COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

OHSUSA:750725534.3 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION 

FUJITSU LIMITED’S COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AGAINST 

TELLABS, INC., TELLABS OPERATIONS, INC., AND 

TELLABS NORTH AMERICA, INC.; and JURY DEMAND

FUJITSU LIMITED, 

 PLAINTIFF, 

 V. 

TELLABS OPERATIONS, INC., TELLABS, INC., AND 

TELLABS NORTH AMERICA, INC. 

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

 DEFENDANTS. 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 1 of 13 PageID #:1
1 

Plaintiff Fujitsu Limited, through counsel, David C. Van Dyke, hereby submits this 

Complaint to demand a jury trial and complain of Defendants Tellabs, Inc., Tellabs Operations, 

Inc., and Tellabs North America as follows: 

NATURE OF THE ACTION 

1. This is an action by Plaintiff Fujitsu Limited (“Fujitsu”) against Defendants 

Tellabs, Inc., Tellabs Operations, Inc., and Tellabs North America, collectively referred to as 

“Defendants,” for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,526,163; U.S. Patent No. 5,521,737; U.S. 

Patent No. 7,227,681 and U.S. patent No. 5,386,418 (collectively, the “Fujitsu Patents”). 

THE PARTIES 

2. Fujitsu is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Japan and having 

a principal place of business at 1-1 Kamikodanaka 4-chome, Nakahara-ku, Kawasaki-shi, 

Kanagawa-ken, 211-8588 Japan. Fujitsu is the owner of all rights in the Fujitsu Patents asserted 

herein. 

3. On information and belief, Defendant Tellabs, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with 

its principal executive offices at One Tellabs Center, 1415 West Diehl Road, Naperville, Illinois 

60563 and is doing business in the Northern District of Illinois and elsewhere in the State of 

Illinois. 

4. On information and belief, Defendant Tellabs Operations, Inc. is a Delaware 

corporation with offices at One Tellabs Center, 1415 West Diehl Road, Naperville, Illinois 60563 

and is doing business in the Northern District of Illinois and elsewhere in the State of Illinois. 

5. On information and belief, Defendant Tellabs North America is a Delaware 

corporation with its principal executive offices at One Tellabs Center, 1415 West Diehl Road, 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 2 of 13 PageID #:2
2 

Naperville, Illinois 60563 and is doing business in the Northern District of Illinois and elsewhere 

in the State of Illinois. 

6. Defendants manufacture, assemble, use, offer for sale and/or sell optical 

communication products (referred to as “the Accused Tellabs Products”). Upon information and 

belief, the Accused Tellabs Products are made, used, offered for sale and/or sold in the United 

States, including in the State of Illinois. More specifically, on information and belief, sales and 

offers for sale that constitute acts of infringement have been made in the Northern District of 

Illinois. On further information and belief, Tellabs North America has been responsible for sales 

and offers for sale of components and modules of Accused Tellabs Products in the Northern 

District of Illinois, and elsewhere throughout the United States, since before the filing of this 

lawsuit. 

7. The Accused Tellabs Products have infringed and continue to infringe U.S. 

Patents owned by Fujitsu. Accordingly, Fujitsu seeks monetary damages to remedy Defendants’ 

past infringement of the Fujitsu Patents and an injunction to prevent further acts of infringement. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

8. This infringement action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 

35, United States Code. This Court has jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 

1338(a). 

9. Defendants’ home office and corporate headquarters are in the Northern District 

of Illinois. 

10. Accordingly, venue in the Northern District of Illinois is proper under 28 U.S.C. 

§§1391(b), 1400(b). 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 3 of 13 PageID #:3
3 

FIRST CLAIM FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

(Infringement of U.S. Patent 7,227,681) 

11. The allegations of Paragraphs 1-10 above are incorporated for this First Claim as 

though fully set forth herein.

12. On June 5, 2007, United States Patent No. 7,227,681 (“the ‘681 Patent”) duly and 

legally issued to Fujitsu. This patent is titled “Controller Which Controls A Variable Optical 

Attenuator To Control The Power Level Of A Wavelength-Multiplexed Optical Signal When 56 

The Number Of Channels Are Varied.” A copy of the ‘681 Patent is attached hereto as “Exhibit 

A” and made a part hereof.

13. Fujitsu is the owner of the ‘681 Patent and has the right to enforce the ‘681 Patent. 

14. On information and belief, Defendants manufacture, offer for sale, sell, use or 

induce the same, systems having an optical amplifier falling within the scope of one or more of 

the claims of the ‘681 Patent, including but not limited to Tellabs® 7100 optical transport 

systems configured with a system processor module (SPM) or other processor module plus any 

of the following input amplifier modules: LIAM-E, LRAM-E, or any other 44-channel input 

amplifier module from feature package 3.3 or higher (collectively, “the 44-Channel Input 

Amplifier Modules”), and all 88 channel versions of those 44 Channel Input Amplifier Modules; 

and the Tellabs® 7100 Nano optical transport systems configured with an SPM-N or other 

processor module plus any 88 channel version of the 44 Channel Input Amplifier Modules (all 

input amplifier modules identified above collectively referred to as “the ‘681 Accused 

Products”). As a result, Defendants have infringed, literally and/or by equivalents, continue to 

infringe, and/or threaten infringement of one or more of the claims of the ‘681 Patent as defined 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 4 of 13 PageID #:4
4 

by 35 U.S.C. § 271. Fujitsu has suffered damage by reason of Defendants’ infringement and will 

continue to suffer additional damage until this Court enjoins the infringing conduct. 

15. Defendants are contributorily infringing, will induce, are inducing and have 

induced infringement of one or more claims of the ‘681 Patent by offering to sell and selling 

Tellabs® 7100 and 7100 Nano optical transport systems, which include but are not limited to the 

current and preceding versions of the ‘681 Accused Products, to customers, buyers, sellers, users 

and others who directly infringe the ‘681 Patent. Infringement of the asserted claims of the ‘681 

Patent can be found through operation of the ‘681 Accused Products, which are not staple articles 

or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use, in an ordinary and 

intended manner. Despite Defendants’ knowledge of the ‘681 Patent, on information and belief, 

Defendants have continued and are continuing to sell and offer to sell the ‘681 Accused Products 

to third parties with the object of promoting their use to infringe, as shown by Defendants’ clear 

expression and other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement by their customers. For 

instance, on information and belief, Defendants provide formal and informal training sessions for 

customers, documents such as datasheets and product manuals, and any training, teaching or 

instruction. Such instructions have directly induced Defendants’ customers to operate the ‘681 

Accused Products in a manner that infringes the asserted claims of the ‘681 Patent. 

16. On information and belief, Defendants’ acts of infringement have been, and, if not 

ceased immediately, will be committed with full knowledge of Fujitsu’s rights under the ‘681 

Patent, and in willful and wanton disregard thereof, rendering this an exceptional case under 35 

U.S.C. § 285. 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 5 of 13 PageID #:5
5 

17. Fujitsu believes that Defendants will continue to infringe the ‘681 Patent unless 

enjoined by this Court. Such infringing activity causes Fujitsu irreparable harm and will 

continue to cause such harm without the issuance of an injunction. 

SECOND CLAIM FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

(Infringement of U.S. Patent 5,526,163) 

18. The allegations of Paragraphs 1-10 above are incorporated for this Second Claim 

as though fully set forth herein. 

19. On June 11, 1996, United States Patent No. 5,526,163 (“the ‘163 Patent”) duly 

and legally issued to Fujitsu. This patent is titled “Optical Amplifier And Optical 

Communication System With Optical Amplifier Using Pumping Light Beam.” A copy of the 

‘163 Patent is attached hereto as “Exhibit B” and made a part hereof. 

20. Fujitsu is the owner of the ‘163 Patent and has the right to enforce the ‘163 Patent. 

21. On information and belief, Defendants manufacture, offer for sale, sell, use or 

induce the use of systems falling within the scope of one or more of the claims of the ‘163 

Patent, including but not limited to Tellabs® 7100 optical transport systems configured with a 

system processor module (SPM) plus any 88 channel version of the 44 Channel Input Amplifier 

Modules; and the Tellabs® 7100 Nano optical transport systems configured with an SPM-N or 

other processor module plus any 88 channel version of the 44 Channel Input Amplifier Modules 

(collectively, “the ‘163 Accused Products”). As a result, Defendants have infringed, literally 

and/or by equivalents, continue to infringe, and/or threaten infringement of one or more of the 

claims of the ‘163 Patent as defined by 35 U.S.C. § 271. Fujitsu has suffered damage by reason 

of Defendants’ infringement and will continue to suffer additional damage until this Court 

enjoins the infringing conduct. 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 6 of 13 PageID #:6
6 

22. Defendants are contributorily infringing, will induce, are inducing and have 

induced infringement of one or more claims of the ‘163 Patent by offering to sell and selling its 

Tellabs® 7100 and 7100 Nano optical transport systems, which include but are not limited to the 

current and preceding versions of the ‘163 Accused Products, to customers, buyers, sellers, users 

and others who directly infringe the ‘163 Patent. Infringement of the asserted claims of the ‘163 

Patent can be found through operation of the ‘163 Accused Products, which are not staple articles 

or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use, in an ordinary and 

intended manner. Despite Defendants’ knowledge of the ‘163 Patent, on information and belief, 

Defendants have continued and are continuing to sell and offer to sell the ‘163 Accused Products 

to third parties with the object of promoting their use to infringe, as shown by Defendants’ clear 

expression and other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement by their customers. For 

instance, on information and belief, Defendants provide formal and informal training sessions for 

customers, documents such as datasheets and product manuals, and any training, teaching or 

instruction. Such instructions have directly induced Defendants’ customers to operate the ‘163 

Accused Products in a manner that infringes the asserted claims of the ‘163 Patent. 

23. On information and belief, Defendants’ acts of infringement have been, and, if not 

ceased immediately, will be committed with full knowledge of Fujitsu’s rights under the ‘163 

Patent, and in willful and wanton disregard thereof, rendering this an exceptional case under 35 

U.S.C. § 285. 

24. Fujitsu believes that Defendants will continue to infringe the ‘163 Patent unless 

enjoined by this Court. Such infringing activity causes Fujitsu irreparable harm and will 

continue to cause such harm without the issuance of an injunction. 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 7 of 13 PageID #:7
7 

THIRD CLAIM FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

(Infringement of U.S. Patent 5,521,737) 

25. The allegations of Paragraphs 1-10 above are incorporated for this Third Claim as 

though fully set forth herein. 

26. On May 28, 1996, United States Patent No. 5,521,737 (“the ‘737 Patent”) duly 

and legally issued to Fujitsu. This patent is titled “Optical Amplifier And Optical 

Communication System With Optical Amplifier Using Pumping Light Beam.” A copy of the 

‘737 Patent is attached hereto as “Exhibit C” and made a part hereof. 

27. Fujitsu is the owner of the ‘737 Patent and has the right to enforce the ‘737 Patent. 

28. On information and belief, Defendants manufacture, offer for sale, sell, use or 

induce the use of systems having an optical amplifier falling within the scope of one or more of 

the claims of the ‘737 Patent, including but not limited to Tellabs® 7100 optical transport 

systems configured with an SPM plus any 44 Channel Input Amplifier Modules other than the 

LIAM-E and LRAM-E, and any 88 channel version of the 44 Channel Input Amplifier Modules; 

and the Tellabs® 7100 Nano optical transport systems configured with an SPM-N or other 

processor module plus any 44 Channel Input Amplifier Modules other than the LIAM-E and 

LRAM-E, and any 88 channel version of the 44 Channel Input Amplifier Modules (collectively 

“the ‘737 Accused Products”). As a result, Defendants have infringed, literally and/or by 

equivalents, continue to infringe, and/or threaten infringement of one or more of the claims of 

the ‘737 Patent as defined by 35 U.S.C. § 271. Fujitsu has suffered damage by reason of 

Defendants’ infringement and will continue to suffer additional damage until this Court enjoins 

the infringing conduct. 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 8 of 13 PageID #:8
8 

29. Defendants are contributorily infringing, will induce, are inducing and have 

induced infringement of one or more claims of the ‘737 Patent by offering to sell and selling 

Tellabs® 7100 and 7100 Nano optical transport systems, which include but are not limited to the 

current and preceding versions of the ‘737 Accused Products, to customers, buyers, sellers, users 

and others who directly infringe the ‘737 Patent. Infringement of the asserted claims of the ‘737 

Patent can be found through operation of the ‘737 Accused Products, which are not staple articles 

or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use, in an ordinary and 

intended manner. Despite Defendants’ knowledge of the ’737 Patent, on information and belief, 

Defendants have continued and are continuing to sell and offer to sell the ‘737 Accused Products 

to third parties with the object of promoting their use to infringe, as shown by Defendants’ clear 

expression and other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement by their customers. For 

instance, on information and belief, Defendants provide formal and informal training sessions for 

customers, documents such as datasheets and product manuals, and any training, teaching or 

instruction. Such instructions have directly induced Defendants’ customers to operate the ‘737 

Accused Products in a manner that infringes the asserted claims of the ‘737 Patent. 

30. On information and belief, Defendants’ acts of infringement have been, and, if not 

ceased immediately, will be committed with full knowledge of Fujitsu’s rights under the ‘737 

Patent, and in willful and wanton disregard thereof, rendering this an exceptional case under 35 

U.S.C. § 285. 

31. Fujitsu believes that Defendants will continue to infringe the ‘737 Patent unless 

enjoined by this Court. Such infringing activity causes Fujitsu irreparable harm and will 

continue to cause such harm without the issuance of an injunction. 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 9 of 13 PageID #:9
9 

FOURTH CLAIM FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

(Infringement of U.S. Patent 5,386,418) 

32. The allegations of Paragraphs 1-10 above are incorporated for this Fourth Claim 

as though fully set forth herein. 

33. On January 31, 1995, United States Patent No. 5,386,418 (“the ‘418 Patent”) duly 

and legally issued to Fujitsu. This patent is titled “Method for Synchronizing Synchronous Data 

Communication Network and Communication Device Used in the Synchronous Data 

Communication Network.” A copy of the ‘418 Patent is attached hereto as “Exhibit D” and 

made a part hereof. 

34. Fujitsu is the owner of the ‘418 Patent and has the right to enforce the ‘418 Patent. 

35. On information and belief, Defendants manufacture, offer for sale, sell, use or 

induce the same, systems for synchronous data communications falling within the scope of one 

or more of the claims of the ‘418 Patent, including but not limited to all current and preceding 

versions of: Tellabs® 7100 optical transport systems configured with any of the following 

modules: SMTM-U, SSM-x, and/or SSM-d; and Tellabs® 7100 Nano optical transport systems 

configured with any of the following modules: SMTM-U, SSM-x, and/or SSM-d (collectively, 

“the ‘418 Accused Products”). As a result, Defendants have infringed, literally and/or by 

equivalents, continue to infringe, and/or threaten infringement of one or more of the claims of the 

‘418 Patent as defined by 35 U.S.C. § 271. Fujitsu has suffered damage by reason of 

Defendants’ infringement and will continue to suffer additional damage until this Court enjoins 

the infringing conduct. 

36. Defendants are contributorily infringing, will induce, are inducing and have 

induced infringement of one or more claims of the ‘418 Patent by offering to sell and selling 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 10 of 13 PageID #:10
10 

Tellabs® 7100 and Tellabs® 7100 Nano optical transport systems, which include but are not 

limited to the current and preceding versions of the ‘418 Accused Products, to customers, buyers, 

sellers, users and others who directly infringe the ‘418 Patent. Infringement of the asserted 

claims of the ‘418 Patent can be found through operation of the ‘418 Accused Products, which 

are not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use, in 

an ordinary and intended manner. Despite Defendants’ knowledge of the ’418 Patent, on 

information and belief, Defendants have continued and are continuing to sell and offer to sell the 

‘418 Accused Products to third parties with the object of promoting their use to infringe, as 

shown by Defendants’ clear expression and other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement 

by their customers. For instance, on information and belief, Defendants provide formal and 

informal training sessions for customers, documents such as datasheets and product manuals, and 

any training, teaching or instruction. Such instructions have directly induced Defendants’ 

customers to operate the ‘418 Accused Products in a manner that infringes the asserted claims of 

the ‘418 Patent. 

37. On information and belief, Defendants acts of infringement have been, and, if not 

ceased immediately, will be committed with full knowledge Fujitsu’s rights under the ‘418 

Patent, and in willful and wanton disregard thereof, rendering this an exceptional case under 35 

U.S.C. § 285. 

38. Fujitsu believes that Defendants will continue to infringe the ‘418 Patent unless 

enjoined by this Court. Such infringing activity causes Fujitsu irreparable harm and will 

continue to cause such harm without the issuance of an injunction. 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 11 of 13 PageID #:11
11 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

 Fujitsu requests that the Court find in its favor and against Defendants and that the Court 

grant the following relief: 

 a. Judgment that Defendants have infringed one or more claims of the ‘163 Patent, 

‘737 Patent, ‘681 Patent and ‘418 Patent, either directly, contributorily, and/or by inducement, 

either literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents; 

 b. Judgment in favor of Fujitsu for the full amount of its actual damages caused by 

Defendants’ infringing activities, which include lost profits and/or a reasonable royalty and an 

assessment of interests and costs, and trebling the same by reason of the willful, wanton, and 

deliberate nature of such infringement; 

 c. Judgment that infringement is willful; 

 d. Judgment that this is an “exceptional case” and awarding Fujitsu its reasonable 

attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285; 

 e. Judgment that Defendants be preliminarily and permanently enjoined from further 

activity or conduct that infringes the claims of the ‘163 Patent, ‘737 Patent, ‘681 Patent and ‘418 

Patent; and 

 f. Judgment that the Court award Fujitsu such other and further relief as is just and 

proper under the circumstances. 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 12 of 13 PageID #:12
12 

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 

In the above-captioned action, Fujitsu hereby demands a trial by jury as to all issues in this 

action triable by jury.

Respectfully submitted, 

Dated: April 30, 2012 /s/ David C. Van Dyke 

 David C. Van Dyke

David C. Van Dyke 

Howard & Howard LLP 

200 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 1100 

Chicago, IL 60604 

Telephone: (312) 456-3641 

Facsimile: (312) 939-5617 

Email: dvd@h2law.com 

Attorney for FUJITSU LIMITED 

Case: 1:12-cv-03229 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/12 Page 13 of 13 PageID #:13