throbber
Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 1 of 13
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Case No. 6:19-cv-00395-ADA
`
`NEODRON LTD.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`AMAZON.COM, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`AGAINST AMAZON.COM, INC.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the United States
`
`of America, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., in which Plaintiff Neodron Ltd. (“Plaintiff” or “Neodron”)
`
`makes the following allegations against Defendant Amazon.com, Inc. (“Defendant”):
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`This complaint arises from Defendant’s unlawful infringement of the following
`
`United States patents owned by Neodron, each of which generally relate to touchscreen
`
`technology: United States Patent Nos. 9,823,784 (“’784 Patent”); 9,489,072 (“’072 Patent”);
`
`8,502,547 (“’547 Patent”); and 7,821,502 (“’502 Patent”) (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”).
`
`2.
`
`Touchscreen technology plays a ubiquitous and important role in countless
`
`electronic devices today. Beyond just providing greater usability to smartphones, tablets, and
`
`notebooks, touchscreens now fill our lives in public and private spaces, from our homes and cars
`
`to the restaurants and stores we visit.
`
`3.
`
`But just a few decades ago, touchscreen technology could only be found in science
`
`fiction books and film. Although the underlying science behind touch technology can be traced
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 2 of 13
`
`
`
`back to the 1940s, working touchscreens were not conceived and feasible until the mid-1960s,
`
`when the first finger-driven touchscreen was invented by E.A. Johnson in 1965 at the Royal Radar
`
`Establishment in Malvern, United Kingdom. Since then, it took several generations and major
`
`technological advancements for touchscreens to achieve the level of complexity—and
`
`convenience—we see and enjoy today.
`
`4.
`
`Built on the fundamental breakthrough that our hands and fingers can form changes
`
`in the capacitance of electrodes and electrode-connections when they are in close proximity to
`
`them, touch technology has developed rapidly over the years. Along the way, engineers have
`
`worked tirelessly to try to overcome the limitations and roadblocks touch technology presents.
`
`From conceiving various ways to detect (and correctly ignore) unintentional touches, to
`
`minimizing signal “noise,” to reducing the latency and power consumption that comes with any
`
`complex, multi-part electrical process, there have been many advances to various aspects of the
`
`technology—each building a little on a related advancement before it—to get us to the highly
`
`advanced state we enjoy today.
`
`5.
`
`These advancements range from fundamental ones, which make basic touch
`
`technology work, to optional improvements, which typically represent one technological option
`
`that improves aspects of the user experience and functionality of a touchscreen. This infringement
`
`action is about the latter: several patented improvements—which took years of research and
`
`millions of dollars in U.S. investments to develop, and which are infringed by Defendant’s accused
`
`products.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 3 of 13
`
`
`
`PARTIES
`
`6.
`
`Plaintiff Neodron Ltd. is an Irish company, having its principal place of business at
`
`Unit 4-5, Burton Hall Road, Sandyford, Dublin 18, D18a094. Neodron is the sole owner by
`
`assignment of all right, title, and interest in each Asserted Patent.
`
`7.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant Amazon.com, Inc. is a corporation organized
`
`under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 410 Terry Avenue
`
`North, Seattle, Washington 98109.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`8.
`
`This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United
`
`States Code. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and
`
`1338(a).
`
`9.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant in this action because
`
`Defendant has committed acts within this District giving rise to this action, and has established
`
`minimum contacts with this forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over Defendant would not
`
`offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Defendant, directly and through
`
`subsidiaries or intermediaries, has committed and continues to commit acts of infringement in this
`
`District by, among other things, making, using, offering to sell, selling, and importing products
`
`that infringe the Asserted Patents.
`
`10.
`
`Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). Upon information and
`
`belief, Defendant has transacted business in this District and has committed acts of direct and
`
`indirect infringement in this District by, among other things, making, using, offering to sell, selling,
`
`and importing products that infringe the Asserted Patents. Defendant has a regular and established
`
`place of business in the District, including offices at 11501 Alterra Parkway, Austin, Texas, and a
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 4 of 13
`
`
`
`fulfillment center at 2093-2209 Rutland Drive, Austin, Texas 78758. Further, Amazon’s website
`
`lists over 300 jobs available in the Austin area.1
`
`COUNT I
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,823,784
`
`11.
`
`Neodron realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`12.
`
`Neodron owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in U.S. Patent No.
`
`9,823,784, entitled “Capacitive Touch Screen with Noise Suppression.” The ’784 Patent was duly
`
`and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on November 21, 2017. A
`
`true and correct copy of the ’784 Patent is attached as Exhibit 1.
`
`13.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or
`
`imports certain products (“Accused Products”), such as the Amazon Fire HD 10 and Amazon Fire
`
`HD 8, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, claims 1-3 of
`
`the ’784 Patent.
`
`14.
`
`Defendant also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of claims 1-3 of
`
`the ’784 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint,
`
`Defendant has had knowledge of the ’784 Patent and the infringing nature of the Accused Products.
`
`Despite this knowledge of the ’784 Patent, Defendant continues to actively encourage and instruct
`
`
`1 See, e.g., https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2017/08/01/amazon-quietly-grows-austin-
`corporate-office-as-it.html; https://www.statesman.com/news/20190328/amazon-plans-austin-
`expansion-that-will-add-800-jobs?template=ampart;
`https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/amazon-opens-new-corporate-office-in-
`austin_20180316004215559/1049346915; https://www.amazon.jobs/en/locations/austin.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 5 of 13
`
`
`
`its customers and end users (for example, through its user manuals and online instruction materials
`
`on its website) to use the Accused Products in ways that directly infringe the ’784 Patent.
`
`Defendant does so knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit these
`
`infringing acts. Defendant also continues to make, use, offer for sale, sell, and/or import the
`
`Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’784 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and
`
`inducing its customers to infringe the ’784 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary
`
`use of the Accused Products.
`
`15.
`
`The Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1-3 of the ’784 Patent.
`
`A claim chart comparing independent claim 1 of the ’784 Patent to a representative Accused
`
`Product, the Amazon Fire HD 10, is attached as Exhibit 2.
`
`16.
`
`By making, using, offering for sale, selling, and/or importing into the United States
`
`the Accused Products, Defendant has injured Neodron and is liable for infringement of the ’784
`
`Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`17.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s infringement of the ’784 Patent, Neodron is entitled to
`
`monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Defendant’s infringement, but in no
`
`event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Defendant, together with
`
`interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
`
`18.
`
`Defendant’s infringing activities have injured and will continue to injure Neodron,
`
`unless and until this Court enters an injunction prohibiting further infringement of the ’784 Patent,
`
`and, specifically, enjoining further manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offers for sale that
`
`come within the scope of the patent claims.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 6 of 13
`
`
`
`COUNT II
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,489,072
`
`19.
`
`Neodron realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`20.
`
`Neodron owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in U.S. Patent No.
`
`9,489,072, entitled “Noise Reduction in Capacitive Touch Sensors.” The ’072 Patent was duly and
`
`legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on November 8, 2016. A true and
`
`correct copy of the ’072 Patent is attached as Exhibit 3.
`
`21.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or
`
`imports certain products (“Accused Products”), such as the Amazon Kindle Paperwhite, that
`
`directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, claims 1-37 of the ’072 Patent.
`
`22.
`
`Defendant also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of claims 1-37 of
`
`the ’072 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint,
`
`Defendant has had knowledge of the ’072 Patent and the infringing nature of the Accused Products.
`
`Despite this knowledge of the ’072 Patent, Defendant continues to actively encourage and instruct
`
`its customers and end users (for example, through its user manuals and online instruction materials
`
`on its website) to use the Accused Products in ways that directly infringe the ’072 Patent.
`
`Defendant does so knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit these
`
`infringing acts. Defendant also continues to make, use, offer for sale, sell, and/or import the
`
`Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’072 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and
`
`inducing its customers to infringe the ’072 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary
`
`use of the Accused Products.
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 7 of 13
`
`
`
`23.
`
`The Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1-37 of the ’072 Patent.
`
`A claim chart comparing independent claim 1 of the ’072 Patent to a representative Accused
`
`Product, the Amazon Kindle Paperwhite, is attached as Exhibit 4.
`
`24.
`
`By making, using, offering for sale, selling, and/or importing into the United States
`
`the Accused Products, Defendant has injured Neodron and is liable for infringement of the ’072
`
`Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`25.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s infringement of the ’072 Patent, Neodron is entitled to
`
`monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Defendant’s infringement, but in no
`
`event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Defendant, together with
`
`interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
`
`26.
`
`Defendant’s infringing activities have injured and will continue to injure Neodron,
`
`unless and until this Court enters an injunction prohibiting further infringement of the ’072 Patent,
`
`and, specifically, enjoining further manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offers for sale that
`
`come within the scope of the patent claims.
`
`COUNT III
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,502,547
`
`27.
`
`Neodron realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`28.
`
`Neodron owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in U.S. Patent No.
`
`8,502,547, entitled “Capacitive Sensor.” The ’547 Patent was duly and legally issued by the United
`
`States Patent and Trademark Office on August 6, 2013. A true and correct copy of the ’547 Patent
`
`is attached as Exhibit 5.
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 8 of 13
`
`
`
`29.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or
`
`imports certain products (“Accused Products”), such as the Amazon Fire HD 10 and Amazon Fire
`
`HD 8, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, claims 1-17 of
`
`the ’547 Patent.
`
`30.
`
`Defendant also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of claims 1-17 of
`
`the ’547 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint,
`
`Defendant has had knowledge of the ’547 Patent and the infringing nature of the Accused Products.
`
`Despite this knowledge of the ’547 Patent, Defendant continues to actively encourage and instruct
`
`its customers and end users (for example, through its user manuals and online instruction materials
`
`on its website) to use the Accused Products in ways that directly infringe the ’547 Patent.
`
`Defendant does so knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit these
`
`infringing acts. Defendant also continues to make, use, offer for sale, sell, and/or import the
`
`Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’547 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and
`
`inducing its customers to infringe the ’547 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary
`
`use of the Accused Products.
`
`31.
`
`The Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1-17 of the ’547 Patent.
`
`A claim chart comparing independent claim 1 of the ’547 Patent to a representative Accused
`
`Product, the Amazon Fire HD 10, is attached as Exhibit 6.
`
`32.
`
`By making, using, offering for sale, selling, and/or importing into the United States
`
`the Accused Products, Defendant has injured Neodron and is liable for infringement of the ’547
`
`Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`33.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s infringement of the ’547 Patent, Neodron is entitled to
`
`monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Defendant’s infringement, but in no
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 9 of 13
`
`
`
`event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Defendant, together with
`
`interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
`
`34.
`
`Defendant’s infringing activities have injured and will continue to injure Neodron,
`
`unless and until this Court enters an injunction prohibiting further infringement of the ’547 Patent,
`
`and, specifically, enjoining further manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offers for sale that
`
`come within the scope of the patent claims.
`
`COUNT IV
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,821,502
`
`35.
`
`Neodron realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`36.
`
`Neodron owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in U.S. Patent No.
`
`7,821,502, entitled “Two-Dimensional Position Sensor.” The ’502 Patent was duly and legally
`
`issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on October 26, 2010. A true and correct
`
`copy of the ’502 Patent is attached as Exhibit 7.
`
`37.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or
`
`imports certain products (“Accused Products”), such as the Amazon Fire HD 10 and Amazon Fire
`
`HD 8, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, claims 1-24 of
`
`the ’502 Patent.
`
`38.
`
`Defendant also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of claims 1-24 of
`
`the ’502 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint,
`
`Defendant has had knowledge of the ’502 Patent and the infringing nature of the Accused Products.
`
`Despite this knowledge of the ’502 Patent, Defendant continues to actively encourage and instruct
`
`its customers and end users (for example, through its user manuals and online instruction materials
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 10 of 13
`
`
`
`on its website) to use the Accused Products in ways that directly infringe the ’502 Patent.
`
`Defendant does so knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit these
`
`infringing acts. Defendant also continues to make, use, offer for sale, sell, and/or import the
`
`Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’502 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and
`
`inducing its customers to infringe the ’502 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary
`
`use of the Accused Products.
`
`39.
`
`The Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1-24 of the ’502 Patent.
`
`A claim chart comparing independent claim 1 of the ’502 Patent to a representative Accused
`
`Product, the Amazon Fire HD 8, is attached as Exhibit 8.
`
`40.
`
`By making, using, offering for sale, selling, and/or importing into the United States
`
`the Accused Products, Defendant has injured Neodron and is liable for infringement of the ’502
`
`Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`41.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s infringement of the ’502 Patent, Neodron is entitled to
`
`monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Defendant’s infringement, but in no
`
`event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Defendant, together with
`
`interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
`
`42.
`
`Defendant’s infringing activities have injured and will continue to injure Neodron,
`
`unless and until this Court enters an injunction prohibiting further infringement of the ’502 Patent,
`
`and, specifically, enjoining further manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offers for sale that
`
`come within the scope of the patent claims.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Neodron respectfully requests that this Court enter:
`
`a.
`
`A judgment in favor of Neodron that Defendant has infringed, either literally and/or
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 11 of 13
`
`
`
`under the doctrine of equivalents, the ’784 Patent, the ’072 Patent, the ’547 Patent, and the ’502
`
`Patent;
`
`b.
`
`A permanent injunction prohibiting Defendant from further acts of infringement of
`
`the ’784 Patent, the ’072 Patent, the ’547 Patent, and the ’502 Patent;
`
`c.
`
`A judgment and order requiring Defendant to pay Neodron its damages, costs,
`
`expenses, and pre-judgment and post-judgment interest for Defendant’s infringement of the ’784
`
`Patent, the ’072 Patent, the ’547 Patent, and the ’502 Patent; and
`
`d.
`
`A judgment and order requiring Defendant to provide an accounting and to pay
`
`supplemental damages to Neodron, including without limitation, pre-judgment and post-judgment
`
`interest;
`
`e.
`
`A judgment and order finding that this is an exceptional case within the meaning
`
`of 35 U.S.C. § 285 and awarding to Neodron its reasonable attorneys’ fees against Defendant; and
`
`f.
`
`Any and all other relief as the Court may deem appropriate and just under the
`
`circumstances.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Neodron, under Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, requests a trial by jury of
`
`any issues so triable by right.
`
`
`Dated: August 28, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Reza Mirzaie
`
`Reza Mirzaie (CA SBN 246953)
`Email: rmirzaie@raklaw.com
`Marc A. Fenster (CA SBN 181067)
`Email: mfenster@raklaw.com
`Brian D. Ledahl (CA SBN 186579)
`Email: bledahl@raklaw.com
`Paul A. Kroeger (CA SBN 229074)
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 12 of 13
`
`Email: pkroeger@raklaw
`Philip X. Wang (CA SBN 262239)
`pwang@raklaw.com
`Neil A. Rubin (CA SBN 250761)
`Email: nrubin@raklaw.com
`Amy E. Hayden (CA SBN 287026)
`Email: ahayden@raklaw.com
`Shani Williams (SBN 274509)
`Email: swilliams@raklaw.com
`Kristopher R. Davis (IL SBN 6296190)
`Email: kdavis@raklaw.com
`Christian W. Conkle (CA SBN 306374)
`Email: cconkle@raklaw.com
`Kent N. Shum (CA SBN 259189)
`Email: kshum@raklaw.com
`RUSS AUGUST & KABAT
`12424 Wilshire Blvd. 12th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90025
`Phone: (310) 826-7474
`Fax: (310) 826-6991
`
`Matthew D. Aichele (VA SBN 77821)
`Email: maichele@raklaw.com
`RUSS AUGUST & KABAT
`800 Maine Avenue, SW, Suite 200
`Washington, DC 20024
`Phone: (310) 826-7474
`Fax: (310) 826-6991
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Neodron Ltd.
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00898-ADA Document 18 Filed 08/28/19 Page 13 of 13
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on August 28, 2019, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk
`
`of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following:
`
`Stefani E. Shanberg
`MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
`425 Market Street
`San Francisco, CA 94105
`Tel: (415) 268-7000
`
`Counsel for Defendant
`Amazon.com, Inc.
`
`
`
`/s/ Reza Mirzaie_______
`Reza Mirzaie
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket