THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SYMBOLOGY INNOVATIONS, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEXCOM, INC.,

Defendants. 

 CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-cv-473

 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

PLAINTIFF’S ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIMS

Symbology Innovations, LLC (“Plaintiff” and “Counter-Defendant”) hereby files this

Answer to the Counterclaims filed by Defendant DexCom, Inc. (“Defendant”) at Dkt. No. 6, 

and would respond as follows:

THE PARTIES

1. Plaintiff lacks sufficient information to admit or deny this allegation.

2. Plaintiff admits this allegation.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3. Plaintiff incorporates its responses above.

4. Plaintiff admits that Defendant is asserting a declaration of non-infringement and 

invalidity.

5. Plaintiff does not contest personal jurisdiction.

6. Plaintiff does not contest venue is proper in this action. 

Case 2:23-cv-00473-JRG Document 7 Filed 11/02/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 156
COUNT I

DECLARATION OF [ALLEGED] NON-INFRINGEMENT 

7. Plaintiff incorporates its responses above.

8. Plaintiff admits there is a controversy concerning infringement, otherwise denies.

9. Plaintiff denies this allegation and demands strict proof thereof. Plaintiff further 

denies that Defendant is entitled to any relief whatsoever. 

10. Plaintiff denies this allegation and demands strict proof thereof. Plaintiff further 

denies that Defendant is entitled to any relief whatsoever.

COUNT II

DECLARATION OF [ALLEGED] INVALIDITY

11. Plaintiff incorporates its responses above.

12. Plaintiff admits there is a controversy concerning validity, otherwise denies.

13. Plaintiff denies this allegation and demands strict proof thereof. 

14. Plaintiff denies this allegation and demands strict proof thereof. It further denies that 

Defendant is entitled to any relief whatsoever.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Plaintiff denies all allegations in Defendant’s Prayer for Relief, and further denies

Defendant is entitled to any relief whatsoever.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

1. Failure to State a Claim. The Counterclaims, and each count therein, fail to state a

claim uponwhich relief may be granted.

Case 2:23-cv-00473-JRG Document 7 Filed 11/02/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 157
2. Unjust Enrichment. Defendant improperly enriched itself and should not benefit for its

improperand illegal acts.

3. Validity. Plaintiff affirmatively pleads that all Asserted Patents are valid.

4. Infringement. Plaintiff affirmatively pleads that Defendant has infringed, including

directly (whether individually or jointly) or indirectly (whether contributorily or by 

inducement),all valid, enforceable claims of the Asserted Patents.

5. Lack of Standing. Defendant does not have any right or standing to assert the claims at

issue.

6. Legal Doctrine. Defendant’s Counterclaim against Plaintiff are barred by one or more 

of the equitable doctrines of laches, estoppel, acquiescence, waiver, and unclean hands.

7. Reservation. Plaintiff reserves the right to assert additional affirmative defenses as 

they become known through additional investigation and/or discovery during the

course of this litigation.

Dated: November 2, 2023 Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ Randall Garteiser

Christopher A. Honea

 Texas Bar No. 24059967

 chonea@ghiplaw.com

Randall Garteiser

 Texas Bar No. 24038912 

 rgarteiser@ghiplaw.com

M. Scott Fuller

 Texas Bar No. 24036607

 rgarteiser@ghiplaw.com

GARTEISER HONEA, PLLC

119 W. Ferguson Street

Tyler, Texas 75702

Telephone: (903) 705-7420

Facsimile: (903) 405-3999

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF

Case 2:23-cv-00473-JRG Document 7 Filed 11/02/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 158