Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/86119392/Klausner-Technologies-v-Voipo
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 21:06:03+00:00

Document:
Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 6:12-cv-00183: Klausner Technologies, Inc. v. Voipo, LLC. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l5HB for more info.
Advanced Data Access v. Fujitsu et. al.
X2Y Attenuators v. Intel et. al.
Stambler v. Ameriprise Financial et. al.
Diamantis v. Safdie International et. al.
NUtech Ventures v. Syngenta Seeds et. al.
Chaffin v. Braden Et. Al.
KLAUSNER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a New York corporation, Plaintiff, vs. CASE NO.
VOIPO, LLC, a Florida limited liability corporation, Defendant.
claimed in United States Patent Nos. 5,572,576 entitled Telephone Answering Device Linking Displayed Data with Recorded Audio Message (the 576 Patent). Defendant (a) has used and continues to use Plaintiffs patented technology in products that it makes, uses, sells, and offers to sell, without Plaintiffs permission, and (b) has contributed to or induced, and continues to contribute to or induce, others to infringe the 576 Patent. Plaintiff Klausner Technologies seeks damages for patent infringements and an injunction preventing Defendant from making, using, selling, or offering to sell, and from contributing to and inducing others to make, use, sell, or offer to sell, Plaintiffs patented technology without permission.
corporation having its principal place of business in Irvine, California.
Patent and will suffer additional irreparable damage and impairment of the value of its patent rights unless Defendant is enjoined from continuing to infringe the 576 Patent. 12. Plaintiff demands trial by jury of all issues so triable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as follows: A. A decree preliminarily and permanently enjoining Defendant, its officers, directors, employees, agents, and all persons in active concert with it, from infringing, and contributing to or inducing others to infringe the 576 Patent; B. Compensatory damages awarding Plaintiff damages caused by Defendants infringement of the 576 Patent; C. D. E. For costs of suit and attorneys fees; For pre-judgment interest; and For such other relief as justice requires.
OF COUNSEL: Pierre R. Yanney William J. Seymour STROOCK & STROOCK & LAVAN LLP 180 Maiden Lane New York, N.Y. 10038 Tel: (212) 806-5400 Fax: (212) 806-6006 Email: pyanney@stroock.com Email: wseymour@stroock.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF, KLAUSNER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
ConforMIS v. Acacia Research Group et. al.
Alex is the Best LLC v. Amazon.com Inc. Et. Al.
Bose v. Monster, Inc., Et. al.
Cellular Communications Equipment v. ZTE Et. Al.
Neptune Technologies & Bioressources v. Aker BioMarine ASA et. al.
EagleView Technologies v. RoofWalk et. al.
Peschke Map Technologies v. Madison Marquette Retail Services et. al.
Overland Storage v. Quantum et. al.
Genband v. Metaswitch Networks Et. Al.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.