1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

BE Labs, Inc.,

Plaintiff,

v.

SonicWall Inc., 

Defendant.

Case No. 1:20-cv-00115

Patent Case

Jury Trial Demanded

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Plaintiff BE Labs, Inc. ("BE Labs"), through its attorneys, complains of SonicWall Inc.

("SonicWall"), and alleges the following:

PARTIES

1. Plaintiff BE Labs, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of 

New York that maintains its principal place of business at 1285 Greenbriar Lane, North Belmore, 

NY 11710.

2. Defendant SonicWall Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the laws 

of Delaware that maintains an established place of business at Austin, TX.

JURISDICTION

3. This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the 

United States, Title 35 of the United States Code.

4. This Court has exclusive subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 

1338(a). 

Case 1:20-cv-00115-LY Document 1 Filed 02/01/20 Page 1 of 8
2

5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because it has engaged in 

systematic and continuous business activities in this District. As described below, Defendant has 

committed acts of patent infringement giving rise to this action within this District. 

VENUE

6. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) because Defendant has 

committed acts of patent infringement in this District, and has an established place of business in 

this District. In addition, BE Labs has suffered harm in this district.

PATENTS-IN-SUIT

7. BE Labs is the assignee of all right, title and interest in United States Patent Nos.

7,827,581 (the "'581 Patent"); 9,344,183 (the "'183 Patent"); (collectively the "Patents-in-Suit");

including all rights to enforce and prosecute actions for infringement and to collect damages for 

all relevant times against infringers of the Patents-in-Suit. Accordingly, BE Labs possesses the 

exclusive right and standing to prosecute the present action for infringement of the Patents-inSuit by Defendant.

The '581 Patent

8. The '581 Patent is entitled "Wireless multimedia system," and issued 11/2/2010. 

The application leading to the '581 Patent was filed on 2/28/2001, which ultimately claims 

priority from provisional application number 60/185,862, filed on 2/29/2000. A true and correct 

copy of the '581 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by reference.

9. The '581 Patent is valid and enforceable.

The '183 Patent

10. The '183 Patent is entitled "Wireless multimedia system," and issued 5/17/2016. 

The application leading to the '183 Patent was filed on 10/1/2010, which ultimately claims 

Case 1:20-cv-00115-LY Document 1 Filed 02/01/20 Page 2 of 8
3

priority from provisional application number 60/185,862, filed on 2/29/2000. A true and correct 

copy of the '183 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 2 and incorporated herein by reference.

11. The '183 Patent is valid and enforceable.

COUNT 1: INFRINGEMENT OF THE '581 PATENT

12. BE Labs incorporates the above paragraphs herein by reference. 

13. Direct Infringement. Defendant has been and continues to directly infringe one 

or more claims of the '581 Patent in at least this District by making, using, offering to sell, selling 

and/or importing, without limitation, at least the SonicWall products identified in the charts

incorporated into this Count below (among the "Exemplary SonicWall Products") that infringe at 

least the exemplary claims of the '581 Patent also identified in the charts incorporated into this 

Count below (the "Exemplary '581 Patent Claims") literally or by the doctrine of equivalents. On 

information and belief, numerous other devices that infringe the claims of the '581 Patent have 

been made, used, sold, imported, and offered for sale by Defendant and/or its customers.

14. Defendant also has and continues to directly infringe, literally or under the 

doctrine of equivalents, the Exemplary '581 Patent Claims, by having its employees internally 

test and use these Exemplary Products.

15. The service of this Complaint upon Defendant constitutes actual knowledge of 

infringement as alleged here.

16. Despite such actual knowledge, Defendant continues to make, use, test, sell, offer 

for sale, market, and/or import into the United States, products that infringe the '581 Patent. On 

information and belief, Defendant has also continued to sell the Exemplary SonicWall Products 

and distribute product literature and website materials inducing end users and others to use its 

products in the customary and intended manner that infringes the '581 Patent. Thus, on 

Case 1:20-cv-00115-LY Document 1 Filed 02/01/20 Page 3 of 8
4

information and belief, Defendant is contributing to and/or inducing the infringement of the '581

Patent.

17. Induced Infringement. Defendant actively, knowingly, and intentionally has 

been and continues to induce infringement of the '581 Patent, literally or by the doctrine of 

equivalents, by selling Exemplary SonicWall Products to their customers for use in end-user 

products in a manner that infringes one or more claims of the '581 Patent.

18. Contributory Infringement. Defendant actively, knowingly, and intentionally 

has been and continues materially contribute to their own customers' infringement of the '581

Patent, literally or by the doctrine of equivalents, by selling Exemplary SonicWall Products to 

their customers for use in end-user products in a manner that infringes one or more claims of the 

'581 Patent. Moreover, the Exemplary SonicWall Products are not a staple article of commerce 

suitable for substantial noninfringing use.

19. Exhibit 3 includes charts comparing the Exemplary '581 Patent Claims to the 

Exemplary SonicWall Products. As set forth in these charts, the Exemplary SonicWall Products 

practice the technology claimed by the '581 Patent. Accordingly, the Exemplary SonicWall

Products incorporated in these charts satisfy all elements of the Exemplary '581 Patent Claims. 

20. BE Labs therefore incorporates by reference in its allegations herein the claim 

charts of Exhibit 3.

21. BE Labs is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for Defendant's 

infringement.

COUNT 2: INFRINGEMENT OF THE '183 PATENT

22. BE Labs incorporates the above paragraphs herein by reference. 

Case 1:20-cv-00115-LY Document 1 Filed 02/01/20 Page 4 of 8
5

23. Direct Infringement. Defendant has been and continues to directly infringe one 

or more claims of the '183 Patent in at least this District by making, using, offering to sell, selling 

and/or importing, without limitation, at least the SonicWall products identified in the charts

incorporated into this Count below (among the "Exemplary SonicWall Products") that infringe at 

least the exemplary claims of the '183 Patent also identified in the charts incorporated into this 

Count below (the "Exemplary '183 Patent Claims") literally or by the doctrine of equivalents. On 

information and belief, numerous other devices that infringe the claims of the '183 Patent have 

been made, used, sold, imported, and offered for sale by Defendant and/or its customers.

24. Defendant also has and continues to directly infringe, literally or under the 

doctrine of equivalents, the Exemplary '183 Patent Claims, by having its employees internally 

test and use these Exemplary Products.

25. The service of this Complaint upon Defendant constitutes actual knowledge of 

infringement as alleged here.

26. Despite such actual knowledge, Defendant continues to make, use, test, sell, offer 

for sale, market, and/or import into the United States, products that infringe the '183 Patent. On 

information and belief, Defendant has also continued to sell the Exemplary SonicWall Products 

and distribute product literature and website materials inducing end users and others to use its 

products in the customary and intended manner that infringes the '183 Patent. Thus, on 

information and belief, Defendant is contributing to and/or inducing the infringement of the '183

Patent.

27. Induced Infringement. Defendant actively, knowingly, and intentionally has 

been and continues to induce infringement of the '183 Patent, literally or by the doctrine of 

Case 1:20-cv-00115-LY Document 1 Filed 02/01/20 Page 5 of 8
6

equivalents, by selling Exemplary SonicWall Products to their customers for use in end-user 

products in a manner that infringes one or more claims of the '183 Patent.

28. Contributory Infringement. Defendant actively, knowingly, and intentionally 

has been and continues materially contribute to their own customers' infringement of the '183

Patent, literally or by the doctrine of equivalents, by selling Exemplary SonicWall Products to 

their customers for use in end-user products in a manner that infringes one or more claims of the 

'183 Patent. Moreover, the Exemplary SonicWall Products are not a staple article of commerce 

suitable for substantial noninfringing use.

29. Exhibit 4 includes charts comparing the Exemplary '183 Patent Claims to the 

Exemplary SonicWall Products. As set forth in these charts, the Exemplary SonicWall Products 

practice the technology claimed by the '183 Patent. Accordingly, the Exemplary SonicWall

Products incorporated in these charts satisfy all elements of the Exemplary '183 Patent Claims. 

30. BE Labs therefore incorporates by reference in its allegations herein the claim 

charts of Exhibit 4.

31. BE Labs is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for Defendant's 

infringement.

JURY DEMAND

32. Under Rule 38(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, BE Labs respectfully 

requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, BE Labs respectfully requests the following relief:

A. A judgment that the '581 Patent is valid and enforceable;

B. A judgment that the '183 Patent is valid and enforceable;

Case 1:20-cv-00115-LY Document 1 Filed 02/01/20 Page 6 of 8
7

C. A judgment that Defendant has infringed, contributorily infringed, and/or induced 

infringement of one or more claims of the '581 Patent;

D. A judgment that Defendant has infringed, contributorily infringed, and/or induced 

infringement of one or more claims of the '183 Patent;

E. An accounting of all damages not presented at trial;

F. A judgment that awards BE Labs all appropriate damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284

for Defendant's past infringement, and any continuing or future infringement of the 

Patents-in-Suit, up until the date such judgment is entered, including pre- or postjudgment interest, costs, and disbursements as justified under 35 U.S.C. § 284 and, 

if necessary, to adequately compensate BE Labs for Defendant's infringement, an 

accounting:

i. that this case be declared exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285 

and that BE Labs be awarded its reasonable attorneys' fees against Defendant

that it incurs in prosecuting this action;

ii. that BE Labs be awarded costs, and expenses that it incurs in prosecuting this 

action; and

iii. that BE Labs be awarded such further relief at law or in equity as the Court 

deems just and proper.

Dated: February 1, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Isaac Rabicoff

Isaac Rabicoff

Rabicoff Law LLC

73 W Monroe St

Chicago, IL 60603

(773) 669-4590

Case 1:20-cv-00115-LY Document 1 Filed 02/01/20 Page 7 of 8
8

isaac@rabilaw.com

Counsel for Plaintiff

BE Labs, Inc.

Case 1:20-cv-00115-LY Document 1 Filed 02/01/20 Page 8 of 8