Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/127357427/JSDQ-Mesh-Technologies-v-Ruckus-Wireless
Timestamp: 2017-12-14 10:57:29
Document Index: 670435590

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1331', '§ 1391', '§ 287', '§ 287', '§ 287', '§ 285']

JSDQ Mesh Technologies v. Ruckus Wireless | Patent Infringement | Lawsuit
JSDQ Mesh Technologies v. Ruckus Wireless
Description: Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-00309-UNA: JSDQ Mesh Technologies LLC v. Ruckus Wireless Inc. Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, no ju...
Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-00309-UNA: JSDQ Mesh Technologies LLC v. Ruckus Wireless Inc. Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l7Jx for more info.
RUCKUS WIRELESS, INC., JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff JSDQ Mesh Technologies LLC complains of Defendant Ruckus Wireless, Inc. as follows: NATURE OF LAWSUIT 1. This is a claim for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the United Case No.
States, Title 35 of the United States Code. THE PARTIES 2. JSDQ Mesh Technologies LLC (“JSDQ”) is a Delaware limited liability company
standing to sue for infringement of United States Patent No. RE 43,675, entitled “Wireless Radio Routing System,” which issued on September 18, 2012 (the “‘675 Patent”) (a true and correct copy is attached as Exhibit A), United States Patent No. 7,916,648, entitled “Method of Call Routing and Connection,” which issued on March 29, 2011 (the “‘648 Patent”) (a true and correct copy is attached as Exhibit B), and United States Patent No. 7,286,828, entitled “Method of Call Routing and Connection,” which issued on October 23, 2007 (the “‘828 Patent”) (a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit C) (collectively, the “Patents-in-Suit”).
Defendant Ruckus Wireless, Inc. (“Ruckus”) is a Delaware corporation with the
registered agent Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware 19808. Ruckus’s principal place of business is 350 West Java Drive, Sunnyvale, California 94089. 5. Ruckus designs, manufactures, and markets Smart Wi-Fi products and Smart
Wireless LAN systems. 6. Ruckus sells Smart Wi-Fi products and Smart Wireless LAN systems (i.e., Smart
Wi-Fi Technology) throughout the United States and the world. 7. Smart Wi-Fi Technology uses an intelligent, high-gain directional antenna system
and quality of service technologies to extend the range of Wi-Fi signals and automatically adapt to environmental changes. 8. Ruckus conducts business within the State of Delaware. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 9. This Court has exclusive jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Complaint
under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). 10. Personal jurisdiction over Ruckus is proper in this Court. Venue in this judicial
district is proper under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b), (c) and/or 1400(b). THE ACCUSED SYSTEMS 11. Ruckus infringes the Patents-in-Suit through at least the manufacture, use, offer
for sale and/or sale of Smart Wi-Fi Technology, including but not limited to its ZoneFlex Smart Mesh Networking products (including hardware and software), and related services (the “Accused Systems”).
Smart Mesh is carrier-class software technology that uses advanced self-
organizing network principles to create highly resilient, high-speed Wi-Fi backbone links between access points. 13. Smart Mesh simplifies the deployment of both service provider and enterprise
wireless networks by reducing cumbersome radio planning and costly cabling needed to reliably connect every Wi-Fi access point. 14. Smart Mesh automatically establishes wireless connections between individual
access points using patented smart antenna technology and self-heals in the event of a failed link. 15. Smart Mesh gives service providers the flexibility to deploy infrastructure assets
where needed with the assurance that both cellular and Wi-Fi traffic can be reliably and cost effectively backhauled. 16. Ruckus’s Smart Wi-Fi technologies include Smart Radio. A primary component
of Smart Radio technology is BeamFlex. BeamFlex is a smart antenna system that makes Wi-Fi signals stronger by focusing them only where they are needed and dynamically steering them in directions that yield the highest throughput for each receiving device. 17. Ruckus offers high capacity Wi-Fi access points with special antennas designed to
focus wireless signals in a specific direction. 18. Ruckus offers several antenna models for its access points including at least
directional antennas, sector antennas (i.e., 120 degrees), and omni-directional antennas. COUNT I – PATENT INFRINGEMENT UNITED STATES PATENT NO. RE 43,675 19. JSDQ realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 18, inclusive,
Ruckus directly infringes at least independent claim 15 of the ‘675 Patent through
the manufacture, use, offer for sale and/or sale of the Accused Systems. 21. Ruckus’s Accused Systems provide radio communication routes among
individual nodes capable of distribution arbitrarily relative to each other. 22. Ruckus’s Accused Systems perform each of the limitations of claim 15 of the
‘675 Patent. Ruckus’s Accused Systems operate by (a) establishing radio links between respective pairs of nodes without regard to their relative locations, at least one node using a directional radio signal; (b) measuring a value of a parameter of a directional radio signal; (c) transmitting radio signals with routing messages; and (d) assembling, by computers in a plurality of nodes, a radio communication route between an originating node and a destination node. 23. Alternatively, Ruckus indirectly infringes at least independent claim 15 of the
‘675 Patent by inducing others’ direct infringement through their use of the Accused Systems. To the extent Ruckus is not the only direct infringer of the ‘675 Patent, users of Ruckus’s Accused Systems would constitute direct infringers. 24. Ruckus has notice of the ‘675 Patent and the likelihood of infringement thereof at
least as early as November 30, 2012 when Scott Hauser, Deputy General Counsel of Ruckus, provided revisions to an agreement tolling any limitations and prohibiting the filing of any civil action until an agreed upon future date. 25. Upon information and belief, Ruckus provides support services to customers with
the specific intent that customers will use the Accused Systems in a manner that infringes the ‘675 Patent. 26. U.S.C. § 287. To the extent required by law, JSDQ has complied with the provisions of 35
Ruckus’s direct and/or indirect infringement as described above has injured and
will continue to injure JSDQ as long as such infringement continues. JSDQ is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate it for such infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty. COUNT II – PATENT INFRINGEMENT UNITED STATES PATENT NO. 7,916,648 28. JSDQ realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 18, inclusive,
as though fully set forth herein. 29. Ruckus directly infringes at least independent claim 29 of the ‘648 Patent through
the manufacture, use, offer for sale and/or sale of the Accused Systems. 30. Ruckus’s Accused Systems provide radio communication routes among
individual nodes capable of distribution arbitrarily relative to each other. 31. Ruckus’s Accused Systems perform each of the limitations of claim 29 of the
‘648 Patent. Ruckus’s Accused Systems operate by (a) establishing radio links between pairs of nodes without regard to their relative locations; (b) measuring values of a parameter of radio signals; (c) transmitting radio signals with routing messages; (d) selecting a preferred multi-link route segment; (e) transmitting a radio signal with a routing message identifying a preferred route segment; and (f) assembling a radio communication route between an originating node and a destination node. 32. Alternatively, Ruckus indirectly infringes at least independent claim 29 of the
‘648 Patent by inducing others’ direct infringement through their use of the Accused Systems. To the extent Ruckus is not the only direct infringer of the ‘648 Patent, users of Ruckus’s Accused Systems would constitute direct infringers.
Ruckus has notice of the ‘648 Patent and the likelihood of infringement thereof at
least as early as November 30, 2012 when Scott Hauser, Deputy General Counsel of Ruckus, provided revisions to an agreement tolling any limitations and prohibiting the filing of any civil action until an agreed upon future date. 34. Upon information and belief, Ruckus provides support services to customers with
the specific intent that customers will use the Accused Systems in a manner that infringes the ‘648 Patent. 35. U.S.C. § 287. 36. Ruckus’s direct and/or indirect infringement as described above has injured and To the extent required by law, JSDQ has complied with the provisions of 35
will continue to injure JSDQ as long as such infringement continues. JSDQ is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate it for such infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty. COUNT III – PATENT INFRINGEMENT UNITED STATES PATENT NO. 7,286,828 37. JSDQ realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 18, inclusive,
as though fully set forth herein. 38. Ruckus infringes at least independent claim 68 of the ‘828 Patent through the
manufacture, use, offer for sale and/or sale of the Accused Systems. 39. Ruckus’s Accused Systems provide wireless communication routes among
individual nodes distributed to form a mesh throughout an area covered by the wireless communication system. 40. Ruckus’s Accused Systems perform each of the limitations of claim 68 of the
‘828 Patent. Ruckus’s Accused Systems operate by (a) establishing wireless links between pairs
of routing nodes using wireless signals; (b) storing routing message; (c) selecting a routing message using a parameter of received wireless signals; (d) modifying a selected routing message; (e) deleting some routing messages; (f) retransmitting modified routing messages; and (g) assembling preferred wireless links into an optimum communication route. 41. Alternatively, Ruckus indirectly infringes at least independent claim 68 of the
‘828 Patent by inducing others’ direct infringement through their use of the Accused Systems. To the extent Ruckus is not the only direct infringer of the ‘828 Patent, users of Ruckus’s Accused Systems would constitute direct infringers. 42. Ruckus has notice of the ‘828 Patent and the likelihood of infringement thereof at
least as early as November 30, 2012 when Scott Hauser, Deputy General Counsel of Ruckus, provided revisions to an agreement tolling any limitations and prohibiting the filing of any civil action until an agreed upon future date. 43. Upon information and belief, Ruckus provides support services to customers with
the specific intent that customers will use the Accused Systems in a manner that infringes the ‘828 Patent. 44. U.S.C. § 287. 45. Ruckus’s direct and/or indirect infringement as described above has injured and To the extent required by law, JSDQ has complied with the provisions of 35
will continue to injure JSDQ as long as such infringement continues. JSDQ is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate it for such infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff JSDQ Mesh Technologies LLC respectfully requests this Court to enter judgment against Ruckus and against its respective subsidiaries, successors, parents, affiliates, officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, granting the following relief: A. B. The entry of judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Ruckus; An award of damages against Ruckus adequate to compensate Plaintiff for the
attorneys’ fees and costs as provided by 35 U.S.C. § 285; D. and E. Such other relief to which Plaintiff is entitled under the law and any other and A permanent injunction prohibiting further infringement of the Patents-in-Suit;
further relief that this Court or a jury may deem just and proper. JURY DEMAND Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues presented in this Complaint.
Dated: February 25, 2013 Respectfully submitted, Of Counsel: Timothy J. Haller Daniel R. Ferri Gabriel I. Opatken NIRO, HALLER & NIRO 181 West Madison Street, Suite 4600 Chicago, IL 60602 Phone: (312) 236-0733 Fax: (312) 236-3137 haller@nshn.com dferri@nshn.com gopatken@nshn.com /s/ Dominick T. Gattuso Dominick T. Gattuso (DE Bar No. 3630) Melissa N. Donimirski (DE Bar No. 4701) PROCTOR HEYMAN LLP 300 Delaware Avenue, Suite 200 Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 472-7300 DGattuso@proctorheyman.com MDonimirski@proctorheyman.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff, JSDQ Mesh Technologies LLC
Documents Similar To JSDQ Mesh Technologies v. Ruckus Wireless
152310 Canada v. HTM Lighting - Complaint
VideoShare v. Google Inc. and YouTube
Blue Spike v. BMAT Licensing, S.L.
Blue Spike v. Accu-Time Systems
Blue Spike v. Griaule Technology