Case 6:15-cv-00044-RWS-JDL Document 16 Filed 06/12/15 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 79
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`TYLER DIVISION
`
`
`
`ADAPTIX, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`v.
`
`SPRINT SPECTRUM, L.P.
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`Case No. 6:15-cv-00044
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT
`INFRINGEMENT
`
`JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`This is an action for patent infringement in which Plaintiff, ADAPTIX, Inc.
`
`(“ADAPTIX”), complains against Defendant, Sprint Spectrum, L.P. (“Sprint”), as follows:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1. ADAPTIX is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 2400 Dallas
`
`Parkway, Suite 200, Plano, TX 75093.
`
`2. Sprint is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 6200 Sprint Parkway,
`
`Overland Park, Kansas 66251, and regularly does business in this judicial district at 921 N.
`
`Central Expressway, Plano, Texas 75075 by, among other things, committing the infringing
`
`acts giving rise to this Complaint.
`
`
`3. This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United States
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`Code, 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28
`
`U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`4. Sprint is subject to this Court’s specific and general personal jurisdiction, pursuant to due
`
`process and/or the Texas Long Arm Statute.
`
`5. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b-c) and 1400(b)
`
`06090294
`
`
`
`

`
`Case 6:15-cv-00044-RWS-JDL Document 16 Filed 06/12/15 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 80
`
`
`because Sprint, inter alia, regularly conducts business in and has committed the acts giving
`
`rise to this action within this judicial district.
`
`COUNT I
`
`(INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,934,375)
`
`6. ADAPTIX incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 5 herein.
`
`7. This cause of action arises under the patent laws of United States of America and, in
`
`particular, 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 et seq.
`
`8. ADAPTIX is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No. 8,934,375, entitled
`
`“OFDMA with Adaptive Subcarrier-Cluster Configuration and Selective Loading” (“the ‘375
`
`Patent”), with ownership of all substantial rights therein, including the right to exclude others
`
`and to sue and recover damages for the past and future infringement thereof. A true and
`
`correct copy of the ‘375 Patent was attached as Exhibit A to the Original Complaint.
`
`9. The ‘375 Patent is valid, enforceable, and was duly issued in full compliance with Title 35 of
`
`the United States Code.
`
`10. Sprint has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe at least Claims 1 and 17 of the
`
`‘375 Patent by, among other things, using, offering for sale and/or selling cellular
`
`communication devices, including without limitation the Apple iPad Air, Apple iPad Air 2,
`
`Apple iPad Mini, Apple iPad Mini 2, Apple iPad Mini 3, Apple iPad Mini with Retina
`
`Display, Apple iPad with Retina Display (iPad 4), Apple iPad 3, Apple iPhone 5, Apple
`
`iPhone 5c, Apple iPhone 5s, Apple iPhone 6, Apple iPhone 6 Plus, HTC 8XT, HTC Desire
`
`510, HTC Evo 4G, HTC One, HTC One (E8), HTC One (M7), HTC One (M8) Harman
`
`Kardon Edition, HTC One (M8), HTC One Max, HTC One M9, Kyocera Hydro Vibe,
`
`Koycera Torque, Kyocera Torque XT, LG G Flex, LG G Flex 2, LG G2, LG G3, LG G3
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`Case 6:15-cv-00044-RWS-JDL Document 16 Filed 06/12/15 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 81
`
`
`Vigor, LG Google Nexus 5 (LG D820), LG Mach, LG Optimus F3, LG Optimus G, LG
`
`Tribute, LG Viper, LG Volt (LG LS740), Novatel MiFi 500 LTE, Sierra Wireless/Netgear
`
`4G LTE Tri-Fi (AirCard 803S), Sierra Wireless/Netgear NETGEAR 341U, Sierra
`
`Wireless/Netgear NETGEAR LTE Gateway 6100D, Sierra Wireless/Netgear NETGEAR
`
`Zing, ZTE Pocket Wi-Fi, ZTE Sprint Flash, ZTE Sprint Force, ZTE Sprint Vital (N9810), for
`
`use on Sprint’s 4G LTE Wireless Network (“Sprint’s LTE network”), and by using its
`
`network to operate those devices. Sprint is thereby liable for infringement of the ‘375 Patent
`
`pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`11. Sprint has indirectly infringed and continues to indirectly infringe at least Claims 1 and 17 of
`
`the ‘375 Patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States by, among other
`
`things, actively inducing the using, offering for sale, selling, or importation of cellular
`
`communication devices, including without limitation the devices listed in Paragraph 10
`
`above, for use on Sprint’s LTE network, and the use of those devices on its LTE network.
`
`Sprint’s end users who purchase systems and components thereof and operate such systems
`
`and components in accordance with Sprint’s instructions directly infringe one or more claims
`
`of the ‘375 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C § 271. Sprint is thereby liable for infringement of
`
`the ‘375 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
`
`12. Sprint has indirectly infringed and continues to indirectly infringe at least Claims 1 and 17 of
`
`the ‘375 Patent by, among other things, contributing to the direct infringement of others,
`
`including without limitation end users of its LTE network and cellular communication
`
`devices, including without limitation the devices listed in Paragraph 10 above, to be used on
`
`its LTE network, by making, offering to sell, or selling, in the United States, or importing a
`
`component of a patented machine, manufacture, or combination, or an apparatus for use in
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`Case 6:15-cv-00044-RWS-JDL Document 16 Filed 06/12/15 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 82
`
`
`practicing a patented process, constituting a material part of the invention, knowing the same
`
`to be especially made or especially adapted for use in infringement of the ‘375 Patent, and
`
`not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
`
`13. Sprint will have been on notice of the ‘375 Patent since, at the latest, the service of the
`
`Original Complaint. By the time of trial, Sprint will thus have known and intended (since
`
`receiving such notice), that its continued actions would actively induce and contribute to
`
`actual infringement of at least Claims 1 and 17 of the ‘375 Patent.
`
`14. ADAPTIX has been reparably and irreparably damaged as a result of Sprint’s infringing
`
`conduct described in this Count. Sprint is thus liable to ADAPTIX for an amount that
`
`adequately compensates ADAPTIX for Sprint’s infringement, 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.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`Wherefore, ADAPTIX respectfully requests that this Court enter:
`
`A. Judgment in favor of ADAPTIX that Sprint has infringed the ‘375 Patent, directly and
`
`indirectly, as aforesaid;
`
`B. A permanent injunction enjoining Sprint, its officers, directors, agents, servants,
`
`affiliates, employees, divisions, branches, subsidiaries, parents, and all others acting in
`
`active concert or privity therewith from direct and/or indirect infringement of the ‘375
`
`Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283;
`
`C. An order requiring Sprint to pay ADAPTIX its damages with pre- and post-judgment
`
`interest thereon pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`D. A determination that this case is exceptional pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285;
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Case 6:15-cv-00044-RWS-JDL Document 16 Filed 06/12/15 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 83
`
`
`E. An order awarding ADAPTIX its attorneys’ fees and costs incurred herein pursuant to 35
`
`U.S.C. § 287; and
`
`F. Any and all further relief to which the Court may deem ADAPTIX entitled.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`ADAPTIX hereby requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable by right pursuant to Fed.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`By: /s/ Paul J. Hayes
`Paul J. Hayes
`James J. Foster
`HAYES MESSINA GILMAN & HAYES LLC
`200 State Street, 6th Floor
`Boston, MA 02109
`Telephone: (617) 345-6900
`Facsimile: (617) 443-1999
`Email: phayes@hayesmessina.com
`Email: jfoster@hayesmessina.com
`
`Craig Tadlock
`Texas State Bar No. 00791766
`Keith Smiley
`Texas State Bar No. 24067869
`TADLOCK LAW FIRM PLLC
`2701 Dallas Parkway, Suite 360
`Plano, Texas 75093
`Phone: (903) 730-6789
`Email: craig@tadlocklawfirm.com
`
`keith@tadlocklawfirm.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR THE PLAINTIFF
`ADAPTIX, INC.
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`R. Civ. P. 38.
`
`
`
`Dated: June 12, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Case 6:15-cv-00044-RWS-JDL Document 16 Filed 06/12/15 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 84
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was filed
`
`electronically in compliance with the Local Rule CV-5 on June 12, 2015. As of this date, all
`counsel of record have consented to electronic service and are being served with a copy of this
`document through the Court’s CM/ECF system under Local Rule CV-5(a)(3)(A).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Paul J. Hayes
`Paul J. Hayes
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6