IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

FLEET CONNECT SOLUTIONS LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

LKQ CORPORATION,

Defendant.

Civil Action No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Plaintiff Fleet Connect Solutions LLC (“FCS” or “Plaintiff”) files this First Amended 

Complaint against LKQ Corporation (“LKQ” or “Defendant”) alleging, based on its own 

knowledge as to itself and its own actions, and based on information and belief as to all other 

matters, as follows:

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This is a patent infringement action to stop Defendant’s infringement of the following 

United States Patents (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”) issued by the United States Patent and 

Trademark Office (“USPTO”), which are available at the links below, respectively:

U.S. Patent 

No.

Title Available at

A. 6,429,810 Integrated Air 

Logistics System

USPTO.GOV,

https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/0977

4547, https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearchpublic/print/downloadPdf/6429810

B. 6,549,583 Optimum Phase Error 

Metric For OFDM 

Pilot Tone Tracking 

In Wireless LAN

USPTO.GOV,

https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/0979

0429, https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearchpublic/print/downloadPdf/6549583

C. 7,742,388 Packet Generation 

Systems and Methods

USPTO.GOV,

https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/1118

5665, https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearchpublic/print/downloadPdf/7742388

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 1 of 28 PageID #: 150
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 2

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

U.S. Patent 

No.

Title Available at

D. 6,647,270 Vehicle Talk USPTO.GOV,

https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/0965

9074, https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearchpublic/print/downloadPdf/6647270

E. 7,747,291 Wireless 

Communication 

Method

USPTO.GOV,

https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/1254

6650, https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearchpublic/print/downloadPdf/7747291

F. 8,494,581 System And Methods 

For Management Of 

Mobile Field Assets 

Via Wireless 

Handheld Devices

USPTO.GOV,

https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/1254

7363, https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearchpublic/print/downloadPdf/8494581

2. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief and monetary damages.

PARTIES

3. Plaintiff is a limited liability company formed under the laws of Texas with its 

registered office address located in Austin, Texas.

4. Defendant is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Delaware with its 

principal place of business located at 500 West Madison Street, Suite 2800, Chicago, Illinois 

60661.

5. Defendant’s registered agent for service is Corporate Creations Network, Inc., 1521 

Concord Pike, Suite 201, New Castle, Delaware 19803.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

6. FCS repeats and re-alleges the allegations in Paragraphs 1-5 as though fully set forth 

in their entirety.

7. This is an action for infringement of a United States patent arising under 35 U.S.C. §§ 

271, 281, and 284–85, among others. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction of the action under 

28 U.S.C. § 1331 and § 1338(a).

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 2 of 28 PageID #: 151
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 3

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

8. Venue is proper against Defendant in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) and 

1391(c) because it has maintained established and regular places of business in this District and 

has committed acts of patent infringement in the District from those regular and established places 

of business. See In re: Cray Inc., 871 F.3d 1355, 1362-1363 (Fed. Cir. 2017). See Figures 1-3 

below. Defendant offers products and services, including through the use of Accused Products, 

and conducts business in this District. For example, and as depicted below, Defendant promotes, 

advertises, and provides its services within this District using the Accused Products.

Figure 1

(source: LKQ CORP, https://www.lkqcorp.com/blog/location/lkq-auto-parts-of-east-texaswhitehouse/)

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 3 of 28 PageID #: 152
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 4

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Figure 2

(source: GOOGLE MAPS, https://www.google.com/maps)

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 4 of 28 PageID #: 153
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 5

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Figure 3

(source: GOOGLE MAPS, https://www.google.com/maps)

9. Defendant is subject to this Court’s specific and general personal jurisdiction under 

due process due at least to Defendant’s substantial business in this judicial district, including: (i) 

at least a portion of the infringements alleged herein; (ii) regularly transacting, doing, and/or 

soliciting business, engaging in other persistent courses of conduct, or deriving substantial revenue 

from goods and services provided to individuals in Texas and in this District; (iii) having an interest 

in, using or possessing real property in Texas and this District; (iv) and having and keeping 

personal property in Texas and in this District.

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 5 of 28 PageID #: 154
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 6

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

10. Specifically, Defendant intends to do and does business in, has committed acts of 

infringement in, and continues to commit acts of infringement in this District directly, through 

intermediaries, by contributing to and through its inducement of third parties, and offers its

products or services, including those accused of infringement here, to customers and potential 

customers located in this District.

11. Defendant maintains regular and established places of business in this District at 

13681 Sydney Road, Whitehouse, Texas 75791.

12. In addition, to conduct this business, Defendant employs a number of individuals 

within this District. These individuals’ employment with Defendant is conditioned upon and 

based on their residence and continued residence within the District to further the specific 

infringing business activities of Defendant within the District. 

13. Defendant also leases, owns, stores, services, and/or operates real and personal 

property including, but not limited to, vehicles and other equipment, and provides and funds office 

space and equipment, vehicles, and other equipment to its employees, exclusive and non-exclusive 

contractors, agents, and affiliates, within this District for the specific purposes of offering, provide, 

and/or support its infringing products and services within this District.

14. Defendant’s business specifically depends on employees, exclusive and nonexclusive contractors, agents, and affiliates, etc., being physically present at places in the District, 

and Defendant affirmatively acted to make permanent operations within this District to service its 

customers. See In re Cray Inc., 871 F.3d 1355, 1365–66 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (citing In re Cordis

Corp., 769 F.2d 733, 736 (Fed. Cir. 1985)). Defendant employs and contracts with those 

employees, exclusive and non-exclusive contractors, agents, and affiliates, etc., with the specific 

requirement that those individuals and entities maintain a presence in the District to service 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 6 of 28 PageID #: 155
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 7

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

customers within the District. At least through these employees, Defendant does its business in 

this District through a permanent and continuous presence. See In re Cordis Corp., 769 F.2d 733, 

737(Fed. Cir. 1985).

15. Defendant commits acts of infringement from its places of business in this District, 

including, but not limited to, use of the Accused Products and inducement of third parties to use 

the Accused Products.

THE ACCUSED PRODUCTS

16. FCS repeats and re-alleges the allegations in the Paragraphs above as though fully set 

forth in their entirety.

17. Defendant uses, causes to be used, provides, supplies, or distributes one or more fleet 

management and tracking solutions, including, but not limited to, Donlen’s DriverPoint® 

Telematics, including the FleetWeb® fleet management platform, FleetWeb Dashboard, the 

DonlenDriver app, FleetWeb® Mobile app, AssetCheck, Advanced Diagnostics, and electronic 

logging devices, and Wheels’ Vehicle Telematics, including the Wheels Mobile Assistant, 

FleetView Dashboard, FleetView Mobile app, Wheels Mobile app, DriverView, and electronic 

logging devices, FleetWeb, and associated hardware, software, and functionality, and/or Geotab 

telematics devices or “Geotab GO Devices” (any and current, predecessor, and successor models, 

names, or releases) with MyGeotab Portal, Enterprise Fleet Management Portal, EV Suitability 

Assessment (EVSA) instrumentalities, Software Development Kits (“SDKs”), Fleet Planning 

Toolkits, eFleets client portal, and eFleets Mobile app (collectively, the “Accused Products”). See

Figures 4 and 5 below.

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 7 of 28 PageID #: 156
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 8

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Figure 4

(source: Yogi Shivdasani, VP, NA Supply Chain, LKQ Corporation, Client Testimonials, 

DONLEN, https://www.donlen.com (last visited Nov. 29, 2023))

Figure 5

(source: FLEET FINANCIALS, https://www.fleetfinancials.com/157524/2017-fleet-executive-ofthe-year-award-nominees (last updated July 7, 2017) (last visited Nov. 29, 2023))

18. On information and belief, Defendant, using the Accused Products, performs wireless 

communications and methods associated with performing and/or implementing wireless 

communications including, but not limited to, wireless communications and methods pursuant to 

various protocols and implementations, including, but not limited to, Bluetooth, IEEE 802.11, and 

LTE protocols and various subsections thereof, including, but not limited to, 802.11ac, 802.11b, 

and 802.11n.

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 8 of 28 PageID #: 157
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 9

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

19. On information and belief, Defendant, using the Accused Products, performs singular 

value decomposition of estimated channel matrices, transmit data over various media, compute 

time slot channels, generate packets for network transmissions, perform or cause to be performed 

error estimation in orthogonal frequency division multiplexed (“OFDM”) receivers, and various 

methods of processing OFDM sybmols.

20. Defendant, using the Accused Products, also tracks, analyzes, and reports vehicle 

maintenance needs and driver warnings associated with a vehicle, tracks or causes to be tracked 

vehicle locations, and allows for communication between a system administrator and a remote unit

to communicate, e.g., advisory notifications.

21. For these reasons and the additional reasons detailed below, the Accused Products

practice at least one claim of each of the Asserted Patents.

COUNT I: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,429,810

22. FCS repeats and re-alleges the allegations in the Paragraphs above as though fully set 

forth in their entirety.

23. FCS owns all substantial rights, interest, and title in and to U.S. Patent No. 6,429,810 

(the “’810 patent”), including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce the 

’810 patent against infringers and to collect damages for all relevant times.

24. The USPTO duly issued the ’810 patent on August 6, 2002, after full and fair 

examination of Application No. 09/774,547 which was filed January 31, 2001. See ’810 patent at 

1.

25. The claims of the ’810 patent are not directed to an abstract idea and are not limited to 

well-understood, routine, or conventional activity. Rather, the claimed inventions include 

inventive components that improve upon the function and operation of logistics and tracking 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 9 of 28 PageID #: 158
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 10

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

systems.

26. The written description of the ’810 patent describes in technical detail each limitation 

of the claims, allowing a skilled artisan to understand the scope of the claims and how the nonconventional and non-generic combination of claim limitations is patently distinct from and 

improved upon what may have been considered conventional or generic in the art at the time of 

the invention.

27. FCS or its predecessors-in-interest have satisfied all statutory obligations required to 

collect pre-filing damages for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’810 patent.

28. Defendant has directly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, 

at least claim 1 of the ’810 patent. For example, Defendant performs a method of providing 

container status information to a user. The method includes attaching an electronic 

communications unit to a shipping container; generating a transaction identification code, wherein 

said transaction identification code is specific to said shipping container and specific to at least 

one user transaction; initiating a status inquiry utilizing said transaction identification code, 

wherein said user performs said initiating step; receiving said status inquiry by a ground 

communications system; transmitting said status inquiry to said electronic communications unit 

by said ground communications system; obtaining a status information response by said electronic 

communications unit; transmitting said status information response to said ground 

communications system by said electronic communications unit; and forwarding said status 

information response to said user by said ground communications system.

29. More specifically, Defendant has infringed the claims of the ‘810 patent as detailed in 

Attachment A to the Preliminary Infringement Contentions served on Defendant on March 11, 

2024, which are incorporated by reference.

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 10 of 28 PageID #: 159
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 11

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

30. FCS has been damaged as a result of the infringing conduct by Defendant alleged 

above. Thus, Defendant is liable to FCS in an amount that compensates it for such infringements, 

which by law cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by 

this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.

COUNT II: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,549,583

31. FCS repeats and re-alleges the allegations in the Paragraphs above as though fully set 

forth in their entirety.

32. FCS owns all substantial rights, interest, and title in and to U.S. Patent No. 6,549,583

(the “’583 patent”), including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce the 

’583 patent against infringers and to collect damages for all relevant times.

33. The USPTO duly issued the ’583 patent on April 15, 2003, after full and fair 

examination of Application No. 09/790,429 which was filed February 21, 2001. See ’583 patent 

at 1.

34. The claims of the ’583 patent are not directed to an abstract idea and are not limited to 

well-understood, routine, or conventional activity. Rather, the claimed inventions include 

inventive components that improve upon the function and operation of preexisting error estimation 

methods.

35. The written description of the ’583 patent describes in technical detail each limitation 

of the claims, allowing a skilled artisan to understand the scope of the claims and how the nonconventional and non-generic combination of claim limitations is patently distinct from and 

improved upon what may have been considered conventional or generic in the art at the time of 

the invention.

36. FCS or its predecessors-in-interest have satisfied all statutory obligations required to 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 11 of 28 PageID #: 160
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 12

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

collect pre-filing damages for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’583 patent.

37. Defendant has directly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, 

at least claim 1 of the ’583 patent. For example, Defendant, using the Accused Products, performs 

a method of pilot phase error estimation in an orthogonal frequency division multiplexed (OFDM) 

receiver. The method includes determining pilot reference points corresponding to a plurality of 

pilots of an OFDM preamble waveform; and estimating an aggregate phase error of a subsequent 

OFDM data symbol relative to the pilot reference points using complex signal measurements 

corresponding to each of the plurality of pilots of the subsequent OFDM data symbol and the pilot 

reference points; wherein the estimating step comprises performing a maximum likelihood-based 

estimation using the complex signal measurements corresponding to each of the plurality of pilots 

of the subsequent OFDM data symbol and the pilot reference points.

38. More specifically, Defendant has infringed the claims of the ‘583 patent as detailed in 

Attachment B to the Preliminary Infringement Contentions served on Defendant on March 11, 

2024, which are incorporated by reference.

39. FCS has been damaged as a result of the infringing conduct by Defendant alleged 

above. Thus, Defendant is liable to FCS in an amount that compensates it for such infringements, 

which by law cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by 

this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.

COUNT III: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,742,388

40. FCS repeats and re-alleges the allegations in the Paragraphs above as though fully set 

forth in their entirety.

41. FCS owns all substantial rights, interest, and title in and to U.S. Patent No. 7,742,388

(the “’388 patent”), including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce the 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 12 of 28 PageID #: 161
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 13

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

’388 patent against infringers and to collect damages for all relevant times.

42. The USPTO duly issued the ’388 patent on June 22, 2010, after full and fair 

examination of Application No. 11/185,665 which was filed July 20, 2005. See ’388 patent at 1.

43. The claims of the ’388 patent are not directed to an abstract idea and are not limited to 

well-understood, routine, or conventional activity. Rather, the claimed inventions include 

inventive components that improve upon the function and operation of preexisting systems and 

methods of generating packets in a digital communications system.

44. The written description of the ’388 patent describes in technical detail each limitation 

of the claims, allowing a skilled artisan to understand the scope of the claims and how the nonconventional and non-generic combination of claim limitations is patently distinct from and 

improved upon what may have been considered conventional or generic in the art at the time of 

the invention.

45. FCS or its predecessors-in-interest have satisfied all statutory obligations required to 

collect pre-filing damages for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’388 patent.

46. Defendant has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe one or more claims 

of the ’388 patent by manufacturing, providing, supplying, using, distributing, selling, or offering 

to sell the Accused Products.

47. Defendant has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe, either literally or 

under the doctrine of equivalents, at least claim 1 of the ’388 patent. For example, Defendant

performs a method including generating a packet with a size corresponding to a protocol used for 

a network transmission, wherein the packet comprises a preamble having a first training symbol 

and a second training symbol. The method further includes increasing the size of the packet by 

adding subcarriers to the second training symbol of the packet to produce an extended packet, 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 13 of 28 PageID #: 162
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 14

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

wherein a quantity of subcarriers of the second training symbol is greater than a quantity of 

subcarriers of the first training symbol; and transmitting the extended packet from an antenna.

48. More specifically, Defendant has infringed the claims of the ‘388 patent as detailed in 

Attachment C to the Preliminary Infringement Contentions served on Defendant on March 11, 

2024, which are incorporated by reference.

49. Since at least the time it was served with the original complaint, Defendant has

indirectly infringed and continues to indirectly infringe the ’388 patent by inducing others to 

directly infringe the ’388 patent. Defendant has induced and continues to induce customers and 

end-users, including, but not limited to, Defendant’s customers, employees, partners, or 

contractors, to directly infringe, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, the ’388 patent 

by providing or requiring use of the Accused Products. Defendant has taken active steps, directly 

or through contractual relationships with others, with the specific intent to cause them to use the 

Accused Products in a manner that infringes one or more claims of the ’388 patent, including, for 

example, claim 1. Such steps by Defendant have included, among other things, advising or 

directing customers, personnel, contractors, or end-users to use the Accused Products in an 

infringing manner; advertising and promoting the use of the Accused Products in an infringing 

manner; or distributing instructions that guide users to use the Accused Products in an infringing 

manner. Defendant has been performing these steps, which constitute induced infringement with 

the knowledge of the ’388 patent and with the knowledge that the induced acts constitute 

infringement. Defendant has been aware that the normal and customary use of the Accused 

Products by others would infringe the ’388 patent. Defendant’s inducement is ongoing.

50. Since at least the time it was served with the original complaint, Defendant has

indirectly infringed and continues to indirectly infringe by contributing to the infringement of the

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 14 of 28 PageID #: 163
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 15

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

’388 patent. Defendant has contributed and continues to contribute to the direct infringement of 

the ’388 patent by its customers, personnel, and contractors. The Accused Products have special 

features that are specially designed to be used in an infringing way and that have no substantial 

uses other than ones that infringe one or more claims of the ’388 patent, including, for example, 

claim 1. The special features constitute a material part of the invention of one or more of the 

claims of the ’388 patent and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. Defendant’s contributory infringement is ongoing.

51. Furthermore, on information and belief, Defendant has a policy or practice of not 

reviewing the patents of others, including instructing its employees to not review the patents of 

others, and thus have been willfully blind of FCS’s patent rights.

52. Defendant’s actions are at least objectively reckless as to the risk of infringing a valid 

patent and this objective risk was either known or should have been known by Defendant.

53. Defendant’s infringement of the ’388 patent is, has been, and continues to be willful, 

intentional, deliberate, or in conscious disregard of FCS’s rights under the patent.

54. FCS has been damaged as a result of the infringing conduct by Defendant alleged 

above. Thus, Defendant is liable to FCS in an amount that compensates it for such infringements, 

which by law cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by 

this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.

55. FCS has suffered irreparable harm, through its loss of market share and goodwill, for 

which there is no adequate remedy at law. FCS has and will continue to suffer this harm by virtue 

of Defendant’s infringement of the ’388 patent. Defendant’s actions have interfered with and will 

interfere with FCS’s ability to license technology. The balance of hardships favors FCS’s ability 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 15 of 28 PageID #: 164
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 16

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

to commercialize its own ideas and technology. The public interest in allowing FCS to enforce its 

right to exclude outweighs other public interests, which supports injunctive relief in this case.

COUNT IV: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,647,270

56. FCS repeats and re-alleges the allegations in the Paragraphs above as though fully set 

forth in their entirety.

57. FCS owns all substantial rights, interest, and title in and to U.S. Patent No. 6,647,270 

(the “’270 patent”), including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce the 

’270 patent against infringers and to collect damages for all relevant times.

58. The USPTO duly issued the ’270 patent on November 11, 2003, after full and fair 

examination of Application No. 09/659,074 which was filed September 11, 2000. See ’270 patent 

at 1.

59. The claims of the ’270 patent are not directed to an abstract idea and are not limited to 

well-understood, routine, or conventional activity. Rather, the claimed inventions include 

inventive components that improve upon the function and operation of voice and data 

communications systems.

60. The written description of the ’270 patent describes in technical detail each limitation 

of the claims, allowing a skilled artisan to understand the scope of the claims and how the nonconventional and non-generic combination of claim limitations is patently distinct from and 

improved upon what may have been considered conventional or generic in the art at the time of 

the invention.

61. FCS or its predecessors-in-interest have satisfied all statutory obligations required to 

collect pre-filing damages for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’270 patent.

62. Defendant has directly infringed the ’270 patent by manufacturing, providing, 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 16 of 28 PageID #: 165
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 17

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

supplying, using, distributing, selling, or offering to sell the Accused Products.

63. Defendant has directly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, 

at least claim 1 of the ’270 patent. For example, Defendant provides a system for transmitting 

voice or data communications comprising a plurality of data packets between a plurality of remote 

units, each remote unit having a unique identifier; whereby each remote unit includes: a memory 

for storing a unique identifier; a transceiver for receiving a wireless communication and 

downconverting said received communication from RF to baseband, and for upconverting a 

baseband communication to RF for transmission as a transmit wireless communication; a GPS 

receiver, for outputting a position signal; a microprocessor, for receiving said position signal and 

said downconverted communication, and for generating said baseband communication; whereby 

said microprocessor generates said baseband communication by constructing said data packets 

from a plurality of data fields, including sender information and receiver information, whereby 

said sender information includes: the unique identifier of the sender, and information derived from 

said position signal; and whereby said receiver information includes: the address of the desired 

remote unit.

64. More specifically, Defendant has infringed the claims of the ‘270 patent as detailed in 

Attachment D to the Preliminary Infringement Contentions served on Defendant on March 11, 

2024, which are incorporated by reference.

65. Since at least the time it was served with the original complaint, Defendant has also 

indirectly infringed the ’270 patent by inducing others to directly infringe the ’270 patent. 

Defendant has induced customers and end-users, including, but not limited to, its customers, 

employees, partners, or contractors, to directly infringe, either literally or under the doctrine of 

equivalents, the ’270 patent by providing or requiring use of the Accused Products. Defendant has 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 17 of 28 PageID #: 166
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 18

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

taken active steps, directly or through contractual relationships with others, with the specific intent 

to cause them to use the Accused Products in a manner that infringes one or more claims of the 

’270 patent, including, for example, claim 1. Such steps by Defendant included, among other 

things, advising or directing personnel, contractors, or end-users to use the Accused Products in 

an infringing manner; advertising and promoting the use of the Accused Products in an infringing 

manner; or distributing instructions that guide users to use the Accused Products in an infringing 

manner. Defendant has performed these steps, which constitute induced infringement with the 

knowledge of the ’270 patent and with the knowledge that the induced acts constituted 

infringement. Defendant was aware that the normal and customary use of the Accused Products 

by others would infringe the ’270 patent.

66. Since at least the time it was served with the original complaint, Defendant has also 

indirectly infringed by contributing to the infringement of the ’270 patent. Defendant has 

contributed to the direct infringement of the ’270 patent by its customers, personnel, and 

contractors. The Accused Products have special features that are specially designed to be used in 

an infringing way and that have no substantial uses other than ones that infringe one or more claims 

of the ’270 patent, including, for example, claim 1. The special features constitute a material part 

of the invention of one or more of the claims of the ’270 patent and are not staple articles of 

commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. 

67. Furthermore, on information and belief, Defendant has a policy or practice of not 

reviewing the patents of others, including instructing its employees to not review the patents of 

others, and thus has been willfully blind of FCS’s patent rights.

68. Defendant’s actions are at least objectively reckless as to the risk of infringing a valid 

patent and this objective risk was either known or should have been known by Defendant.

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 18 of 28 PageID #: 167
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 19

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

69. Defendant’s infringement of the ’270 patent has been willful, intentional, deliberate, 

or in conscious disregard of FCS’s rights under the patent.

70. FCS has been damaged as a result of the infringing conduct by Defendant alleged 

above. Defendant is liable to FCS in an amount that compensates it for such infringements, which 

by law cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by this 

Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.

COUNT V: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,747,291

71. FCS repeats and re-alleges the allegations in the Paragraphs above as though fully set 

forth in their entirety.

72. FCS owns all substantial rights, interest, and title in and to U.S. Patent No. 7,747,291 

(the “’291 patent”), including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce the 

’291 patent against infringers and to collect damages for all relevant times.

73. The USPTO duly issued the ’291 patent on June 29, 2010, after full and fair 

examination of Application No. 12/546,650 which was filed August 24, 2009. See ’291 patent at 

1.

74. The claims of the ’291 patent are not directed to an abstract idea and are not limited to 

well-understood, routine, or conventional activity. Rather, the claimed inventions include 

inventive components that improve upon the function and operation of preexisting methods and 

systems for mobile vehicle-based communications systems utilizing short-range communication 

links.

75. The written description of the ’291 patent describes in technical detail each limitation 

of the claims, allowing a skilled artisan to understand the scope of the claims and how the nonconventional and non-generic combination of claim limitations is patently distinct from and 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 19 of 28 PageID #: 168
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 20

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

improved upon what may have been considered conventional or generic in the art at the time of 

the invention.

76. FCS or its predecessors-in-interest have satisfied all statutory obligations required to 

collect pre-filing damages for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’291 patent.

77. Defendant has directly infringed the ’291 patent by using, providing, supplying, or 

distributing the Accused Products.

78. Defendant has directly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, 

at least claim 1 of the ’291 patent.

79. For example, upon information and belief, Defendant uses the Accused Products to 

perform a method of wirelessly interconnecting a vehicle with a mobile unit and a website. The 

method includes broadcasting a short range communication link from the vehicle comprising a 

transceiver to the mobile unit wherein the short range communication link is a first communication 

link; determining by the vehicle if the first communication link with the mobile unit is authorized; 

establishing a second communication link between the vehicle and the website; receiving a 

communication from the mobile unit, by the vehicle, the communication comprising information 

to be stored at the website; uploading the communication from the vehicle to the website; receiving 

by the vehicle a confirmation that the communication was received by the website; and sending 

the confirmation from the vehicle to the mobile unit.

80. More specifically, Defendant has infringed the claims of the ‘291 patent as detailed in 

Attachment E to the Preliminary Infringement Contentions served on Defendant on March 11, 

2024, which are incorporated by reference.

81. Since at least the time it was served with the original complaint, Defendant has also 

indirectly infringed one or more claims of the ’291 patent by inducing others to directly infringe 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 20 of 28 PageID #: 169
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 21

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

said claims. Defendant has induced end-users, including, but not limited to, its employees, 

partners, or contractors, to directly infringe, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, 

the ’291 patent by providing or requiring use of the Accused Products. Defendant took active 

steps, directly or through contractual relationships with others, with the specific intent to cause 

them to use the Accused Products in a manner that infringes one or more claims of the ’291 patent, 

including, for example, Claim 1. Such steps by Defendant included, among other things, advising 

or directing personnel, contractors, or end-users to use the Accused Products in an infringing 

manner; advertising and promoting the use of the Accused Products in an infringing manner; or 

distributing instructions that guide users to use the Accused Products in an infringing manner. 

Defendant performed these steps, which constitute induced infringement with the knowledge of 

the ’291 patent and with the knowledge that the induced acts constitute infringement. Defendant 

was aware that the normal and customary use of the Accused Products by others would infringe 

the ’291 patent. Defendant’s inducement is ongoing. 

82. Since at least the time it was served with the original complaint, Defendant has also 

indirectly infringed by contributing to the infringement of the ’291 patent. Defendant has 

contributed to the direct infringement of the ’291 patent by its personnel, contractors, and 

customers. The Accused Products have special features that are specially designed to be used in 

an infringing way and that have no substantial uses other than ones that infringe one or more 

claims of the ’291 patent, including, for example, Claim 1. The special features constitute a 

material part of the invention of one or more of the claims of the ’291 patent and are not staple 

articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. 

83. Furthermore, on information and belief, Defendant had a policy or practice of not 

reviewing the patents of others, including instructing its employees to not review the patents of 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 21 of 28 PageID #: 170
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 22

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

others, and thus was willfully blind of FCS’s patent rights.

84. Defendant’s actions were at least objectively reckless as to the risk of infringing a 

valid patent and this objective risk was either known or should have been known by Defendant.

85. Defendant’s infringement of the ’291 patent has been willful, intentional, deliberate, 

or in conscious disregard of FCS’s rights under the patent.

86. FCS has suffered irreparable harm, through its loss of market share and goodwill, for 

which there is no adequate remedy at law. FCS has and will continue to suffer this harm by virtue 

of Defendant’s infringement of the ’291 patent. Defendant’s actions have interfered with FCS’s 

ability to license technology. The balance of hardships favors FCS’s ability to commercialize its 

own ideas and technology. The public interest in allowing FCS to enforce its right to exclude 

outweighs other public interests, which supports injunctive relief in this case.

87. FCS has been damaged as a result of the infringing conduct by Defendant alleged 

above. Thus, Defendant is liable to FCS in an amount that compensates it for such infringements, 

which by law cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by 

this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.

COUNT VI: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,494,581

88. FCS repeats and re-alleges the allegations in the Paragraphs above as though fully set 

forth in their entirety.

89. FCS owns all substantial rights, interest, and title in and to U.S. Patent No. 8,494,581

(the “’581 patent”), including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce the 

’581 patent against infringers and to collect damages for all relevant times.

90. The USPTO duly issued the ’581 patent on July 23, 2013, after full and fair 

examination of Application No. 12/547,363 which was filed August 25, 2009. See ’581 patent at 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 22 of 28 PageID #: 171
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 23

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

1.

91. The claims of the ’581 patent are not directed to an abstract idea and are not limited to 

well-understood, routine, or conventional activity. Rather, the claimed inventions include 

inventive components that improve upon the function and operation of preexisting methods and 

systems of collecting and communicating field data based on geographical location.

92. The written description of the ’581 patent describes in technical detail each limitation 

of the claims, allowing a skilled artisan to understand the scope of the claims and how the nonconventional and non-generic combination of claim limitations is patently distinct from and 

improved upon what may have been considered conventional or generic in the art at the time of 

the invention.

93. FCS or its predecessors-in-interest have satisfied all statutory obligations required to 

collect pre-filing damages for the full period allowed by law for infringement of the ’581 patent.

94. Defendant has directly infringed the ’581 patent by using, providing, supplying, or 

distributing the Accused Products.

95. Defendant has directly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, 

at least claim 21 of the ’581 patent.

96. For example, upon information and belief, Defendant uses the Accused Products to 

perform a method that using a handheld device to access an assessment program stored in a 

memory of a computing device located geographically remote from the handheld device, the 

assessment program being configured to enable a field assessment in a specific industry; collecting 

field data associated with the field assessment using the handheld device in response to the 

assessment program; using the handheld device to determine a geographical location of the 

handheld device; and communicating the field data collected using the handheld device and the 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 23 of 28 PageID #: 172
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 24

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

geographical location of the handheld device to the computing device.

97. More specifically, Defendant has infringed the claims of the ‘581 patent as detailed in 

Attachment F to the Preliminary Infringement Contentions served on Defendant on March 11, 

2024, which are incorporated by reference.

98. FCS has been damaged as a result of the infringing conduct by Defendant alleged 

above. Thus, Defendant is liable to FCS in an amount that compensates it for such infringements, 

which by law cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by 

this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.

JURY DEMAND

99. FCS hereby requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable by right.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

100. FCS requests that the Court find in its favor and against Defendant, and that the Court 

grant FCS the following relief:

a. Judgment that one or more claims of each of the Asserted Patents has been infringed, 

either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, by Defendant or others acting in 

concert therewith;

b. A permanent injunction enjoining Defendant and its officers, directors, agents, 

servants, affiliates, employees, divisions, branches, subsidiaries, parents, and all others 

acting in concert therewith from infringement of the ’388 patent, ’270 patent and ’291

patent; or, in the alternative, an award of a reasonable ongoing royalty for future 

infringement of the ’388 patent, ’270 patent and ’291 patent by such entities;

c. Judgment that Defendant account for and pay to FCS all damages to and costs incurred 

by FCS because of Defendant’s infringing activities and other conduct complained of 

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 24 of 28 PageID #: 173
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 25

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

herein;

d. Judgment that Defendant’s infringements of the ’388, ’270 and ’291 patents be found 

willful, and that the Court award treble damages for the period of such willful 

infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;

e. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the damages caused by Defendant’s

infringing activities and other conduct complained of herein;

f. That this Court declare this an exceptional case and award FCS its reasonable 

attorneys’ fees and costs in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 285; and

g. All other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper under the 

circumstances.

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 25 of 28 PageID #: 174
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 26

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Dated: March 11, 2024 Respectfully submitted,

By:/s/ James F. McDonough, III

James F. McDonough, III (GA 117088) *

Jonathan R. Miller (GA507179) *

Travis E. Lynch (GA 162373) *

Rozier Hardt McDonough, PLLC

659 Auburn Avenue NE, Unit 254

Atlanta, Georgia 30312 

Telephone: (404) 564-1866, -1863, -1962

Email: jim@rhmtrial.com

Email: miller@rhmtrial.com

Email: lynch@rhmtrial.com

C. Matthew Rozier (CO 46854) *

Kristin M. Whidby (VA 91805) *

Rozier Hardt McDonough, PLLC

1500 K Street, 2nd Floor

Washington, DC 20005

Telephone: (404) 779-5305; (202) 217-0575

Email: matt@rhmtrial.com

Jonathan L. Hardt (TX 24039906) *

Rozier Hardt McDonough, PLLC

712 W. 14th Street, Suite C

Austin, Texas 78701

Telephone: (737) 295-0876

Email: hardt@rhmtrial.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff FLEET CONNECT SOLUTIONS LLC

*Admitted to the Eastern District of Texas

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 26 of 28 PageID #: 175
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 27

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

List of Supportive Links

A. U.S. Patent No. 6,429,810, USPTO.GOV,

https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/09774547, https://imageppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/6429810

B. U.S. Patent No. 6,549,583, USPTO.GOV,

https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/09790429, https://imageppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/6549583

C. U.S. Patent No. 7,742,388, USPTO.GOV,

https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/11185665, https://imageppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/7742388

D. U.S. Patent No. 6,647,270, USPTO.GOV,

https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/09659074, https://imageppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/6647270

E. U.S. Patent No. 7,747,291, USPTO.GOV,

https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/12546650, https://imageppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/7747291

F. U.S. Patent No. 8,494,581, USPTO.GOV,

https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/12547363, https://imageppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/8494581

G. LKQ CORP, https://www.lkqcorp.com/blog/location/lkq-auto-parts-of-east-texas-whitehouse/

H. Yogi Shivdasani, VP, NA Supply Chain, LKQ Corporation, Client Testimonials, DONLEN, 

https://www.donlen.com (last visited Nov. 29, 2023)

I. FLEET FINANCIALS, https://www.fleetfinancials.com/157524/2017-fleet-executive-of-theyear-award-nominees (last updated July 7, 2017) (last visited Nov. 29, 2023)

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 27 of 28 PageID #: 176
E.D. Tex. No. 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP - Page | 28

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this date a true copy of the above document was filed using this 

Court’s ECF System which caused it to be served by electronic mail upon the attorneys of record.

Dated: March 11, 2024

By: /s/ James F. McDonough, III

James F. McDonough, III

Case 2:23-cv-00555-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 03/11/24 Page 28 of 28 PageID #: 177