Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 1 of 23 PageID #: 1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`(SHERMAN DIVISION)
`
`
`BELL NORTHERN RESEARCH, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`ASUSTEK COMPUTER INC. and ASUS
`COMPUTER INTERNATIONAL,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. _____
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff Bell Northern Research, LLC (“BNR” or “Plaintiff”), for its Complaint against
`
`Defendants ASUSTek Computer Inc. and ASUS Computer International (collectively, “ASUS”
`
`or “Defendants”), alleges the following:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the
`
`United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff BNR is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State
`
`of Delaware with a place of business at 401 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60611.
`
`3. BNR is informed and believes Defendant ASUSTek Computer Inc. has its principal
`
`place of business and headquarters at No. 15, Li-Te Rd., Beitou Dist., Taipei 112, Taiwan. BNR
`
`is informed and believes that Defendant ASUSTek Computer Inc. imports, sells for importation,
`
`and/or sells after importation into the United States products that practice the accused methods
`
`(“Accused Products”), including at least the ASUS PN52 ExpertCenter MiniPC Computer,
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 2 of 23 PageID #: 2
`
`which contains a MediaTek MT7922 chip that it uses to communicate over wireless networks in
`
`an infringing manner, and the ASUS RT-AX89X AX6000 Dual Band router, which contains a
`
`Qualcomm IPQ8074 chip that it uses to communicate over wireless networks in an infringing
`
`manner (“ASUS Exemplary Accused Products”), either directly or by directing the co-defendant
`
`ASUS entities to do so.
`
`4.
`
`BNR is informed and believes Defendant ASUS Computer International has its
`
`principal place of business and headquarters at 48720 Kato Rd., Fremont, CA 94538. BNR is
`
`informed and believes Defendant ASUS Computer International is a subsidiary of or otherwise
`
`controlled by Defendant ASUSTek Computer Inc. as to the sale for importation, importation,
`
`and/or sale after importation into the United States of the Accused Products, including the ASUS
`
`Exemplary Accused Products. BNR is informed and believes that Defendant ASUS Computer
`
`International imports, sells for importation, and/or sells after importation into the United States
`
`the Accused Products, including the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products, either directly or on
`
`behalf of the other ASUS entities. On information and belief, ASUSTek Computer Inc. also uses
`
`ASUS Accused Products within the United States.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`5.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the
`
`United States, Title 35 of the United States Code.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b).
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant ASUSTek Computer Inc. is not a
`
`resident in the United States and may be sued in any judicial district. Defendant ASUSTek
`
`Computer Inc. has a place of business located at No. 15, Li-Te Rd., Beitou Dist., Taipei 112,
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 3 of 23 PageID #: 3
`
`Taiwan. On information and belief, Defendant ASUSTek Computer Inc. has committed acts of
`
`infringement in this District.
`
`9.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant ASUS Computer International has its
`
`principal place of business and headquarters at t 48720 Kato Rd., Fremont, CA 94538. On
`
`information and belief, Defendant ASUS Computer International has committed acts of
`
`infringement within this district.
`
`10.
`
`ASUS has previously consented to jurisdiction and venue in this District, for
`
`example, in Genghiscomm Holdings, LLC v. ASUStek Computer, Inc., Case No. 2:22-cv-66
`
`(E.D. Tex. 2022).
`
`11.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendants are subject to this Court’s general and
`
`specific personal jurisdiction, because the Defendants have sufficient minimum contacts within
`
`the State of Texas and this District, pursuant to due process and/or the Texas Long Arm Statute,
`
`because the Defendants purposefully availed itself of the privileges of conducting business in the
`
`State of Texas and in this District, because the Defendants regularly conduct and solicits
`
`business within the State of Texas and within this District, and because Plaintiff’s causes of
`
`action arise directly from the Defendants’ business contacts and other activities in the State of
`
`Texas and this District.
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`12.
`
`The Asserted Patents come from a rich pedigree dating back to the late 19th
`
`century. This is when Bell Labs sprang to life from the combined efforts of AT&T and Western
`
`Electric. Bell Labs is one of America’s greatest technology incubators, and paved the way for
`
`many technological advances we know and use today, including the transistor, several kinds of
`
`lasers, the UNIX operating system, and computer languages such as C++. In total, Bell Labs
`
`received nine Nobel Prizes for its work over the years.
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 4 of 23 PageID #: 4
`
`13.
`
`Eventually the Bell system broke up and spawned several new companies. They
`
`included telecommunications powerhouses Lucent and Agere Systems. Lucent was absorbed by
`
`Nokia, while Agere Systems was acquired by LSI, then Avago, and ultimately renamed
`
`Broadcom. The Bell system also spun off Northern Electric which led to the creation of a
`
`research lab known as BNR. This lab grew to host thousands of engineers in offices around the
`
`globe. One of those was an 800,000-square-foot campus in Richardson, Texas.
`
`14.
`
`Collectively, these companies spurred a digital revolution in telecommunications,
`
`starting with the first digital telephone switch in 1975. They continued to push the industry to
`
`new heights in the late-80s, when BNR announced the desire to create a global fiber optic
`
`network (called “FiberWorld”). Its goal was to give users easy, reliable, and fast access to a
`
`variety of multimedia services. To realize this vision, Bell Labs and subsequent innovators made
`
`numerous breakthroughs in laser, integrated circuit, photodetector, amplifier, and waveguide
`
`designs. These advancements led to the modern fiber optic systems we use today.
`
`15.
`
`This work naturally evolved to include cellular telecommunications as well. On
`
`May 6, 1992, BNR VP George Brody—along with executives from Bell Cellular and Northern
`
`Electric—made the first Canada-US digital cellular call. It stretched from Toronto, Ontario to
`
`Fort Worth, Texas.
`
`16.
`
`Eventually, Nortel Networks absorbed BNR. Although Nortel was ultimately
`
`unsuccessful in its bid to supply digital telecommunications and networking solutions to the
`
`market, some Bell Labs and Nortel alumni decided to reenergize BNR in 2017. Today it is the
`
`successor in interest to many of the key telecommunications technologies.
`
`17.
`
`The BNR Patent portfolio comprises hundreds of patents that reflect important
`
`developments in telecommunications that were invented and refined by leading technology
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 5 of 23 PageID #: 5
`
`research companies, including Agere, LSI, and Broadcom. These include U.S. Patent Nos. RE
`
`48,629, 8,416,862, and 7,564,914 (collectively, these patents comprise the “Asserted Patents”).
`
`18.
`
`Portions of the BNR portfolio are presently licensed and/or were previously
`
`licensed to leading technology companies.
`
`19.
`
`BNR brings this action to put a stop to the Defendants’ unauthorized and
`
`unlicensed use of the Asserted Patents.
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. RE 48,629
`
`20.
`
`Jason Alexander Trachewsky and Rajendra T. Moorti are the inventors of U.S.
`
`Patent No. RE 48,629 (the ’629 patent). A true and correct copy of the ’629 patent is attached as
`
`Exhibit A.
`
`21. On July 6, 2021, the ’629 patent was duly and legally reissued by the United States
`
`Patent and Trademark Office under the title “Backward-compatible Long Training Sequences for
`
`Wireless Communication Networks.”
`
`22. BNR is the assignee and owner of the right, title and interest in and to the ’629 patent,
`
`including the right to assert all causes of action arising under the Patent and the right to any
`
`remedies for infringement of it.
`
`23.
`
`The ’629 patent resulted from the pioneering efforts of Messrs. Trachewsky and
`
`Moorti (hereinafter “the Inventors”) in the general area of wireless communication systems and
`
`more particularly to long training sequences of minimum peak-to-average power ratio which
`
`may be used in legacy systems. At the time of these pioneering efforts, conventionally
`
`implemented technology did not sufficiently address the problem of different wireless devices
`
`compliant with different standards or different versions of the same standard while enabling
`
`backward compatibility with legacy devices that avoids collisions. For example, in the 802.11a
`
`and 802.11g standards, each data packet starts with a preamble which includes a short training
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 6 of 23 PageID #: 6
`
`sequence followed by a long training sequence. The short and long training sequences are used
`
`for synchronization between the sender and the receiver. The long training sequence of 802.11a
`
`and 802.11g is defined such that each of sub-carriers -26 to +26, except for the subcarrier 0
`
`which is set to 0, has one binary phase shift keying constellation point, either +1 or -1.
`
`24.
`
`There existed a need to create a long training sequence of minimum peak-to-
`
`average ratio that uses more sub-carriers without interfering with adjacent channels.
`
`25.
`
`For example, the Inventors developed a wireless communications device,
`
`comprising: a signal generator that generates an extended long training sequence; and an Inverse
`
`Fourier Transformer operatively coupled to the signal generator, wherein the Inverse Fourier
`
`Transformer processes the extended long training sequence from the signal generator and
`
`provides an optimal extended long training sequence with a minimal peak-to-average ratio, and
`
`wherein at least the optimal extended long training sequence is carried by a greater number of
`
`subcarriers than a standard wireless networking configuration for an Orthogonal Frequency
`
`Division Multiplexing scheme, wherein the optimal extended long training sequence is carried
`
`by exactly 56 active sub-carriers, and wherein the optimal extended long training sequence is
`
`represented by encodings for indexed sub-carriers -28 to +28, excluding indexed sub-carrier 0
`
`which is set to zero, as follows:
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 7 of 23 PageID #: 7
`
`26.
`
`One advantage of the patented invention is that it provides an expanded long
`
`training sequence of minimum peak-to-average power ratio thereby decreasing power back-off.
`
`(See ’629 patent at 4:15-17.)
`
`27.
`
`Another advantage of the invention is that expanded long training sequence may
`
`be used by 802.11a and 802.11g devices for estimating the channel impulse response and by a
`
`receiver for estimating the carrier frequency offset between the transmitter clock and receiver
`
`clock. (See ’629 patent at 4:17-21.)
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. 8,416,862
`
`28. Carlos Aldana and Joonsuk Kim are the inventors of U.S. Patent No 8,416,862 (“the
`
`’862 patent”). A true and correct copy of the ’862 patent is attached as Exhibit B.
`
`29. On April 9, 2013, the ’862 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States
`
`Patent and Trademark Office under the title “Efficient Feedback of Channel Information in a
`
`Closed Loop Beamforming Wireless Communications System.”
`
`30. BNR is the assignee and owner of the right, title and interest in and to the ’862 patent,
`
`including the right to assert all causes of action arising under the patent and the right to any
`
`remedies for infringement of it.
`
`31.
`
`The ’862 patent resulted from the pioneering efforts of Messrs. Aldana and Kim
`
`(hereinafter “the Inventors”) in the area of wireless communications systems using beamforming.
`
`These efforts resulted in the development of a method and system for the efficient feedback of
`
`channel information in a closed loop beamforming wireless communication system.
`
`32.
`
`At the time of these pioneering efforts, the most widely implemented technology
`
`used to address reduced beam forming feedback information for wireless communications was to
`
`reduce the size of the feedback. For instance, in a 2x2 MIMO wireless communication, the
`
`feedback needs four elements that are all complex Cartesian coordinate values V11 V12;V21
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 8 of 23 PageID #: 8
`
`V22. In general, Vik=aik+j*bik, where aik and bik are values between -1, 1. Thus, with 1 bit
`
`express per each element for each of the real and imaginary components, aik and bik can be
`
`either -1/2 or +1/2, which requires 4x2x1=8 bits per tone. With 4 bit expressions per each
`
`element of V(f) in an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) 2x2 MIMO wireless
`
`communication, the number of bits required is 1728 per tone (e.g., 42*54*4=1728, 4 elements
`
`per tone, 2 bits for real and imaginary components per tone, 54 data tones per frame, and 4 bits
`
`per element), which requires overhead for a packet exchange that is too large for practical
`
`applications.
`
`33.
`
`The Inventors conceived of the invention claimed in the ’862 patent as a way to
`
`reduce beam forming feedback information for wireless communications.
`
`34.
`
`For example, the Inventors developed a method for feeding back transmitter
`
`beamforming information from a receiving wireless communication device to a transmitting
`
`wireless communication device, the method comprising: the receiving wireless communication
`
`device receiving a preamble sequence from the transmitting wireless device; the receiving
`
`wireless device estimating a channel response based upon the preamble sequence; the receiving
`
`wireless device determining an estimated transmitter beamforming unitary matrix (V) based
`
`upon the channel response and a receiver beamforming unitary matrix (U); the receiving wireless
`
`device decomposing the estimated transmitter beamforming unitary matrix (V) to produce the
`
`transmitter beamforming information; and the receiving wireless device wirelessly sending the
`
`transmitter beamforming information to the transmitting wireless device.
`
`35.
`
`One advantage of the patented invention is a reduction of beamforming feedback
`
`information for wireless communications. (See ’862 patent at 3:49–51.)
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 9 of 23 PageID #: 9
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. 7,564,914
`
`36.
`
`Christopher J. Hansen, Carlos H. Aldana, and Joonsuk Kim are the inventors of
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,564,914 (“the ’914 patent”). A true and correct copy of the ’914 patent is
`
`attached as Exhibit C.
`
`37. On July 21, 2009, the ’914 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States
`
`Patent and Trademark Office under the title “Method and System for Frame Formats for MIMO
`
`Channel Measurement Exchange.”
`
`38. BNR is the assignee and owner of the right, title and interest in and to the ’914 patent,
`
`including the right to assert all causes of action arising under the patent and the right to any
`
`remedies for infringement of it.
`
`39.
`
`The ’914 patent resulted from the pioneering efforts of Messrs. Hansen, Aldana,
`
`and Kim (hereinafter “the Inventors”) in the general area of wireless networking.
`
`40.
`
`For example, the Inventors developed a method for communicating information in
`
`a communication system, the method comprising: transmitting data via a plurality of radio
`
`frequency (RF) channels utilizing a plurality of transmitting antennas; receiving feedback
`
`information via at least one of said plurality of RF channels; modifying a transmission mode
`
`based on said feedback information; receiving said feedback information comprising channel
`
`estimates based on transmission characteristics of said transmitted data via at least one of said
`
`plurality of transmitting antennas; and deriving said feedback information from mathematical
`
`matrix decomposition of said channel estimates.
`
`41.
`
`One advantage of the ’914 patent is the more precise estimation of channel
`
`characteristics. (See ’914 patent at 18:12–15.)
`
`42.
`
`Another advantage of the patented invention is that it minimizes the quantity of
`
`feedback information and in turn reduces overhead. (See ’914 patent at 18:35–39.)
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 10 of 23 PageID #: 10
`
`43.
`
`Further advantages include higher information transfer rates, and more effective
`
`beamforming on transmitted signals. (See ’914 patent at 18:40–45.)
`
`DEFENDANTS’ ACTIVITIES
`
`44.
`
`ASUS makes, uses, sells, imports and/or provides or causes to be used ASUS
`
`Accused Products, which are wireless communications devices that communicate over wireless
`
`networks and/or operate according to the 802.11ax, 802.11ac, and/or similarly backward-
`
`compatible standards, such as the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products: the ASUS PN52
`
`ExpertCenter MiniPC Computer, which contains a MediaTek MT7922 chip that it uses to
`
`communicate over wireless networks in an infringing manner, and the ASUS RT-AX89X
`
`AX6000 Dual Band router, which contains a Qualcomm IPQ8074 chip that it uses to
`
`communicate over wireless networks in an infringing manner. ASUS Accused Products include
`
`all ASUS wireless communications products that utilize a chip, chipset, SoC, or other
`
`semiconductor device provided by an unlicensed party (including, but not limited to Qualcomm,
`
`MediaTek, and/or NXP) that is used to communicate over wireless networks in an infringing
`
`manner as set forth below.
`
`COUNT I – INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. RE 48,629
`
`45. BNR re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations of the foregoing
`
`paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
`
`46. Upon information and belief, the Defendants have and continue to directly infringe
`
`one or more claims of the ’629 patent, including at least claim 1, making, using, selling,
`
`importing and/or providing and causing to be used the ASUS Accused Products. A set of charts
`
`showing exemplary infringement of the ’629 patent by the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products
`
`is provided in Exhibit D to this Complaint.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 11 of 23 PageID #: 11
`
`47. The 802.11n standard was introduced on or about October 2009, and provides a
`
`definition for a High Throughput Long Training Field (“HT-LTF”). The first part of the HT-
`
`LTF “consists of one, two, or four HT-LTFs that are necessary for demodulation of the HT-Data
`
`portion of the PPDU” (i.e., Protocol Data Unit). The 802.11n standard provides a specific HT-
`
`LTF sequence that is transmitted in the case of 20 MHz operation. (See 802.11-2016 at
`
`19.3.9.4.6 or 802.11-2009 at 20.3.9.4.6.)
`
`48. Upon information and belief after a reasonable investigation, the ASUS Accused
`
`products, including at least the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products, infringe the ’629 patent.
`
`The ASUS Accused Products are wireless communication devices that include a signal generator
`
`that generates an extended long training sequence. For instance, the ASUS Exemplary Accused
`
`Products are 802.11n compliant because they are each 802.11ac compliant, and, therefore, each
`
`uses a specific HT-LTF sequence that is transmitted in the case of 20 MHz operation. (See
`
`802.11-2016 at 19.3.9.4.6 or 802.11-2009 at 20.3.9.4.6; see, e.g., Ex. D.) This corresponds to the
`
`long training sequence with minimum peak-to-average power ratio described in the ’629 patent.
`
`(See id.) Devices operating in accordance with the 802.11n standard (known as “wireless
`
`stations” or “STAs”), including the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products, must be able to
`
`generate the HT-LTF described.
`
`49. The ASUS Accused Products, including the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products,
`
`include an Inverse Fourier Transformer operatively coupled to the signal generator. For
`
`instance, the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products are 802.11n compliant and, therefore, each
`
`uses an encoding process that requires a reverse Fourier transformer. (See 802.11-2016 and
`
`19.3.4(b) or 802.11-2009 at 20.3.4(b); see, e.g., Ex. D.)
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 12 of 23 PageID #: 12
`
`50. The ASUS Accused Products, including the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products,
`
`include an Inverse Fourier Transformer (as explained above) that processes the extended long
`
`training sequence from the signal generator and provides an optimal extended long training
`
`sequence with a minimal peak-to-average ratio. For instance, the ASUS Exemplary Accused
`
`Products are 802.11n compliant because they are 802.11ac compliant and, therefore, each
`
`processes the HT-LTF training sequence from the signal generator. (See 802.11-2016 at Figure
`
`19-9 and 19.3.9.4.6; see, e.g., Ex. D.) The IPQ8074 and MT7922 also provide an optimal HT-
`
`LTF training sequence with a minimal peak-to-average ratio. (See 802.11-2016 at 19.3.9.4.6 at
`
`Equation 19-23; see, e.g., Ex. D.)
`
`51. The ASUS Accused Products, including the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products,
`
`also include an optimal extended long training sequence that is carried by a greater number of
`
`subcarriers than a standard wireless networking configuration for an OFDM scheme. For
`
`instance, the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products are 802.11n compliant because they are
`
`802.11ac compliant, and, therefore, each includes an optimal HT-LTF training sequence that is
`
`carried by a greater number of subcarriers than is standard for an OFDM scheme. (See 802.11-
`
`2016 at 19.3.9.4.6 at Equation 19-23 and additional subcarriers noted therein as compared to L-
`
`LT; see, e.g., Ex. D)
`
`52. The ASUS Accused Products also include an optimal extended long training
`
`sequence that is carried by exactly 56 active subcarriers. For instance, each ASUS Exemplary
`
`Accused Product is 802.11n compliant because it is 802.11ac compliant, and, therefore, includes
`
`an optimal HT-LTF training sequence that is carried by 56 active subcarriers. (See 802.11-2016
`
`at 19.3.9.4.6; see, e.g., Ex. D.)
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 13 of 23 PageID #: 13
`
`53. The ASUS Accused Products also include an optimal extended long training
`
`sequence (as explained above) that is represented by encodings for indexed subcarriers -28 to
`
`+28, excluding indexed subcarrier 0 which is set to zero, as follows:
`
`
`
`54. For instance, each ASUS Exemplary Accused Product is 802.11n compliant because
`
`it is 802.11ac compliant, and therefore includes an optimal HT-LTF training sequence that is
`
`represented by encodings for indexed subcarriers -28 to +28, excluding indexed subcarrier 0
`
`according to the chart above. (See 19.3.9.4.6 at Equation 19-23; see, e.g., Ex. D.)
`
`55. Defendants have infringed and is infringing, individually and/or jointly, either
`
`literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least claim one claim of the ’629 patent, e.g.,
`
`claim 1, in violation of 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, et seq., directly or indirectly, by making, using,
`
`offering for sale, selling, offering for lease, leasing in the United States, and/or importing into the
`
`United States without authority or license, ASUS Accused Products, including the ASUS
`
`Exemplary Accused Products.
`
`56. Upon information and belief, ASUS has been aware of the ’629 patent and its
`
`infringement thereof at least as early as December 3, 2017, when BNR sent a notice letter to
`
`ASUS.
`
`57. Upon information and belief, since the Defendants have had knowledge of the ’629
`
`patent, ASUS has induced and continues to induce others to infringe at least claim 1 of the ’629
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 14 of 23 PageID #: 14
`
`patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by, among other things, and with specific intent or willful
`
`blindness, actively aiding and abetting others to infringe, including but not limited to ASUS’s
`
`partners, clients, customers, and end users whose use of the ASUS Accused Products constitutes
`
`direct infringement of at least claim 1 of the ’629 patent.
`
`58. In particular, ASUS’s actions that aid and abet others such as its partners, customers,
`
`clients, and end users to infringe include advertising and distributing the ASUS Accused
`
`Products and providing instruction materials, training, and services regarding the ASUS Accused
`
`Products. On information and belief, ASUS has engaged in such actions with specific intent to
`
`cause infringement or with willful blindness to the resulting infringement because ASUS has had
`
`actual knowledge of the ’629 patent and knowledge that its acts were inducing infringement of
`
`the ’629 patent since at least the date ASUS received notice that such activities infringed the
`
`’629 patent.
`
`59. Upon information and belief, the Defendants have engaged in such actions with
`
`specific intent to cause infringement or with willful blindness to the resulting infringement
`
`because the Defendants have had actual knowledge of the ’629 patent and that its acts were
`
`inducing infringement of the ’629 patent since ASUS has had knowledge of the ’629 patent.
`
`60. ASUS’s infringement of the ’629 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling BNR to
`
`enhanced damages and attorneys’ fees.
`
`61. ASUS’s infringement of the ’629 patent is exceptional and entitles BNR to attorneys’
`
`fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this action under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
`
`62. BNR is entitled to recover from ASUS all damages that BNR has sustained as a result
`
`of Defendants’ infringement of the ’629 patent, including without limitation and/or not less than
`
`a reasonable royalty.
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 15 of 23 PageID #: 15
`
`COUNT II – INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,416,862
`
`63. BNR re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations of the foregoing
`
`paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
`
`64. Upon information and belief, ASUS has and continues to directly or indirectly
`
`infringe one or more claims of the ’862 patent, e.g., claim 1, by selling, offering to sell, making,
`
`using, and/or providing and causing to be used ASUS Accused Products that operate according
`
`to the 802.11ac standard, such as the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products. A chart showing
`
`exemplary infringement of the ’862 patent by the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products is
`
`attached as Exhibit E.
`
`65. The 802.11ac standard was introduced on or about December 2013, and provides a
`
`definition and standardization for channel sounding for beamforming for Multiple Input Multiple
`
`Output (“MIMO”) RF radio links, including how a receiving wireless device communicates
`
`channel sounding to a base station. Beamforming requires the use of a steering matrix that
`
`improves the reception to the beamformee. The 802.11ac standard provides a specific way to
`
`compress the beamforming feedback matrix by the beamformee, and how to determine and
`
`decompose the estimated transmitter beamforming unitary matrix and compressed into angles for
`
`efficient transmission to the beamformer, which generates a next steering matrix. (See 802.11-
`
`2016 at 19.3.12.1.)
`
`66. Upon information and belief after a reasonable investigation, the ASUS Accused
`
`Products, including at least the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products, infringe the ’862 patent by
`
`providing a method for feeding back transmitter beamforming information from a receiving
`
`wireless communication device to a transmitting wireless communication device. For instance,
`
`the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products are 802.11ac compliant and therefore each provides a
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 16 of 23 PageID #: 16
`
`compressed beamforming feedback matrix to a beamformer. (See, e.g., 802.11-2016 at
`
`19.3.12.1; Ex. E.)
`
`67. The ASUS Accused Products, for example, receive a preamble sequence from a
`
`transmitting wireless device. For instance, each of the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products
`
`comprises an 802.11ac compliant receiver and, therefore, each receives a PHY preamble with
`
`HT-LTFs from a beamformer. (See, e.g., 802.11-2016 at 19.3.13.1; Ex. E.)
`
`68. The ASUS Accused Products include estimating a channel response based upon the
`
`preamble sequence. For instance, the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products are each 802.11ac
`
`compliant wireless devices and, therefore, each estimates a channel response as a result of
`
`receiving the HT-LTF’s which are part of the PHY preamble. (See, e.g., 802.11-2016 at
`
`19.3.13.1; Ex. E.)
`
`69. The ASUS Accused Products include determining an estimated transmitter
`
`beamforming unitary matrix (V) based upon the channel response and a receiver beamforming
`
`unitary matrix (U). For instance, the ASUS Exemplary Accused Products are 802.11ac
`
`compliant wireless devices, and therefore each calculates a beamforming unitary matrix V based
`
`on a singular value decomposition of the channel response H=UDV*, where D is a diagonal
`
`matrix and U is a receiver unitary matrix. (See, e.g., 802.11-2016 at 19.3.12.3.6; Ex. E.)
`
`70. The ASUS Accused Products include decomposing the estimated transmitter
`
`beamforming unitary matrix (V) to produce the transmitter beamforming information. For
`
`instance, each ASUS Exemplary Accused Product is an 802.11ac compliant wireless device and,
`
`therefore, determines beamforming feedback matrices and compresses those into the form of
`
`angles. (See, e.g., 802.11-2016 at 19.3.12.3.6; Ex. E.)
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 17 of 23 PageID #: 17
`
`71. The ASUS Accused Products include wirelessly sending the transmitter beamforming
`
`information to the transmitting wireless device. For instance, each ASUS Exemplary Accused
`
`Product is an 802.11ac compliant wireless device and, therefore, wirelessly sends the
`
`compressed beamformed matrices to the beamformer. (See, e.g., 802.11-2016 at 19.3.12.3.6;
`
`Ex. E.)
`
`72. ASUS has infringed and is infringing, individually and/or jointly, either literally or
`
`under the doctrine of equivalents, at least one claim of the ’862 patent, e.g. claim 1, in violation
`
`of 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, et seq., directly and/or indirectly, by making, using, offering for sale,
`
`selling, offering for lease, leasing in the United States, and/or importing into the United States
`
`without authority or license, ASUS Accused Products, including the ASUS Exemplary Accused
`
`Products.
`
`73. Upon information and belief ASUS has been aware of the ’862 patent and its
`
`infringement thereof at least as early as December 3, 2017, upon the receipt of a notice letter
`
`from BNR.
`
`74. Upon information and belief, since ASUS has had knowledge of the ’862 patent,
`
`ASUS has induced and continues to induce others to infringe at least claim 1 of the ’862 patent
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by, among other things, and with specific intent or willful blindness,
`
`actively aiding and abetting others to infringe, including but not limited to ASUS’s partners,
`
`clients, customers, and end users across the country and in this District, whose use of the ASUS
`
`Accused Products constitutes direct infringement of at least one claim of the ’862 patent.
`
`75. In particular, ASUS’s actions that aid and abet others such as its partners, customers,
`
`clients, and end users to infringe include advertising and distributing the ASUS Accused
`
`Products and providing instruction materials, training, and services regarding the ASUS Accused
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 4:23-cv-00573-ALM Document 1 Filed 06/20/23 Page 18 of 23 PageID #: 18
`
`Products. On information and belief, ASUS has engaged in such actions with specific intent to
`
`cause infringement or with willful blindness to the resulting infringement because ASUS has had
`
`actual knowledge of the ’862 patent and knowledge that its acts were inducing infringement of
`
`the ’862 patent since at least the date ASUS received notice that such activities infringed the
`
`’862 patent.
`
`76. Upon information and belief, AS