Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 17 Filed 04/27/21 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 416
`
`OCEAN SEMICONDUCTOR LLC
`
`
`v.
`
`HUAWEI DEVICE USA, INC., HUAWEI
`DEVICE CO., LTD., AND HISILICON
`TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD.
`
`
`United States District Court
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`SHERMAN DIVISION
`
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`
`MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 4:20-cv-991
`Judge Mazzant
`
`
`
`
`Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim
`
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 271(g) (Dkt. #13). Having considered the Motion and relevant pleadings, the
`
`Court finds that it should be DENIED.
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`
`
`On December 31, 2020, Ocean Semiconductor, LLC (“Ocean”) sued Huawei Device USA,
`
`Inc., Huawei Device Co., Ltd., and HiSilicon Technologies Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Huawei”) for
`
`patent infringement (Dkt. #1). On April 5, 2021, Huawei moved to dismiss the case for failure to
`
`state a claim under 35 U.S.C. § 271(g) (Dkt. #13). On April 20, 2021, Ocean responded (Dkt.
`
`#14). On April 26, 2021, Huawei replied (Dkt. #16).
`
`LEGAL STANDARD
`
`The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that each claim in a complaint include a “short
`
`and plain statement . . . showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” FED. R. CIV. P. 8(a)(2). Each
`
`claim must include enough factual allegations “to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.”
`
`Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007).
`
`A Rule 12(b)(6) motion allows a party to move for dismissal of an action when the
`
`complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6). When
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 17 Filed 04/27/21 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 417
`
`considering a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), the Court must accept as true all well-pleaded
`
`facts in the plaintiff’s complaint and view those facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.
`
`Bowlby v. City of Aberdeen, 681 F.3d 215, 219 (5th Cir. 2012). The Court may consider “the
`
`complaint, any documents attached to the complaint, and any documents attached to the motion to
`
`dismiss that are central to the claim and referenced by the complaint.” Lone Star Fund V (U.S.),
`
`L.P. v. Barclays Bank PLC, 594 F.3d 383, 387 (5th Cir. 2010). The Court must then determine
`
`whether the complaint states a claim for relief that is plausible on its face. “A claim has facial
`
`plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the [C]ourt to draw the reasonable
`
`inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Gonzalez v. Kay, 577 F.3d 600,
`
`603 (5th Cir. 2009) (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)). “But where the well-
`
`pleaded facts do not permit the [C]ourt to infer more than the mere possibility of misconduct, the
`
`complaint has alleged—but it has not ‘show[n]’—‘that the pleader is entitled to relief.’” Iqbal,
`
`556 U.S. at 679 (quoting FED. R. CIV. P. 8(a)(2)).
`
`In Iqbal, the Supreme Court established a two-step approach for assessing the sufficiency
`
`of a complaint in the context of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion. First, the Court should identify and
`
`disregard conclusory allegations, for they are “not entitled to the assumption of truth.” Iqbal, 556
`
`U.S. at 664. Second, the Court “consider[s] the factual allegations in [the complaint] to determine
`
`if they plausibly suggest an entitlement to relief.” Id. “This standard ‘simply calls for enough
`
`facts to raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence of the necessary claims
`
`or elements.’” Morgan v. Hubert, 335 F. App’x 466, 470 (5th Cir. 2009) (citation omitted). This
`
`evaluation will “be a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial
`
`experience and common sense.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 4:20-cv-00991-ALM Document 17 Filed 04/27/21 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 418
`
`Thus, “[t]o survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,
`
`accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.”’ Id. at 678 (quoting
`
`Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570).
`
`ANALYSIS
`
`After reviewing the Motion, the pleadings, and briefing, the Court finds that Plaintiff has
`
`stated plausible claims for purposes of defeating a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`It is therefore ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim
`
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 271(g) (Dkt. #13) is hereby DENIED.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`