Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 1 of 16
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC,
`
`Case No. 6:23-cv-00160
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`v.
`
`GOOGLE LLC,
`
`Defendant.
`
`PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff, AGIS Software Development LLC (“AGIS Software” or “Plaintiff”) files this
`
`Complaint against Defendant Google LLC (“Google” or “Defendant”) for patent infringement
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 271 and alleges as follows:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff AGIS Software is a limited liability company organized and existing under
`
`the laws of the State of Texas and maintains its principal place of business at 100 W. Houston
`
`Street, Marshall, Texas 75670. AGIS Software is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and
`
`to U.S. Patent No. 8,213,970 (the “Patent-in-Suit”).
`
`2.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant Google is a Delaware corporation, with a
`
`principal address of 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, California 94043, and has
`
`regular and established places of business throughout this District, including at least at 500 West
`
`2nd
`
`Street,
`
`Suite
`
`2900,
`
`Austin,
`
`Texas
`
`78701.
`
`See
`
`https://about.google/intl/en_us/locations/?region=north-america&office=austin.
`
` Defendant is
`
`registered to do business in Texas and may be served through its registered agent at Corporation
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 2 of 16
`
`Service Company DBA CSC – Lawyers Inco, located at 211 East 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin,
`
`Texas 78701.
`
`3.
`
`On information and belief, Defendant directly and/or indirectly develops, designs,
`
`manufactures, distributes, markets, offers to sell, and/or sells infringing products and services in
`
`the United States, including in the Western District of Texas, and otherwise directs infringing
`
`activities to this District in connection with its products and services.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`4.
`
`This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the United
`
`States, 35 U.S.C. §§ 1, et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant
`
`to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338(a), and 1367.
`
`5.
`
`This Court has specific and personal jurisdiction over Defendant in this action
`
`because Defendant has committed acts within this Judicial 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
`
`conducts business and has committed acts of patent infringement and/or has induced acts of patent
`
`infringement by others in this Judicial District and/or has contributed to patent infringement by
`
`others in this Judicial District, the State of Texas, and elsewhere in the United States by, among
`
`other things, offering to sell and selling products and/or services that infringe the Patent-in-Suit.
`
`6.
`
`Venue is proper in this Judicial District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b)
`
`because Defendant has regular and established places of business in this Judicial District.
`
`Defendant through its own acts and/or through the acts of others, makes, uses, sells, and/or offers
`
`to sell infringing products within this Judicial District, regularly does and solicits business in this
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 3 of 16
`
`District, and has the requisite minimum contacts with this Judicial District, such that this venue is
`
`a fair and reasonable one.
`
`PATENT-IN-SUIT
`
`7.
`
`On July 3, 2012, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally
`
`issued U.S. Patent No. 8,213,970 (the “’970 Patent”) entitled “Method of Utilizing Forced Alerts
`
`for Interactive Remote Communications.” On September 1, 2021, the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office issued an Inter Partes Review Certificate for the ’970 Patent cancelling claims
`
`1 and 3-9. On December 9, 2021, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued an
`
`Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate for the ’970 Patent determining claims 2 and 10 (as amended)
`
`and claims 11-13 to be valid and patentable. A true and correct copy of the ’970 Patent, which
`
`includes the September 1, 2021 Inter Partes Review Certificate and the December 9, 2021
`
`Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate, is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`
`8.
`
`AGIS is the sole and exclusive owner of all right, title, and interest in the Patent-
`
`in-Suit, and holds the exclusive right to take all actions necessary to enforce its rights to the Patent-
`
`in-Suit, including the filing of this patent infringement lawsuit. AGIS also has the right to recover
`
`all damages for past, present, and future infringement of the Patent-in-Suit and to seek injunctive
`
`relief as appropriate under the law.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`9.
`
`Malcolm K. “Cap” Beyer, Jr., a graduate of the United States Naval Academy and
`
`a former U.S. Marine, is the CEO of AGIS Software and a named inventor of the AGIS patent
`
`portfolio. AGIS Software was formed in 2017 and has since opened two offices in Texas,
`
`including one office at 2226 Washington Avenue #2, Waco, Texas 76701. AGIS Software also
`
`has a data center in Texas.
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 4 of 16
`
`10. Mr. Beyer has maintained longstanding ties to Texas and the Western District. In
`
`1987, Mr. Beyer founded Advanced Programming Concepts, an Austin-based company focused
`
`on real-time tactical command and control systems. Advanced Programming Concepts was later
`
`acquired by Ultra Electronics, Inc. and is now the Advanced Tactical Systems unit of Ultra
`
`Electronics, Inc., still based in Austin, Texas.
`
`11. Mr. Beyer founded Advanced Ground Information Systems, Inc. (“AGIS, Inc.”)
`
`shortly after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks because he believed that many first responder
`
`and civilian lives could have been saved through the implementation of a better communication
`
`system. He envisioned and developed a new communication system that would use integrated
`
`software and hardware components on mobile devices to give users situational awareness superior
`
`to systems provided by conventional military and first responder radio systems.
`
`12.
`
`AGIS, Inc. developed prototypes that matured into its LifeRing system. LifeRing
`
`provides first responders, law enforcement, and military personnel with what is essentially a
`
`tactical operations center built into hand-held mobile devices. Using GPS-based location
`
`technology and existing or special-purpose cellular communication networks, LifeRing users can
`
`exchange location, heading, speed, and other information with other members of a group, view
`
`each other’s locations on maps and satellite images, and rapidly communicate and coordinate their
`
`efforts.
`
`13.
`
`AGIS Software licenses its patent portfolio, including the ’970 Patent to AGIS, Inc.
`
`AGIS, Inc. has marked its products accordingly. AGIS Software and all previous assignees of the
`
`Patent-in-Suit have complied with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 287(a).
`
`14.
`
`Defendant manufactures, uses, sells, offers for sale, and/or imports into the United
`
`States products, such as [1] Google mobile devices, smartphones, and tablets including, but not
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 5 of 16
`
`limited to: Nexus S, Galaxy Nexus, Nexus 4, Nexus 5, Nexus 6, Nexus 5X, Nexus 6P, Nexus 7 1st
`
`Gen., Nexus 7 2nd Gen., Nexus 10, Pixel 2, Pixel 2 XL, Pixel 3, Pixel 3 XL, Pixel 3a XL, Pixel 4,
`
`Pixel 4 XL, Pixel 4a, Pixel 4a (5G), Pixel 5, Pixel 5a, Pixel 6, Pixel 6 Pro, Pixel 6a, Pixel 7, Pixel
`
`7 Pro, Pixel C, Chromebook Pixel, Google Pixelbook, Google Pixelbook Go, and Pixel Slate; and
`
`[2] the Android operating system and Android-based applications and/or services including, but
`
`not limited to, Google Find My Device (formerly Android Device Manager), Google Play Protect,
`
`Google Play Services, Google Mobile Services, Google Maps, Google Messages, and Google
`
`Chrome (collectively, “Accused Products”), as well as Google’s servers for running the
`
`aforementioned applications and services. The Accused Products include applications and
`
`software including, but not limited to, the above-listed applications and/or features as components
`
`of its operating system and as downloads from a pre-installed application store, such as the Play
`
`Store, in the Accused Products. The Accused Products, together with Google’s software
`
`components such as, but not limited to, Google Find My Device (formerly Android Device
`
`Manager), Google Play Protect, Google Play Services, Google Mobile Services, Google Maps,
`
`Google Messages, and Google Chrome applications and services which are configured to interact
`
`with Google’s servers which provide services related to the above Android OS and Android-based
`
`applications and services, among other services provided by Google and utilized by Google’s
`
`customers when operating the Accused Products, such as the Google mobile devices, smartphones,
`
`and tablets identified herein.
`
`15.
`
`The Accused Products include functionalities that allow users to share and view
`
`locations with other users, display symbols corresponding to locations (including locations of other
`
`users or entities) on a map, and initiate communications with other users through the interface of
`
`the Accused Products. The Accused Products include the functionalities to display map
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 6 of 16
`
`information, including symbols corresponding with users, entities, and locations. The Accused
`
`Products further include the functionalities to remotely control their own lost or stolen devices.
`
`The Accused Products further include functionalities to send a forced message alert to which a
`
`required response must be transmitted.
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 7 of 16
`
`1
`
`
`1 https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/6160491?hl=en
`
`
` 2
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 8 of 16
`
`COUNT I
`(Infringement of the ’970 Patent)
`
`16.
`
`Paragraphs 1 through 15 are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth in
`
`their entireties.
`
`17.
`
`AGIS Software has not licensed or otherwise authorized Defendant to make, use,
`
`offer for sale, sell, or import any Accused Products and/or products that embody the inventions of
`
`the ’970 Patent.
`
`18.
`
`Defendant
`
`infringes, contributes
`
`to
`
`the
`
`infringement of, and/or
`
`induces
`
`infringement of the ’970 Patent by making, using, selling, offering for sale, distributing, exporting
`
`from, and/or importing into the United States products and/or methods covered by one or more
`
`claims of the ’970 Patent including, but not limited to, the Accused Products.
`
`19.
`
`Defendant has and continues to directly infringe at least claim 10 of the ’970 Patent,
`
`either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, selling, offering for sale,
`
`distributing, exporting from, and/or importing into the United States the Accused Products without
`
`authority and in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`20.
`
`Defendant has and continues to indirectly infringe at least claim 10 of the ’970
`
`Patent by actively, knowingly, and intentionally inducing others to directly infringe, either literally
`
`or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, selling, offering for sale, distributing,
`
`exporting from, and/or importing into the United States the Accused Products and by instructing
`
`users of the Accused Products to perform methods claimed in the ’970 Patent. For example,
`
`Defendant, with knowledge that the Accused Products infringe the ’970 Patent at least as of the
`
`
`
`2
`https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.adm&hl=en_US&gl=US
`&pli=1
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 9 of 16
`
`date of this Complaint, actively, knowingly, and intentionally induced, and continues to knowingly
`
`and intentionally induce direct infringement of the ’970 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
`
`21.
`
`For example, Defendant has indirectly infringed and continues to indirectly infringe
`
`at least claim 10 of the ’970 Patent in the United States because Defendant’s customers use the
`
`Accused Products in accordance with Defendant’s instructions and thereby directly infringe at
`
`least claim 10 of the ’970 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271. For example, Defendant directly
`
`and/or indirectly intentionally instruct its customers to infringe through training videos,
`
`demonstrations, brochures, installations and/or user guides, such as those located at one or more
`
`of
`
`the
`
`following:
`
`https://support.google.com/android/answer/6160491?hl=en;
`
`https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.adm;
`
`https://support.google.com/android/answer/9459346?visit_id=638132811099646203-
`
`2467035281&rd=1;
`
`https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kic-A51Wqgk&t=2s;
`
`https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/9338817?hl=en;
`
`https://www.google.com/android/find/;
`
`https://support.google.com/pixelphone/?hl=en#topic=7078250;
`
`https://support.google.com/pixelphone/topic/7083317?hl=en&ref_topic=7077942;
`
`https://guidebooks.google.com/pixel
`
`and
`
`https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/9338680?hl=en&ref_topic=7083317. Defendant
`
`is thereby liable for infringement of the ’970 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
`
`22.
`
`For example, Defendant directly infringes and/or indirectly infringes by instructing
`
`its customers to infringe by performing claim 10 of the ’970 Patent, including: a method of
`
`receiving, acknowledging and responding to a forced message alert from a sender PDA/cell phone
`
`to a recipient PDA/cell phone, wherein the receipt, acknowledgment, and response to said forced
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 10 of 16
`
`message alert is forced by a forced message alert software application program, said method
`
`comprising the steps of: receiving an electronically transmitted electronic message; identifying
`
`said electronic message as a forced message alert, wherein said forced message alert comprises a
`
`voice or text message and a forced message alert application software packet, which triggers the
`
`activation of the forced message alert software application program within the recipient PDA/cell
`
`phone; transmitting an automatic acknowledgment of receipt to the sender PDA/cell phone, which
`
`triggers the forced message alert software application program to take control of the recipient
`
`PDA/cell phone and show the content of the text message and a required response list on the
`
`display recipient PDA/cell phone or to repeat audibly the content of the voice message on the
`
`speakers of the recipient PDA/cell phone and show the required response list on the display
`
`recipient PDA/cell phone; and transmitting a selected required response from the response list in
`
`order to allow the message required response list to be cleared from the recipient’s cell phone
`
`display, whether said selected response is a chosen option from the response list, causing the forced
`
`message alert software to release control of the recipient PDA/cell phone and stop showing the
`
`content of the text message and a response list on the display recipient PDA/cell phone and/or stop
`
`repeating the content of the voice message on the speakers of the recipient PDA/cell phone;
`
`displaying the response received from the PDA/cell phone that transmitted the response on the
`
`sender of the forced alert PDA/cell phone; and providing a list of the recipient PDA/cell phones
`
`that have automatically acknowledged receipt of a forced alert message and their response to the
`
`forced alert message; and displaying a geographical map with georeferenced entities on the display
`
`of the sender PDA/cell phone; obtaining location and status data associated with the recipient
`
`PDA/cellphone; and presenting a recipient symbol on the geographical map corresponding to a
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 11 of 16
`
`correct geographical location of the recipient PDA/cellphone based on at least the location data.
`
`For example, the Accused Products include features as shown below.
`
`3
`
`
`3 https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/6160491?hl=en
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 12 of 16
`
`4
`
`5
`
`
`4 https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/6160491?hl=en
`5 https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/6160491?hl=en#zippy=%2Cuse-find-my-device-
`app
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 13 of 16
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`6
`https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.adm&hl=en_US&gl=US
`&pli=1
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 14 of 16
`
`7
`
`23.
`
`AGIS Software has suffered damages as a result of Defendant’s direct and indirect
`
`infringement of the ’970 Patent in an amount to be proved at trial.
`
`24.
`
`AGIS Software has suffered, and will continue to suffer, irreparable harm as a result
`
`of Defendant’s infringement of the ’970 Patent for which there is no adequate remedy at law unless
`
`Defendant’s infringement is enjoined by this Court.
`
`25.
`
`Defendant has committed and continues to commit acts of infringement that
`
`Defendant actually knew or should have known constituted an unjustifiably high risk of
`
`infringement of at least one valid and enforceable claim of the ’970 Patent. Defendant’s
`
`
`
`7
`https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.adm&hl=en_US&gl=US
`&pli=1
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 15 of 16
`
`infringement of the ’970 Patent has been and continues to be willful, entitling AGIS Software to
`
`an award of treble damages, reasonable attorney fees, and costs in bringing this action.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Plaintiff hereby demands a jury for all issues so triable.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, AGIS Software prays for relief against Defendant as follows:
`
`a.
`
`Entry of judgment declaring that Defendant has directly and/or indirectly infringed
`
`one or more claims of each of the Patent-in-Suit;
`
`b.
`
`Entry of judgment declaring that Defendant’s infringement of the Patent-in-Suit
`
`has been willful and deliberate;
`
`c.
`
`An order pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283 permanently enjoining Defendant, its
`
`officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and those persons in active concert or
`
`participation with it, from further acts of infringement of the Patent-in-Suit;
`
`d.
`
`An order awarding damages sufficient to compensate AGIS Software for
`
`Defendant’s infringement of the Patent-in-Suit including, but not limited to, lost profits or at a
`
`minimum reasonable royalties, together with pre- and post-judgment interest and costs;
`
`e.
`
`An order awarding AGIS Software all ongoing lost profits, royalties, and/or other
`
`damages caused by Defendant’s continuing infringement of the Patent-in-Suit;
`
`f.
`
`An order awarding AGIS Software treble damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 as a
`
`result of Defendant’s willful and deliberate infringement of the Patent-in-Suit;
`
`g.
`
`Entry of judgment declaring that this case is exceptional and awarding AGIS
`
`Software its costs and reasonable attorney fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285; and
`
`h.
`
`Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 6:23-cv-00160-DC-DTG Document 1 Filed 03/01/23 Page 16 of 16
`
`Dated: March 1, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/Raymond W. Mort, III
`Raymond W. Mort, III
`Texas Bar No. 00791308
`Email: raymort@austinlaw.com
`THE MORT LAW FIRM, PLLC
`100 Congress Avenue, Suite 2000
`Austin, Texas 78701
`Tel/Fax: 512-865-7950
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`Alfred R. Fabricant (pro hac vice to be filed)
`NY Bar No. 2219392
`Email: ffabricant@fabricantllp.com
`Peter Lambrianakos (pro hac vice to be filed
`NY Bar No. 2894392
`Email: plambrianakos@fabricantllp.com
`Vincent J. Rubino, III (pro hac vice to be filed)
`NY Bar No. 4557435
`Email: vrubino@fabricantllp.com
`FABRICANT LLP
`411 Theodore Fremd Avenue,
`Suite 206 South
`Rye, New York 10580
`Telephone: (212) 257-5797
`Facsimile: (212) 257-5796
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF,
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC
`
`16
`
`
`
`