Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`TYLER DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:14-cv-982
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.,
`LG ELECTRONICS U.S.A., INC.,
`AT&T INC.,
`AT&T MOBILITY LLC,
`VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,
`CELLCO PARTNERSHIP D/B/A
`VERIZON WIRELESS,
`SPRINT NEXTEL CORPORATION,
`SPRINT SOLUTIONS, INC.,
`SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P.,
`BOOST MOBILE, LLC,
`T-MOBILE USA, INC., and
`T-MOBILE US, INC.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff Cellular Communications Equipment LLC files this Original Complaint against
`
`
`
`LG Electronics, Inc.; LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc.; AT&T Inc.; AT&T Mobility LLC; Verizon
`
`Communications, Inc.; Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless; Sprint Nextel Corporation;
`
`Sprint Solutions, Inc.; Sprint Spectrum L.P.; Boost Mobile, LLC; T-Mobile USA, Inc.; and T-
`
`Mobile US, Inc. (collectively, the “Defendants”) for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,385,966
`
`(“the ’966 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 8,848,556 (“the ’556 patent”), and U.S. Patent No.
`
`8,868,060 (“the ’060 patent”).
`
`
`
` 
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 2 of 17 PageID #: 2
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Cellular Communications Equipment LLC (“CCE”) is a Texas limited liability
`
`company with its principal place of business in Plano, Texas.
`
`2.
`
`On information and belief, LG Electronics, Inc. is incorporated under the laws of
`
`South Korea with its principal place of business at LG Twin Towers 20, Yeouido-dong,
`
`Yeongdeunspo-gu, Seoul 150-721, South Korea. This Defendant may be served with process at
`
`its principal place of business at LG Twin Towers 20, Yeouido-dong, Yeongdeunspo-gu, Seoul
`
`150-721, South Korea. This Defendant does business in the State of Texas and in the Eastern
`
`District of Texas.
`
`3.
`
`LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. (with LG Electronics, Inc., “LG”) is a Delaware
`
`corporation with its principal place of business in Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. This
`
`Defendant may be served with process through its agent, United States Corporation Company,
`
`2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware 19808. This Defendant does business
`
`in the State of Texas and in the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`4.
`
`AT&T Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in
`
`Dallas, Texas. This Defendant may be served with process through its agent, The Corporation
`
`Trust Company, Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801.
`
`This Defendant does business in the State of Texas and in the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`5.
`
`AT&T Mobility LLC (with AT&T Inc., “AT&T”) is a Delaware limited liability
`
`company with its principal place of business in Atlanta, Georgia. This Defendant may be served
`
`with process through its agent, The Corporation Trust Company, Corporation Trust Center, 1209
`
`Orange Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801. This Defendant does business in the State of
`
`Texas and in the Eastern District of Texas.
`
` 
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 3 of 17 PageID #: 3
`
`6.
`
`Verizon Communications Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place
`
`of business in New York, New York. This Defendant may be served with process through its
`
`agent, The Corporation Trust Company, Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street,
`
`Wilmington, Delaware 19801. This Defendant does business in the State of Texas and in the
`
`Eastern District of Texas.
`
`7.
`
`Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless (with Verizon Communications Inc.,
`
`“Verizon”) is a Delaware general partnership with its principal place of business in Basking
`
`Ridge, New Jersey. This Defendant may be served with process through its agent, The
`
`Corporation Trust Company, Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington,
`
`Delaware 19801. This Defendant does business in the State of Texas and in the Eastern District
`
`of Texas.
`
`8.
`
`Sprint Nextel Corporation is a Kansas corporation with its principal place of
`
`business in Overland Park, Kansas. This Defendant may be served with process through its
`
`agent, Corporation Service Company, 200 S.W. 30th Street, Topeka, Kansas 66611. This
`
`Defendant does business in the State of Texas and in the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`9.
`
`Sprint Solutions, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
`
`business in Reston, Virginia. This Defendant may be served with process through its agent,
`
`Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware 19808.
`
`This Defendant does business in the State of Texas and in the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`10.
`
`Sprint Spectrum L.P. is a Delaware limited partnership with its principal place of
`
`business in Overland Park, Kansas. This Defendant may be served with process through its
`
`agent, Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware
`
`19808. This Defendant does business in the State of Texas and in the Eastern District of Texas.
`
` 
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 4 of 17 PageID #: 4
`
`11.
`
`Boost Mobile, LLC (with Sprint Nextel Corporation, Sprint Solutions, Inc., and
`
`Sprint Spectrum L.P., “Sprint”) is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place
`
`of business in Irvine, California. This Defendant may be served with process through its agent,
`
`Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware 19808.
`
`This Defendant does business in the State of Texas and in the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`12.
`
`T-Mobile USA, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business
`
`in Bellevue, Washington. This Defendant may be served with process through its agent,
`
`Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware 19808.
`
`This Defendant does business in the State of Texas and in the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`13.
`
`T-Mobile US, Inc. (with T-Mobile USA, Inc., “T-Mobile”) is a Delaware
`
`corporation with its principal place of business in Bellevue, Washington. This Defendant may be
`
`served with process through its agent, Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Road,
`
`Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware 19808. This Defendant does business in the State of Texas
`
`and in the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`14.
`
`This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, namely 35 U.S.C. §§
`
`271, 281, and 284-285, among others.
`
`15.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and
`
`1338(a), and 1367.
`
`16.
`
`Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c),
`
`and 1400(b). On information and belief, each Defendant is deemed to reside in this judicial
`
`district, has committed acts of infringement in this judicial district, has purposely transacted
`
`business in this judicial district, and/or has regular and established places of business in this
`
`judicial district.
`
` 
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 5 of 17 PageID #: 5
`
`17.
`
`On information and belief, each Defendant is subject to this Court’s specific and
`
`general personal jurisdiction pursuant to due process and/or the Texas Long Arm Statute, due at
`
`least to their substantial and pervasive business in this State and judicial district, including: (i) at
`
`least part of their infringing activities alleged herein; and (ii) regularly doing or soliciting
`
`business, engaging in other persistent conduct, and/or deriving substantial revenue from goods
`
`sold and services provided to Texas residents.
`
`18. More specifically, Defendants’ substantial contacts with the forum include, but
`
`are not limited to: (i) the manufacture, marketing, sale, distribution, and use of LG mobile
`
`devices; (ii) the marketing and sale of services for mobile device communications; (iii) the
`
`ownership and/or operation of stores where LG mobile devices are sold and serviced; and/or (iv)
`
`the provision of technical and customer support for LG mobile devices and attendant mobile
`
`device communications services.
`
`COUNT I
`
`(INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,385,966)
`
`CCE incorporates paragraphs 1 through 18 herein by reference.
`
`CCE is the assignee of the ’966 patent, entitled “Method, Apparatus, and
`
`19.
`
`20.
`
`Computer Program for Power Control Related to Random Access Procedures” with ownership of
`
`all substantial rights in the ’966 patent, including the right to exclude others and to enforce, sue,
`
`and recover damages for past and future infringements. A true and correct copy of the ’966
`
`patent is attached as Exhibit A.
`
`21.
`
`The ’966 patent is valid, enforceable, and was duly issued in full compliance with
`
`Title 35 of the United States Code.
`
`22.
`
`Defendants LG, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon have and continue to
`
`directly and/or indirectly infringe (by inducing infringement and/or contributing to infringement)
`5
`
` 
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 6 of 17 PageID #: 6
`
`one or more claims of the ’966 patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas and the
`
`United States, including at least claims 1-7 and 10-17, without the consent or authorization of
`
`CCE, by or through their making, having made, offering for sale, selling, importing, testing,
`
`and/or use of LG mobile devices, including, for example: the LG G2, LG G3, LG G3 Vigor, LG
`
`G Flex, LG G Vista, LG G Pad 7.0 LTE, LG Optimus G, and LG Optimus G Pro (the “’966
`
`AT&T Mobile Devices”); the LG G2, LG G3, LG G3 Vigor, LG G Flex, LG Google Nexus 5,
`
`LG Mach, LG Optimus F3, LG Optimus G, and LG Viper (the “’966 Sprint Mobile Devices”);
`
`the LG G3, LG Optimus F3Q, LG Optimus F6, LG G Flex, LG Google Nexus 5, and LG
`
`Optimus F3 (the “’966 T-Mobile Mobile Devices”); and the LG G3, LG Lucid 3, LG Enact, LG
`
`G2, LG G Vista, LG Spectrum 2, LG Lucid 2, LG Lucid 4G, and LG Intuition (the “’966
`
`Verizon Mobile Devices”). These devices are collectively referred to as the “’966 LG Devices.”
`
`23.
`
`Defendants directly infringe the apparatus claims of the ’966 patent by making,
`
`using, testing, offering to sell, selling, and/or importing the ’966 LG Devices. Defendants also
`
`directly infringe the ’966 patent by making, using, testing, selling, offering for sale, and/or
`
`importing the ’966 LG Devices to practice the claimed methods. Defendants are thereby liable
`
`for direct infringement.
`
`24.
`
`Additionally, Defendants are liable for indirect infringement of the ’966 patent
`
`because they induce and/or contribute to the direct infringement of the patent by their customers
`
`(including, but not limited to, cellular network providers and/or their subscribers) and other end
`
`users who use the ’966 LG Devices to practice the claimed methods.
`
`25.
`
`Each Defendant is a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (or “3GPP”) member
`
`organization, or is affiliated with a 3GPP member organization. 3GPP solicits identification of
`
`standard essential patents, and, through 3GPP, Defendants received actual notice of the standard
`
`essential patents at issue here. The ’966 patent is one such patent, and Defendants have known
`6
`
` 
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 7 of 17 PageID #: 7
`
`of the patent application that issued as the ’966 patent at least as early as June 2011, when it was
`
`disclosed to 3GPP via the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (“ETSI,” an
`
`organizational member of 3GPP).
`
`26.
`
`Despite having knowledge of the ’966 patent, Defendants named in this Count
`
`have and continue to specifically intend for persons who acquire and use such devices, including
`
`Defendants’ customers, to use such devices in a manner that infringes the ’966 patent, including
`
`at least claims 1-7. This is evident when Defendants encourage and instruct customers and other
`
`end users in the use and operation of the ’966 LG Devices.
`
`27.
`
`In particular, despite having knowledge of the ’966 patent, Defendants have
`
`provided, and continue to provide, instructional materials, such as user guides, owner manuals,
`
`and similar online resources (available via http://www.lg.com/us/support/cell-phones for
`
`instance) that specifically teach the customers and other end users to use the ’966 LG Devices in
`
`an infringing manner. By providing such instructions, Defendants know (and have known), or
`
`should know (and should have known), that their actions have, and continue to, actively induce
`
`infringement.
`
`28.
`
`Additionally, Defendants named in this Count know, and have known, that the
`
`’966 LG Devices include proprietary hardware components and software instructions that work
`
`in concert to perform specific, intended functions. Such specific, intended functions, carried out
`
`by these hardware and software combinations, are a material part of the inventions of the ’966
`
`patent and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
`
`29.
`
`On information and belief, despite having knowledge of the ’966 patent and
`
`knowledge that they are directly and/or indirectly infringing one or more claims of the ’966
`
`patent, Defendants named in this Count have nevertheless continued their infringing conduct and
`
`disregarded an objectively high likelihood of infringement; thus, Defendants’ infringing
`7
`
` 
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 8 of 17 PageID #: 8
`
`activities relative to the ’966 patent have been, and continue to be, willful, wanton, and
`
`deliberate in disregard of CCE’s rights.
`
`30.
`
`On information and belief, LG and AT&T test, make, use, offer for sale, sell,
`
`and/or import the ’966 AT&T Mobile Devices described in this Count, pursuant to one or more
`
`contractual agreements between them relating to, at least, the distribution and sale of such
`
`devices. Accordingly, LG and AT&T are jointly, severally, or alternatively liable for
`
`infringements described in this Count.
`
`31.
`
`On information and belief, LG and Sprint test, make, use, offer for sale, sell,
`
`and/or import the ’966 Sprint Mobile Devices described in this Count, pursuant to one or more
`
`contractual agreements between them relating to, at least, the distribution and sale of such
`
`devices. Accordingly, LG and Sprint are jointly, severally, or alternatively liable for
`
`infringements described in this Count.
`
`32.
`
`On information and belief, LG and T-Mobile test, make, use, offer for sale, sell,
`
`and/or import the ’966 T-Mobile Mobile Devices described in this Count, pursuant to one or
`
`more contractual agreements between them relating to, at least, the distribution and sale of such
`
`devices. Accordingly, LG and T-Mobile are jointly, severally, or alternatively liable for
`
`infringements described in this Count.
`
`33.
`
`On information and belief, LG and Verizon test, make, use, offer for sale, sell,
`
`and/or import the ’966 Verizon Mobile Devices described in this Count, pursuant to one or more
`
`contractual agreements between them relating to, at least, the distribution and sale of such
`
`devices. Accordingly, LG and Verizon are jointly, severally, or alternatively liable for
`
`infringements described in this Count.
`
`34.
`
`CCE has been damaged as a result of Defendants’ infringing conduct described in
`
`this Count. Defendants are, thus, liable to CCE in an amount that adequately compensates it for
`8
`
` 
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 9 of 17 PageID #: 9
`
`their infringements, which, by law, cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with
`
`interest and costs as fixed by this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.
`
`COUNT II
`
`(INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,848,556)
`
`CCE incorporates paragraphs 1 through 18 herein by reference.
`
`CCE is the assignee of the ’556 patent, entitled “Carrier Aggregation with Power
`
`35.
`
`36.
`
`Headroom Report,” with ownership of all substantial rights in the ’556 patent, including the right
`
`to exclude others and to enforce, sue, and recover damages for past and future infringements. A
`
`true and correct copy of the ’556 patent is attached as Exhibit B.
`
`37.
`
`The ’556 patent is valid, enforceable, and was duly issued in full compliance with
`
`Title 35 of the United States Code.
`
`38.
`
`Defendants LG, AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon have and continue to directly infringe
`
`one or more claims of the ’556 patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas and the
`
`United States, including at least claims 13-15 and 21-22, without the consent or authorization of
`
`CCE, by or through their making, having made, offering for sale, selling, importing, testing,
`
`and/or use of LG mobile devices, including, for example: the LG G2 for AT&T (the “’556
`
`AT&T Mobile Devices”); the LG G2 for Sprint (the “’556 Sprint Mobile Devices”); and the LG
`
`G2 for Verizon (the “’556 Verizon Mobile Devices”). These devices are collectively referred to
`
`as the “’556 LG Devices.”
`
`39.
`
`Defendants directly infringe the apparatus claims of the ’556 patent by making,
`
`using, testing, offering to sell, selling, and/or importing the ’556 LG Devices. Defendants are
`
`thereby liable for direct infringement.
`
`40.
`
`Each Defendant is a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (or “3GPP”) member
`
`organization, or is affiliated with a 3GPP member organization. 3GPP solicits identification of
`9
`
` 
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 10 of 17 PageID #: 10
`
`standard essential patents, and, through 3GPP, Defendants received actual notice of the standard
`
`essential patents at issue here. The ’556 patent is one such patent, and Defendants have known
`
`of the patent application that issued as the ’556 patent at least as early as October 2012, when it
`
`was disclosed to 3GPP via the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (“ETSI,” an
`
`organizational member of 3GPP).
`
`41.
`
`On information and belief, despite having knowledge of the ’556 patent and
`
`knowledge that they are directly infringing one or more claims of the ’556 patent, Defendants
`
`named in this Count have nevertheless continued their infringing conduct and disregarded an
`
`objectively high likelihood of infringement; thus, Defendants’ infringing activities relative to the
`
`’556 patent have been, and continue to be, willful, wanton, and deliberate in disregard of CCE’s
`
`rights.
`
`42.
`
`On information and belief, LG and AT&T test, make, use, offer for sale, sell,
`
`and/or import the ’556 AT&T Mobile Devices described in this Count, pursuant to one or more
`
`contractual agreements between them relating to, at least, the distribution and sale of such
`
`devices. Accordingly, LG and AT&T are jointly, severally, or alternatively liable for
`
`infringements described in this Count.
`
`43.
`
`On information and belief, LG and Sprint test, make, use, offer for sale, sell,
`
`and/or import the ’556 Sprint Mobile Devices described in this Count, pursuant to one or more
`
`contractual agreements between them relating to, at least, the distribution and sale of such
`
`devices. Accordingly, LG and Sprint are jointly, severally, or alternatively liable for
`
`infringements described in this Count.
`
`44.
`
`On information and belief, LG and Verizon test, make, use, offer for sale, sell,
`
`and/or import the ’556 Verizon Mobile Devices described in this Count, pursuant to one or more
`
`contractual agreements between them relating to, at least, the distribution and sale of such
`10
`
` 
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 11 of 17 PageID #: 11
`
`devices. Accordingly, LG and Verizon are jointly, severally, or alternatively liable for
`
`infringements described in this Count.
`
`45.
`
`CCE has been damaged as a result of Defendants’ infringing conduct described in
`
`this Count. Defendants are, thus, liable to CCE in an amount that adequately compensates it for
`
`their infringements, which, by law, cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with
`
`interest and costs as fixed by this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.
`
`COUNT III
`
`(INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,868,060)
`
`CCE incorporates paragraphs 1 through 18 herein by reference.
`
`CCE is the assignee of the ’060 patent, entitled “Method, Network and Device for
`
`46.
`
`47.
`
`Information Provision by Using Paging and Cell Broadcast Services,” with ownership of all
`
`substantial rights in the ’060 patent, including the right to exclude others and to enforce, sue, and
`
`recover damages for past and future infringements. A true and correct copy of the ’060 patent is
`
`attached as Exhibit C.
`
`48.
`
`The ’060 patent is valid, enforceable, and was duly issued in full compliance with
`
`Title 35 of the United States Code.
`
`49.
`
`Defendants LG, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon have and continue to
`
`directly and/or indirectly infringe (by inducing infringement and/or contributing to infringement)
`
`one or more claims of the ’060 patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas and the
`
`United States, including at least claims 1, 3, 7, 9, and 15, without the consent or authorization of
`
`CCE, by or through their making, having made, offering for sale, selling, importing, testing,
`
`and/or use of LG mobile devices, including, for example: the LG G2, LG G3, LG G3 Vigor, LG
`
`G Flex, and LG G Vista (the “’060 AT&T Mobile Devices”); LG G2, LG G3, LG G3 Vigor, and
`
`LG G Flex (the “’060 Sprint Mobile Devices”); LG G3, LG Optimus L90, LG Optimus F3Q, LG
`11
`
` 
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 12 of 17 PageID #: 12
`
`Optimus F6, and LG G Flex (the “’060 T-Mobile Mobile Devices”); and LG G3, LG Lucid 3,
`
`LG Enact, LG G2, LG G Vista, and LG Spectrum 2 (the “’060 Verizon Mobile Devices”).
`
`These devices are collectively referred to as the “’060 LG Devices.”
`
`50.
`
`Defendants directly infringe the apparatus claims of the ’060 patent by making,
`
`using, testing, offering to sell, selling, and/or importing the ’060 LG Devices. Defendants also
`
`directly infringe the ’060 patent by making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing the
`
`’060 LG Devices to practice the claimed methods. Defendants are thereby liable for direct
`
`infringement.
`
`51.
`
`Additionally, Defendants are liable for indirect infringement of the ’060 patent
`
`because they induce and/or contribute to the direct infringement of the patent by their customers
`
`(including, but not limited to, cellular network providers and/or their subscribers) and other end
`
`users who use the ’060 LG Devices to practice the claimed methods.
`
`52.
`
`Each Defendant is a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (or “3GPP”) member
`
`organization, or is affiliated with a 3GPP member organization. 3GPP solicits identification of
`
`standard essential patents, and, through 3GPP, Defendants received actual notice of the standard
`
`essential patents at issue here. The ’060 patent is one such patent, and Defendants have known
`
`of the patent application that issued as the ’060 patent at least as early as December 14, 2010,
`
`when it was disclosed to 3GPP via the European Telecommunications Standards Institute
`
`(“ETSI,” an organizational member of 3GPP).
`
`53.
`
`Despite having knowledge of the ’060 patent, Defendants named in this Count
`
`have and continue to specifically intend for persons who acquire and use such devices, including
`
`Defendants’ customers, to use such devices in a manner that infringes the ’060 patent, including
`
`at least claims 1 and 3. This is evident when Defendants encourage and instruct customers and
`
`other end users in the use and operation of the ’060 LG Devices.
`12
`
` 
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 13 of 17 PageID #: 13
`
`54.
`
`In particular, despite having knowledge of the ’060 patent, Defendants have
`
`provided, and continue to provide, instructional materials, such as user guides, owner manuals,
`
`and similar online resources (available via http://www.lg.com/us/support/cell-phones, for
`
`instance) that specifically teach the customers and other end users to use the ’060 LG Devices in
`
`an infringing manner. By providing such instructions, Defendants know (and have known), or
`
`should know (and should have known), that their actions have, and continue to, actively induce
`
`infringement.
`
`55.
`
`Additionally, Defendants named in this Count know, and have known, that the
`
`’060 LG Devices include proprietary hardware components and software instructions that work
`
`in concert to perform specific, intended functions. Such specific, intended functions, carried out
`
`by these hardware and software combinations, are a material part of the inventions of the ’060
`
`patent and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
`
`56.
`
`On information and belief, despite having knowledge of the ’060 patent and
`
`knowledge that they are directly and/or indirectly infringing one or more claims of the ’060
`
`patent, Defendants named in this Count have nevertheless continued their infringing conduct and
`
`disregarded an objectively high likelihood of infringement; thus, Defendants’ infringing
`
`activities relative to the ’060 patent have been, and continue to be, willful, wanton, and
`
`deliberate in disregard of CCE’s rights.
`
`57.
`
`On information and belief, LG and AT&T test, make, use, offer for sale, sell,
`
`and/or import the ’060 AT&T Mobile Devices described in this Count, pursuant to one or more
`
`contractual agreements between them relating to, at least, the distribution and sale of such
`
`devices. Accordingly, LG and AT&T are jointly, severally, or alternatively liable for
`
`infringements described in this Count.
`
` 
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 14 of 17 PageID #: 14
`
`58.
`
`On information and belief, LG and Sprint test, make, use, offer for sale, sell,
`
`and/or import the ’060 Sprint Mobile Devices described in this Count, pursuant to one or more
`
`contractual agreements between them relating to, at least, the distribution and sale of such
`
`devices. Accordingly, LG and Sprint are jointly, severally, or alternatively liable for
`
`infringements described in this Count.
`
`59.
`
`On information and belief, LG and T-Mobile test, make, use, offer for sale, sell,
`
`and/or import the ’060 T-Mobile Mobile Devices described in this Count, pursuant to one or
`
`more contractual agreements between them relating to, at least, the distribution and sale of such
`
`devices. Accordingly, LG and T-Mobile are jointly, severally, or alternatively liable for
`
`infringements described in this Count.
`
`60.
`
`On information and belief, LG and Verizon test, make, use, offer for sale, sell,
`
`and/or import the ’060 Verizon Mobile Devices described in this Count, pursuant to one or more
`
`contractual agreements between them relating to, at least, the distribution and sale of such
`
`devices. Accordingly, LG and Verizon are jointly, severally, or alternatively liable for
`
`infringements described in this Count.
`
`61.
`
`CCE has been damaged as a result of Defendants’ infringing conduct described in
`
`this Count. Defendants are, thus, liable to CCE in an amount that adequately compensates it for
`
`their infringements, which, by law, cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with
`
`interest and costs as fixed by this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.
`
`JOINDER OF PARTIES
`
`62.
`
`63.
`
`CCE incorporates paragraphs 1 through 61 herein by reference.
`
`On information and belief, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon have each
`
`purchased or otherwise acquired from LG certain mobile devices for sale, resale, and/or
`
`distribution to their customers (and other end users) that are the subject of Counts I through III
`14
`
` 
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 15 of 17 PageID #: 15
`
`(or some subset thereof). Thus, for these Counts, the right to relief against AT&T, Sprint, T-
`
`Mobile, and/or Verizon is asserted jointly and severally with LG.
`
`64.
`
`The alleged infringements set forth in Counts I through III arise out of the same
`
`transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences relating to the testing, making,
`
`using, offering for sale, selling, and/or importing of the LG mobile devices made the subject of
`
`Counts I through III.
`
`65.
`
`Questions of fact common to all Defendants will arise in this action including, for
`
`example, infringement by, or through use of, LG mobile devices.
`
`66.
`
`Thus, joinder of LG, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon is proper in this
`
`litigation pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 299(a).
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`CCE hereby requests a trial by jury pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil
`
`Procedure.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`
`
`CCE requests that the Court find in its favor and against Defendants, and that the Court
`
`grant CCE the following relief:
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`Judgment that one or more claims of the ’966, ’556, and ’060 patents have been
`infringed, either literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, by Defendants
`and/or by others whose infringements have been induced by Defendants and/or by
`others to whose infringements Defendants have contributed;
`
`Judgment that Defendants account for and pay to CCE all damages to and costs
`incurred by CCE because of Defendants’ infringing activities and other conduct
`complained of herein;
`
`Judgment that Defendants account for and pay to CCE a reasonable, ongoing,
`post-judgment royalty because of Defendants’ infringing activities and other
`conduct complained of herein;
`
`That Defendants’ infringements relative to the ’966, ’556, and ’060 patents be
`found willful from the time that Defendants became aware of the infringing nature
`
` 
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 16 of 17 PageID #: 16
`
`of their products, and that the Court award treble damages for the period of such
`willful infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`That CCE be granted pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the damages
`caused by Defendants’ infringing activities and other conduct complained of
`herein; and
`
`That CCE be granted such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and
`proper under the circumstances.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`
`Dated: December 19, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Edward R. Nelson, III by permission Claire A.
`Henry
`Edward R. Nelson, III – LEAD ATTORNEY
`enelson@nbclaw.net
`Texas State Bar No. 00797142
`Brent N. Bumgardner
`bbumgardner@nbclaw.net
`Texas State Bar No. 00795272
`Barry J. Bumgardner
`barry@nbclaw.net
`Texas State Bar No. 00793424
`S. Brannon Latimer
`blatimer@nbclaw.net
`Texas State Bar No. 24060137
`Thomas C. Cecil
`tcecil@nbclaw.net
`Texas State Bar No. 24069489
`NELSON BUMGARDNER CASTO, P.C.
`3131 West 7th Street, Suite 300
`Fort Worth, Texas 76107
`Phone: (817) 377-9111
`Fax: (817) 377-3485
`
`T. John Ward, Jr.
`Texas State Bar No. 00794818
`J. Wesley Hill
`Texas State Bar No. 24032294
`Claire Abernathy Henry
`Texas State Bar No. 24053063
`WARD & SMITH LAW FIRM
`P.O. Box 1231
`1127 Judson Rd. Ste. 220
`Longview, Texas 75606-1231
`(903) 757-6400
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 1 Filed 12/19/14 Page 17 of 17 PageID #: 17
`
`(903) 757-2323 (fax)
`jw@jwfirm.com
`wh@wsfirm.com
`ch@wsfirm.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC
`
`17
`
`
`
`
`
` 
`
`