1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

_______________________________________ 

 ) 

BARCO, INC. and BARCO NV, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiffs, ) 

 ) Case No. 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP 

 ) 

v. ) 

 ) 

YEALINK (USA) NETWORK ) 

TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD., and ) 

YEALINK NETWORK ) 

TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. ) 

 ) 

 Defendants. ) 

_______________________________________) 

PLAINTIFFS’ ANSWER TO DEFENDANTS’ COUNTERCLAIMS 

Plaintiffs Barco, Inc. and Barco NV (collectively, “Barco” or “Plaintiffs”) answer the 

Counterclaims (ECF 19) filed by defendants Yealink (USA) Network Technology Co., Ltd. 

(“Yealink USA”), and Yealink Network Technology Co., Ltd. (“Yealink China”) (collectively, 

“Yealink” or “Defendants”). For ease of reference, Plaintiffs repeat the headings employed by 

Defendants throughout the Counterclaims, but state that because these are not assertions of law or 

fact, they therefore do not require a response. To the extent that the headings contained in the 

Counterclaims can be read as allegations that require a response, Plaintiffs deny the allegations. 

PARTIES 

1. Plaintiffs lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth 

of the allegations in the first sentence of Paragraph 1, and therefore deny them. Plaintiffs admit 

Yealink China is a company based in Xiamen, China and allegedly headquartered at 666 Hu’an 

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/16/24 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 324
2 

Road, Huli District, Xiamen, Fujian Province, 361009, China. Plaintiffs deny the remaining 

allegations contained in Paragraph 1. 

2. Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 2. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

3. Paragraph 3 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 3. 

4. Paragraph 4 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 4. 

5. Paragraph 5 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit this Court has jurisdiction over this case and denies 

any additional allegations contained in Paragraph 5. 

6. Paragraph 6 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit venue is proper before this Court for this case and 

denies any additional allegations contained in Paragraph 6. 

COUNT I (Declaratory Judgement of Noninfringement of the ’002 Patent) 

7. Paragraph 7 contains no facts and therefore there is nothing to admit or deny. 

8. Paragraph 8 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit that they allege in their Complaint that Yealink has 

infringed one or more claims of the ’002 Patent. Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations 

contained in Paragraph 8. 

9. Paragraph 9 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 9. 

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/16/24 Page 2 of 11 PageID #: 325
3 

10. Paragraph 10 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they assert Yealink has infringed claims of the ’002 

Patent, but deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 10. 

11. Paragraph 11 asserts a legal conclusion, to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 11. 

COUNT II (Declaratory Judgement of Noninfringement of the ’832 Patent) 

12. Paragraph 12 contains no facts and therefore there is nothing to admit or deny. 

13. Paragraph 13 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they allege in their Complaint that Yealink has 

infringed one or more claims of the ’832 Patent. Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations 

contained in Paragraph 13. 

14. Paragraph 14 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 14. 

15. Paragraph 15 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they assert Yealink has infringed claims of the ’832 

Patent, but deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 15. 

16. Paragraph 16 asserts a legal conclusion, to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 16. 

COUNT III (Declaratory Judgement of Noninfringement of the ’103 Patent) 

17. Paragraph 17 contains no facts and therefore there is nothing to admit or deny. 

18. Paragraph 18 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they allege in their Complaint that Yealink has 

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/16/24 Page 3 of 11 PageID #: 326
4 

infringed one or more claims of the ’103 Patent. Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations 

contained in Paragraph 18. 

19. Paragraph 19 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 19. 

20. Paragraph 20 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they assert Yealink has infringed claims of the ’103 

Patent, but deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 20. 

21. Paragraph 21 asserts a legal conclusion, to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 21. 

COUNT IV (Declaratory Judgement of Noninfringement of the ’676 Patent) 

22. Paragraph 22 contains no facts and therefore there is nothing to admit or deny. 

23. Paragraph 23 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they allege in their Complaint that Yealink has 

infringed one or more claims of the ’676 Patent. Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations 

contained in Paragraph 23. 

24. Paragraph 24 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 24. 

25. Paragraph 25 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they assert Yealink has infringed claims of the ’676 

Patent, but deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 25. 

26. Paragraph 26 asserts a legal conclusion, to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 26. 

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/16/24 Page 4 of 11 PageID #: 327
5 

COUNT V (Declaratory Judgement of Noninfringement of the ’237 Patent) 

27. Paragraph 27 contains no facts and therefore there is nothing to admit or deny. 

28. Paragraph 28 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they allege in their Complaint that Yealink has 

infringed one or more claims of the ’237 Patent. Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations 

contained in Paragraph 28. 

29. Paragraph 29 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 29. 

30. Paragraph 30 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they assert Yealink has infringed claims of the ’237 

Patent, but deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 30. 

31. Paragraph 31 asserts a legal conclusion, to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 31. 

COUNT VI (Declaratory Judgement of Noninfringement of the ’951 Patent) 

32. Paragraph 32 contains no facts and therefore there is nothing to admit or deny. 

33. Paragraph 33 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they allege in their Complaint that Yealink has 

infringed one or more claims of the ’951 Patent. Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations 

contained in Paragraph 33. 

34. Paragraph 34 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 34. 

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/16/24 Page 5 of 11 PageID #: 328
6 

35. Paragraph 35 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they assert Yealink has infringed claims of the ’951 

Patent, but deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 35. 

36. Paragraph 36 asserts a legal conclusion, to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 36. 

COUNT VII (Declaratory Judgement of Invalidity of the ’002 Patent) 

37. Paragraph 37 contains no facts and therefore there is nothing to admit or deny. 

38. Paragraph 38 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit that they allege in their Complaint that the ’002 

Patent is valid, enforceable, and was duly issued in full compliance with Title 35 of the United 

States Code. Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 38. 

39. Paragraph 39 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 39. 

40. Paragraph 40 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they assert Yealink has infringed the ’002 Patent, 

but deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 40. 

41. Paragraph 41 asserts a legal conclusion, to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 41. 

COUNT VIII (Declaratory Judgement of Invalidity of the ’832 Patent) 

42. Paragraph 42 contains no facts and therefore there is nothing to admit or deny. 

43. Paragraph 43 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit that they allege in their Complaint that the ’832 

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/16/24 Page 6 of 11 PageID #: 329
7 

Patent is valid, enforceable, and was duly issued in full compliance with Title 35 of the United 

States Code. Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 43. 

44. Paragraph 44 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 44. 

45. Paragraph 45 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they assert Yealink has infringed the ’832 Patent, 

but deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 45. 

46. Paragraph 46 asserts a legal conclusion, to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 46. 

COUNT IX (Declaratory Judgement of Invalidity of the ’103 Patent) 

47. Paragraph 47 contains no facts and therefore there is nothing to admit or deny. 

48. Paragraph 48 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit that they allege in their Complaint that the ’103 

Patent is valid, enforceable, and was duly issued in full compliance with Title 35 of the United 

States Code. Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 48. 

49. Paragraph 49 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 49. 

50. Paragraph 50 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they assert Yealink has infringed the ’103 Patent, 

but deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 50. 

51. Paragraph 51 asserts a legal conclusion, to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 51. 

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/16/24 Page 7 of 11 PageID #: 330
8 

COUNT X (Declaratory Judgement of Invalidity of the ’676 Patent) 

52. Paragraph 52 contains no facts and therefore there is nothing to admit or deny. 

53. Paragraph 53 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit that they allege in their Complaint that the ’676 

Patent is valid, enforceable, and was duly issued in full compliance with Title 35 of the United 

States Code. Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 53. 

54. Paragraph 54 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 54. 

55. Paragraph 55 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they assert Yealink has infringed the ’676 Patent, 

but deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 55. 

56. Paragraph 56 asserts a legal conclusion, to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 56. 

COUNT XI (Declaratory Judgement of Invalidity of the ’237 Patent) 

57. Paragraph 57 contains no facts and therefore there is nothing to admit or deny. 

58. Paragraph 58 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit that they allege in their Complaint that the ’237 

Patent is valid, enforceable, and was duly issued in full compliance with Title 35 of the United 

States Code. Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 58. 

59. Paragraph 59 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 59. 

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/16/24 Page 8 of 11 PageID #: 331
9 

60. Paragraph 60 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they assert Yealink has infringed the ’237 Patent, 

but deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 60. 

61. Paragraph 61 asserts a legal conclusion, to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 61. 

COUNT XII (Declaratory Judgement of Invalidity of the ’951 Patent) 

62. Paragraph 62 contains no facts and therefore there is nothing to admit or deny. 

63. Paragraph 63 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit that they allege in their Complaint that the ’951 

Patent is valid, enforceable, and was duly issued in full compliance with Title 35 of the United 

States Code. Plaintiffs deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 63. 

64. Paragraph 64 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 64. 

65. Paragraph 65 asserts a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit they assert Yealink has infringed the ’951 Patent, 

but deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 65. 

66. Paragraph 66 asserts a legal conclusion, to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, Plaintiffs admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 66. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

67. Paragraphs a. through g. of the Prayer for Relief section contained in Defendants’ 

Counterclaims state legal conclusions, to which no response is required. To the extent a response 

is required, Plaintiffs deny that Defendants are entitled to any of the requested relief. 

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/16/24 Page 9 of 11 PageID #: 332
10 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

First Affirmative Defense 

The Counterclaims fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 

Second Affirmative Defense 

The Counterclaims are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands. 

RESERVATION OF RIGHTS 

Plaintiffs reserve the right to assert additional defenses, or amend these defenses, upon 

further investigation and discovery. 

Dated: April 16, 2024 /s/ Erik J. Halverson

Erik J. Halverson* (California Bar No. 333492) 

erik.halverson@klgates.com 

K&L GATES LLP 

Four Embarcadero Ctr, Suite 1200 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 882-8238 

*Admitted to practice before this Court 

Melissa Smith (Texas Bar No. 24001351) 

GILLAM & SMITH, LLP 

303 South Washington Avenue 

Marshall, Texas 75670 

Telephone: +1 903 934 8450 

Facsimile: +1 903 934 9257 

melissa@gillamsmithlaw.com 

Christopher Centurelli (pro hac vice) 

christopher.centurelli@klgates.com 

Anna E. L’Hommedieu (pro hac vice) 

Anna.lhommedieu@klgates.com 

Joshua N. Andrews (pro hac vice) 

Joshua.Andrews@klgates.com 

K&L GATES LLP 

1 Congress Street, Suite 2900 

Boston, MA 02114-2023 

Telephone: (617) 261-3100 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Barco, Inc. and Barco N.V.

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/16/24 Page 10 of 11 PageID #: 333
11 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify that on April 16, 2024, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk 

of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to all counsel of 

record. 

/s/ Erik J. Halverson 

Erik Halverson 

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/16/24 Page 11 of 11 PageID #: 334