Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 1 of 45
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SABLE NETWORKS, INC. AND
`SABLE IP, LLC,
` Plaintiffs,
`v.
`
`
`DELL TECHNOLOGIES INC., DELL INC., AND
`EMC CORPORATION,
` Defendants.
`
`
`
`Civil Action No._________
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Sable Networks, Inc. and Sable IP, LLC (collectively, “Sable” or “Plaintiffs”) bring this
`
`action and make the following allegations of patent infringement relating to U.S. Patent Nos.:
`
`6,977,932 (the “’932 patent”); 7,428,209 (the “’209 patent”); 7,630,358 (the “’358 patent”); and
`
`8,243,593 (the “’593 patent”) (collectively, the “patents-in-suit”). Defendants Dell Technologies
`
`Inc., Dell Inc., and EMC Corporation (collectively, “Dell” or “Defendants”) infringes the patents-
`
`in-suit in violation of the patent laws of the United States of America, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`The patents-in-suit arise from technologies developed by Dr. Lawrence G. Roberts
`
`1.
`
`- one of the founding fathers of the internet.1 The patents relate to technologies for efficiently
`
`managing the flow of data packets over routers and switch devices. Dr. Roberts and engineers at
`
`Caspian Networks, Inc. and later Sable Networks, Inc. developed these technologies to address the
`
`increasing amount of data sent over computer networks.
`
`
`1 Chris Woodford, THE INTERNET: A HISTORICAL ENCYCLOPEDIA VOLUME 2 at 204 (2005)
`(“Widely regarded as one of the founding fathers of the Internet, Lawrence Roberts was the
`primary architect of ARPANET, the predecessor of the Internet.”).
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 1 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 2 of 45
`
`2.
`
`Dr. Roberts is best known for his work as the Chief Scientist of the Advanced
`
`Research Projects Agency (ARPA) where he designed and oversaw the implementation of
`
`ARPANET, the precursor to the internet. Dr. Roberts’ work on ARPANET played a key role in
`
`the development of digital network transmission technologies.2 Initially, ARPANET was used
`
`primarily to send electronic mail and Dr. Roberts developed the first program for reading and
`
`sending electronic messages.
`
`Keenan Mayo and Peter Newcomb, How The Web Was Won, VANITY FAIR at 96-97 (January 7,
`2009); One of the Engineers Who Invented the Internet Wants to Build A Radical new Router,
`IEEE SPECTRUM MAGAZINE (July 2009); Katie Hafner, Billions Served Daily, and Counting, N.Y.
`TIMES at G1 (December 6, 2001)(“Lawrence Roberts, who was then a manager at the Advanced
`Research Projects Agency's Information Processing Techniques Office, solved that problem after
`his boss began complaining about the volume of e-mail piling up in his in box. In 1972, Dr. Roberts
`produced the first e-mail manager, called RD, which included a filing system, as well as a Delete
`function.”).
`
`3.
`
`Dr. Roberts’ work on ARPANET played a key role in the development of packet
`
`switching networks. Packet switching is a digital network transmission process in which data is
`
`broken into parts which are sent independently and reassembled at a destination. Electronic
`
`messages sent over the ARPANET were broken up into packets then routed over a network to a
`
`destination. “In designing the ARPANET, Roberts expanded on the work he'd done at MIT, using
`
`
`2 Katie Hafner, Lawrence Roberts, Who Helped Design Internet’s Precursor, N.Y. TIMES at A2
`(December 31, 2018) (“Dr. Roberts was considered the decisive force behind packet switching,
`the technology that breaks data into discrete bundles that are then sent along various paths around
`a network and reassembled at their destination.”).
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 2 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 3 of 45
`
`those tiny data packets to send information from place to place.”3 Packet switching has become
`
`the primary technology for data communications over computer networks.
`
`George Johnson, From Two Small Nodes, a Mighty Web Has Grown, N.Y. TIMES at F1 (October
`12, 1999).
`
`4.
`
`After leaving ARPANET, Dr. Roberts grew increasingly concerned that existing
`
`technologies for routing data packets were incapable of addressing the increasing amounts of data
`
`traversing the internet.4 Dr. Roberts identified that as the “Net grows, the more loss and
`
`transmission of data occurs. Eventually, gridlock will set in.”5
`
`The Internet is broken. I should know: I designed it. In 1967, I wrote the first plan
`for the ancestor of today's Internet, the Advanced Research Projects Agency
`Network, or ARPANET, and then led the team that designed and built it. The main
`idea was to share the available network infrastructure by sending data as small,
`independent packets, which, though they might arrive at different times, would still
`generally make it to their destinations. The small computers that directed the data
`traffic-I called them Interface Message Processors, or IMPs-evolved into today's
`routers, and for a long time they've kept up with the Net's phenomenal growth. Until
`now.
`
`
`3 Code Metz, Larry Roberts Calls Himself the Founder of The Internet. Who Are You To Argue,
`WIRED MAGAZINE (September 24, 2012); John C. McDonald, FUNDAMENTALS OF DIGITAL
`SWITCHING at 211 (1990) (“The ARPANET was, in part, an experimental verification of the
`packet switching concept. Robert’s objective was a new capability for resource sharing.”).
`4 eWeek Editors, Feeling A Little Congested, EWEEK MAGAZINE (September 24, 2001) (“Lawrence
`Roberts, one of the primary developers of Internet precursor ARPANet and CTO of Caspian
`Networks, recently released research indicating that Net traffic has quadrupled during the past
`year alone.”).
`5 Michael Cooney, Can ATM Save The Internet, NETWORK WORLD at 16 (May 20, 1996);
`Lawrence Roberts, A RADICAL NEW ROUTER, IEEE Spectrum Vol. 46 34-39 (August 2009).
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 3 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 4 of 45
`
`Lawrence Roberts, A Radical New Router, IEEE SPECTRUM Vol. 46(7) at 34 (August 2009)
`(emphasis added).
`In 1998, Dr. Roberts founded Caspian Networks.6 At Caspian Networks, Dr.
`5.
`
`Roberts developed a new kind of internet router to efficiently route packets over a network. This
`
`new router was aimed at addressing concerns about network “gridlock.” In a 2001 interview with
`
`Wired Magazine, Dr. Roberts discussed the router he was developing at Caspian Networks – the
`
`Apeiro. “Roberts says the Apeiro will also create new revenue streams for the carriers by solving
`
`the ‘voice and video problem.’ IP voice and video, unlike email and static Web pages, breaks
`
`down dramatically if there's a delay - as little as a few milliseconds - in getting packets from host
`
`to recipient.”7
`
`Jim Duffy, Router Newcomers take on Cisco, Juniper, NETWORK WORLD at 14 (April 14, 2013);
`Stephen Lawson, Caspian Testing Stellar Core Offering, NETWORK WORLD at 33 (December 17,
`2001); Tim Greene, Caspian Plans Superfast Routing For The ‘Net Core, NETWORK WORLD at 10
`(January 29, 2001); Andrew P. Madden, Company Spotlight: Caspian Networks, MIT
`TECHNOLOGY REVIEW at 33 (August 2005); and Loring Wirbel, Caspian Moves Apeiro Router To
`Full Availability, EE TIMES (April 14, 2003).
`
`
`6 Caspian Networks, Inc. was founded in 1998 as Packetcom, LLC and changed its name to
`Caspian Networks, Inc. in 1999.
`7 John McHugh, The n-Dimensional Superswitch, WIRED MAGAZINE (May 1, 2001).
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 4 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 5 of 45
`
`6.
`
`The Apeiro debuted in 2003. The Apeiro, a flow-based router, can identify the
`
`nature of a packet – be it audio, text, or video, and prioritize it accordingly. The Apeiro included
`
`numerous technological advances including quality of service (QoS) routing and flow-based
`
`routing.
`
`7.
`
`At its height, Caspian Networks Inc. raised more than $300 million dollars and
`
`grew to more than 320 employees in the pursuit of developing and commercializing Dr. Roberts’
`
`groundbreaking networking technologies, including building flow-based routers that advanced
`
`quality of service and load balancing performance. However, despite early success with its
`
`technology and business, Caspian hit hard times when the telecommunications bubble burst.
`
`8.
`
`Sable Networks, Inc. was formed by Dr. Sang Hwa Lee to further develop and
`
`commercialize the flow-based networking technologies developed by Dr. Roberts and Caspian
`
`Networks.8 Sable Networks, Inc. has continued its product development efforts and has gained
`
`commercial success with customers in Japan, South Korea, and China. Customers of Sable
`
`Networks, Inc. have included: SK Telecom, NTT Bizlink, Hanaro Telecom, Dacom Corporation,
`
`USEN Corporation, Korea Telecom, China Unicom, China Telecom, and China Tietong.
`
`
`8 Dr. Lee, through his company Mobile Convergence, Ltd. purchased the assets of Caspian
`Networks Inc. and subsequently created Sable Networks, Inc.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 5 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 6 of 45
`
`SK Telecom and Sable Networks Sign Convergence Network Deal, COMMS UPDATE – TELECOM
`NEWS SERVICE (February 4, 2009) (“South Korean operator SK Telecom has announced that it has
`signed a deal with US-based network and solutions provider Sable Networks.”); China Telecom
`Deploys Sable, LIGHT READING NEWS FEED (November 19, 2007) (“Sable Networks Inc., a leading
`provider of service controllers, today announced that China Telecom Ltd, the largest landline
`telecom company in China, has deployed the Sable Networks Service Controller in their
`network.”).
`
`9.
`
`Armed with the assets of Caspian Networks Inc. as well as members of Caspian
`
`Networks’ technical team, Sable Networks, Inc. continued the product development efforts
`
`stemming from Dr. Roberts’ flow-based router technologies. Sable Networks, Inc. developed
`
`custom application-specific integrated circuits (“ASIC”) designed for flow traffic management.
`
`Sable Network, Inc.’s ASICs include the Sable Networks SPI, which enables 20 Gigabit flow
`
`processing. In addition, Sable Networks, Inc. developed and released S-Series Service Controllers
`
`(e.g., S80 and S240 Service Controller models) that contain Sable Networks’ flow-based
`
`programmable ASICs, POS and Ethernet interfaces, and carrier-hardened routing and scalability
`
`from 10 to 800 Gigabits.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 6 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 7 of 45
`
`SABLE NETWORKS S-SERIES SERVICE CONTROLLERS (showing the S240-240G Multi-Shelf System,
`S80-80G Single-Shelf System, and S20-20G Stand-Alone System).
`
`10.
`
`Sable pursues the reasonable royalties owed for Dell’s use of the inventions claimed
`
`in Sable’s patent portfolio, which arise from Caspian Networks and Sable Networks’
`
`groundbreaking technology.
`
`SABLE’S PATENT PORTFOLIO
`Sable’s patent portfolio includes over 34 patent assets, including 14 granted U.S.
`
`11.
`
`patents. Dr. Lawrence Roberts’ pioneering work on QoS traffic prioritization, flow-based
`
`switching and routing, and the work of Dr. Roberts’ colleagues at Caspian Networks Inc. and Sable
`
`Networks, Inc. are claimed in the various patents owned by Sable.
`
`12.
`
`Highlighting the importance of the patents-in-suit is the fact that the Sable’s patent
`
`portfolio has been cited by over 1,000 U.S. and international patents and patent applications
`
`assigned to a wide variety of the largest companies operating in the computer networking field.
`
`Sable’s patents have been cited by companies such as:
`
`• Cisco Systems, Inc.9
`
`
`9 See, e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 7,411,965; 7,436,830; 7,539,499; 7,580,351; 7,702,765; 7,817546;
`7,936,695; 8,077,721; 8,493,867; 8,868,775; and 9,013,985.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 7 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 8 of 45
`
`• Juniper Networks, Inc.10
`• Broadcom Limited11
`• EMC Corporation12
`• F5 Networks, Inc.13
`• Verizon Communications Inc.14
`• Microsoft Corporation15
`Intel Corporation16
`•
`• Extreme Networks, Inc.17
`• Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.18
`THE PARTIES
`
`SABLE NETWORKS, INC.
`
`13.
`
`Sable Networks, Inc. (“Sable Networks”) is a corporation organized and existing
`
`under the laws of the State of California.
`
`14.
`
`Sable Networks was formed to continue the research, development, and
`
`commercialization work of Caspian Networks Inc., which was founded by Dr. Lawrence Roberts
`
`to provide flow-based switching and routing technologies to improve the efficiency and quality of
`
`computer networks.
`
`15.
`
`Sable Networks is the owner by assignment of all of the patents-in-suit.
`
`
`10 See, e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 7,463,639; 7,702,810; 7,826,375; 8,593,970; 8,717,889; 8,811,163;
`8,811,183; 8,964,556; 9,032,089; 9,065,773; and 9,832,099.
`11 See, e.g., U.S. Patent No. 7,187,687; 7,206,283; 7,266,117; 7,596,139; 7,649,885; 8,014,315;
`8,037,399; 8,170,044; 8,194,666; 8,271,859; 8,448,162; 8,493,988; 8,514,716; and 7,657,703.
`12 See, e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 6,976,134; 7,185,062; 7,404,000; 7,421,509; 7,864,758; and
`8,085,794.
`13 See, e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 7,206,282; 7,580,353; 8,418,233; 8,565,088; 9,225,479; 9,106,606;
`9,130,846; 9,210,177; 9,614,772; 9,967,331; and 9,832,069.
`14 See, e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 7,349,393; 7,821,929; 8,218,569; 8,289,973; 9,282,113; and
`8,913,623.
`15 See, e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 7,567,504; 7,590,736; 7,669,235; 7,778,422; 7,941,309; 7,636,917;
`9,571,550; and 9,800,592.
`16 See, e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 7,177,956; 7,283,464; 9,485,178; 9,047,417; 8,718,096; 8,036,246;
`8,493,852; and 8,730,984.
`17 See, e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 7,903,654; 7,978,614; 8,149839; 10,212,224; 9,112,780; and
`8,395,996.
`18 See, e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 7,903,553; 7,957,421; 10,015,079; 10,505,840; and Chinese Patent
`Nos. CN108028828 and CN106161333.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 8 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 9 of 45
`
`SABLE IP, LLC
`Sable IP, LLC (“Sable IP”) is a Delaware limited liability company with its
`16.
`
`principal place of business at 225 S. 6th Street, Suite 3900, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402.
`
`Pursuant to an exclusive license agreement with Sable Networks, Sable IP is the exclusive licensee
`
`of the patents-in-suit.
`
`DELL DEFENDANTS
`
`17.
`
`Dell Technologies Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
`
`business at One Dell Way, Round Rock, Texas 78682. Dell Technologies Inc. may be served
`
`through its registered agent Corporation Service Company, 251 Little Falls Drive, Wilmington,
`
`DE 19808.
`
`18.
`
`Dell Inc. is a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business at One Dell
`
`Way, Round Rock, Texas 78682. Dell Inc. may be served through its registered agent Corporation
`
`Service Company, 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701. Dell Inc. is registered to do
`
`business in the State of Texas and has been since at least October 27, 1987. In addition to its
`
`corporate headquarters in Round Rock, Texas, Defendant Dell Inc. maintains several other offices
`
`in this District, including offices at 12500 Tech Ridge Blvd., Bldg. PS4, Austin, Texas 78753;
`
`1404 Park Center Dr., Austin, Texas 78754; 4309 Emma Browning Ave., Austin, Texas 78719;
`
`600 Congress Ave., Austin, Texas 78701; 701 E. Parmer Lane, Bldg. PS2, Austin, Texas 78753;
`
`9715 Burnet Road, Metric – 7, Suite 300, Austin, Texas 78758; 5822 Cromo Drive, El Paso, Texas
`
`79912; 200 Dell Way, Round Rock, Texas 78758; 2300 Greenlawn Blvd., Round Rock, Texas
`
`78682; 401 Dell Way, Round Rock, Texas 78682; 501 Dell Way, Round Rock, Texas 78682; and
`
`9830 Colonnade Blvd., Suite 380, San Antonio, Texas 78230.
`
`19.
`
`EMC Corporation is a Massachusetts corporation with a principal place of business
`
`at One Dell Way, Round Rock, Texas 78682. EMC Corporation may be served through its
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 9 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 10 of 45
`
`registered agent Corporation Service Company, 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701.
`
`EMC Corporation is registered to do business in the State of Texas and has been since at least July
`
`17, 1987. In addition to its corporate headquarters in Round Rock, Texas, on information and
`
`belief, EMC Corporation operates out of multiple offices in this District.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`20.
`
`This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United
`
`States Code. Accordingly, this Court has exclusive subject matter jurisdiction over this action
`
`under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`21.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Dell in this action because Dell has
`
`committed acts within the Western District of Texas giving rise to this action and has established
`
`minimum contacts with this forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over Dell would not offend
`
`traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Dell, directly and/or through subsidiaries or
`
`intermediaries (including distributors, retailers, and others), has committed and continues to
`
`commit acts of infringement in this District by, among other things, offering to sell and selling
`
`products and/or services that infringe the patents-in-suit. Moreover, Dell Inc. and EMC
`
`Corporation are registered to do business in the State of Texas. Each of the Defendants is
`
`headquartered in this District, and Dell Inc. and EMC Corporation each maintain multiple office
`
`locations in this District. Further, Dell actively directs its activities to customers located in the
`
`State of Texas.
`
`22.
`
`Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b)-(d) and 1400(b). Dell
`
`is headquartered in this District, has transacted business in the Western District of Texas, and has
`
`committed acts of direct and indirect infringement in the Western District of Texas.
`
`23.
`
`Defendants also each have a regular and established place of business in this
`
`District and have committed acts of infringement in this District. Dell has also committed acts of
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 10 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 11 of 45
`
`infringement in this District by commercializing, marketing, selling, distributing, testing, and
`
`servicing certain accused products.
`
`24.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Dell. Dell has conducted and does
`
`conduct business within the State of Texas. Dell, directly or through subsidiaries or intermediaries
`
`(including distributors, retailers, and others), ships, distributes, makes, uses, offers for sale, sells,
`
`imports, and/or advertises (including by providing an interactive web page) its products and/or
`
`services in the United States and the Western District of Texas and/or contributes to and actively
`
`induces its customers to ship, distribute, make, use, offer for sale, sell, import, and/or advertise
`
`(including the provision of an interactive web page) infringing products and/or services in the
`
`United States and the Western District of Texas. Dell, directly and through subsidiaries or
`
`intermediaries (including distributors, retailers, and others), has purposefully and voluntarily
`
`placed one or more of its infringing products and/or services, as described below, into the stream
`
`of commerce with the expectation that those products will be purchased and used by customers
`
`and/or consumers in the Western District of Texas. These infringing products and/or services have
`
`been and continue to be made, used, sold, offered for sale, purchased, and/or imported by
`
`customers and/or consumers in the Western District of Texas. Dell has committed acts of patent
`
`infringement within the Western District of Texas. Dell interacts with customers in Texas,
`
`including through visits to customer sites in Texas. Through these interactions and visits, Dell
`
`directly infringes the patents-in-suit. Dell also interacts with customers who sell the Accused
`
`Products into Texas, knowing that these customers will sell the Accused Products into Texas,
`
`either directly or through intermediaries.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 11 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 12 of 45
`
`25.
`
`Dell has minimum contacts with this District such that the maintenance of this
`
`action within this District would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
`
`Thus, the Court therefore has both general and specific personal jurisdiction over Dell.
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. 6,977,932
`
`THE ASSERTED PATENTS
`
`26.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,977,932 (the “’932 patent”) entitled, System and Method for
`
`Network Tunneling Utilizing Micro-Flow State Information, was filed on January 16, 2002. The
`
`‘932 patent is subject to a 35 U.S.C. § 154(b) term extension of 815 days. Sable Networks, Inc. is
`
`the owner by assignment of the ‘932 patent. Sable IP is the exclusive licensee of the ‘932 patent.
`
`A true and correct copy of the ‘932 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`
`27.
`
`The ‘932 patent discloses novel methods and apparatuses for utilizing a router
`
`capable of network tunneling utilizing flow state information.
`
`28.
`
`The inventions disclosed in the ‘932 patent enable the use of micro-flow state
`
`information to improve network tunneling techniques.
`
`29.
`
`The inventions disclosed in the ‘932 patent maintain flow state information for
`
`various quality of service characteristics by utilizing aggregate flow blocks.
`
`30.
`
`The aggregate flow blocks disclosed in the ‘932 patent maintain micro-flow block
`
`information.
`
`31.
`
`The technologies claimed in the ‘932 patent speed the flow of network traffic over
`
`computer networks by avoiding time consuming and processor intensive tasks by combining flow
`
`state information with other information such as label switched paths utilization information. This
`
`permits the micro-flows associated with an aggregate flow block to all be processed in a similar
`
`manner.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 12 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 13 of 45
`
`32.
`
`The technologies disclosed in the ‘932 patent result in more efficient computer
`
`networks by avoiding the processor intensive tasks of searching millions of flow blocks to identify
`
`flow blocks having certain micro-flow characteristics in order to process large numbers of micro-
`
`flows.
`
`33.
`
`The ‘932 patent discloses a router capable of network tunneling utilizing flow state
`
`information containing an aggregate flow block having tunnel specific information for a particular
`
`network tunnel.
`
`34.
`
`The ‘932 patent discloses a router capable of network tunneling utilizing flow state
`
`information containing a flow block having flow state information for a micro-flow, the flow block
`
`further including an identifier that associates the flow block with the aggregate flow block.
`
`35.
`
`The ‘932 patent discloses a router capable of network tunneling utilizing flow state
`
`information wherein the aggregate flow block stores statistics for the particular network tunnel.
`
`36.
`
`The ‘932 patent has been cited by 86 patents and patent applications as relevant
`
`prior art. Specifically, patents issued to the following companies have cited the ‘932 patent as
`
`relevant prior art:
`
`• Cisco Systems, Inc.
`• Juniper Networks, Inc.
`• Avaya, Inc.
`• Fujitsu, Ltd.
`Intel Corporation
`•
`• Nokia Corporation
`• Qualcomm, Inc.
`• Sprint Communications Co.
`• Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson
`• Verizon Communications, Inc.
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. 7,428,209
`
`37.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,428,209 (the “’209 patent”) entitled, Network Failure Recovery
`
`Mechanism, was filed on June 12, 2001. The ‘209 patent is subject to a 35 U.S.C. § 154(b) term
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 13 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 14 of 45
`
`extension of 655 days. Sable Networks, Inc. is the owner by assignment of the ‘209 patent. Sable
`
`IP is the exclusive licensee of the ‘209 patent. A true and correct copy of the ‘209 patent is
`
`attached hereto as Exhibit B.
`
`38.
`
`The ‘209 patent discloses novel methods and systems for implementing within a
`
`network router a method for recovering from a failure.
`
`39.
`
`The inventions disclosed in the ‘209 patent enable large-scale computer networks
`
`to quickly recover from a component failure.
`
`40.
`
`The ‘209 patent discloses a method implemented on a network router that recovers
`
`from a failure.
`
`41.
`
`The ‘209 patent discloses a method implemented on a network router for sending,
`
`via a first route, a first set of information from an ingress module to a first egress module for
`
`forwarding by the first egress module to a destination external to the router, where a first set of
`
`information traverses a path which encompasses at least a portion of the first route.
`
`42.
`
`The ‘209 patent discloses a method implemented on a network router for detecting
`
`an external failure beyond the first egress module.
`
`43.
`
`The ‘209 patent discloses a method implemented on a network router for directing
`
`a message to the ingress module informing the ingress module of the external failure in response
`
`to an external failure.
`
`44.
`
`The ‘209 patent discloses a method implemented on a network router for selecting
`
`an alternate egress module capable of forwarding information to a destination in response to an
`
`error message.
`
`45.
`
`The ‘209 patent discloses a method implemented on a network router for sending,
`
`via a second route, a future set of information from the ingress module to the alternate egress
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 14 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 15 of 45
`
`module for forwarding to the destination, where the first set of information and the future set of
`
`information are both part of a flow.
`
`46.
`
`The ‘209 patent discloses a method implemented on a network router for causing
`
`other sets of information associated with the flow to be sent from the ingress module to the
`
`alternate egress module in response to the message.
`
`47.
`
`The ‘209 patent discloses a method implemented on a network router for directing
`
`to the ingress module that comprises: (1) identifying the ingress module; (2) accessing a routing
`
`table which comprises one or more routes to the ingress module; (3) obtaining a return route from
`
`the routing table, wherein the return route directs the message to the ingress module along a
`
`different path than that traversed by said first set of information; and (4) sending a message to the
`
`ingress module via the return route.
`
`48.
`
`The ‘209 patent discloses a method implemented on a network router where the
`
`first egress module and the alternate egress module are predetermined, where identifiers associated
`
`with the first egress module and the alternate egress module are stored within a flow block
`
`associated with the flow. Further, the ’209 patent teaches storing an indication in the flow block
`
`that all sets of information associated with the flow are to be sent to the alternate egress module.
`
`49.
`
`The ‘209 patent family has been cited by 52 patents and patent applications as
`
`relevant prior art. Specifically, patents issued to the following companies have cited the ‘209
`
`patent family as relevant prior art:
`
`• Cisco Systems, Inc.
`• AT&T, Inc.
`• Canon, Inc.
`• British Telecommunications Public Limited Co.
`• EMC Corporation
`• Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company
`Infinera Corporation
`•
`•
`International Business Machines Corporation
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 15 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 16 of 45
`
`• ShoreTel, Inc.
`• Nokia Corporation
`• Monarch Networking Solutions LLC
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. 7,630,358
`
`50.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,630,358 (“the ‘358 patent”) entitled, Mechanism for
`
`Implementing Multiple Logical Routers Within A Single Physical Router, was filed on July 9, 2002,
`
`and claims priority to July 9, 2001. The ‘358 patent is subject to a 35 U.S.C. § 154(b) term
`
`extension of 1,136 days. Sable Networks, Inc. is the owner by assignment of the ‘358 patent.
`
`Sable IP is the exclusive licensee of the ‘358 patent. A true and correct copy of the ‘358 patent is
`
`attached hereto as Exhibit C.
`
`51.
`
`The ‘358 patent claims specific methods and systems for implementing multiple
`
`logical routers within a single physical router.
`
`52.
`
`The ‘358 patent discloses systems and methods that combine the benefits of multi-
`
`routers and virtual routers. The logical routers are included within the same physical router;
`
`however, internal links permit improved efficiency over virtual routers because the technologies
`
`claimed in the ‘358 patent can take advantage of the fact that the logical routers are not standalone
`
`routers bur are embodied in the same physical router.
`
`53.
`
`The ‘358 patent discloses technology for implementing multiple logical routers
`
`within a single physical router.
`
`54.
`
`The ‘358 patent discloses a router with a first set of one or more components
`
`capable of being figured to implement a first logical router within the router.
`
`55.
`
`The ‘358 patent discloses a router with a second set of one or more components
`
`capable of being configured to implement a second logical router within the router.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 16 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 17 of 45
`
`56.
`
`The ‘358 patent discloses a router with a forwarding routing table that comprises
`
`an identifier that indicates an internal link is internal rather than an external link.
`
`57.
`
`The ‘358 patent discloses a router wherein the first and second sets of components
`
`comprise functionality for establishing the internal link between the first logical router and the
`
`second logical router and advertising the internal link to other routers external to the router such
`
`that the first and second logical routers appear to the other routers as interconnected standalone
`
`routers, wherein the internal link is a logical, non-physical entity.
`
`58.
`
`The ‘358 patent has been cited by 42 United States and international patents and
`
`patent applications as relevant prior art. Specifically, patents issued to the following companies
`
`have all cited the ‘358 patent as relevant prior art:
`
`• Cisco Systems, Inc.
`• Dell Technologies, Inc.
`• Juniper Networks, Inc.
`• Nicira, Inc.
`International Business Machines Corporation
`•
`• NantWorks, LLC
`• Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson
`• Verizon Communications, Inc.
`U.S. PATENT NO. 8,243,593
`
`59.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,243,593 entitled, Mechanism for Identifying and Penalizing
`
`Misbehaving Flows in a Network, was filed on December 22, 2004. The ‘593 patent is subject to
`
`a 35 U.S.C. § 154(b) term extension of 1,098 days. Sable Networks, Inc. is the owner by
`
`assignment of the ’593 patent. Sable IP is the exclusive licensee of the ‘593 patent. A true and
`
`correct copy of the ‘593 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit D.
`
`60.
`
`The ‘593 patent discloses novel methods and systems for processing a flow of a
`
`series of information packets.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Page 17 of 45
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00569-ADA Document 1 Filed 06/26/20 Page 18 of 45
`
`61.
`
`The inventions disclosed in the ‘593 patent teach technologies that permit the
`
`identification and control of less desirable network traffic.
`
`62.
`
`Because the characteristics of data packets in undesirable network traffic can be
`
`disguised, the ‘593 patent improves the operation of computer networks by disclosing technologies
`
`that monitor the characteristics of flows of data packets rather than ancillary factors such as port
`
`numbers or signatures.
`
`63.
`
`The ‘593 patent discloses tracking the behavioral statistics of a flow of d