Source: https://www.scribd.com/doc/185416945/TLI-Communications-v-Imgur
Timestamp: 2017-03-24 16:21:21
Document Index: 447878823

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 271', '§ 284', '§ 283', '§ 1331', '§ 1391', '§ 284', '§ 285', '§ 284', 'art0', '§ 271', 'art09', '§ 271']

TLI Communications v. Imgur
BrowseInterestsStay InformedCareerPersonal GrowthFiction & BiographiesHealth & FitnessLifestyleCultureBrowse byBooksAudiobooksNews & MagazinesSheet MusicBrowse allUploadSign inJoinUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------x TLI COMMUNICATIONS LLC, : : C.A. No. _____________ Plaintiff, : : : v.: : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED IMGUR LLC : Defendant. : : : : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------x Complaint for Patent Infringement Plaintiff TLI Communications LLC (“TLI”) files this Complaint for Patent Infringement (“Complaint”) against Imgur LLC (“Imgur”), wherein, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 and 281, Plaintiff seeks a judgment of infringement by Defendant of U.S. Patent No. 6,038,295 (the “’295 Patent”) and damages resulting therefrom pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, as well as preliminary and permanent injunction of the infringing activity pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283, and such other relief as the Court deems just and proper, and in support thereof alleges as follows: The Parties 1. Plaintiff TLI is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of
business at 3422 Old Capitol Trail, Suite 72, Wilmington, Delaware 19808. 2. On information and belief, Defendant Imgur is a California limited liability
company with its principal place of business at 929 Market Street, Suite 400, San Francisco, California 94103.
§§ 1331 and 1338(a) because the action concerns infringement of a United States patent. 5. Upon information and belief, Imgur conducts substantial business in Delaware,
directly or through intermediaries, including: (i) at least a portion of the infringements alleged herein; and (ii) regularly doing or soliciting business, engaging in other persistent courses of conduct and/or deriving substantial revenue from goods and services provided to individuals in Delaware. 6. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400. The Patent-in-Suit 7. TLI is the owner of the ’295 Patent entitled “Apparatus and Method for
Recording, Communicating and Administering Digital Images,” which the United States Patent & Trademark Office lawfully and duly issued on March 14, 2000. A true and correct copy of the ’295 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Factual Background 8. 9. Dr. Heinz Mattes is the named inventor of the ’295 patent. The ’295 patent claims priority to an application filed on June 17, 1996. The ’295
recognized that mobile telephony and digital photography, each then in their infancy, would likely become more and more popular. Dr. Mattes recognized that mobile telephones could be
integrated with digital cameras, resulting in a proliferation of the quantity of digital images that could and would be taken. 11. Dr. Mattes invented a revolutionary way of communicating and recording such
of digital images from a telephone. Over the past few years, smart cellular telephones that incorporate sophisticated digital cameras have exploded in popularity, as has social media. Today, hundreds of millions of digital images are uploaded onto computer servers and social media websites every day, including via www.imgur.com. Imgur’s products use the ’295’s patented technology, without license or authority, to classify those images so that they can be easily uploaded, stored, organized, retrieved and shared. Imgur’s Infringing Products 14. 15. Imgur provides web based products and services. Imgur recently offered downloadable applications, especially designed for iPhone
and Android mobile telephones, and other mobile telephone platforms, which allow telephone users to easily characterize and upload digital images to Imgur servers. 16. So that these digital images could be uploaded, stored and organized, Imgur had
to develop products and processes that, on information and belief, employ TLI’s patented technology. The infringing products include, but are not limited to, the products and processes that Imgur uses to upload, store and organize the digital images it receives from mobile 3
telephones (“Imgur Infringing Products”). Discovery is expected to uncover the full extent of Imgur’s unlawful use of TLI’s patented technology beyond these accused Infringing Products already identified through public information. CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Infringement of the ’295 Patent) 17. TLI incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 16 of the Complaint as if set
forth here in full. 18. Upon information and belief, Imgur has been and is currently directly infringing
one or more claims of the ’295 Patent by making, using, offering to sell, and/or selling within the United States, and/or importing into the United States, without authority, the Imgur Infringing Products. For example, and without limitation, Imgur has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe the ’295 Patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States. Imgur's infringement includes, without limitation, (i) making and using the apparatus of claim 1 and claims dependent thereon, and (ii) practicing the method of claim 17 and claims dependent thereon. 19. Specifically, Imgur’s direct infringement includes, without limitation (i) its
uploading of digital images from mobile telephones onto Imgur servers (or onto servers operated on or for Imgur’s behalf (“Imgur servers”)), (ii) its testing of its Imgur products by uploading images with mobile telephones onto Imgur servers within the United States, and (iii) its maintaining Imgur servers that categorize and store images that were uploaded via mobile telephones. Imgur also directs and/or controls its employees, executives, agents, customers and agents to use the Imgur Infringing Products to upload images from mobile telephones onto Imgur servers within the United States. Imgur also directly infringes one or more claims of the ’295 Patent by providing downloadable applications to mobile telephone users and thus putting the Infringing Products into use. 4
Upon information and belief, upon knowledge of the ’295 Patent (at least since
the filing date of this Complaint), Imgur is contributing to the infringement of the ’295 Patent by, among other things, knowingly and with intent, actively encouraging its customers, suppliers, agents and affiliates to make, use, sell and/or offer for sale the Imgur Infringing Products in a manner that constitutes infringement of one or more claims of the ’295 Patent. There are no substantial uses of the Infringing Products that do not infringe one or more claims of the ’295 Patent. Imgur mobile telephone applications that Imgur provides to its customers, for example, have no substantial non-infringing use. 21. Upon information and belief, upon knowledge of the ’295 Patent (at least since
the filing date of this Complaint), Imgur is inducing infringement of the ’295 Patent by, among other things, knowingly and with intent, actively encouraging its customers, suppliers, agents and affiliates to make, use, sell and/or offer for sale Imgur Infringing Products in a manner that constitutes infringement of one or more claims of the ’295 Patent. 22. To the extent that Imgur’s customers can be considered to put the Infringing
Products into use, then Imgur would also be inducing infringement of the ’295 Patent by, among other things, knowingly and with intent (at least since the filing date of this Complaint), actively encouraging its customers to make and use Imgur’s products in a manner that constitutes infringement of one or more claims of the ’295 Patent. 23. As a result of Imgur’s unlawful infringement of the ’295 Patent, TLI has suffered
and will continue to suffer damage. TLI is entitled to recover from Imgur the damages adequate to compensate for such infringement, which have yet to be determined. 24. Any further manufacturing, sales, offers for sale, uses, or importation by Imgur of
the Infringing Products will demonstrate a deliberate and conscious decision to infringe the ’295
Patent or, at the very least, a reckless disregard of TLI’s patent rights. If Imgur continues to manufacture, use, offer to sell, sell, and/or import the Infringing Products following its notice of the ’295 Patent claims, Imgur’s infringement will be willful and TLI will be entitled to treble damages and attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in this action, along with prejudgment interest under 35 U.S.C. §§ 284, 285. 25. this Court. 26. Imgur’s acts of infringement have caused and will continue to cause irreparable Imgur will continue to infringe the ‘295 Patent unless and until it is enjoined by
harm to TLI unless and until Imgur is enjoined by this Court. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, TLI prays for a Judgment in favor of TLI and against Defendant as follows: A. B. C. Imgur; D. An order preliminarily and permanently enjoining Imgur and its affiliates, That Imgur has directly infringed the ’295 Patent; That Imgur has indirectly infringed the ’295 Patent; That this case is “exceptional” within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285 against
subsidiaries, officers, directors, employees, agents, representatives, licensees, successors, assigns, and all those acting for them and on their behalf, or acting in concert with them directly or indirectly, from further acts of infringement of the ’295 Patent; E. A full accounting for and an award of damages to TLI for Imgur’s infringement of
the ’295 Patent; including enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, together with pre- and post-judgment interest; F. An award of TLI’s reasonable attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs; and 6
G. proper.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL TLI hereby demands trial by jury on all issues so triable.
Sign up to vote on this titleUsefulNot usefulTLI Communications v. Imgur by PriorSmart0.0 (0)EmbedDownloadDescriptionOfficial Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. None: TLI Communications LLC v. Imgur LLC. Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, no judge yet assigned. See http:...Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. None: TLI Communications LLC v. Imgur LLC. Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l9vU 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
RelatedHunter's Edge v. Primos - Complaintby slbursteinParallel Networks v. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts Onlineby PriorSmartGeoTag v. Oracleby PriorSmartArunachalam v. Office Depotby PatentBlastNetwork Signatures v. Purdue Pharmaby PriorSmartWayne-Gossard Corporation v. Moretz Hosiery Mills, Inc., 539 F.2d 986, 4th Cir. (1976)by Scribd Government DocsFreemanby PriorSmartCyberFone Systems v. Bright House Networksby PriorSmartMelvino Technologies et. al. v. Missoula Urban Transportation Districtby PriorSmartTelinit Technologies v. Spotifyby PriorSmarte.Digital v. Huawei Technologies et. al.by PriorSmartSample 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) complaintby nairriRockler Co. v. Franklin Int'l - Complaintby slbursteinCRFD Research Inc.by PriorSmart09Sep2016 Casesby Namu BwakaFondriest v. Chippewa Aerospaceby PatentBlastPlayCore Wisconsin v. Xccentby PriorSmartTainoApp v. Kobo Et. Al.by PatentBlastDatatreasury v. Fidelity National Information Services et. al.by PriorSmartRPost Holdings et. al. v. Constant Contactby PriorSmartMasterbuilt Manufacturing v. Sportsman Guideby PatentBlastWyncomm v. Sand Dune Venturesby PatentBlastWyncomm v. Archosby PatentBlastData Carriers v. Wal-Mart Stores et. al.by PriorSmartSagacious Research - Patent and Trademark Updates – 29-December 2011by sagaciousresearchPragmatus Telecom v. AOL.by PriorSmartKoninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. et. al. v. Zoll Lifecorby PriorSmartTrustees of Boston University v. Seoul Semiconductor Company et. al.by PriorSmartSimilar To TLI Communications v. ImgurSkip carouselHunter's Edge v. Primos - ComplaintParallel Networks v. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts OnlineGeoTag v. OracleArunachalam v. Office DepotNetwork Signatures v. Purdue PharmaWayne-Gossard Corporation v. Moretz Hosiery Mills, Inc., 539 F.2d 986, 4th Cir. (1976)FreemanCyberFone Systems v. Bright House NetworksMelvino Technologies et. al. v. Missoula Urban Transportation DistrictTelinit Technologies v. Spotifye.Digital v. Huawei Technologies et. al.Sample 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) complaintRockler Co. v. Franklin Int'l - ComplaintCRFD Research Inc.09Sep2016 CasesFondriest v. Chippewa AerospacePlayCore Wisconsin v. XccentTainoApp v. Kobo Et. Al.Datatreasury v. Fidelity National Information Services et. al.RPost Holdings et. al. v. Constant ContactMasterbuilt Manufacturing v. Sportsman GuideWyncomm v. Sand Dune VenturesWyncomm v. ArchosData Carriers v. Wal-Mart Stores et. al.Sagacious Research - Patent and Trademark Updates – 29-December 2011Pragmatus Telecom v. AOL.Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. et. al. v. Zoll LifecorTrustees of Boston University v. Seoul Semiconductor Company et. al.Project Paperless v. BlueWave Computing et. al.Trulia motion to dismiss Zillow suitTLI Communications v. Imgur