1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

ZT IP, LLC, )

Plaintiff, )

) Civil Action No. 3:22-cv-00970

v. )

)

VMWARE, INC., )

Defendant. )

) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

)

PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT 

Plaintiff ZT IP, LLC. (“ZT”) files this Original Complaint and demand for jury trial seeking 

relief from patent infringement of the claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,647,583 (“the ‘583 patent”)

(referred to as the “Patent-in-Suit”) by VMware, Inc. (“Defendant” or “VMware”).

I. THE PARTIES

1. ZT IP, LLC is a Texas limited liability corporation with its principal place of business 

located in Austin, Texas.

2. On information and belief, VMware, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the 

laws of Delaware having a regular and established place of business located at 1503 LBJ Parkway 

Suite 700 Farmers Branch, Texas 75234, and authorized to do business in Texas. Defendant can 

be served through its registered agent, Corporation Service Company d/b/a CSC-Lawyers 

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

its place of business, or anywhere ese it may be found.

Case 3:22-cv-00970-X Document 1 Filed 05/02/22 Page 1 of 6 PageID 1
2

3. On information and belief, Defendant sells and offers to sell products and services 

throughout Texas, including in this judicial district, introduces products and services that perform 

infringing methods or processes into the stream of commerce knowing that they would be sold in 

Texas and this judicial district, and otherwise directs infringing activities to this judicial district in 

connection with its products and services.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This Court has original subject-matter jurisdiction over the entire action pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) because Plaintiff’s claim arises under an Act of Congress relating to 

patents, namely, 35 U.S.C. § 271.

5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because: (i) Defendant is present 

within or has minimum contacts within the State of Texas and this judicial district; (ii) Defendant 

has purposefully availed itself of the privileges of conducting business in the State of Texas and 

in this judicial district; and (iii) Plaintiff’s cause of action arises directly from Defendant’s business 

contacts and other activities in the State of Texas and in this judicial district. 

6. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and 1400(b). Defendant has

committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business in this District. 

Further, venue is proper because Defendant conducts substantial business in this forum, directly 

or through intermediaries, including: (i) at least a portion of the infringements alleged herein; and 

(ii) regularly doing or soliciting business, engaging in other persistent courses of conduct and/or 

deriving substantial revenue from goods and services provided to individuals in Texas and this 

District. 

III. INFRINGEMENT 

Case 3:22-cv-00970-X Document 1 Filed 05/02/22 Page 2 of 6 PageID 2
3

A. Infringement of the ‘583 Patent

7. On January 12, 2010, U.S. Patent No. 7,647,583 (“the ‘583”, included as an attachment) 

entitled “Method and Apparatus For Emulating A Hardware/Software System Using A Computer” 

was duly and legally issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Plaintiff owns the ‘583

patent by assignment.

8. The ‘583 patent relates to novel and improved systems, methods, and apparatuses for 

facilitating a platform for running embedded software in real time. 

9. Defendant maintains, operates, and administers systems, products, and services that 

facilitate developing real time operating system that infringes one or more of claims 1-12 of the 

‘583 patent, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. Defendant put the inventions claimed by 

the ‘583 patent into service (i.e., used them); but for Defendant’s actions, the claimed-inventions 

embodiments involving Defendant’s products and services would never have been put into service. 

Defendant’s acts complained of herein caused those claimed-invention embodiments as a whole 

to perform, and Defendant’s procurement of monetary and commercial benefit from it.

10. Support for the allegations of infringement may be found in the following exemplary table 

included as Exhibit A. These allegations of infringement are preliminary and are therefore subject 

to change. 

11. Defendant has and continues to induce infringement. Defendant has actively encouraged 

or instructed others (e.g., its customers and/or the customers of its related companies), and 

continues to do so, on how to use its systems, products and services (e.g., facilitating the platform 

for running embedded software in real time) such as to cause infringement of one or more of claims

1-12 of the ‘583 patent, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. Moreover, Defendant has

Case 3:22-cv-00970-X Document 1 Filed 05/02/22 Page 3 of 6 PageID 3
4

known of the ‘583 patent and the technology underlying it from at least the filing date of the 

lawsuit.1 For clarity, direct infringement is previously alleged in this complaint. 

12. Defendant has and continues to contributorily infringe. Defendant has actively encouraged 

or instructed others (e.g., its customers and/or the customers of its related companies), and continue 

to do so, on how to use its products and services (e.g., facilitating the platform for running 

embedded software in real time) and related services such as to cause infringement of one or more 

of claims 1-12 of the ‘583 patent, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. Further, there are 

no substantial noninfringing uses for Defendant’s products and services. Moreover, Defendant 

has known of the ‘583 patent and the technology underlying it from at least the filing date of the 

lawsuit. 2 For clarity, direct infringement is previously alleged in this complaint. 

13. Defendant has caused and will continue to cause Plaintiff damage by direct and indirect 

infringement of (including inducing infringement of) the claims of the ‘583 patent.

IV. JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff hereby requests a trial by jury on issues so triable by right.

V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief as follows:

a. enter judgment that Defendant has infringed the claims of the ‘583 patent;

b. award Plaintiff damages in an amount sufficient to compensate it for Defendant’s

infringement, in an amount no less than a reasonable royalty or lost profits, together with 

pre-judgment and post-judgment interest and costs under 35 U.S.C. § 284;

1 Plaintiff reserves the right to amend if discovery reveals an earlier date of knowledge.

2 Plaintiff reserves the right to amend if discovery reveals an earlier date of knowledge.

Case 3:22-cv-00970-X Document 1 Filed 05/02/22 Page 4 of 6 PageID 4
5

c. award Plaintiff an accounting for acts of infringement not presented at trial and an award 

by the Court of additional damage for any such acts of infringement;

d. declare this case to be “exceptional” under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and award Plaintiff its 

attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs incurred in this action;

e. declare Defendant’s infringement to be willful and treble the damages, including attorneys’ 

fees, expenses, and costs incurred in this action and an increase in the damage award

pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;

f. a decree addressing future infringement that either (i) awards a permanent injunction 

enjoining Defendant and its agents, servants, employees, affiliates, divisions, and 

subsidiaries, and those in association with Defendant from infringing the claims of the 

Patents-in-Suit, or (ii) awards damages for future infringement in lieu of an injunction in 

an amount consistent with the fact that for future infringement the Defendants will be an 

adjudicated infringer of a valid patent, and trebles that amount in view of the fact that the 

future infringement will be willful as a matter of law; and,

g. award Plaintiff such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. 

DATED: May 2, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

Ramey LLP

William P. Ramey, III

Texas State Bar No. 24027643

5020 Montrose Blvd., Suite 800

Houston, Texas 77006

Case 3:22-cv-00970-X Document 1 Filed 05/02/22 Page 5 of 6 PageID 5
6

(713) 426-3923 (telephone)

(832) 900-4941 (fax)

wramey@rameyfirm.com

Attorneys for ZT IP, LLC.

Case 3:22-cv-00970-X Document 1 Filed 05/02/22 Page 6 of 6 PageID 6