Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 1 of 19
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`NEODRON LTD.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Case No. 6:20-cv-00623
`
`v.
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`SAMSUNG DISPLAY CO., LTD.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`AGAINST SAMSUNG DISPLAY CO., LTD.
`
`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 Samsung Display Co., Ltd. (“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. 8,610,009 (“’009 Patent”); 8,847,898 (“’898 Patent”);
`
`7,821,502 (“’502 Patent”); 10,365,747 (“’747 Patent”); and 9,965,106 (“’106 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.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 2 of 19
`
`
`
`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
`
`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 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 3 of 19
`
`
`
`PARTIES
`
`6.
`
`Plaintiff Neodron Ltd. is an Irish company, having its principal place of business at
`
`Suite 23, The Hyde Building, Carrickmines, Dublin 18, Ireland. Neodron is the sole owner by
`
`assignment of all right, title, and interest in each Asserted Patent.
`
`7.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant Samsung Display Co., Ltd. is a corporation
`
`organized under the laws of South Korea, with its principal place of business at 1 Samsung-Ro,
`
`Giheung-gu, Yongin-si, Gyeonggi-Do, 17113, South Korea.
`
`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. §§ 1391 and 1400(b). Defendant is
`
`a foreign corporation. Venue is proper as to a foreign defendant in any district. 28 U.S.C.
`
`§ 1391(c)(3).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 4 of 19
`
`
`
`COUNT I
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,610,009
`
`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.
`
`8,610,009, entitled “Capacitive Touch Sensors.” The ’009 Patent was duly and legally issued by
`
`the United States Patent and Trademark Office on December 17, 2013. A true and correct copy of
`
`the ’009 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 Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5, that
`
`directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, claims 1-17 of the ’009 Patent.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant makes, offers for sale, and sells certain infringing
`
`products such as touchscreen displays to customers, such as Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.,
`
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Apple Inc. and HP Inc., who integrate the infringing products
`
`into products that are sold to consumers, such as smartphones, tablets, and laptop computers.
`
`14.
`
`Defendant also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of claims 1-17 of
`
`the ’009 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint,
`
`Defendant has had knowledge of the ’009 Patent and the infringing nature of the Accused Products.
`
`Despite this knowledge of the ’009 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 ’009 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
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 5 of 19
`
`
`
`Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’009 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and
`
`inducing its customers to infringe the ’009 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary
`
`use of the Accused Products. Upon information and belief, Defendant makes, offers for sale, and
`
`sells certain products such as touchscreen displays to customers, such as Samsung Electronics Co.,
`
`Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Apple Inc. and HP Inc., who integrate the infringing
`
`products into infringing products that are sold to consumers, such as smartphones, tablets, and
`
`laptop computers.
`
`15.
`
`The Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1-17 of the ’009 Patent.
`
`A claim chart comparing independent claim 1 of the ’009 Patent to a representative Accused
`
`Product, the Samsung Galaxy Tab A 10.5, 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 ’009
`
`Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`17.
`
`Defendant has known of the ’009 Patent or has been willfully blind to the ’009
`
`Patent, since at least 2015. Upon information and belief, Defendant learned of the ’009 Patent
`
`under a non-disclosure agreement through its work with Microchip Technology, Inc. and Atmel
`
`Corp. to manufacture and supply the Accused Products and other touch-related products. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendant learned of the ’009 Patent and its disclosed inventions as a result
`
`of its collaboration with Microchip and Atmel, including touchscreen design and function, touch
`
`controller design and function, and touch sensor design and function, including the design and
`
`function of touch electrodes, such as metal mesh touch electrodes, and the design and function of
`
`touch sensing techniques, algorithms, and circuitry.
`
`18.
`
`Defendant has known how the Accused Products are made and has known, or has
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 6 of 19
`
`
`
`been willfully blind to the fact, that making, using, offering to sell, and selling the accused products
`
`within the United States, or importing the Accused Products into the United States, would
`
`constitute infringement.
`
`19.
`
`Defendant’s infringement of the ’009 Patent has been, and continues to be, willful
`
`and egregious.
`
`20.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s infringement and willful infringement of the ’009 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, and enhanced damages due to
`
`Defendant’s willful infringement.
`
`21.
`
`Defendant’s infringing activities has injured and will continue to injure Neodron,
`
`unless and until this Court enters an injunction prohibiting further infringement of the ’009 Patent,
`
`and, specifically, enjoining further manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offers for sale that
`
`come within the scope of the patent claims.
`
`COUNT II
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,847,898
`
`22.
`
`Neodron realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`23.
`
`Neodron owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in U.S. Patent No.
`
`8,847,898, entitled “Signal-to-Noise Ratio in Touch Sensors.” The ’898 Patent was duly and
`
`legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on September 30, 2014. A true
`
`and correct copy of the ’898 Patent is attached as Exhibit 3.
`
`24.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 7 of 19
`
`
`
`imports certain products (“Accused Products”), such as the Samsung Notebook 9 Pro 15, that
`
`directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, claims 1-24 of the ’898 Patent.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant makes, offers for sale, and sells certain infringing
`
`products such as touchscreen displays to customers, such as Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.,
`
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Apple Inc. and HP Inc., who integrate the infringing products
`
`into products that are sold to consumers, such as smartphones, tablets, and laptop computers.
`
`25.
`
`Defendant also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of claims 1-24 of
`
`the ’898 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint,
`
`Defendant has had knowledge of the ’898 Patent and the infringing nature of the Accused Products.
`
`Despite this knowledge of the ’898 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 ’898 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 ’898 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and
`
`inducing its customers to infringe the ’898 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary
`
`use of the Accused Products. Upon information and belief, Defendant makes, offers for sale, and
`
`sells certain products such as touchscreen displays to customers, such as Samsung Electronics Co.,
`
`Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Apple Inc. and HP Inc., who integrate the infringing
`
`products into infringing products that are sold to consumers, such as smartphones, tablets, and
`
`laptop computers.
`
`26.
`
`The Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1-24 of the ’898 Patent.
`
`A claim chart comparing independent claim 1 of the ’898 Patent to a representative Accused
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 8 of 19
`
`
`
`Product, the Samsung Notebook 9 Pro 15, is attached as Exhibit 4.
`
`27.
`
`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 ’898
`
`Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`28.
`
`Defendant has known of the ’898 Patent or has been willfully blind to the ’898
`
`Patent, since at least 2015. Upon information and belief, Defendant learned of the ’898 Patent
`
`under a non-disclosure agreement through its work with Microchip Technology, Inc. and Atmel
`
`Corp. to manufacture and supply the Accused Products and other touch-related products. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendant learned of the ’898 Patent and its disclosed inventions as a result
`
`of its collaboration with Microchip and Atmel, including touchscreen design and function, touch
`
`controller design and function, and touch sensor design and function, including the design and
`
`function of touch electrodes, such as metal mesh touch electrodes, and the design and function of
`
`touch sensing techniques, algorithms, and circuitry.
`
`29.
`
`Defendant has known how the Accused Products are made and has known, or has
`
`been willfully blind to the fact, that making, using, offering to sell, and selling the accused products
`
`within the United States, or importing the Accused Products into the United States, would
`
`constitute infringement.
`
`30.
`
`Defendant’s infringement of the ’898 Patent has been, and continues to be, willful
`
`and egregious.
`
`31.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s infringement and willful infringement of the ’898 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, and enhanced damages due to
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 9 of 19
`
`
`
`Defendant’s willful infringement.
`
`32.
`
`Defendant’s infringing activities has injured and will continue to injure Neodron,
`
`unless and until this Court enters an injunction prohibiting further infringement of the ’898 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. 7,821,502
`
`33.
`
`Neodron realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`34.
`
`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 5.
`
`35.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or
`
`imports certain products (“Accused Products”), such as the Samsung Galaxy S8, Samsung Galaxy
`
`S8+, Samsung Galaxy Note8, Samsung Galaxy S9, Samsung Galaxy S9+, Samsung Galaxy Note9,
`
`Samsung Galaxy S10, and Samsung Galaxy S10+, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the
`
`doctrine of equivalents, claims 1-24 of the ’502 Patent. Upon information and belief, Defendant
`
`makes, offers for sale, and sells certain infringing products such as touchscreen displays to
`
`customers, such as Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Apple Inc.
`
`and HP Inc., who integrate the infringing products into products that are sold to consumers, such
`
`as smartphones, tablets, and laptop computers.
`
`36.
`
`Defendant also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of claims 1-24 of
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 10 of 19
`
`
`
`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
`
`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. Upon information and belief, Defendant makes, offers for sale, and
`
`sells certain products such as touchscreen displays to customers, such as Samsung Electronics Co.,
`
`Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Apple Inc. and HP Inc., who integrate the infringing
`
`products into infringing products that are sold to consumers, such as smartphones, tablets, and
`
`laptop computers.
`
`37.
`
`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 Samsung Galaxy S9, is attached as Exhibit 6.
`
`38.
`
`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.
`
`39.
`
`Defendant has known of the ’502 Patent or has been willfully blind to the ’502
`
`Patent, since at least 2015. Upon information and belief, Defendant learned of the ’502 Patent
`
`under a non-disclosure agreement through its work with Microchip Technology, Inc. and Atmel
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 11 of 19
`
`
`
`Corp. to manufacture and supply the Accused Products and other touch-related products. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendant learned of the ’502 Patent and its disclosed inventions as a result
`
`of its collaboration with Microchip and Atmel, including touchscreen design and function, touch
`
`controller design and function, and touch sensor design and function, including the design and
`
`function of touch electrodes, such as metal mesh touch electrodes, and the design and function of
`
`touch sensing techniques, algorithms, and circuitry.
`
`40.
`
`Defendant has known how the Accused Products are made and has known, or has
`
`been willfully blind to the fact, that making, using, offering to sell, and selling the accused products
`
`within the United States, or importing the Accused Products into the United States, would
`
`constitute infringement.
`
`41.
`
`Defendant’s infringement of the ’502 Patent has been, and continues to be, willful
`
`and egregious.
`
`42.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s infringement and willful 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, and enhanced damages due to
`
`Defendant’s willful infringement.
`
`43.
`
`Defendant’s infringing activities has 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.
`
`COUNT IV
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 10,365,747
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 12 of 19
`
`
`
`44.
`
`Neodron realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`45.
`
`Neodron owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in U.S. Patent No.
`
`10,365,747, entitled “Touch-Sensing Panel and Force Detection.” The ’747 Patent was duly and
`
`legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on July 30, 2019. A true and
`
`correct copy of the ’747 Patent is attached as Exhibit 7.
`
`46.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or
`
`imports certain products (“Accused Products”), such as the Samsung Galaxy S8, Samsung Galaxy
`
`S8+, Samsung Galaxy Note8, Samsung Galaxy S9, Samsung Galaxy S9+, and Samsung Galaxy
`
`Note9, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, claims 1-21 of
`
`the ’747 Patent. Upon information and belief, Defendant makes, offers for sale, and sells certain
`
`infringing products such as touchscreen displays to customers, such as Samsung Electronics Co.,
`
`Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Apple Inc. and HP Inc., who integrate the infringing
`
`products into products that are sold to consumers, such as smartphones, tablets, and laptop
`
`computers.
`
`47.
`
`Defendant also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of claims 1-21 of
`
`the ’747 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint,
`
`Defendant has had knowledge of the ’747 Patent and the infringing nature of the Accused Products.
`
`Despite this knowledge of the ’747 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 ’747 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
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 13 of 19
`
`
`
`Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’747 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and
`
`inducing its customers to infringe the ’747 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary
`
`use of the Accused Products. Upon information and belief, Defendant makes, offers for sale, and
`
`sells certain products such as touchscreen displays to customers, such as Samsung Electronics Co.,
`
`Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Apple Inc. and HP Inc., who integrate the infringing
`
`products into infringing products that are sold to consumers, such as smartphones, tablets, and
`
`laptop computers.
`
`48.
`
`The Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1-21 of the ’747 Patent.
`
`A claim chart comparing independent claim 16 of the ’747 Patent to a representative Accused
`
`Product, the Samsung Galaxy S9, is attached as Exhibit 8.
`
`49.
`
`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 ’747
`
`Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`50.
`
`Defendant has known of the ’747 Patent or has been willfully blind to the ’747
`
`Patent, since at least 2015. Upon information and belief, Defendant learned of the ’747 Patent
`
`under a non-disclosure agreement through its work with Microchip Technology, Inc. and Atmel
`
`Corp. to manufacture and supply the Accused Products and other touch-related products. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendant learned of the ’747 Patent and its disclosed inventions as a result
`
`of its collaboration with Microchip and Atmel, including touchscreen design and function, touch
`
`controller design and function, and touch sensor design and function, including the design and
`
`function of touch electrodes, such as metal mesh touch electrodes, and the design and function of
`
`touch sensing techniques, algorithms, and circuitry.
`
`51.
`
`Defendant has known how the Accused Products are made and has known, or has
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 14 of 19
`
`
`
`been willfully blind to the fact, that making, using, offering to sell, and selling the accused products
`
`within the United States, or importing the Accused Products into the United States, would
`
`constitute infringement.
`
`52.
`
`Defendant’s infringement of the ’747 Patent has been, and continues to be, willful
`
`and egregious.
`
`53.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s infringement and willful infringement of the ’747 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, and enhanced damages due to
`
`Defendant’s willful infringement.
`
`54.
`
`Defendant’s infringing activities has injured and will continue to injure Neodron,
`
`unless and until this Court enters an injunction prohibiting further infringement of the ’747 Patent,
`
`and, specifically, enjoining further manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offers for sale that
`
`come within the scope of the patent claims.
`
`COUNT V
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 9,965,106
`
`55.
`
`Neodron realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if
`
`fully set forth herein.
`
`56.
`
`Neodron owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in U.S. Patent No.
`
`9,965,106, entitled “Touch Screen with Electrodes Positioned Between Pixels.” The ’106 Patent
`
`was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on May 8, 2018. A
`
`true and correct copy of the ’106 Patent is attached as Exhibit 9.
`
`57.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 15 of 19
`
`
`
`imports certain products (“Accused Products”), such as the Samsung Galaxy S8, Samsung Galaxy
`
`S8+, Samsung Galaxy Note8, Samsung Galaxy S9, Samsung Galaxy S9+, Samsung Galaxy Note9,
`
`Samsung Galaxy S10, and Samsung Galaxy S10+, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the
`
`doctrine of equivalents, claims 1-22 of the ’106 Patent. Upon information and belief, Defendant
`
`makes, offers for sale, and sells certain infringing products such as touchscreen displays to
`
`customers, such as Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Apple Inc.
`
`and HP Inc., who integrate the infringing products into products that are sold to consumers, such
`
`as smartphones, tablets, and laptop computers.
`
`58.
`
`Defendant also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of claims 1-22 of
`
`the ’106 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint,
`
`Defendant has had knowledge of the ’106 Patent and the infringing nature of the Accused Products.
`
`Despite this knowledge of the ’106 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 ’106 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 ’106 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and
`
`inducing its customers to infringe the ’106 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary
`
`use of the Accused Products. Upon information and belief, Defendant makes, offers for sale, and
`
`sells certain products such as touchscreen displays to customers, such as Samsung Electronics Co.,
`
`Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Apple Inc. and HP Inc., who integrate the infringing
`
`products into infringing products that are sold to consumers, such as smartphones, tablets, and
`
`laptop computers.
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 16 of 19
`
`
`
`59.
`
`The Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1-22 of the ’106 Patent.
`
`A claim chart comparing independent claim 1 of the ’106 Patent to a representative Accused
`
`Product, the Samsung Galaxy S10, is attached as Exhibit 10.
`
`60.
`
`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 ’106
`
`Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`61.
`
`Defendant has known of the ’106 Patent or has been willfully blind to the ’106
`
`Patent, since at least 2015. Upon information and belief, Defendant learned of the ’106 Patent
`
`under a non-disclosure agreement through its work with Microchip Technology, Inc. and Atmel
`
`Corp. to manufacture and supply the Accused Products and other touch-related products. Upon
`
`information and belief, Defendant learned of the ’106 Patent and its disclosed inventions as a result
`
`of its collaboration with Microchip and Atmel, including touchscreen design and function, touch
`
`controller design and function, and touch sensor design and function, including the design and
`
`function of touch electrodes, such as metal mesh touch electrodes, and the design and function of
`
`touch sensing techniques, algorithms, and circuitry.
`
`62.
`
`Defendant has known how the Accused Products are made and has known, or has
`
`been willfully blind to the fact, that making, using, offering to sell, and selling the accused products
`
`within the United States, or importing the Accused Products into the United States, would
`
`constitute infringement.
`
`63.
`
`Defendant’s infringement of the ’106 Patent has been, and continues to be, willful
`
`and egregious.
`
`64.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s infringement and willful infringement of the ’106 Patent,
`
`Neodron is entitled to monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Defendant’s
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 6:20-cv-00623-ADA Document 1 Filed 07/09/20 Page 17 of 19
`
`
`
`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, and enhanced damages due to
`
`Defendant’s willful infringement.
`
`65.
`
`Defendant’s infringing activities has injured and will continue to injure Neodron,
`
`unless and until this Court enters an injunction prohibiting further infringement of the ’106 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
`
`under the doctrine of equivalents, the ’009 Patent, the ’898 Patent, the ’502 Patent, the ’747 Patent,
`
`and the ’106 Patent;
`
`b.
`
`A judgment that Defendant has willfully infringed the ’009 Patent, the ’898 Patent,
`
`the ’502 Patent, the ’747 Patent, and the ’106 Patent and that Neodron is entitled to enhanced
`
`damages as a result of such willful infringement;
`
`c.
`
`A permanent injunction prohibiting Defendant from further acts of infringement of
`
`the ’009 Patent, the ’898 Patent, the ’502 Patent, the ’747 Patent, and the ’106 Patent;
`
`d.
`
`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 ’009
`
`Patent, the ’898 Patent, the ’502 Patent, the ’747 Patent, and the ’106