Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/230983330/Effective-Exploration-v-Fossil-Resources
Timestamp: 2017-02-27 12:47:12
Document Index: 491367579

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1331', '§ 1391', '§ 271', '§ 284', '§ 285', '§ 271', 'art0']

Effective Exploration v. Fossil Resources
BrowseInterestsBiography & MemoirBusiness & LeadershipFiction & LiteraturePolitics & EconomyHealth & WellnessSociety & CultureHappiness & Self-HelpMystery, Thriller & CrimeHistoryYoung AdultBrowse byBooksAudiobooksNews & MagazinesSheet MusicBrowse allUploadSign inJoin_____________________________________________________________________________EFFECTIVE EXPLORATION, LLC’S COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION EFFECTIVE EXPLORATION, LLC, Plaintiff, v. FOSSIL RESOURCES, INC. Defendant. Civil Action No. J URY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff Effective Exploration, LLC (“Effective Exploration”), by way of Complaint against Fossil Resources, Inc. (“Fossil” or “Defendant”), alleges the following: NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United States Code. THE PARTIES 2. Plaintiff Effective Exploration is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Texas with a place of business at 555 Republic Drive., Suite 200, Plano, Texas 75084. 3. On information and belief, Defendant Fossil is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Texas with a principal place of business and registered agent at 17304 Preston Road, Suite 625, Dallas, Texas, 75252. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338. _____________________________________________________________________________ EFFECTIVE EXPLORATION, LLC’S COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Page 2 of 4 5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Coreterra because it has ongoing and systematic contacts with this District and the United States. Specifically, Defendant is a corporation organized under the laws of Texas and, has a registered agent for service of process in Texas. Moreover, the infringing conduct takes place in this District, and Defendant has thereby availed itself of the privileges and the protections of the laws of the State of Texas and this J udicial District. 6. Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(c) and 1400(b). COUNT I INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,505,620 7. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 6 as though fully set forth herein. 8. On August 13, 2013, United States Patent No. 8,505,620 (“the ’620 Patent”), entitled “METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ACCESSING SUBTERRANEAN DEPOSITS FROM THE SURFACE AND TOOLS THEREFOR,” was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. A true and correct copy of the ’620 Patent is attached as Exhibit A to this Complaint. 9. Effective Exploration is the assignee and owner of the right, title and interest in the’620 Patent, including the right to assert all causes of action arising under said patent and the right to any remedies for infringement of it. 10. Defendant has been directly infringing and continues to directly infringe one or more claims of the ’620 Patent in the United States through at least its operation of oil and gas wells throughout the United States in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), including, but not limited to, the following well (identified by API number): 4234731693. _____________________________________________________________________________ EFFECTIVE EXPLORATION, LLC’S COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Page 3 of 4 11. Defendant was made aware of the ’620 Patent and its infringement thereof at least as early as the filing of this Complaint. 12. Because of Defendant’s infringement of the ’620 Patent, Plaintiff has suffered damages and will continue to suffer damages in the future. Plaintiff is entitled to an award of such damages, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty, the precise amount to be determined at trial. JURY DEMAND Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Effective Exploration, LLC respectfully demands entry of judgment against Defendant Fossil as follows: A. finding that Defendant has infringed one or more claims of the ’620 Patent; B. permanently enjoining and restraining Defendant, its agents, affiliates, subsidiaries, servants, employees, officers, directors, attorneys, and those persons in active concert with or controlled by Defendant from further infringing the ’620 Patent; C. awarding Plaintiff damages to be paid by Defendant adequate to compensate Plaintiff for Defendant’s past infringement of the ’620 Patent and any continuing or future infringement of the ’620 Patent through the date such judgment is entered, together with pre-
judgment and post-judgment interest, costs and expenses as justified under 35 U.S.C. § 284; D. a declaration that this case is exceptional under 35 U.S.C. § 285, and an award of Plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees; _____________________________________________________________________________ EFFECTIVE EXPLORATION, LLC’S COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Page 4 of 4 E. ordering an accounting of all infringing acts including, but not limited to, those acts not presented at trial and an award of damages to Plaintiff for any such acts; F. a finding that Defendant willfully infringed one or more claims of the ’620 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, et seq.; and G. awarding such other and further relief at law or in equity as the Court deems just and proper. Dated: J une 23, 2014 /s/ Steven R. Daniels Steven R. Daniels Texas State Bar No. 24025318 LEAD ATTORNEY Gary R. Sorden Texas State Bar No. 24066124 M. Brett J ohnson Texas State Bar No. 00790975 FARNEY DANIELS PC 800 South Austin Ave., Suite 200 Georgetown, Texas 78626 Telephone: (512) 582-2828 Attorneys for Plaintiff Effective Exploration, LLC More From This UserSkip carouselLike kind card game (US patent 6193235)Like kind money board table game (US patent 6186505)Intelligent user interface including a touch sensor device (US patent 8288952)User interface with proximity sensing (US patent 8035623)Wine cellar alarm system (US patent 8710985)Cell regulatory genes, encoded products, and uses related thereto (US patent 7030227)Multicasting method and apparatus (US patent 6434622)Method and apparatus for retrieving data from a network using linked location identifiers (US patent 6226655)Casino bonus game using player strategy (US patent 6645071)High-speed serial linking device with de-emphasis function and the method thereof (US patent 7313187)Casing spacer (US patent 6736166)Advance Products & Systems v. CCI Piping SystemsModern Telecom Systems LLCTracBeam v. AppleRichmond v. Creative IndustriesSenju Pharmaceutical et. al. v. Metrics et. al.VIA Technologies et. al. v. ASUS Computer International et. al.Perrie v. PerrieEckart v. Silberline ManufacturingSenju Pharmaceutical et. al. v. Metrics et. al.Kenzinc v. imblowingup et. al.Sun Zapper v. Devroy et. al.Merck Sharp & Dohme v. Fresenius KabiTracBeam v. T-Mobile et. al.ATEN International v. Uniclass Technology et. al.
Sign up to vote on this titleUsefulNot usefulEffective Exploration v. Fossil Resources by PriorSmart0.0 (0)EmbedDownloadDescriptionOfficial Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. None: Effective Exploration, LLC v. Fossil Resources, Inc. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, no judge ye...Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. None: Effective Exploration, LLC v. Fossil Resources, Inc. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-laBr for more info.Interests: Types, Business/Law, Court FilingsRead on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.Copyright: Public DomainDownload as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentShow moreShow less
RelatedEffective Exploration v. Newfield Exploration Companyby PatentBlastEffective Exploration LLCby PriorSmartEffective Exploration LLCby PriorSmartEffective Exploration v. Etocoby PatentBlastEffective Exploration v. Whiting Oil and Gasby PriorSmartActivision TV v. Arby's Restaurant Groupby PriorSmartDietGoal Innovations v. Tropical Smoothie Cafeby PriorSmartDietGoal Innovations v. Marco's Franchisingby PriorSmartDietGoal Innovations v. Potbelly Sandwich Worksby PriorSmartEffective Exploration v. John Linder Operatingby PriorSmartEffective Exploration v. Classic Operatingby PatentBlastDietGoal Innovations v. Mrs. Fields Famous Brandsby PriorSmartActivelight v. GoGo Media Networksby PriorSmartDietGoal Innovations v. Deli Management, Inc. D/B/A Jason's Deliby PriorSmartDietGoal Innovations v. Genghis Grill Franchise Conceptsby PriorSmartDietGoal Innovations v. Ufood Restaurant Groupby PriorSmartActivision TV v. Colbea Enterprisesby PatentBlastLennon Image Technologies v. Tacori Enterprisesby PriorSmartReal Time Social Inventions v. CMI Marketing et. al.by PriorSmartReal Time Social Inventions v. Glam Media et. al.by PriorSmartLBS Innovations v. Sally Beauty Supply et. al.by PriorSmartReal Time Social Inventions v. Rockmeltby PriorSmartLBS Innovations v. Gasbuddy OpenStoreby PatentBlastDietGoal Innovations v. Webmdby PriorSmartDietGoal Innovations v. Whataburger Restaurantsby PriorSmartActivision TV v. CSG Systemsby PriorSmartBetter Food Choices v. MyNetDiary et. al.by PriorSmartEdekka v Etsyby jeff_roberts881Similar to Effective Exploration v. Fossil ResourcesSkip carouselEffective Exploration v. Newfield Exploration CompanyEffective Exploration LLCEffective Exploration LLCEffective Exploration v. EtocoEffective Exploration v. Whiting Oil and GasActivision TV v. Arby's Restaurant GroupDietGoal Innovations v. Tropical Smoothie CafeDietGoal Innovations v. Marco's FranchisingDietGoal Innovations v. Potbelly Sandwich WorksEffective Exploration v. John Linder OperatingEffective Exploration v. Classic OperatingDietGoal Innovations v. Mrs. Fields Famous BrandsActivelight v. GoGo Media NetworksDietGoal Innovations v. Deli Management, Inc. D/B/A Jason's DeliDietGoal Innovations v. Genghis Grill Franchise ConceptsDietGoal Innovations v. Ufood Restaurant GroupActivision TV v. Colbea EnterprisesLennon Image Technologies v. Tacori EnterprisesReal Time Social Inventions v. CMI Marketing et. al.Real Time Social Inventions v. Glam Media et. al.LBS Innovations v. Sally Beauty Supply et. al.Real Time Social Inventions v. RockmeltLBS Innovations v. Gasbuddy OpenStoreDietGoal Innovations v. WebmdDietGoal Innovations v. Whataburger RestaurantsActivision TV v. CSG SystemsBetter Food Choices v. MyNetDiary et. al.Edekka v EtsyPatent Group v. Abercrombie & FitchPatent Group v. Academy.ComEffective Exploration v. Fossil Resources