Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 1 of 13
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
` Solas OLED Ltd., an Irish corporation,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`vs.
`
`Samsung Display Co., Ltd, a Korea corporation;
`
` Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CASE NO.
`
`
`Complaint for Patent
`Infringement
`
`JURY DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`Complaint for Patent Infringement
`
`Plaintiff Solas OLED Ltd. (“Solas”) files this complaint against Defendant Samsung
`
`Display Co., Ltd. (“SDC”), alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,072,450 (“Patent-in-
`
`Suit”). The accused products are SDC’s organic light-emitting diode (“OLED”) display modules
`
`included in Apple products.
`
`Plaintiff Solas OLED and the Patents-in-Suit.
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff Solas is a technology licensing company organized under the laws of
`
`Ireland, with its headquarters at 4-5 Burton Hall Road, Sandyford, Dublin 18.
`
`2.
`
`Solas is the owner of U.S. Patent No. 6,072,450, entitled “Display Apparatus,”
`
`which issued June 6, 2000 (the “’450 patent”). A copy of the ’450 patent is attached to this
`
`complaint as Exhibit 1.
`
`Defendant and the Accused Products.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant Samsung Display Corporation. is a Korea corporation.
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`6:12-cv-00185
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
` Solas OLED Ltd., an Irish corporation,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`vs.
`
`Samsung Display Co., Ltd, a Korea corporation;
`
` Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CASE NO.
`
`
`Complaint for Patent
`Infringement
`
`JURY DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`Complaint for Patent Infringement
`
`Plaintiff Solas OLED Ltd. (“Solas”) files this complaint against Defendant Samsung
`
`Display Co., Ltd. (“SDC”), alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,072,450 (“Patent-in-
`
`Suit”). The accused products are SDC’s organic light-emitting diode (“OLED”) display modules
`
`included in Apple products.
`
`Plaintiff Solas OLED and the Patents-in-Suit.
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff Solas is a technology licensing company organized under the laws of
`
`Ireland, with its headquarters at 4-5 Burton Hall Road, Sandyford, Dublin 18.
`
`2.
`
`Solas is the owner of U.S. Patent No. 6,072,450, entitled “Display Apparatus,”
`
`which issued June 6, 2000 (the “’450 patent”). A copy of the ’450 patent is attached to this
`
`complaint as Exhibit 1.
`
`Defendant and the Accused Products.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant Samsung Display Corporation. is a Korea corporation.
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`6:12-cv-00185
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 2 of 13
`
`4.
`
`The accused products are SDC’s organic light-emitting diode (“OLED”) display
`
`modules included in Apple products. As illustrative examples, this includes iPhone, Apple, and
`
`MacBook Pro models.
`
`Jurisdiction, venue, and joinder.
`
`5.
`
`Solas asserts claims for patent infringement against SDC under the patent laws of
`
`the United States, including 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 and 281, et seq. The Court has original jurisdiction
`
`over Solas’ patent infringement claims under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`
`6.
`
`The Court has personal jurisdiction over SDC. Defendant SDC has established
`
`minimum contacts with the United States as a whole such that the exercise of jurisdiction would
`
`not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Defendant SDC has
`
`purposefully directed activities at the United States—in particular, directing display modules,
`
`either alone and/or included in products such as smartphones and computers, to distributors and
`
`customers within the United States (including within this district) and engaging in sales and
`
`marketing efforts to generate and support such sales. The claims for infringement arise out of, or
`
`relate to, those activities. The exercise of jurisdiction over SDC would not offend traditional
`
`notions of fair play and substantial justice.
`
`7.
`
`Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §1400(b) and 28 U.S.C. §§
`
`1391(c) because SDC is a foreign defendant.
`
`Count 1 – Claim for infringement of the ’450 patent.
`
`Solas incorporates by reference each of the allegations in the above paragraphs
`
`8.
`
`and further alleges as follows:
`
`9.
`
`On June 6, 2000, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,072,450, entitled “Display Apparatus.” Ex. 1.
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 3 of 13
`
`10.
`
`Solas is the owner of the ’450 patent with full rights to pursue recovery of
`
`royalties for damages for infringement, including full rights to recover past and future damages.
`
`11.
`
`12.
`
`Each claim of the ’450 patent is valid, enforceable, and patent-eligible.
`
`Solas and its predecessors in interest have satisfied the requirements of 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 287(a) with respect to the ’450 patent, and Solas is entitled to damages for SDC’s past
`
`infringement.
`
`13.
`
`SDC has directly infringed (literally and equivalently) and induced others,
`
`including, Apple Incorporated, to infringe the ’450 patent and, unless enjoined, will continue to
`
`do so by making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing products that infringe the claims
`
`of the ’450 patent and by inducing others to infringe the claims of the ’450 patent without a
`
`license or permission from Solas.
`
`
`
`Direct Infringement
`
`14.
`
`SDC has directly infringed (literally and equivalently) at least one claim of the
`
`’450 patent by offering to sell, selling, and importing the Accused Products in the United States.
`
`SDC has infringed multiple claims of the ’450 patent, including independent claim 1. By way of
`
`example only, the SDC’s display modules included in the Apple MacBook Pro infringes an
`
`exemplary claim of the ’450 patent, as in the following description, which Solas provides
`
`without the benefit of information about the accused device obtained through discovery. For
`
`example, claim 1 claims a display apparatus as follows:
`
`[1a] “a substrate;”
`
`The accused MacBook Pro display modules include Organic Light Emitting Diode
`
`(OLED) panels that include a polyimide substrate:
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 4 of 13
`
`substrate
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 5 of 13
`
`[1b] “active elements formed over said substrate and driven by an externally
`
`supplied signal;”
`
`The accused MacBook Pro display modules include active elements formed over the
`
`substrate:
`
`OLED Removed/ Al Layer
`
`8
`
`7
`
`9
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 6 of 13
`
`These active elements are driven by an externally supplied signal:
`
`OLED Removed/ Al Layer
`
`
`
`[1c] “an insulation film formed over said substrate so as to cover said active
`
`elements, said insulation having at least one contact hole;”
`
`In the accused MacBook Pro display modules, an insulation film is formed over the
`
`substrate, covers the active elements, and has contact holes:
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 7 of 13
`
`insulation film
`
`contact hole
`
`
`
`substrate
`
`
`
`[1d] “at least one first electrode formed on said insulation film so as to cover said
`
`active elements, and connected to said active elements through said at least one contact
`
`hole, said at least one first electrode being made of a material which shields visible light;”
`
`In the accused MacBook Pro display modules, an electrode is formed on the insulation
`
`film, covers active elements, and is connected to active elements through contact holes:
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 8 of 13
`
`insulation film
`
`first
`electrode
`(anode)
`
`8
`
`7
`
`9
`
`1
`
`connected to
`
`contact hole
`
`This electrode is formed of a material which shields visible light:
`
`
`
`first
`electrode
`(anode)
`
`[1e] “an organic electroluminescent layer having an organic electroluminescent
`
`material formed on said at least one first electrode so as to cover said active elements and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 9 of 13
`
`including at least one layer which emits light in accordance with a voltage applied to said at
`
`least one layer;”
`
`In the accused MacBook Pro display modules, a layer of organic electroluminescent
`
`material is formed on the electrode, and covers active elements:
`
`organic
`electroluminescent layer
`
`first
`electrode
`(anode)
`
`
`
`This organic electroluminescent layer emits in accordance with a voltage applied to the
`
`layer using the OLED cathode and anode.
`
`[1f] “and at least one second electrode formed on said organic electroluminescent
`
`layer which covers said active elements.”
`
`In the accused MacBook Pro display modules, a second electrode is formed on the
`
`organic electroluminescent layer:
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 10 of 13
`
`second electrode
`(cathode)
`
`active elements
`
`
`
`Indirect infringement
`
`
`SDC has had knowledge of the ’450 patent from at least as early as 2006. In US
`
`15.
`
`11/170,158 (published as US2006/0001363A1) (“Active matrix organic light emitting display
`
`device and method of fabricating the same”), published on January 5, 2006, assigned to
`
`“Samsung SDI Co., Ltd,” the ’450 patent was cited by the examiner of this patent application in
`
`a rejection of Samsung SDI Co. Ltd.’s claims issued on August 17, 2007. U.S. Patent No.
`
`7,402,950 issued based upon this application on July 22, 2008 and cites the ’450 patent on its
`
`face. On December 12, 2008, Samsung SDI Co. Ltd. assigned this patent to Samsung Mobile
`
`Display Co., Ltd. On July 2, 2012, Samsung Mobile Display Co., Ltd. merged into Samsung
`
`Display. SDC has known how the Accused Products are made and has known, or have been
`
`willfully blind to the fact, that third parties such as Apple Inc., 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.
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 11 of 13
`
`16.
`
`SDC has induced, and continues to induce, infringement of the ’450 patent by
`
`actively encouraging Apple Inc. and entities associated with Apple Inc. to use, offer to sell, sell,
`
`and import the Accused Products. On information and belief, these acts include providing
`
`information and instructions on the use of the Accused Products; providing information,
`
`education and instructions supporting sales by Apple; providing the Accused Products to Apple;
`
`and indemnifying patent infringement within the United States.
`
`Damages
`
`
`Solas has been damaged by SDC’s infringement of the ’450 patent and is entitled
`
`17.
`
`to damages as provided for in 35 U.S.C. § 284, including reasonable royalty damages.
`
`Jury demand.
`
`18.
`
`Solas demands trial by jury of all issues.
`
`Relief requested.
`
`Solas prays for the following relief:
`
`A.
`
`A judgment in favor of Solas that SDC has infringed the ’450 patent and that the
`
`’450 patent is valid, enforceable, and patent-eligible;
`
`B.
`
`A judgment and order requiring SDC to pay Solas all damages provided for under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 284, including compensatory damages, costs, expenses, and pre- and post-judgment
`
`interest for its infringement of the asserted patents;
`
`D.
`
`A permanent injunction prohibiting SDC from further acts of infringement of the
`
`’450 patent;
`
`E.
`
`A judgment and order requiring SDC to provide an accounting and to pay
`
`supplemental damages to Solas, including, without limitation, pre-judgment and
`
`post-judgment interest;
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 12 of 13
`
`F.
`
`A finding that this case is exceptional under 35 U.S.C. § 285, and an award of
`
`Solas’ reasonable attorney’s fees and costs; and
`
`G.
`
`Any and all other relief to which Solas may be entitled.
`
`Dated: February 26, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Reza Mirzaie
`Marc Fenster
`CA State Bar No. 181067
`Reza Mirzaie
`CA State Bar No. 246953
`Neil A. Rubin
`CA State Bar No. 250761
`Kent N. Shum
`CA State Bar No. 259189
`RUSS AUGUST & KABAT
`12424 Wilshire Blvd. 12th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90025
`Telephone: 310-826-7474
`Email: mfenster@raklaw.com
`Email: rmirzaie@raklaw.com
`Email: nrubin@raklaw.com
`Email: kshum@raklaw.com
`
`Sean A. Luner
`CA State Bar No. 165443
`Gregory S. Dovel
`CA State Bar No. 135387
`Jonas B. Jacobson
`CA State Bar No. 269912
`DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
`201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
`Santa Monica, CA 90401
`Telephone: 310-656-7066
`Email: sean@dovel.com
`Email: greg@dovel.com
`Email: jonas@dovel.com
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00185-ADA Document 1 Filed 02/26/21 Page 13 of 13
`
`T. John Ward, Jr.
`Texas State Bar No. 00794818
`Claire Abernathy Henry
`Texas State Bar No. 24053063
`Andrea L. Fair
`Texas State Bar No. 24078488
`WARD, SMITH & HILL, PLLC
`PO Box 1231
`Longview, Texas 75606-1231
`(903) 757-6400 (telephone)
`(903) 757-2323 (facsimile)
`E-mail: jw@wsfirm.com
`E-mail: claire@wsfirm.com
`E-mail: andrea@wsfirm.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF,
`SOLAS OLED, LTD.
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
