Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 1 of 26 PageID #: 258
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`EIREOG INNOVATIONS LTD.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 2:24-cv-00239-JRG
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`LENOVO GROUP LIMITED,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`AGAINST LENOVO GROUP LIMITED
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the United States
`
`of America, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., in which Plaintiff Eireog Innovations Limited (“Plaintiff” or
`
`“Eireog”) makes the following allegations against Defendant Lenovo Group Limited (“Defendant”
`
`or “Lenovo”):
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`This complaint arises from Lenovo’s unlawful infringement of the following
`
`United States patents owned by Plaintiff, which relate to improvements in processing devices and
`
`systems: United States Patent Nos. 9,436,626 (“the ’626 Patent”), 9,442,870 (“the ’870 Patent”),
`
`8,504,777 (“the ’777 Patent”), 8,117,399 (“the ’399 Patent”), and 9,335,805 (“the ’805 Patent”)
`
`(collectively, the “Asserted Patents”).
`
`PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff Eireog Innovations Limited is a private company limited by shares
`
`organized and existing under the laws of Ireland, with its principal place of business at The Hyde
`
`Building, Suite 23, The Park, Carrickmines, Dublin 18, Ireland. Eireog is the sole owner by
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 2 of 26 PageID #: 259
`
`assignment of all rights, title, and interest in the Asserted Patents, including the right to recover
`
`damages for past, present, and future infringement.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant Lenovo Group Limited is a foreign company organized and existing
`
`under the laws of China, with its headquarters at 23rd Floor, Lincoln House, Taikoo Place, 979
`
`King’s Road, Quarry Bay, Hong Kong S.A.R. of China. Lenovo does business in Texas and in
`
`the Eastern District of Texas, directly or through intermediaries, such as its wholly-owned
`
`subsidiaries. Lenovo is responsible for importing, making, marketing, distributing, offering for
`
`sale, and/or selling Lenovo-branded servers, workstations, laptops, and desktops in the United
`
`States (directly or through its wholly-owned subsidiaries), including in this District.
`
`4.
`
`Lenovo induces its subsidiaries, affiliates, retail partners, and customers in the
`
`making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing throughout the United States, including
`
`within this District, infringing products (such as Lenovo-branded servers, workstations, laptops,
`
`and desktops) and placing such products into the stream of commerce via established
`
`distribution channels knowing or understanding that such products would be sold and used in
`
`the United States, including in the Eastern District of Texas. Lenovo purposefully directs the
`
`Accused Products into established distribution channels within this District and the U.S. nationally.
`
`For example, Lenovo sells and offers to sell the Accused Products through its website,
`
`Lenovo.com, which may be accessed throughout the United States, the State of Texas, and this
`
`District. Additionally, Lenovo has authorized sellers and sales representatives that offer for sale
`
`and sell the Accused Products throughout the State of Texas and to consumers throughout this
`
`District, such as: Best Buy, 422 West Loop 281, Suite 100, Longview, Texas 75605; Costco
`
`Wholesale, 3650 West University Drive, McKinney, Texas 75071; Office Depot, 422 West Loop
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 3 of 26 PageID #: 260
`
`281, Suite 300, Longview, Texas 75605; Target, 3092 North Eastman Road, Suite 100, Longview,
`
`Texas 75605; and Wal-Mart, 1701 East End Boulevard North, Marshall, Texas 75670.
`
`5.
`
`Lenovo maintains a corporate presence in the United States via at least its wholly-
`
`owned subsidiaries, including Lenovo (United States) Inc. (“Lenovo US”) and Lenovo Global
`
`Technology (United States) Inc. (“Lenovo Tech.”).
`
`6.
`
`Lenovo US is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Delaware,
`
`with a corporate headquarters located at 1009 Think Place, Morrisville, NC 27560. Lenovo US is
`
`registered to do business in the State of Texas and may be served through CT Corporation System,
`
`1999 Bryan St., Ste. 900, Dallas, TX 75201.
`
`7.
`
`Lenovo Tech. is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Delaware,
`
`with a corporate headquarters located at 1009 Think Place, Morrisville, NC 27560. Lenovo Tech.
`
`is registered to do business in the State of Texas and may be served through CT Corporation
`
`System, 1999 Bryan St., Ste. 900, Dallas, TX 75201.
`
`8.
`
`Lenovo and its U.S.-based subsidiaries (which act as part of a global network of
`
`sales and manufacturing subsidiaries) operate as agents of one another and vicariously as parts of
`
`the same business group to work in concert together. For example, in its 2022/23 Annual Report,
`
`Lenovo describes itself and its subsidiaries as follows:
`
`Ex. 1 at 192. Lenovo identifies U.S.-based subsidiaries (including but not limited to Lenovo US
`
`and Lenovo Tech.) in its list of “principal subsidiaries.” Id. at 279, 281. Lenovo describes its
`
`“principal subsidiaries” as follows:
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 4 of 26 PageID #: 261
`
`
`
`Id. at 276. Lenovo identifies its 2023 “percentage of issued share capital held” for Lenovo US and
`
`Lenovo Tech. as “100%.” Id. at 279, 281. Further, Lenovo identifies the “principal activities” for
`
`Lenovo US as “[d]istribution of IT products” and the “principal activities” for Lenovo Tech. as
`
`“[p]rovision of IT services and distribution of IT products.” Id. As such, Lenovo US and Lenovo
`
`Tech. are agents of Lenovo. At the direction and control of Lenovo, U.S.-based subsidiaries
`
`(including but not limited to Lenovo US and Lenovo Tech.) make, use, import, offer to sell, and/or
`
`sell Lenovo-branded servers, workstations, laptops, and desktops that infringe the Asserted
`
`Patents, including in the State of Texas and this District.
`
`9.
`
`Lenovo, alone and through its U.S.-based subsidiaries (such as Lenovo US and
`
`Lenovo Tech.), places such infringing products into the stream of commerce via established
`
`distribution channels knowing or understanding that such products would be sold and used in the
`
`United States, including in the Eastern District of Texas. Lenovo has derived substantial revenue
`
`from infringing acts in the United States, including from the sale and use of infringing products.
`
`See Ex. 1 at 225 (showing revenues for “Americas”).
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`10.
`
`This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United
`
`States Code. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and
`
`1338(a).
`
`11.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Lenovo in this action because Lenovo has
`
`committed acts within Texas (and this District) giving rise to this action and has established
`
`minimum contacts with this forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over Lenovo would not
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 5 of 26 PageID #: 262
`
`offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Lenovo, directly and/or through
`
`subsidiaries or intermediaries, has committed and continues to commit acts of infringement in this
`
`District by, among other things, making, using, importing, offering to sell, and/or selling products
`
`that infringe the Asserted Patents. Courts in Texas have concluded that Lenovo is subject to
`
`personal jurisdiction in the State of Texas. See ACQIS LLC v. Lenovo Grp. Ltd., 572 F. Supp. 3d
`
`291, 307 (W.D. Tex. 2021) (“this Court finds that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over
`
`[Lenovo Group Limited] is both reasonable and fair.”); see also AX Wireless LLC v. Lenovo Grp.
`
`Ltd., No. 2:22-cv-00280-RWS-RSP, Dkt. No. 110 (report and recommendation) (E.D. Tex. Sept.
`
`6, 2023) (“exercising personal jurisdiction [over Lenovo Grp. Ltd.] would not offend traditional
`
`notions of fair place and substantial justice.”).
`
`12.
`
`Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b). Lenovo,
`
`directly and/or through subsidiaries or intermediaries, has transacted business in this District and
`
`has committed acts of direct infringement in this District by, among other things, making, using,
`
`offering to sell, selling, and importing products that infringe the Asserted Patents. Venue is also
`
`proper as to Lenovo because it is a foreign corporation organized under the laws of China and suits
`
`against foreign entities are proper in any judicial district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(3); In re HTC
`
`Corp., 889 F.3d 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2018).
`
`COUNT I
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,436,626
`
`13.
`
`Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully
`
`set forth herein.
`
`14.
`
`Plaintiff owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest, including the right to
`
`recover damages for past, present, and future infringement, in U.S. Patent No. 9,436,626, titled
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 6 of 26 PageID #: 263
`
`“Processor interrupt interface with interrupt partitioning and virtualization enhancements.”
`
`The ’626 Patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on
`
`September 6, 2016. The ’626 Patent is valid and enforceable. A true and correct copy of the ’626
`
`Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.
`
`15.
`
`Lenovo makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or imports certain products,
`
`including without limitation Lenovo’s products using Intel-based CPUs (Haswell-based
`
`architecture and newer) (including but not limited to ThinkSystem Servers (SD530 V3, SD550
`
`V3, SE350 V2, SE360 V2, ST650 V3, SR630 V3, SR650 V3, SR850 V3, SR860 V3, SR950 V3,
`
`SD650 V3, SD650-I V3, SD650-N V3, SE450, ST50 V2, SR250 V2, ST650 V2, SR630 V2,
`
`SR650 V2, SR670 V2, SD630 V2, SD650 V2, SD650-N V2, SN550 V2 , SE350, ST50, SR530,
`
`SR630, SR650, SR850, SR850P, SR850 V2, SR860 V2, SR950, ST550, SN550, SN850),
`
`ThinkAgile Systems (HX630 V3, HX650 V3, HX1330, HX2330, HX3330, HX5530, HX7530,
`
`HX7820), ThinkStation Workstations (P3 Tiny Workstation, P3 Tower Workstation, P3 Ultra
`
`Small Workstation, P5 Workstation, P7 Workstation, PX Workstation), ThinkCentre Desktops
`
`(M80q Gen 4, Neo 50s Gen 4, M70s Gen 3, M70q Gen 3, Gen 4, M90q Gen 3, M90t Gen 3),
`
`ThinkPad Laptops (ThinkPad X1, ThinkPad E16, ThinkPad T14, ThinkPad T16 Gen 2), Legion
`
`Laptops (Legion Pro 71, Legion Pro 5i Gen 8), ThinkBook Laptops (ThinkBook 16 Gen 1,
`
`ThinkBook 14 Gen 6), IdeaPads (IdeaPad 5i), and Yoga Laptops (Yoga 9i, 7i)) and AMD Zen-
`
`based CPUs (including but not limited to ThinkSystem Servers (SE455 V3, SR635 V3, SR655 V3,
`
`SR645 V3, SR665 V3, SR675 V3, SD665-N V3, SR635, SR655 V3, SR645, SR665), ThinkAgile
`
`Systems (HX645 V3 and HX655 V3), ThinkStation Workstations (P620 Workstation, P8
`
`Workstation), ThinkCentre Desktops (M75q, M75s), ThinkPad Laptops (L14 Gen 3, P14s Gen 4,
`
`T16 Gen 2), ThinkBook Laptops (ThinkBook 16 Gen 6, ThinkBook 14 Gen 4), Legion Pro
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 7 of 26 PageID #: 264
`
`Laptops (Legion Pro 5 Gen 8), IdeaPad Laptops (Flex 5, Slim 5), and Yoga Laptops (Yoga 7)) (the
`
`“Accused Products”), that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, one
`
`or more claims of the ’626 Patent. Identification of the accused products will be provided in
`
`Plaintiff’s infringement contentions pursuant to the Court’s scheduling order.
`
`16.
`
`The Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of one or more claims of the ’626
`
`Patent. A claim chart comparing exemplary independent claim 1 of the ’626 Patent to
`
`representative Accused Products is attached as Exhibits 3 and 4.
`
`17.
`
`By making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing into the United States
`
`the Accused Products, Lenovo has injured Plaintiff and is liable for infringement of the ’626 Patent
`
`pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`18.
`
`Lenovo also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of one or more
`
`claims of the ’626 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). At least as of the filing and service
`
`of the original complaint on April 11, 2024, Lenovo has knowledge of the ’626 Patent and the
`
`infringing nature of the Accused Products through, for example, the ’626 Patent claim charts
`
`served therewith. Despite this knowledge of the ’626 Patent, Lenovo continues to actively
`
`encourage and instruct its customers and end users (for example, through user manuals and online
`
`instruction materials on its website and materials cited in Exhibits 3 and 4) to use the Accused
`
`Products in ways that directly infringe the ’626 Patent. For example, Lenovo advertises the
`
`benefits of Intel Xeon and AMD EPYC processors and their impact on Lenovo’s products, such
`
`as
`
`the
`
`accused
`
`ThinkSystem
`
`and
`
`ThinkAgile
`
`products.
`
`
`
`See
`
`Ex.
`
`5
`
`(https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/c/servers-storage/servers-
`
`intel/?orgRef=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252F);
`
`Ex.
`
`6
`
`(https://lenovopress.lenovo.com/lp1866-launch-5th-gen-intel-xeon-scalable-
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 8 of 26 PageID #: 265
`
`processors?orgRef=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252F);
`
`
`
`Ex.
`
`7
`
`(https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/servers-
`
`storage/alliance/amd/?orgRef=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252F).
`
` Further,
`
`Lenovo provides customers with instructions and user manuals detailing how to setup, configure,
`
`and utilize the Accused Products to utilize the infringing functionality. See, e.g., Ex. 8
`
`(https://pubs.lenovo.com/st650-v2/ST650_V2_setup_guide.pdf);
`
`Ex.
`
`9
`
`(https://pubs.lenovo.com/thinkagile-hx/hx_series_user_guide.pdf).
`
` Lenovo provides
`
`these
`
`instructions, user manuals, and other materials knowing and intending (or with willful blindness
`
`to the fact) that its customers and end users will commit these infringing acts. Lenovo also
`
`continues to make, use, offer for sale, sell, and/or import the Accused Products, despite its
`
`knowledge of the ’626 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and inducing its customers to
`
`infringe the ’626 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary use of the Accused
`
`Products.
`
`19.
`
`Lenovo has also infringed, and continues to infringe, one or more claims of the ’626
`
`Patent by selling, offering for sale, or importing into the United States, the Accused Products,
`
`knowing that the Accused Products constitute a material part of the inventions claimed in the ’626
`
`Patent, are especially made or adapted to infringe the ’626 Patent, and are not staple articles or
`
`commodities of commerce suitable for non-infringing use. At least as of the filing and service of
`
`the original complaint on April 11, 2024, Lenovo has knowledge of the ’626 Patent and the
`
`infringing nature of the Accused Products through, for example, the ’626 Patent claim chart served
`
`therewith. Lenovo has been, and currently is, contributorily infringing the ’626 Patent in violation
`
`of 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(c) and/or (f). For example, the accused processor interrupt management
`
`features constitute a material part of the inventions claimed in the ’626 Patent, are especially made
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 9 of 26 PageID #: 266
`
`or adapted to infringe the ’626 Patent, and are not staple articles or commodities of commerce
`
`suitable for non-infringing use, as demonstrated by the evidence in Exhibits 3 and 4.
`
`20.
`
`On information and belief, Plaintiff (including its predecessors and any licensees)
`
`complied with 35 U.S.C. § 287 during the relevant time period because Plaintiff, any predecessor
`
`assignees to the ’626 Patent, and any licensees did not make, offer for sale, or sell products that
`
`practice(d) the ’626 Patent during the relevant time period or were not required to mark during the
`
`relevant time period.
`
`21.
`
`As a result of Lenovo’s direct infringement of the ’626 Patent, Plaintiff is entitled
`
`to monetary damages (past, present, and future) in an amount adequate to compensate for Lenovo’s
`
`infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by
`
`Lenovo, together with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
`
`22.
`
`As a result of Lenovo’s indirect infringement of the ’626 Patent, Plaintiff is entitled
`
`to monetary damages (present and future) in an amount adequate to compensate for Lenovo’s
`
`infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by
`
`Lenovo, together with interest and costs as fixed by the Court, accruing as of the time Lenovo
`
`obtained knowledge of the ’626 Patent.
`
`COUNT II
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,442,870
`
`23.
`
`Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully
`
`set forth herein.
`
`24.
`
`Plaintiff owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest, including the right to
`
`recover damages for past, present, and future infringement, in U.S. Patent No. 9,442,870, titled
`
`“Interrupt priority management using partition-based priority blocking processor registers.”
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 10 of 26 PageID #: 267
`
`The ’870 Patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on
`
`September 13, 2016. The ’870 Patent is valid and enforceable. A true and correct copy of the ’870
`
`Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 10.
`
`25.
`
`Lenovo makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or imports certain products,
`
`including without limitation Lenovo’s products using Intel-based CPUs (Haswell-based
`
`architecture and newer) (including but not limited to ThinkSystem Servers (SD530 V3, SD550
`
`V3, SE350 V2, SE360 V2, ST650 V3, SR630 V3, SR650 V3, SR850 V3, SR860 V3, SR950 V3,
`
`SD650 V3, SD650-I V3, SD650-N V3, SE450, ST50 V2, SR250 V2, ST650 V2, SR630 V2,
`
`SR650 V2, SR670 V2, SD630 V2, SD650 V2, SD650-N V2, SN550 V2 , SE350, ST50, SR530,
`
`SR630, SR650, SR850, SR850P, SR850 V2, SR860 V2, SR950, ST550, SN550, SN850),
`
`ThinkAgile Systems (HX630 V3, HX650 V3, HX1330, HX2330, HX3330, HX5530, HX7530,
`
`HX7820), ThinkStation Workstations (P3 Tiny Workstation, P3 Tower Workstation, P3 Ultra
`
`Small Workstation, P5 Workstation, P7 Workstation, PX Workstation), ThinkCentre Desktops
`
`(M80q Gen 4, Neo 50s Gen 4, M70s Gen 3, M70q Gen 3, Gen 4, M90q Gen 3, M90t Gen 3),
`
`ThinkPad Laptops (ThinkPad X1, ThinkPad E16, ThinkPad T14, ThinkPad T16 Gen 2), Legion
`
`Laptops (Legion Pro 71, Legion Pro 5i Gen 8), ThinkBook Laptops (ThinkBook 16 Gen 1,
`
`ThinkBook 14 Gen 6), IdeaPads (IdeaPad 5i), and Yoga Laptops (Yoga 9i, 7i)) and AMD Zen-
`
`based CPUs (including but not limited to ThinkSystem Servers (SE455 V3, SR635 V3, SR655 V3,
`
`SR645 V3, SR665 V3, SR675 V3, SD665-N V3, SR635, SR655 V3, SR645, SR665), ThinkAgile
`
`Systems (HX645 V3 and HX655 V3), ThinkStation Workstations (P620 Workstation, P8
`
`Workstation), ThinkCentre Desktops (M75q, M75s), ThinkPad Laptops (L14 Gen 3, P14s Gen 4,
`
`T16 Gen 2), ThinkBook Laptops (ThinkBook 16 Gen 6, ThinkBook 14 Gen 4), Legion Pro
`
`Laptops (Legion Pro 5 Gen 8), IdeaPad Laptops (Flex 5, Slim 5), and Yoga Laptops (Yoga 7)) (the
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 11 of 26 PageID #: 268
`
`“Accused Products”), that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, one
`
`or more claims of the ’870 Patent. Identification of the accused products will be provided in
`
`Plaintiff’s infringement contentions pursuant to the Court’s scheduling order.
`
`26.
`
`The Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of one or more claims of the ’870
`
`Patent. A claim chart comparing exemplary independent claim 1 of the ’870 Patent to
`
`representative Accused Products is attached as Exhibits 11 and 12.
`
`27.
`
`By making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing into the United States
`
`the Accused Products, Lenovo has injured Plaintiff and is liable for infringement of the ’870 Patent
`
`pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`28.
`
`Lenovo also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of one or more
`
`claims of the ’870 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). At least as of the filing and service
`
`of the original complaint on April 11, 2024, Lenovo has knowledge of the ’870 Patent and the
`
`infringing nature of the Accused Products through, for example, the ’870 Patent claim charts
`
`served therewith. Despite this knowledge of the ’870 Patent, Lenovo continues to actively
`
`encourage and instruct its customers and end users (for example, through user manuals and online
`
`instruction materials on its website and materials cited in Exhibits 11 and 12) to use the Accused
`
`Products in ways that directly infringe the ’870 Patent. For example, Lenovo advertises the
`
`benefits of Intel Xeon and AMD EPYC processors and their impact on Lenovo’s products, such
`
`as
`
`the
`
`accused
`
`ThinkSystem
`
`and
`
`ThinkAgile
`
`products.
`
`
`
`See
`
`Ex.
`
`5
`
`(https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/c/servers-storage/servers-
`
`intel/?orgRef=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252F);
`
`Ex.
`
`(https://lenovopress.lenovo.com/lp1866-launch-5th-gen-intel-xeon-scalable-
`
`processors?orgRef=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252F);
`
`Ex.
`
`6
`
`7
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 12 of 26 PageID #: 269
`
`(https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/servers-
`
`storage/alliance/amd/?orgRef=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252F).
`
` Further,
`
`Lenovo provides customers with instructions and user manuals detailing how to setup, configure,
`
`and utilize the Accused Products to utilize the infringing functionality. See, e.g., Ex. 8
`
`(https://pubs.lenovo.com/st650-v2/ST650_V2_setup_guide.pdf);
`
`
`
`Ex.
`
`9
`
`(https://pubs.lenovo.com/thinkagile-hx/hx_series_user_guide.pdf).
`
` Lenovo provides
`
`these
`
`instructions, user manuals, and other materials knowing and intending (or with willful blindness
`
`to the fact) that its customers and end users will commit these infringing acts. Lenovo also
`
`continues to make, use, offer for sale, sell, and/or import the Accused Products, despite its
`
`knowledge of the ’870 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and inducing its customers to
`
`infringe the ’870 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary use of the Accused
`
`Products.
`
`29.
`
`Lenovo has also infringed, and continues to infringe, one or more claims of the ’870
`
`Patent by selling, offering for sale, or importing into the United States, the Accused Products,
`
`knowing that the Accused Products constitute a material part of the inventions claimed in the ’870
`
`Patent, are especially made or adapted to infringe the ’870 Patent, and are not staple articles or
`
`commodities of commerce suitable for non-infringing use. At least as of the filing and service of
`
`the original complaint on April 11, 2024, Lenovo has knowledge of the ’870 Patent and the
`
`infringing nature of the Accused Products through, for example, the ’870 Patent claim chart served
`
`therewith. Lenovo has been, and currently is, contributorily infringing the ’870 Patent in violation
`
`of 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(c) and/or (f). For example, the accused processor interrupt management
`
`features constitute a material part of the inventions claimed in the ’870 Patent, are especially made
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 13 of 26 PageID #: 270
`
`or adapted to infringe the ’870 Patent, and are not staple articles or commodities of commerce
`
`suitable for non-infringing use, as demonstrated by the evidence in Exhibits 11 and 12.
`
`30.
`
`On information and belief, Plaintiff (including its predecessors and any licensees)
`
`complied with 35 U.S.C. § 287 during the relevant time period because Plaintiff, any predecessor
`
`assignees to the ’870 Patent, and any licensees did not make, offer for sale, or sell products that
`
`practice(d) the ’870 Patent during the relevant time period or were not required to mark during the
`
`relevant time period.
`
`31.
`
`As a result of Lenovo’s direct infringement of the ’870 Patent, Plaintiff is entitled
`
`to monetary damages (past, present, and future) in an amount adequate to compensate for Lenovo’s
`
`infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by
`
`Lenovo, together with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
`
`32.
`
`As a result of Lenovo’s indirect infringement of the ’870 Patent, Plaintiff is entitled
`
`to monetary damages (present and future) in an amount adequate to compensate for Lenovo’s
`
`infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by
`
`Lenovo, together with interest and costs as fixed by the Court, accruing as of the time Lenovo
`
`obtained knowledge of the ’870 Patent.
`
`COUNT III
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,504,777
`
`33.
`
`Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully
`
`set forth herein.
`
`34.
`
`Plaintiff owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest, including the right to
`
`recover damages for past, present, and future infringement, in U.S. Patent No. 8,504,777, titled
`
`“Data processor for processing decorated instructions with cache bypass.” The ’777 Patent was
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 14 of 26 PageID #: 271
`
`duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on August 6, 2013.
`
`The ’777 Patent is valid and enforceable. A true and correct copy of the ’777 Patent is attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit 13.
`
`35.
`
`Lenovo makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or imports certain products,
`
`including without limitation Lenovo’s products using Intel-based CPUs (Skylake-based
`
`architecture and newer) (including but not limited to ThinkSystem Servers (SD530 V3, SD550
`
`V3, SE350 V2, SE360 V2, ST650 V3, SR630 V3, SR650 V3, SR850 V3, SR860 V3, SR950 V3,
`
`SD650 V3, SD650-I V3, SD650-N V3, SE450, ST50 V2, SR250 V2, ST650 V2, SR630 V2,
`
`SR650 V2, SR670 V2, SD630 V2, SD650 V2, SD650-N V2, SN550 V2 , SE350, ST50, SR530,
`
`SR630, SR650, SR850, SR850P, SR850 V2, SR860 V2, SR950, ST550, SN550, SN850) and
`
`ThinkAgile Systems (HX630 V3, HX650 V3, HX1330, HX2330, HX3330, HX5530, HX7530,
`
`HX7820)) and AMD-based EPYC CPUs (including but not limited to ThinkSystem Servers
`
`(SE455 V3, SR635 V3, SR655 V3, SR645 V3, SR665 V3, SR675 V3, SD665-N V3, SR635,
`
`SR655 V3, SR645, SR665) and ThinkAgile Systems (HX645 V3 and HX655 V3)) (the “Accused
`
`Products”), that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, one or more
`
`claims of the ’777 Patent. Identification of the accused products will be provided in Plaintiff’s
`
`infringement contentions pursuant to the Court’s scheduling order.
`
`36.
`
`The Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of one or more claims of the ’777
`
`Patent. A claim chart comparing exemplary independent claim 16 of the ’777 Patent to
`
`representative Accused Products is attached as Exhibits 14 and 15.
`
`37.
`
`By making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing into the United States
`
`the Accused Products, Lenovo has injured Plaintiff and is liable for infringement of the ’777 Patent
`
`pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 15 of 26 PageID #: 272
`
`38.
`
`Lenovo also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of one or more
`
`claims of the ’777 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). At least as of the filing and service
`
`of the original complaint on April 11, 2024, Lenovo has knowledge of the ’777 Patent and the
`
`infringing nature of the Accused Products through, for example, the ’777 Patent claim chart served
`
`therewith. Despite this knowledge of the ’777 Patent, Lenovo continues to actively encourage and
`
`instruct its customers and end users (for example, through user manuals and online instruction
`
`materials on its website and materials cited in Exhibits 14 and 15) to use the Accused Products in
`
`ways that directly infringe the ’777 Patent. For example, Lenovo advertises the benefits of Intel
`
`Xeon and AMD EPYC processors and their impact on Lenovo’s products, such as the accused
`
`ThinkSystem and ThinkAgile products. See Ex. 5 (https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/c/servers-
`
`storage/servers-intel/?orgRef=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252F);
`
`Ex.
`
`6
`
`(https://lenovopress.lenovo.com/lp1866-launch-5th-gen-intel-xeon-scalable-
`
`processors?orgRef=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252F);
`
`
`
`
`
`Ex.
`
`7
`
`(https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/servers-
`
`storage/alliance/amd/?orgRef=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252F).
`
` Further,
`
`Lenovo provides customers with instructions and user manuals detailing how to setup, configure,
`
`and utilize the Accused Products to utilize the infringing functionality. See, e.g., Ex. 8
`
`(https://pubs.lenovo.com/st650-v2/ST650_V2_setup_guide.pdf);
`
`Ex.
`
`9
`
`(https://pubs.lenovo.com/thinkagile-hx/hx_series_user_guide.pdf).
`
` Lenovo provides
`
`these
`
`instructions, user manuals, and other materials knowing and intending (or with willful blindness
`
`to the fact) that its customers and end users will commit these infringing acts. Lenovo also
`
`continues to make, use, offer for sale, sell, and/or import the Accused Products, despite its
`
`knowledge of the ’777 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and inducing its customers to
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 16 of 26 PageID #: 273
`
`infringe the ’777 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary use of the Accused
`
`Products.
`
`39.
`
`Lenovo has also infringed, and continues to infringe, one or more claims of the ’777
`
`Patent by selling, offering for sale, or importing into the United States, the Accused Products,
`
`knowing that the Accused Products constitute a material part of the inventions claimed in the ’777
`
`Patent, are especially made or adapted to infringe the ’777 Patent, and are not staple articles or
`
`commodities of commerce suitable for non-infringing use. At least as of the filing and service of
`
`the original complaint on April 11, 2024, Lenovo has knowledge of the ’777 Patent and the
`
`infringing nature of the Accused Products through, for example, the ’777 Patent claim chart served
`
`therewith. Lenovo has been, and currently is, contributorily infringing the ’777 Patent in violation
`
`of 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(c) and/or (f). For example, the accused cache processing features constitute
`
`a material part of the inventions claimed in the ’777 Patent, are especially made or adapted to
`
`infringe the ’777 Patent, and are not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable for non-
`
`infringing use, as demonstrated by the evidence in Exhibits 14 and 15.
`
`40.
`
`On information and belief, Plaintiff (including its predecessors and any licensees)
`
`complied with 35 U.S.C. § 287 during the relevant time period because Plaintiff, any predecessor
`
`assignees to the ’777 Patent, and any licensees did not make, offer for sale, or sell products that
`
`practice(d) the ’777 Patent during the relevant time period or were not required to mark during the
`
`relevant time period.
`
`41.
`
`As a result of Lenovo’s direct infringement of the ’777 Patent, Plaintiff is entitled
`
`to monetary damages (past, present, and future) in an amount adequate to compensate for Lenovo’s
`
`infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by
`
`Lenovo, together with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00239-JRG Document 12 Filed 06/04/24 Page 17 of 26 PageID #: 274
`
`42.
`
`As a result of Lenovo’s indirect infringement of the ’777 Patent, Plaintiff is entitled
`
`to monetary damages (present and future) in an amount adequate to compensate for Lenovo’s
`
`infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by
`
`Lenovo, together with interest and costs as fixed by the Court, accruing as of the time Lenovo
`
`obtained knowledge of the ’777 Patent.
`
`COUNT IV
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,117,399
`
`43.
`
`Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully
`
`set forth here