Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 170 Filed 12/07/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 2093
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`TYLER DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:14-cv-982
`
`CONSOLIDATED LEAD CASE
`
`
`
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.,
`LG ELECTRONICS U.S.A., 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 REPLY TO LG ELECTRONICS’ COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`Plaintiff Cellular Communications Equipment LLC (“CCE”) hereby files this reply to
`
`Defendants LG Electronics, Inc. and LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. (collectively “LG” or
`
`“Counterclaimants”) Counterclaims to the First Amended Complaint. All allegations not
`
`expressly admitted are denied. With respect to the individually numbered paragraphs in
`
`Defendants’ counterclaims, Plaintiff replies as follows:
`
`LG ELECTRONICS’ COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`172. CCE admits that Counterclaimant purports to incorporate paragraphs 1-171 of
`
`Counterclaimants’ answer as if set forth in paragraph 172 in their entirety. CCE asserts that such
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`TYLER DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:14-cv-982
`
`CONSOLIDATED LEAD CASE
`
`
`
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.,
`LG ELECTRONICS U.S.A., 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 REPLY TO LG ELECTRONICS’ COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`Plaintiff Cellular Communications Equipment LLC (“CCE”) hereby files this reply to
`
`Defendants LG Electronics, Inc. and LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. (collectively “LG” or
`
`“Counterclaimants”) Counterclaims to the First Amended Complaint. All allegations not
`
`expressly admitted are denied. With respect to the individually numbered paragraphs in
`
`Defendants’ counterclaims, Plaintiff replies as follows:
`
`LG ELECTRONICS’ COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`172. CCE admits that Counterclaimant purports to incorporate paragraphs 1-171 of
`
`Counterclaimants’ answer as if set forth in paragraph 172 in their entirety. CCE asserts that such
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 170 Filed 12/07/15 Page 2 of 9 PageID #: 2094
`
`wholesale incorporation by reference of over 170 paragraphs in this singular paragraph is
`
`improper. Except as admitted, CCE denies the allegations of paragraph 172.
`
`173. The allegations in paragraph 173 are legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent that paragraph 173 contains any factual allegations to which CCE must
`
`respond, CCE denies such allegations.
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`174. The allegations in paragraph 174 are legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent that paragraph 174 contains any factual allegations to which CCE must
`
`respond, CCE admits that an actual controversy exists with respect to infringement and validity.
`
`Except as admitted, the allegations of paragraph 174 are denied.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`175. CCE lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about paragraph
`
`175 and thus denies same.
`
`176. CCE lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about paragraph
`
`176 and thus denies same.
`
`177. CCE admits that it is a Texas limited liability company with a principal place of
`
`business in Plano, Texas. Except as admitted, the allegations of paragraph 177 are denied.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`178. CCE admits that LG’s counterclaims arise under Title 35 of the United States
`
`Code. CCE admits that the Court has original jurisdiction under the subject matter of LG’s
`
`counterclaims. Except as admitted, the allegations of paragraph 178 are denied.
`
`179. CCE admits that the Court has personal jurisdiction over it with respect to the
`
`claims and counterclaims asserted in this action. Except as admitted, the allegations of
`
`paragraph 179 are denied.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 170 Filed 12/07/15 Page 3 of 9 PageID #: 2095
`
`
`
`180. CCE admits that venue is proper in this District with respect to the claims and
`
`counterclaims asserted in this action. Except as admitted, CCE denies the allegations in
`
`paragraph 180.
`
`181. CCE admits that an actual justiciable controversy exists between LG and CCE
`
`concerning infringement and validity of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,385,966 (“the ’966 patent”),
`
`8,848,556 (“the ’556 patent”), and 8,868,060 (“the ’060 patent”). CCE admits that it has
`
`asserted that LG has infringed and is infringing the ’966 Patent, ’556 Patent, and ’060 Patent.
`
`CCE admits that LG purports to assert that it has not infringed the ’966 Patent, ’556 Patent, and
`
`’060 Patent. Except as admitted, the allegations of paragraph 181 are denied.
`
`COUNTERCLAIM I
`(Declaration of Noninfringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,385,966)
`
`that Counterclaimants purport
`
`182. CCE admits
`
`to
`
`incorporate and re-allege
`
`paragraphs 172-181 of their Counterclaims. CCE incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs 172-
`
`181 of this Reply.
`
`183. CCE denies the allegations of paragraph 183.
`
`184. The allegations in paragraph 184 are legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent that paragraph 184 contains any factual allegations to which CCE must
`
`respond, CCE denies such allegations.
`
`COUNTERCLAIM II
`(Declaration of Noninfringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,848,556)
`
`185. CCE admits
`
`that Counterclaimants purport
`
`to
`
`incorporate and re-allege
`
`paragraphs 172-184 of their Counterclaims. CCE incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs 172-
`
`184 of this Reply.
`
`186. CCE denies the allegations of paragraph 186.
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 170 Filed 12/07/15 Page 4 of 9 PageID #: 2096
`
`187. The allegations in paragraph 187 are legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent that paragraph 187 contains any factual allegations to which CCE must
`
`respond, CCE denies such allegations.
`
`COUNTERCLAIM III
`(Declaration of Noninfringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,868,060)
`
`that Counterclaimants purport
`
`188. CCE admits
`
`to
`
`incorporate and re-allege
`
`paragraphs 172-187 of their Counterclaims. CCE incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs 172-
`
`187 of this Reply.
`
`189. CCE denies the allegations of paragraph 189.
`
`190. The allegations in paragraph 190 are legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent that paragraph 190 contains any factual allegations to which CCE must
`
`respond, CCE denies such allegations.
`
`COUNTERCLAIM IV
`(Declaration of Invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 8,385,966)
`
`191. CCE admits
`
`that Counterclaimants purport
`
`to
`
`incorporate and re-allege
`
`paragraphs 172-190 of their Counterclaims. CCE incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs 172-
`
`190 of this Reply.
`
`192. CCE denies the allegations of paragraph 192.
`
`193. The allegations in paragraph 193 are legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent that paragraph 193 contains any factual allegations to which CCE must
`
`respond, CCE denies such allegations.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 170 Filed 12/07/15 Page 5 of 9 PageID #: 2097
`
`COUNTERCLAIM V
`(Declaration of Invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 8,848,556)
`
`194. CCE admits
`
`that Counterclaimants purport
`
`to
`
`incorporate and re-allege
`
`paragraphs 172-193 of their Counterclaims. CCE incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs 172-
`
`193 of this Reply.
`
`195. CCE denies the allegations of paragraph 195.
`
`196.
`
`allegations in paragraph 196 are legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent that paragraph 196 contains any factual allegations to which CCE must
`
`respond, CCE denies such allegations.
`
`COUNTERCLAIM VI
`(Declaration of Invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 8,868,060)
`
`197. CCE admits
`
`that Counterclaimant purports
`
`to
`
`incorporate and re-allege
`
`paragraphs 172-196 of its Counterclaims. CCE incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs 172-196
`
`of this Reply.
`
`198. CCE denies the allegations of paragraph 198.
`
`199. The allegations in paragraph 199 are legal conclusions to which no response is
`
`required. To the extent that paragraph 199 contains any factual allegations to which CCE must
`
`respond, CCE denies such allegations.
`
`COUNTERCLAIM VII
`(Breach of Contract)
`
`200. CCE filed an antecedent motion to dismiss this counterclaim. Thus, other than as
`
`indicated in the motion to dismiss, CCE makes no response to the allegations comprising the
`
`counterclaim at this time.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 170 Filed 12/07/15 Page 6 of 9 PageID #: 2098
`
`201. CCE filed an antecedent motion to dismiss this counterclaim. Thus, other than as
`
`indicated in the motion to dismiss, CCE makes no response to the allegations comprising the
`
`counterclaim at this time.
`
`202. CCE filed an antecedent motion to dismiss this counterclaim. Thus, other than as
`
`indicated in the motion to dismiss, CCE makes no response to the allegations comprising the
`
`counterclaim at this time.
`
`203. CCE filed an antecedent motion to dismiss this counterclaim. Thus, other than as
`
`indicated in the motion to dismiss, CCE makes no response to the allegations comprising the
`
`counterclaim at this time.
`
`204. CCE filed an antecedent motion to dismiss this counterclaim. Thus, other than as
`
`indicated in the motion to dismiss, CCE makes no response to the allegations comprising the
`
`counterclaim at this time.
`
`205. CCE filed an antecedent motion to dismiss this counterclaim. Thus, other than as
`
`indicated in the motion to dismiss, CCE makes no response to the allegations comprising the
`
`counterclaim at this time.
`
`206. CCE filed an antecedent motion to dismiss this counterclaim. Thus, other than as
`
`indicated in the motion to dismiss, CCE makes no response to the allegations comprising the
`
`counterclaim at this time.
`
`207. CCE filed an antecedent motion to dismiss this counterclaim. Thus, other than as
`
`indicated in the motion to dismiss, CCE makes no response to the allegations comprising the
`
`counterclaim at this time.
`
`208. CCE filed an antecedent motion to dismiss this counterclaim. Thus, other than as
`
`indicated in the motion to dismiss, CCE makes no response to the allegations comprising the
`
`counterclaim at this time.
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 170 Filed 12/07/15 Page 7 of 9 PageID #: 2099
`
`209. CCE filed an antecedent motion to dismiss this counterclaim. Thus, other than as
`
`indicated in the motion to dismiss, CCE makes no response to the allegations comprising the
`
`counterclaim at this time.
`
`COUNTERCLAIM VIII
`(Declaration that Products are Licensed)
`
`210. CCE admits
`
`that Counterclaimants purport
`
`to
`
`incorporate and re-allege
`
`paragraphs 172-209 of their Counterclaims. CCE incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs 172-
`
`209 of this Reply.
`
`211. CCE lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about paragraph
`
`211 and thus denies same.
`
`212. CCE admits that it has granted licenses to third parties to certain third parties.
`
`Except as admitted, the allegations of paragraph 212 are denied.
`
`213. CCE lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about paragraph
`
`213 and thus denies same.
`
`214. CCE lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about paragraph
`
`214 and thus denies same.
`
`215. CCE lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about paragraph
`
`215 and thus denies same.
`
`216. CCE denies the allegations of paragraph 216.
`
`217. CCE lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about paragraph
`
`217 and thus denies same.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`CCE admits that LG requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable.
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 170 Filed 12/07/15 Page 8 of 9 PageID #: 2100
`
`PLAINTIFF’S PRAYER
`
`Plaintiff prays for the following relief:
`
`A. All relief sough in Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint;
`
`B. Dismissal of LG’s counterclaims and judgment that LG take nothing;
`
`C. Judgment declaring that LG infringes one or more claims of the ’966 Patent, ’556 Patent,
`
`and/or ’060 Patent;
`
`D. Judgment declaring that the ’966 Patent, ’556 Patent, and/or ’060 Patent are valid and
`
`enforceable;
`
`E. Judgment that LG account for and pay to Plaintiff all damages to and costs incurred by
`
`Plaintiff because of LG’s infringing activities, either through direct or indirect
`
`infringement, either alone or in combination with the actions of others;
`
`F. Judgment declaring that LG account for and pay to Plaintiff a reasonable, on-going, post-
`
`judgement royalty because of LG’s infringing activities;
`
`G. An award of Plaintiff’s fees and costs in defending against LG’s counterclaims, together
`
`with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest in the maximum amount provided by law;
`
`and
`
`H. Any and all further relief for Plaintiff as the Court may deem just and proper.
`
`
`
`
`Dated: December 7, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Edward R. Nelson III
`Edward R. Nelson III
`ed@nelbum.com
`Texas State Bar No. 00797142
`Thomas C. Cecil
`tom@nelbum.com
`Texas State Bar No. 24069489
`NELSON BUMGARDNER, P.C.
`3131 West 7th Street, Suite 300
`8
`
`
`
`Case 6:14-cv-00982-KNM Document 170 Filed 12/07/15 Page 9 of 9 PageID #: 2101
`
`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
`(903) 757-2323 (fax)
`jw@jwfirm.com
`wh@wsfirm.com
`claire@wsfirm.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS
`EQUIPMENT LLC
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing was served on all parties of record
`on December 7, 2015 via the Court’s CM/ECF system.
`
`
`
`/s/ Edward R. Nelson III
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
