IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`ANCORA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
`
`Civil Action No. 6:21-cv-738
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Jury Trial Requested
`
`v.
`
`NINTENDO CO., LTD., and RETRO
`STUDIOS, INC.
`
`Defendants.
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`This is an action for patent infringement in which Ancora Technologies, Inc. makes the
`
`following allegations against Nintendo Co., Ltd., and Retro Studios, Inc. (collectively “Nintendo”):
`
`RELATED CASE
`
`1.
`
`This case is related to the actions Ancora Technologies, Inc. v. Roku, Inc. (W.D. Tex.
`
`Jul. 16, 2021); Ancora Technologies Inc. v. Google, LLC (W.D. Tex. Jul. 16, 2021); and Ancora
`
`Technologies Inc. v. Vizio, Inc. (W.D. Tex. Jul. 16, 2021)—each of which was filed on July 16,
`
`2021, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Waco Division, asserting
`
`infringement of United States Patent No. 6,411,941.
`
`PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff Ancora Technologies, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the
`
`laws of the State of Delaware with a place of business at 23977 S.E. 10th Street, Sammamish,
`
`Washington 98075.
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`3.
`
`Defendant Nintendo Co., Ltd. (“NCL”) is a corporation organized and existing under
`
`the laws of Japan with a principal place of business at 11-1 Hokotate-cho, Kamitoba, Minami-ku,
`
`Kyoto 601-8501, Japan.
`
`4.
`
`Defendant Retro Studios, Inc. (“Retro Studios”) is a corporation organized and
`
`existing under the laws of the State of Texas with a principal place of business at 12345 N Lamar
`
`Blvd #300, Austin, TX 78753. Retro Studios is wholly owned by NCL, and is a game development
`
`studio that designs games for Nintendo hardware systems, such as Donkey Kong Country: Tropical
`
`Freeze. Retro Studios and has designed or worked on games for at least the Wii, Nintendo 3DS, and
`
`Switch systems. See https://www.retrostudios.com/games/; Motion Games, LLC v. Nintendo Co. Ltd.
`
`(“Motion Games”), No. 6:12-cv-00878, ECF No. 33-1 (Declaration of Michael Kelbaugh, President
`
`and CEO of Retro Studios, Inc. (“Kelbaugh Decl.”)) ¶¶1-2 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 4, 2013).
`
`5.
`
`NCL approves games that Retro Studio develops and submits to NCL for approval.
`
`See Kelbaugh Decl. ¶¶2-3. Retro Studios does not participate in or assist with any decision making
`
`about whether to manufacture a particular game. See id. On information and belief, Retro worked
`
`closely with NCL in ensuring the successful integration of Retro Studios’ software into the final
`
`products sold to customers in the United States, including in the Western District of Texas.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`6.
`
`This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United
`
`States Code, such that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and
`
`1338(a).
`
`7.
`
`This Court also has personal jurisdiction over NCL and Retro Games. For example,
`
`Retro Games maintain a regular and established place of business in the Western District of Texas,
`
`including at 12345 N Lamar Blvd #300, Austin, TX 78753.
`
`
`
`2
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`8.
`
`Further, on information and belief, NCL directs and control the actions of Retro
`
`Games such that NCL also maintain places of business in Texas, including at 12345 N Lamar Blvd
`
`#300, Austin, TX 78753.
`
`9.
`
`For example, NCL has exerted its authority to speak for Retro Studios, as when NCL
`
`and its wholly owned subsidiary, Nintendo of America, Inc., determined that they would provide a
`
`“Nintendo[] witness . . . to testify on Retro’s behalf” for purposes of a third-party subpoena for
`
`testimony under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 46. See SyncPoint Imaging, LLC v. Nintendo of
`
`America, Inc., No. 1:15-mc-00768-SS, ECF No. 1 (Non-Party Retro Studios, Inc.’s Opposed Motion
`
`to Quash) at 4 (W.D. Tex., Aug. 31, 2015); see id. at 2 (“Nintendo will be providing testimony
`
`regarding its relationship with Retro and Retro’s lack of connection to the Eastern District of
`
`Texas.”).
`
`10.
`
`In addition, directly or through intermediaries, NCL and Retro Games have
`
`committed acts within the Western District of Texas giving rise to this action and/or have established
`
`minimum contacts with the Western District of Texas such that the exercise of jurisdiction would not
`
`offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
`
`11.
`
`For example, NCL has placed or contributed to placing infringing products like the
`
`Nintendo Switch, Wii console, and Nintendo 3DS into the stream of commerce via an established
`
`distribution channel knowing or understanding that such products would be sold and used in the
`
`United States, including in the Western District of Texas.
`
`12.
`
`As another example, Nintendo admitted that NCL has “‘designed, manufacture[d],
`
`and import[ed]’ the accused products,” including at least the Wii console and Nintendo 3DS, into the
`
`United States. Motion Games, LLC v. Nintendo Co. Ltd. (“Motion Games”), No. 6:12-cv-00878,
`
`
`
`3
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`ECF No. 33 (Retro Studios, Inc., Mot. to Dismiss for Improper Venue (“Motion Games Mot. to
`
`Dismiss”) at 12 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 4, 2013).
`
`13.
`
`As another example, NCL has testified that NCL is responsible for the “design and
`
`development” of the Accused Products, including the Wii console and the Nintendo 3DS, the
`
`“software” for such Accused Products, the “manufacture” of such Accused Products, and the
`
`“business activities” for such Accused Products “related to finance; the design, development and
`
`testing of Nintendo Products . . . ; contracts and agreements; human resources; marketing;
`
`advertising; and the results of surveys, studies and evaluations”:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Motion Games, No. 6:12-cv-00878, ECF No. 34-30 (Declaration of Toshiro Hibino) at 1-2 (E.D.
`
`Tex. Mar. 4, 2013).
`
`14.
`
`As another example, Nintendo directs and controls the development of software for
`
`the Accused Products, id., and—on information and belief—the distribution of system software
`
`updates for the Accused Products, including the Nintendo Switch, Wii console, and Nintendo 3DS.
`
`
`
`4
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`NCL sends or causes to be sent such system software updates knowing that they will be distributed
`
`to Accused Products in the Western District of Texas:
`
`https://twitter.com/nintendo_cs/status/1402468144430518276;
`
`https://twitter.com/nintendo_cs/status/1379227688087392257.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`https://twitter.com/nintendo_cs/status/1259268601225179137.
`
`
`
`https://www.nintendo.co.jp/support/3ds/system_update/index.html.
`
`15.
`
`Further, on information and belief, Nintendo also has derived substantial revenues
`
`from infringing acts in the Western District of Texas, including from the sale and use of infringing
`
`
`
`products like the Nintendo Switch.
`
`
`
`6
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`16.
`
`Further, on information and belief, Nintendo maintained a system of 28,000 WiFi
`
`hotspots or relay points throughout North America, which are referred to as “Nintendo Zones,”
`
`including Nintendo Zone hotspots in the Western District of Texas, such as the Austin–Bergstrom
`
`International Airport. Nintendo provided or directed and controlled the provision of WiFi terminals
`
`to provide its users with no-cost access to the internet in order to make use of Nintendo game
`
`consoles and games. On information and belief, prior to the expiration of the ’941 Patent, Nintendo
`
`used Nintendo Zones to send or cause to be sent software updates to Nintendo consoles.
`
`17.
`
`In addition, venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)-(c) and 28 U.S.C. § 1400 as
`
`Nintendo maintains a regular and established place of business in the Western District of Texas,
`
`including at least at 12345 N Lamar Blvd #300, Austin, TX 78753. In re HTC Corp., 889 F.3d 1349,
`
`1354 (Fed. Cir. 2018); In re Cray Inc., 871 F.3d 1355, 1362-63 (Fed. Cir. 2017).
`
`THE ASSERTED PATENT
`
`18.
`
`This lawsuit asserts causes of action for infringement of United States Patent No.
`
`6,411,941 (“the ’941 Patent”), which is entitled “Method of Restricting Software Operation Within a
`
`License Limitation.”
`
`19.
`
`The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office duly and legally issued the ’941 Patent on
`
`June 25, 2002.
`
`20.
`
`Subsequent to issue, and at least by December 21, 2004, all right, title, and interest in
`
`the ’941 Patent, including the sole right to sue for any infringement, were assigned to Ancora
`
`Technologies, Inc., which has held, and continues to hold, all right, title, and interest in the ’941
`
`Patent.
`
`21.
`
`The president of Ancora Technologies, Inc.—Mr. Miki Mullor—is one of the
`
`inventors of the ’941 Patent.
`
`
`
`7
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`22.
`
`A reexamination certificate to the ’941 Patent subsequently was issued on June 1,
`
`2010.
`
`23.
`
`Since being assigned to Ancora Technologies, Inc., the ’941 Patent has been asserted
`
`in patent infringement actions filed against Microsoft Corporation, Dell Incorporated, Hewlett
`
`Packard Incorporated, Toshiba America Information Systems, Apple Inc., HTC America, Inc., HTC
`
`Corporation, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., LG Electronics,
`
`Inc., LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., Sony Mobile Communications AB, Sony Mobile
`
`Communications, Inc., Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc., Lenovo Group Ltd., Lenovo
`
`(United States) Inc., Motorola Mobility, LLC, TCT Mobile (US) Inc., and Huizhou TCL Mobile
`
`Communication Co., Ltd.
`
`24.
`
`In the course of these litigations, a number of the ’941 Patent’s claim terms have been
`
`construed, and the validity of the ’941 Patent has been affirmed repeatedly.
`
`25.
`
`For example, in December 2012, the United States District Court for the Northern
`
`District of California issued a claim construction order construing the terms (1) “volatile memory”;
`
`(2) “non-volatile memory”; (3) “BIOS”; (4) “program”; (5) “license record”; and (6) “verifying the
`
`program using at least the verification structure.” Ancora Techs., Inc. v. Apple Inc., No. 11–CV–
`
`06357 YGR, 2012 WL 6738761, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 31, 2012).
`
`26.
`
`Further, the court rejected Apple’s indefiniteness arguments and further held that, at
`
`least with respect to Claims 1-3 and 5-17, “[t]he steps of the Claim do not need to be performed in
`
`the order recited.” Ancora Techs., Inc. v. Apple Inc., No. 11–CV–06357 YGR, 2012 WL 6738761, at
`
`*5, *13 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 31, 2012).
`
`
`
`8
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`27.
`
`Subsequently, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the
`
`district court’s rejection of Apple’s indefiniteness argument. Ancora Techs., Inc. v. Apple, Inc., 744
`
`F.3d 732, 739 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
`
`28.
`
`The Federal Circuit also agreed with Ancora Technologies, Inc. that “the district court
`
`erred in construing ‘program’ to mean ‘a set of instructions for software applications that can be
`
`executed by a computer’”—holding that, as Ancora had argued, the term should be accorded its
`
`normal meaning of “‘a set of instructions’ for a computer.” Ancora Techs., Inc. v. Apple, Inc., 744
`
`F.3d 732, 734-35, 737 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
`
`29.
`
`Subsequently, in a more recent decision, the Federal Circuit held that the ’941 Patent
`
`satisfied § 101 as a matter of law—stating: “[W]e conclude that claim 1 of the ’941 patent is not
`
`directed to an abstract idea.” Ancora Techs., Inc. v. HTC Am., Inc., 908 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2018),
`
`as amended (Nov. 20, 2018).
`
`30.
`
`In addition, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board rejected HTC’s request to institute
`
`covered business method review proceedings on the ’941 Patent—explaining that “the ’941
`
`[P]atent’s solution to the addressed problem is rooted in technology, and thus, is a ‘technical
`
`solution’” and also rejecting HTC’s argument that “the ’941 [P]atent recites a technological solution
`
`that is not novel and nonobvious.”
`
`31.
`
`This Court likewise issued a claim construction order construing or adopting the plain
`
`and ordinary meaning of various claims of the ’941 Patent, including (1) “non-volatile memory”; (2)
`
`“license”; (3) “license record”; (4) “volatile memory”; (5) “BIOS”; (6) “memory of the BIOS”; (7)
`
`“program”; (8) “selecting a program residing in the volatile memory”; (9) “using an agent to set up a
`
`verification structure in the erasable, non-volatile memory of the BIOS”; (10) “set up a verification
`
`structure”; (11) “verifying the program using at least the verification structure”; (12) “acting on the
`
`
`
`9
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`program according to the verification”; (13) “first non-volatile memory area of the computer”; (14)
`
`the Claim 1 preamble; and (15) the order of Claim 1 steps. Ancora Technologies, Inc. v. LG
`
`Electronics, Inc., 1:20-cv-00034-ADA, at Dkt. 69 (W.D Tex. June 2, 2020).
`
`32.
`
`Finally, and most recently, the United States District Court for the Central District of
`
`California issued a claim construction order construing the terms (1) “volatile memory”; (2)
`
`“selecting a program residing in the volatile memory”; (3) “set up a verification structure”; (4)
`
`“license record”; (5) “memory of the BIOS”; and (6) the whole of Claim 8. Ancora Techs., Inc v.
`
`TCT Mobile (US), Inc., et al., No. 8:19-cv-02192-GW-AS, ECF No. 66 & 69 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 18-19,
`
`2020).
`
`COUNT 1 – INFRINGEMENT
`
`33.
`
`Plaintiff repeats and incorporates by reference each preceding paragraph as if fully set
`
`forth herein and further state:
`
`34.
`
`Nintendo has infringed the ’941 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by, prior to
`
`the expiration of the ’941 Patent, selling, and/or offering for sale in the United States, and/or
`
`importing into the United States, without authorization, products and/or operating system and game
`
`software for products that are capable of performing at least Claim 1 of the ’941 Patent literally or
`
`under the doctrine of equivalents and, without authorization, then causing such products to perform
`
`each step of at least Claim 1 of the ’941 Patent.
`
`35.
`
`At a minimum, such Accused Products include those servers/software utilized by
`
`Nintendo to transmit an over-the-air (“OTA”) software update, as well as those gaming consoles,
`
`game controllers, and other devices and technology that included Nintendo’s operating system
`
`software and game software and to which Nintendo sent or had sent an OTA update that caused such
`
`device to perform the method recited in Claim 1 prior to the expiration of the ’941 Patent.
`
`
`
`10
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`36.
`
`Such Accused Products include products like the Nintendo Switch, which—as
`
`detailed below—Nintendo configured such that it would be capable of performing each step of
`
`Claim 1 of the ’941 Patent and subsequently provided one or more OTA updates that caused the
`
`device to perform each step of Claim 1.1
`
`37.
`
`Such Accused Products also include products like the Nintendo 3DS, Nintendo 3DS
`
`XL, Nintendo 2DS, New Nintendo 3DS XL, New Nintendo 2DS XL, Wii U, Wii Remote, Wii U Pro
`
`Controller, Balance Board, Nintendo Switch Joy Con, Nintendo Switch Joy Con Wheel, Nintendo
`
`Labo Toy-Con 04, GameCube Controller, and Nintendo Pro Controller, as well as any predecessor
`
`models to such devices, to which Nintendo sent, or had sent, an OTA update prior to the expiration
`
`of the ’941 Patent.
`
`38.
`
`For example, Claim 1 of the ’941 Patent claims “a method of restricting software
`
`operation within a license for use with a computer including an erasable, non-volatile memory area
`
`of a BIOS of the computer, and a volatile memory area; the method comprising the steps of: [1]
`
`selecting a program residing in the volatile memory, [2] using an agent to set up a verification
`
`structure in the erasable, non-volatile memory of the BIOS, the verification structure accommodating
`
`data that includes at least one license record, [3] verifying the program using at least the verification
`
`structure from the erasable non-volatile memory of the BIOS, and [4] acting on the program
`
`according to the verification.”
`
`39. When Nintendo transmitted an OTA update like its Nintendo Switch Version 2
`
`updates, Nintendo performed and/or caused devices like the Nintendo Switch to perform each
`
`element of Claim 1 as part of its Nintendo-specified, pre-configured software update process:
`
`
`1 This description of infringement is illustrative and not intended to be an exhaustive or limiting
`explanation of every manner in which each Accused Product infringes the ’941 patent. Further, on
`information and belief, the identified functionality of the Nintendo Switch is representative of
`components and functionality present in all Accused Products.
`
`
`
`11
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/22525/~/nintendo-switch-
`system-updates-and-change-history.
`
`40.
`
`In particular, each Nintendo Switch contains both erasable, non-volatile memory in
`
`the form of flash memory and volatile memory in the form of RAM memory.
`
`
`
`
`
`See Nintendo of Am. Inc. v. Does 1-20, No. 2:20-cv-00738-TSZ, ECF No. 1 (Complaint) ¶53 (W.D.
`
`Wa. Mar. 15, 2020).
`
`41.
`
`Such non-volatile memory includes memory that is associated with Nintendo BIOS
`
`firmware and used by the Nintendo BIOS as part of its normal operations, which—on information
`
`and belief—is an example of BIOS memory:
`
`See Nintendo of Am. Inc. v. Storman, No. 2:19-CV-07818, ECF No. 1 (Complaint) ¶41 (C.D. Cal.
`
`
`
`Sept. 10, 2019).
`
`
`
`12
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`42.
`
`Various third parties have also reported such functionality:
`
`https://switchbrew.org/wiki/Cryptosystem.
`
`
`
`https://switchbrew.org/wiki/Cryptosystem.
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`https://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.07643.pdf.
`
`43.
`
`Further, as detailed above, each Nintendo Switch was configured by Nintendo to
`
`repeatedly check to see if a new software update was available, including through the following
`
`
`
`method:
`
`
`
`14
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/22767/~/how-to-update-software.
`
`
`
`https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/22525/~/nintendo-switch-system-
`updates-and-change-history.
`
`44.
`
`During this process, one or more OTA servers owned or controlled by Nintendo set
`
`up a verification structure in the erasable, non-volatile memory of the BIOS of the Nintendo Switch
`
`by transmitting to the device an OTA update, which the Nintendo Switch is configured by Nintendo
`
`
`
`to save to the erasable, non-volatile memory of its BIOS.
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`See Nintendo of Am. Inc. v. Does 1-20, No. 2:20-cv-00738-TSZ, ECF No. 1 (Complaint) ¶54 (W.D.
`
`Wa. Mar. 15, 2020).
`
`45.
`
`This OTA update contains a verification structure that includes data accommodating
`
`at least one license record.
`
`46.
`
`Examples of such a license record includes what is known as an “encrypted
`
`identifier” or “signature” as well as a “key unique to each Nintendo Switch console.” For example,
`
`as Nintendo has admitted in other litigation:
`
`See Nintendo of Am. Inc. v. Does 1-20, No. 2:20-cv-00738-TSZ, ECF No. 1 (Complaint) ¶¶52-54
`
`
`
`(W.D. Wa. Mar. 15, 2020).
`
`
`
`16
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`47.
`
`Once the verification structure has been set up in the BIOS, the Nintendo Switch is
`
`configured by Nintendo to reboot, load the OTA update into its volatile memory (e.g., RAM), and
`
`then use the at least one license record from the BIOS to verify the OTA update as part of its secure
`
`boot process:
`
`https://www.howtogeek.com/671251/how-to-update-your-nintendo-switch/.
`
`48.
`
`For example, as Nintendo has admitted in other litigation:
`
`
`
`
`
`Nintendo of Am. Inc. v. Does 1-20, No. 2:20-cv-00738-TSZ, ECF No. 1 (Complaint) ¶52 (W.D. Wa.
`
`Mar. 15, 2020).
`
`
`
`17
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`49.
`
`Various third parties also have reported such functionality:
`
`https://switchbrew.org/wiki/Package1.
`
`
`
`https://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.07643.pdf.
`
`https://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.07643.pdf.
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`50.
`
`If the OTA update is verified, the Nintendo Switch is further configured to load and
`
`execute the update.
`
`51.
`
`Further, during the infringing time period, Nintendo performed or caused to be
`
`performed each of the Claim 1 steps identified above by providing an OTA update to each Accused
`
`Product: https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/43314; https://en-
`
`americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1436/~/system-menu-update-history;
`
`https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/231/~/system-menu-update-
`
`history.
`
`52.
`
`In addition, during the infringing time period, Nintendo performed or caused to be
`
`performed each of the Claim 1 steps identified above by providing a software update to games
`
`running on each accused product, such as Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, developed by
`
`Retro Studios: https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/29365/~/how-to-
`
`update-donkey-kong%3A-tropical-freeze-%28nintendo-switch%29;
`
`https://en-americas-
`
`support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/645/~/how-to-install-the-mario-kart-7-update;
`
`http://www.benoitren.be/switch-gamepatches.html; https://www.perfectly-nintendo.com/nintendo-
`
`updates/ .
`
`53.
`
`For example, Nintendo employs encryption and signature checks similar to that of the
`
`Nintendo Switch’s operating system described above for purposes of receiving OTA updates for
`
`Nintendo games like Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze.
`
`54.
`
`Further, as detailed above, each Nintendo Switch installed with Donkey Kong
`
`Country: Tropical Freeze was configured by Nintendo to repeatedly check to see if a new software
`
`update for Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze was available, including through the following
`
`method:
`
`
`
`19
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/29365/kw/donkey/p/989/c/120.
`
`55.
`
`For example, Nintendo employs encryption and signature checks similar to that of the
`
`Nintendo Switch’s operating system described above for purposes of receiving OTA updates for
`
`Nintendo games like Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze. For example, as Nintendo has
`
`
`
`admitted in other litigation:
`
`Nintendo of Am. Inc. v. Does 1-20, No. 2:20-cv-00738-TSZ, ECF No. 1 (Complaint) ¶52 (W.D. Wa.
`
`
`
`Mar. 15, 2020).
`
`56.
`
`Further, Nintendo expressly conditions participation in the OTA update process and
`
`the receipt of the benefit of a software update on the performance of each of the above steps.
`
`57.
`
`Primarily, as described above, Nintendo pre-configures/programs each Accused
`
`Product to perform the above described steps upon receiving an OTA update from Nintendo.
`
`
`
`20
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`58.
`
`Further, Nintendo not only set the time and conditions under which a user could
`
`receive and install an OTA update, but Nintendo required all users to accept and install such updates.
`
`59.
`
`For example, Nintendo stated the following in its End User License Agreement for
`
`the Nintendo Switch:
`
`
`
`https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/48058/kw/EULA.
`
`60.
`
`Further, Nintendo emphasizes the benefits associated with updating the software of its
`
`Accused Products, including to allow users to “play games, enjoy features, software, data or content,
`
`or continue to access services available through the [Nintendo] Console,” to “enhance the user’s
`
`experience,” and to add new functionality.
`
`61.
`
`Nintendo also identified the specific benefits associated with each OTA update it
`
`provided: https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/43314#v200.
`
`62.
`
`Further, Nintendo controlled the manner in which each OTA update could be
`
`performed, including by pre-configuring each Accused Product such that, upon receiving an OTA
`
`update from Nintendo, the device would automatically perform each remaining step of the claimed
`
`method.
`
`
`
`21
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`63.
`
`Nintendo also controlled the timing of the performance of such method by
`
`determining when to utilize its OTA servers/software to set up a verification structure in each
`
`Accused Product.
`
`64.
`
`Nintendo also had the right and ability to stop or limit infringement simply by not
`
`performing the initial step of using its OTA servers/software to set up a verification structure in each
`
`Accused Product. Absent this action by Nintendo, the infringement at issue in this lawsuit would not
`
`have occurred.
`
`65.
`
`Nintendo’s infringement has caused damage to Ancora, and Ancora is entitled to
`
`recover from Nintendo those damages that Ancora has sustained as a result of Nintendo’s
`
`infringement.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`66.
`
`Ancora hereby demands a jury trial for all issues so triable.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as follows:
`
`A.
`
`Declaring that Nintendo has infringed United States Patent No. 6,411,941 in violation
`
`of 35 U.S.C. § 271;
`
`B.
`
`Awarding damages to Ancora arising out of this infringement, including enhanced
`
`damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 and prejudgment and post-judgment interest, in an amount
`
`according to proof;
`
`C.
`
`Awarding such other costs and relief the Court deems just and proper, including any
`
`relief that the Court may deem appropriate under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`22
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`

`

`/s/ Andres Healy
`
`Andres Healy (WA 45578)
`SUSMAN GODFREY LLP
`1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`Tel: (206) 516-3880
`Fax: 206-516-3883
`ahealy@susmangodfrey.com
`
`Lexie G. White (TX 24048876)
`SUSMAN GODFREY LLP
`1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5100
`Houston, Texas 77002
`Tel: (713) 651-9366
`Fax: (713) 654-6666
`lwhite@susmangodfrey.com
`
`Charles Ainsworth
`State Bar No. 00783521
`Robert Christopher Bunt
`State Bar No. 00787165
`PARKER, BUNT & AINSWORTH, P.C.
`100 E. Ferguson, Suite 418
`Tyler, TX 75702
`903/531-3535
`E-mail: charley@pbatyler.com
`E-mail: rcbunt@pbatyler.com
`
`COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF ANCORA
`TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
`
`Date: July 16, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`23
`
`Nintendo - Ancora Exh. 1076
`
`