.nokia.com/phones/en_us/support/user-guides;
`
`and Defendants’
`
`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). Alternatively, Defendants believed there was a high
`
`probability that others would infringe the ’970 Patent but remained willfully blind to the infringing
`
`nature of others’ actions.
`
`26.
`
`For example, Defendants directly infringe and/or indirectly infringe by instructing
`
`their customers to infringe by performing claim 10 of the ’970 Patent, including: a method of
`
`receiving, acknowledging and responding to a forced message alert from a sender PDA/cell phone
`
`to a recipient PDA/cell phone, wherein the receipt, acknowledgment, and response to said forced
`
`message alert is forced by a forced message alert software application program, said method
`
`comprising the steps of: receiving an electronically transmitted electronic message; identifying
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 12 of 38 PageID #: 12
`
`said electronic message as a forced message alert, wherein said forced message alert comprises a
`
`voice or text message and a forced message alert application software packet, which triggers the
`
`activation of the forced message alert software application program within the recipient PDA/cell
`
`phone; transmitting an automatic acknowledgment of receipt to the sender PDA/cell phone, which
`
`triggers the forced message alert software application program to take control of the recipient
`
`PDA/cell phone and shows the content of the text message and a required response list on the
`
`display recipient PDA/cell phone or to repeat audibly the content of the voice message on the
`
`speakers of the recipient PDA/cell phone and show the required response list on the display
`
`recipient PDA/cell phone; and transmitting a selected required response from the response list in
`
`order to allow the message required response list to be cleared from the recipient’s cell phone
`
`display, whether said selected response is a chosen option from the response list, causing the forced
`
`message alert software to release control of the recipient PDA/cell phone and stop showing the
`
`content of the text message and a response list on the display recipient PDA/cell phone and/or stop
`
`repeating the content of the voice message on the speakers of the recipient PDA/cell phone;
`
`displaying the response received from the PDA cell phone that transmitted the response on the
`
`sender of the forced alert PDA/cell phone; and providing a list of the recipient PDA/cell phones
`
`that have automatically acknowledged receipt of a forced alert message and their response to the
`
`forced alert message; and displaying a geographical map with georeferenced entities on the display
`
`of the sender PDA/cell phone; obtaining location and status data associated with the recipient
`
`PDA/cellphone; and presenting a recipient symbol on the geographical map corresponding to a
`
`correct geographical location of the recipient PDA/cellphone based on at least the location data.
`
`For example, the Accused Products include features, as shown below.
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 13 of 38 PageID #: 13
`
`
`
` 2
`
`
`2 https://www.nokia.com/phones/en_int/support/api/pdf/nokia-g50-user-guide
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 14 of 38 PageID #: 14
`
` 3
`
`27.
`
`AGIS Software has suffered damages as a result of Defendants’ direct and indirect
`
`infringement of the ’970 Patent in an amount to be proved at trial.
`
`28.
`
`AGIS Software has suffered, and will continue to suffer, irreparable harm as a result
`
`of Defendants’ infringement of the ’970 Patent for which there is no adequate remedy at law unless
`
`Defendants’ infringement is enjoined by this Court.
`
`3 Id.
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 15 of 38 PageID #: 15
`
`COUNT II
`(Infringement of the ’251 Patent)
`
`29.
`
`Paragraphs 1 through 19 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth in
`
`their entireties.
`
`30.
`
`AGIS Software has not licensed or otherwise authorized Defendants to make, use,
`
`offer for sale, sell, distribute, export from, or import any Accused Products and/or products that
`
`embody the inventions of the ’251 Patent.
`
`31.
`
`Defendants infringe, contribute to the infringement of, and/or induce infringement
`
`of the ’251 Patent by making, using, selling, offering for sale, distributing, exporting from, and/or
`
`importing into the United States products and/or methods covered by one or more claims of the
`
`’251 Patent including, but not limited to, the Accused Products.
`
`32.
`
`Defendants have and continue to directly infringe at least claim 24 of the ’251
`
`Patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, selling, offering for
`
`sale, distributing, exporting from, and/or importing into the United States the Accused Products
`
`without authority and in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`33.
`
`Defendants have and continue to indirectly infringe at least claim 24 of the ’251
`
`Patent by actively, knowingly, and intentionally inducing others to directly infringe, either literally
`
`or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, selling, offering for sale, distributing,
`
`exporting from, and/or importing into the United States the Accused Products and by instructing
`
`users of the Accused Products to perform methods claimed in the ’251 Patent. For example,
`
`Defendants, with knowledge that the Accused Products infringe the ’251 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 ’251 Patent. Alternatively,
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 16 of 38 PageID #: 16
`
`Defendants believed there was a high probability that others would infringe the ’251 Patent but
`
`remained willfully blind to the infringing nature of others’ actions.
`
`34.
`
`For example, Defendants have indirectly infringed and continue to indirectly
`
`infringe at least claim 24 of the ’251 Patent in the United States because Defendants’ customers
`
`use the Accused Products, including at least Google Maps Apps and/or services or the Accused
`
`Products with the Google Maps Apps and/or services, alone or in conjunction with additional
`
`Accused Products, in accordance with Defendants’ instructions and thereby directly infringe at
`
`least claim 24 of the ’251 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: https://www.nokia.com/phones/en_int/support/api/pdf/nokia-g50-user-guide;
`
`https://www.nokia.com/phones/en_us/support/user-guides;
`
`and Defendants’
`
`agents
`
`and
`
`representatives located within this Judicial District. Defendants are thereby liable for infringement
`
`of the ’251 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Alternatively, Defendants believed there was a high
`
`probability that others would infringe the ’251 Patent but remained willfully blind to the infringing
`
`nature of others’ actions.
`
`35.
`
`For example, Defendants’ Accused Products are pre-installed with at least the
`
`Google Maps App which allows users to share their locations and view other users’ locations on a
`
`map and to communicate with those users via the Google Maps App which is integrated with
`
`Messages, which is also pre-installed on the Accused Products.
`
`36.
`
`For example, the exemplary Accused Products allows users to establish groups and
`
`to exchange messages via interaction with servers which provide the Google Maps service, among
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 17 of 38 PageID #: 17
`
`other relevant services. The exemplary Accused Products further allows users to retrieve map
`
`information from multiple sources including street-view maps.
`
`37.
`
`The exemplary Accused Products are programmed to receive messages from other
`
`devices where
`
`those messages
`
`relate
`
`to
`
`joining groups, as depicted below
`
`(e.g.,
`
`https://support.google.com/maps/answer/7326816?visit_id=638038217506681650-
`
`271792540&hl=en&rd=1;
`
`https://support.google.com/contacts/answer/30970?hl=en&visit_id=638038217507566921-
`
`2877008583&rd=1).
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 18 of 38 PageID #: 18
`
`38.
`
`The exemplary Accused Products are further programmed to facilitate participation
`
`in the group by communicating with a server and sending to and receiving location information,
`
`as
`
`depicted
`
`below
`
`(e.g.,
`
`https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/android-
`
`
`
`sdk/location).
`
`18
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 19 of 38 PageID #: 19
`
`
`
`39.
`
`This location information is presented on interactive displays on the exemplary
`
`Accused Products which include interactive maps and a plurality of user selectable symbols
`
`corresponding to other devices. These symbols are positioned on the map at positions
`
`corresponding
`
`to
`
`the
`
`locations of
`
`the other devices, as depicted below
`
`(e.g.,
`
`https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/03/location-sharing-finally-returns-to-google-maps/).
`
`40.
`
`The exemplary Accused Products are programmed to permit users to request and
`
`display additional maps by, for example, moving the map screen and/or by selecting satellite image
`
`maps. The exemplary Accused Products are further programmed to permit interaction with the
`
`
`
`19
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 20 of 38 PageID #: 20
`
`display where a user may select one or more symbols and where the exemplary Accused Products
`
`further permit data to be sent to other devices based on that interaction.
`
`41.
`
`AGIS Software has suffered damages as a result of Defendants’ direct and indirect
`
`infringement of the ’251 Patent in an amount to be proved at trial.
`
`42.
`
`AGIS Software has suffered, and will continue to suffer, irreparable harm as a result
`
`of Defendants’ infringement of the ’251 Patent for which there is no adequate remedy at law unless
`
`Defendants’ infringement is enjoined by this Court.
`
`COUNT III
`(Infringement of the ’838 Patent)
`
`43.
`
`Paragraphs 1 through 19 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth in
`
`their entireties.
`
`44.
`
`AGIS Software has not licensed or otherwise authorized Defendants to make, use,
`
`offer for sale, sell, distribute, export from, or import any Accused Products and/or products that
`
`embody the inventions of the ’838 Patent.
`
`45.
`
`Defendants infringe, contribute to the infringement of, and/or induce infringement
`
`of the ’838 Patent by making, using, selling, offering for sale, distributing, exporting from, and/or
`
`importing into the United States products and/or methods covered by one or more claims of the
`
`’838 Patent including, but not limited to, the Accused Products.
`
`46.
`
`Defendants have and continue to directly infringe at least claim 54 of the ’838
`
`Patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, selling, offering for
`
`sale, distributing, exporting from, and/or importing into the United States the Accused Products
`
`without authority and in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`47.
`
`Defendants have and continue to indirectly infringe at least claim 54 of the ’838
`
`Patent by actively, knowingly, and intentionally inducing others to directly infringe, either literally
`
`20
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-00443-JRG Document 1 Filed 11/18/22 Page 21 of 38 PageID #: 21
`
`or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, selling, offering for sale, distributing,
`
`exporting from, and/or importing into the United States the Accused Products and by instructing
`
`users of the Accused Products to perform methods claimed in the ’838 Patent. For example,
`
`Defendants, with knowledge that the Accused Products infringe the ’838 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 ’838 Patent. Alternatively,
`
`Defendants believed there was a high probability that others would infringe the ’838 Patent but
`
`remained willfully blind to the infringing nature of others’ actions.
`
`48.
`
`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 the Accused Products, including at least the Google Maps Apps and/or services or the Accused
`
`Products with the Google Maps Apps and/or services, alone or in conjunction with additional
`
`Accused Products, 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: https://www.nokia.com/phones/en_int/support/api/pdf/nokia-g50-user-guide;
`
`https://www.nokia.com/phones/en_us/support/user-guides;
`
`and Defendants’
`
`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). Alternatively, Defendants believed there was a high
`
`probability that others would infringe the ’838 Patent but remained willfully blind to the infringing
`
`nature of others’ actions.
`
`21