IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

SAVEITSAFE, LLC, 

Plaintiff,

v.

ULTRA ELECTRONICS HOLDINGS PLC,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-00295

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

Plaintiff SaveItSafe, LLC (“Plaintiff” or “SaveItSafe”), by and through its attorneys, for its 

Original Complaint against Ultra Electronics Holdings plc (“Defendant” or “Ultra”), and

demanding trial by jury, hereby alleges as follows:

I. NATURE OF THE ACTION

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

States, 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, et seq., to enjoin and obtain damages resulting from Defendant’s

unauthorized use, sale, and offer to sell in the United States of products, methods, processes, 

services and/or systems that infringe SaveItSafe’s United States patent, as described herein.

Ultra manufactures, provides, uses, sells, offers for sale, imports, and/or distributes

infringing products and services; and encourages others to use its products and services in an 

infringing manner, including their customers, as set forth herein.

SaveItSafe seeks past and future damages and prejudgment and post-judgment 

interest for Ultra’s past infringement of the Patent-in-Suit, as defined below.

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 1 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-2-

II. PARTIES

Plaintiff SaveItSafe is a limited liability company organized and existing under the 

laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business located at 1312 Sunset Court, 

Tool, Texas, 75143. SaveItSafe’s registered agent for service of process in Texas is Corporation 

Service Company, 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701.

SaveItSafe is the result of a corporate spin off from No Magic, Inc. (“No Magic”). 

No Magic was established in 1996 by the current CEO of SaveItSafe (who was also the CEO of 

No Magic) and his brother, the inventor of the Patent-in-Suit. No Magic primarily focused on 

software development. It garnered substantial success, generating over 10,000 customer 

companies, including those in the energy, automotive, financial, logistics, telecommunications and 

space exploration (NASA) industries. No Magic’s commercial success led to its eventual 

acquisition by a world leader in engineering software, Dassault Systèmes SE (“Dassault”). 

However, the rights to the Patent-in-Suit were not sold to Dassault as part of its acquisition of No 

Magic, but were instead transferred to SaveItSafe so that SaveItSafe’s CEO and the inventor of 

the Patent-in-Suit could maintain ownership and control.

On information and belief, Defendant Ultra is a public limited company organized 

under the laws of the United Kingdom with a registered office at 35 Portman Square, London W1H 

6LR, United Kingdom. Ultra also maintains offices in this District at 707 Jeffrey Way, Round 

Rock, Texas 78665 and 4101 Smith School Road, Building IV, Suite 100, Austin, Texas 78744.

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the United 

States, in particular 35 U.S.C. §271, 281, 283, 284, and 285. This Court has jurisdiction over the 

subject matter of this action under 28 U.S.C. §1331 and 1338(a).

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 2 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-3-

Upon information and belief, Defendant transacts substantial business in the State 

of Texas and the Western District of Texas. Defendant, directly and through subsidiaries or 

intermediaries (including distributors, retailers, resellers and others), has purposefully and 

voluntarily placed one or more of their infringing products, as described below, into the stream of 

commerce with the expectation that these infringing products will be purchased and used by 

customers in the District. Defendant has committed acts of patent infringement within the District. 

Defendant has also placed downstream products containing infringing components

into the stream of commerce by shipping infringing products into Texas, knowing that they would 

be shipped into Texas, and/or knowing that these infringing products would be incorporated into 

other products that would be shipped into Texas. 

On information and belief, Defendant interacts with distributors and customers who 

sell the infringing products into Texas, knowing that these customers will sell the infringing 

products into Texas, either directly or through intermediaries. 

This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because it has committed acts 

giving rise to this action within Texas and within this District. The Court’s exercise of jurisdiction 

over Defendant would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice because 

Defendant has established minimum contacts with the forum with respect to both general and 

specific jurisdiction. 

Venue is further proper as to Defendant Ultra, which is organized under the laws 

of the United Kingdom, in light of 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(3) which provides that “a defendant not 

resident in the United States may be sued in any judicial district, and the joinder of such a defendant 

shall be disregarded in determining where the action may be brought with respect to other 

defendants.”

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 3 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-4-

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

PATENT-IN-SUIT

SaveItSafe is the owner of all right, title and interest in and to U.S. Patent No. 

8,929,552 (the “’552 Patent”), entitled “Electronic Information and Cryptographic Key 

Management System” issued on January 6, 2015. The ’552 Patent discloses improved systems and 

methods for securing electronic information. The information that is to be secured is associated 

with a cryptographic key and that key is then also secured by encrypting it, saving it, restricting 

access to it, or by other means. A key management system may be tasked with securing the key 

and confirming that the key is indeed secured. The claimed invention of the ‘552 Patent was 

intended to address problems with conventional methods of securing electronic information: 

conventional systems and methods failed to secure all of the components of a cryptosystem and 

did not adequately address securement of cryptographic keys. ’552 Patent, 5:1-7:3. The ’552 Patent 

addressed these shortcomings, in one respect, by enabling a function of the system only after it has 

first confirmed, via a second functionality that is independent of the functionality that secured the 

key, that the relevant cryptographic key has been secured. Id. at 7:19-23. Examples of the functions 

that can be enabled in response to the confirmation of the securement of the key include enabling 

the encryption of electronic information, decryption of electronic information, transfer of 

electronic information, saving of electronic information, reading of electronic information, 

rewriting electronic information, creating electronic information, and manipulating electronic 

information. Additionally, the ’552 Patent discloses enhanced security measures such as using 

secure socket layer for transferring keys or information and requiring simultaneous access requests 

from multiple administrators in order to allow access to secure electronic information. 

SaveItSafe is the assignee of the ’552 Patent and has all rights to sue for 

infringement and collect past and future damages for the infringement thereof.

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 4 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-5-

DEFENDANT’S ACTS

Ultra is a global provider of secure communication and encryption products and 

solutions. Specifically, Ultra provides hardware, software, and services that secure electronic 

information via hardware security modules (“HSMs”) and cryptographic operations to its 

customers in the United States, including in this District. For example, Ultra’s Keyper HSM, 

Keyper Plus HSM, and CryptoSec Banking HSM, provide transaction security, key storage, and 

key security. “An Ultra innovation, the KeyperPlus HSM provides the ultimate level of protection 

for the most sensitive data and information systems. At the heart of KeyperPlus is Ultra’s 

revolutionary ACCE technology; the flexible crypto platform providing the highest level of 

assurance – FIPS 140-2, Level 4.” https://www.ultra-cis.com/capabilities/militarycommunication-systems/cryptographic-key-management. Likewise, Ultra describes the Cryptosec 

HSM as “specially designed for the banking and finance industry, providing the power needed to 

tackle multiple currencies and high transaction rates, whilst maintaining processing speed.” 

https://www.ultra-cis.com/capabilities/military-communication-systems/cryptographic-keymanagement. 

Generally, Ultra’s HSMs associate a cryptographic key with secured information. 

This cryptographic key is further secured by encryption or other technical means. Once the 

securement of the cryptographic key is confirmed, the HSMs may enable subsequent cryptographic 

or data processing functions based on that confirmation. For example, the relevant high-level 

functions of Ultra’s Keyper and CryptoSec HSM are illustrated in the images below:

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 5 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-6-

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 6 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-7-

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 7 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-8-

Keyper Plus HSM Datasheet, available at: https://www.ultra-cis.com/uploads/keyper

%20hsm%20v2_1.pdf.

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 8 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-9-

FIPS 140-2 Non-Proprietary Security Policy, Advanced Configurable Cryptographic 

Environment, available at: https://csrc.nist.gov/CSRC/media/projects/cryptographic-modulevalidation-program/documents/security-policies/140sp2793.pdf. 

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 9 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-10-

Cryptosec Banking HSM Datasheet, available at: https://www.ultracis.com/uploads/realsec%20cryptosec%20banking%20v1_6%20(1).pdf

Ultra instructs its customers regarding the implementation and operation of the 

accused instrumentalities, including at https://www.ultra-cis.com/capabilities/militarycommunication-systems/cryptographic-key-management and through documentation provided to 

and made available by the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s Computer Security 

Resource Center at https://csrc.nist.gov/. 

On information of belief, Defendant Ultra also implements contractual protections 

in the form of license and use restrictions with its customers to preclude the unauthorized 

reproduction, distribution and modification of its software.

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 10 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-11-

Moreover, on information and belief, Defendant Ultra implements technical 

precautions to attempt to thwart customers who would circumvent the intended operation of Ultra’s

products.

Ultra had knowledge of the ’552 Patent and its infringing conduct as early as the 

date when SaveItSafe effected service of its Original Complaint. 

V. COUNTS OF PATENT INFRINGEMENT

COUNT ONE

INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,929,552

SaveItSafe incorporates by reference its allegations in the preceding paragraphs as

if fully restated in this paragraph.

SaveItSafe is the assignee and owner of all right, title and interest to the ’552 Patent. 

SaveItSafe has the legal right to enforce the patent, sue for infringement, and seek equitable relief 

and damages.

On information and belief, Defendant Ultra, without authorization or license from

SaveItSafe, has been and is presently directly infringing at least claim 4 of the ’552 Patent, as 

infringement is defined by 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), including through making, using (including for 

testing purposes), selling and offering for sale methods and articles infringing one or more claims 

of the ’552 Patent. Defendant Ultra is thus liable for direct infringement of the ’552 Patent pursuant 

to 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).

Exemplary infringing products include Ultra’s Keyper HSM, Keyper Plus, HSM, 

and Cryptosec Banking HSM which support securing electronic information and a cryptographic 

key by using one function to secure the key, a second function to confirm the securing, enabling a 

function in response to that confirmation, and restricting access to electronic information to 

situations where the system receives substantially simultaneous access requests.

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 11 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-12-

On information and belief, Defendant Ultra, without authorization or license from

SaveItSafe, has been and is presently indirectly infringing at least claim 4 of the ’552 Patent, 

including actively inducing infringement of the ’552 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Such

inducements include without limitation, with specific intent to encourage the infringement, 

knowingly inducing consumers to use infringing articles and methods that Ultra knows or should 

know infringe one or more claims of the ’552 Patent. Ultra instructs its customers to make and use 

the patented inventions of the ’552 Patent by operating Ultra’s products in accordance with Ultra’s 

specifications. Ultra specifically intends its customers to infringe by implementing its hardware 

security modules to secure electronic information and a cryptographic key by using one function 

to secure the key, a second function to confirm the securing, enabling a function in response to 

that confirmation, and restricting access to electronic information to situations where the system 

receives substantially simultaneous access requests, as set forth above.

On information and belief, Defendant Ultra, without authorization or license from

SaveItSafe, has been and is presently indirectly infringing at least claim 4 of the ’552 Patent, 

including contributory infringement of the ’552 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) and/or § 271(f), 

either literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, by selling, offering for sale, and/or 

importing into the United States, the infringing products. Ultra knows that the infringing products 

(i) constitute a material part of the inventions claimed in the ’552 Patent; (ii) are especially made 

or adapted to infringe the ’552 Patent; (iii) are not staple articles or commodities of commerce 

suitable for non-infringing use; and (iv) are components used for or in its hardware security 

modules to secure electronic information and a cryptographic key with a first and second function 

and restrict access to electronic information in an infringing manner. 

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 12 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-13-

As a result of Ultra’s infringement of the ’552 Patent, SaveItSafe has suffered 

monetary damages, and is entitled to an award of damages adequate to compensate it for such

infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 284, but in no event, less than a reasonable royalty.

VI. JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff SaveItSafe demands a trial by jury of all matters to which it is entitled to 

trial by jury, pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 38.

VII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, SaveItSafe prays for judgment and seeks relief against Defendant as 

follows:

A. That the Court determine that one or more claims of the Patent-in-Suit is infringed 

by Defendant Ultra, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents;

B. That the Court award damages adequate to compensate SaveItSafe for the patent 

infringement that has occurred, together with prejudgment and post-judgment 

interest and costs, and an ongoing royalty for continued infringement; 

C. That the Court award enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §284; and

D. That the Court award such other relief to SaveItSafe as the Court deems just and 

proper.

DATED: April 16, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Andrew G. DiNovo

Andrew G. DiNovo

Texas State Bar No. 00790594

adinovo@dinovoprice.com 

Daniel L. Schmid

Texas State Bar No. 24093118

dschmid@dinovoprice.com

DINOVO PRICE LLP

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 13 of 14
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

-14-

7000 N. MoPac Expressway, Suite 350

Austin, Texas 78731

Telephone: (512) 539-2626

Telecopier: (512) 539-2627

Counsel for Plaintiff SaveItSafe, LLC

Case 6:20-cv-00295 Document 1 Filed 04/16/20 Page 14 of 14