throbber
Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 99 Filed 01/11/19 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1281
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`C.A. No. 13-919-LPS
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`)))))))))
`
`ARENDI S.A.R.L.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`GOOGLE LLC,
`
`Defendant.
`
`DEFENDANT GOOGLE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Defendant Google LLC (“Google”), by and through the undersigned counsel, answers the
`
`Amended Complaint of Plaintiff Arendi S.A.R.L. (“Arendi”) as follows:
`
`RELATED ACTIONS
`
`1.
`
`Google lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations in paragraph 1, and therefore denies them.
`
`THE PARTIES AND ACCUSED PRODUCTS
`
`2.
`
`Google lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations in paragraph 2, and therefore denies them.
`
`3.
`
`Google admits that Google LLC is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
`
`business in Mountain View, California. Google denies any remaining allegations in paragraph 3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`Google admits that it transacts business in this judicial district.
`
`Google admits that it makes, uses, imports, offers to sell, or sells (and/or has made, used,
`
`imported, offered to sell, or sold) Gmail, Google Documents/Docs, Google Sheets, Google
`
`Slides, Google Chrome, Google Translate, Google Calendar, Google Hangouts, the Google App,
`
`Nexus, Pixel, Chromebook Pixel, and Pixelbook. Google denies any remaining allegations in
`
`paragraph 5.
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 99 Filed 01/11/19 Page 2 of 10 PageID #: 1282
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`6.
`
`Google admits that the Amended Complaint purports to state a claim arising under the
`
`patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the U.S. Code. Google denies any remaining
`
`allegations in paragraph 6.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`Google admits that this Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this case.
`
`For the purposes of this matter, Google does not contest personal jurisdiction in this
`
`District. Google denies that it has committed any acts of infringement within this or any other
`
`district and denies any remaining allegations in paragraph 8.
`
`9.
`
`Google admits that venue is proper in this District. Google denies that it has committed
`
`any acts of infringement within this or any other district and denies any remaining allegations in
`
`paragraph 9.
`
`THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`10.
`
`Google admits that U.S. Patent No. 7,917,843 (the “’843 patent”) is titled “Method,
`
`System and Computer Readable Medium for Addressing Handling from a Computer Program.”
`
`Google admits that Exhibit A appears to be a copy of the ’843 patent, but lacks sufficient
`
`information to verify its authenticity. Google denies that the ’843 patent was duly and legally
`
`issued. Google lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any
`
`remaining allegations in paragraph 10, and therefore denies them.
`
`11.
`
`Google admits that U.S. Patent No. 7,496,854 (the “’854 patent”) is titled “Method,
`
`System and Computer Readable Medium for Addressing Handling from a Computer Program.”
`
`Google admits that Exhibit B appears to be a copy of the ’854 patent, but lacks sufficient
`
`information to verify its authenticity. Google denies that the ’854 patent was duly and legally
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 99 Filed 01/11/19 Page 3 of 10 PageID #: 1283
`
`issued. Google lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any
`
`remaining allegations in paragraph 11, and therefore denies them.
`
`12.
`
`Google admits that U.S. Patent No. 7,921,356 (the “’356 patent”) is titled “Method,
`
`System and Computer Readable Medium for Addressing Handling from a Computer Program.”
`
`Google admits that Exhibit C appears to be a copy of the ’356 patent, but lacks sufficient
`
`information to verify its authenticity. Google denies that the ’356 patent was duly and legally
`
`issued. Google lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any
`
`remaining allegations in paragraph 12, and therefore denies them.
`
`13.
`
`Google admits that U.S. Patent No. 8,306,993 (the “’993 patent”) is titled “Method,
`
`System and Computer Readable Medium for Addressing Handling from an Operating System.”
`
`Google admits that Exhibit D appears to be a copy of the ’993 patent, but lacks sufficient
`
`information to verify its authenticity. Google denies that the ’993 patent was duly and legally
`
`issued. Google lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any
`
`remaining allegations in paragraph 13, and therefore denies them.
`
`14.
`
`Google lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations in paragraph 14, and therefore denies them.
`
`15.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 15.
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`16.
`
`Google lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations in paragraph 16, and therefore denies them.
`
`17.
`
`Google lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations in paragraph 17, and therefore denies them.
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 99 Filed 01/11/19 Page 4 of 10 PageID #: 1284
`
`COUNT I
`
`(Infringement of United States Patent No. 7,917,843)
`
`18.
`
`Google repeats and realleges its answers to the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth
`
`here.
`
`19.
`
`20.
`
`21.
`
`22.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 19.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 20.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 21.
`
`Google admits that it has been aware of the ‘843 patent as of the service of the original
`
`Complaint. Google denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 22.
`
`23.
`
`24.
`
`25.
`
`26.
`
`27.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 23.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 24.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 25.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 26.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 27.
`
`COUNT II
`
`(Infringement of United States Patent No. 7,496,854)
`
`28.
`
`Google repeats and realleges its answers to the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth
`
`here.
`
`29.
`
`30.
`
`31.
`
`32.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 29.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 30.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 31.
`
`Google admits that it has been aware of the ‘854 patent as of the service of the original
`
`Complaint. Google denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 32.
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 99 Filed 01/11/19 Page 5 of 10 PageID #: 1285
`
`33.
`
`34.
`
`35.
`
`36.
`
`37.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 33.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 34.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 35.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 36.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 37.
`
`COUNT III
`
`(Infringement of United States Patent No. 7,921,356)
`
`38.
`
`Google repeats and realleges its answers to the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth
`
`here.
`
`39.
`
`40.
`
`41.
`
`42.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 39.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 40.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 41.
`
`Google admits that it has been aware of the ‘356 patent as of the service of the original
`
`Complaint. Google denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 42.
`
`43.
`
`44.
`
`45.
`
`46.
`
`47.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 43.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 44.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 45.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 46.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 47.
`
`COUNT IV
`
`(Infringement of United States Patent No. 8,306,993)
`
`48.
`
`Google repeats and realleges its answers to the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth
`
`here.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 99 Filed 01/11/19 Page 6 of 10 PageID #: 1286
`
`49.
`
`50.
`
`51.
`
`52.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 49.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 50.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 51.
`
`Google admits that it has had knowledge of the ‘993 patent as of the service of the
`
`Amended Complaint on December 21, 2018. Google denies the remaining allegations in
`
`paragraph 52.
`
`53.
`
`54.
`
`55.
`
`56.
`
`57.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 53.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 54.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 55.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 56.
`
`Google denies each and every allegation in paragraph 57.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`58.
`
`Google denies that Arendi is entitled to any relief from Google or the Court, either as
`
`prayed for in the Amended Complaint or otherwise. Google has not infringed, either directly or
`
`indirectly, any valid and enforceable claim of the patents-in-suit, and Arendi is not entitled to
`
`any remedy or recovery. To the extent paragraphs A-E under Plaintiff’s Prayer for Relief are
`
`interpreted to contain any factual allegations, Google denies them.
`
`DEFENSES
`
`59.
`
`Google asserts the following defenses. In doing so, Google does not assume the burden of
`
`proof for matters for which Arendi bears the burden. Google also reserves all rights to allege
`
`additional defenses that become known during litigation.
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 99 Filed 01/11/19 Page 7 of 10 PageID #: 1287
`
`First Defense
`(Non-Infringement)
`
`60.
`
`Google does not infringe, has not infringed (directly, indirectly, literally or under the
`
`doctrine of equivalents) any valid and enforceable claim of the ’843, ’854, ’356, or ’993 patents.
`
`Second Defense
`(Invalidity)
`
`61.
`
`The claims of the ’843, ’854, ’356, and ’993 patents are invalid and/or unenforceable for
`
`failure to satisfy one or more of the patentability conditions set forth in Title 35 of the U.S. Code,
`
`including but not limited to 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, and 112.
`
`Third Defense
`(Limitation of Damages)
`
`62.
`
`Arendi’s claim for damages, costs, or attorneys’ fee, if any, against Google for alleged
`
`patent infringement is limited by 35 U.S.C. §§ 286 and/or 288. Furthermore, the six-year
`
`limitation (pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 286) on Arendi’s claim for damages, if any, against Google
`
`for alleged patent infringement of any of the claims of the ’993 patent, and any new, previously
`
`unasserted claims of any of the remaining patents-in-suit, is restricted to a start date of December
`
`21, 2018, the date of filing of Arendi’s Amended Complaint.
`
`Fourth Defense
`(Failure to Mark)
`
`63.
`
`Arendi has failed to comply with the patent marking and notice requirements of 35
`
`U.S.C. § 287, and therefore Arendi’s claim for damages, if any, against Google for alleged patent
`
`infringement is limited pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 287, to those damages occurring only after notice
`
`of infringement.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 99 Filed 01/11/19 Page 8 of 10 PageID #: 1288
`
`Fifth Defense
`(No Injunctive Relief)
`
`64.
`
`Arendi is not entitled to any injunctive relief because any injury to Arendi is neither
`
`immediate nor irreparable and because Arendi has adequate remedies at law.
`
`Sixth Defense
`(Estoppel, Waiver, and Unclean Hands)
`
`65.
`
`Arendi’s claims for relief are barred, in whole or in part, by the equitable doctrines of
`
`estoppel, waiver and/or unclean hands.
`
`Seventh Defense
`(Prosecution History Estoppel)
`
`66.
`
`Arendi’s infringement claims are barred by the doctrine of prosecution history estoppel
`
`based on statements, representations and admissions made during a.) the prosecution of the
`
`patent applications resulting in at least one of the ’843, ’854, ’356, or ’993 patents; and b.) the
`
`Inter Partes Review proceedings involving the ’843, ’854, ’356, or ’993 patents.
`
`Eighth Defense
`(No Exceptional Case)
`
`67.
`
`Arendi pleaded no valid basis for finding an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
`
`Ninth Defense
`(Substantial Non-infringing Use)
`
`68.
`
`Any and all allegedly infringing products or actions have substantial non-infringing uses
`
`and do not induce or contribute to the alleged infringement of the ’843, ’854, ’356, or ’993
`
`patents.
`
`Tenth Defense
`(Patent Exhaustion and/or Implied License)
`
`69.
`
`Arendi’s claims are barred by the doctrines of patent exhaustion and/or implied license,
`
`in whole or in part, to the extent there are licensed rights, implied or otherwise, granted to third-
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 99 Filed 01/11/19 Page 9 of 10 PageID #: 1289
`
`parties, including but not limited to its settlement agreement with Microsoft Corp., or Arendi has
`
`otherwise been compensated for any alleged acts of infringement by Google.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Google prays for judgment that:
`
`A.
`
`Arendi’s Amended Complaint against Google be dismissed in its entirety with
`
`prejudice;
`
`B.
`
`Arendi is not entitled to any of the relief prayed for in its Complaint as to Google,
`
`or to any relief whatsoever;
`
`C.
`
`Google has not infringed any valid and enforceable asserted claim of the ’843,
`
`’854, ’356, or ’993 patents;
`
`D.
`
`Each asserted claim of the ’843, ’854, ’356, or ’993 patents is invalid and
`
`unenforceable;
`
`E.
`
`No damages or royalties are due or owing for any of the acts alleged by Arendi in
`
`its Complaint as to Google, nor is any preliminary or permanent injunction appropriate as a
`
`matter of law;
`
`F.
`
`Google be awarded its costs, disbursements, and reasonable attorneys’ fees
`
`pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285 as against Arendi; and
`
`G.
`
`Google be granted such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and
`
`proper.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`Google demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable in this action.
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 99 Filed 01/11/19 Page 10 of 10 PageID #: 1290
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`POTTER ANDERSON & CORROON LLP
`
`By: /s/ Bindu A. Palapura
`David E. Moore (#3983)
`Bindu A. Palapura (#5370)
`Hercules Plaza, 6th Floor
`1313 N. Market Street
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`Tel: (302) 984-6000
`dmoore@potteranderson.com
`bpalapura@potteranderson.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendant Google LLC
`
`Robert W. Unikel
`Michelle Marek Figueiredo
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`71 South Wacker Drive, Suite 4500
`Chicago, IL 60606
`Tel: (312) 449-6000
`
`Robert R. Laurenzi
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`200 Park Avenue
`New York, NY 10166
`Tel: (212) 318-6000
`
`Evan M. McLean
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`1117 S. California Avenue
`Palo Alto, CA 94304
`Tel: (650) 320-1800
`
`Ariell Bratton
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`4747 Executive Drive, 12th Floor
`San Diego, CA 92121
`Tel: (858) 458-3000
`
`Dated: January 11, 2019
`6051308 / 40549
`
`10
`
`

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


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

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

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket