Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/68373278/Kind-Fire-Lawsuit
Timestamp: 2016-07-30 10:30:52
Document Index: 768296641

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 271', '§ 284', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', 'art 1', 'art 1']

UploadSign inJoinBooksAudiobooksComicsSheet MusicEditors' Picks BooksHand-picked favorites from our editorsEditors' Picks AudiobooksHand-picked favorites from our editorsEditors' Picks ComicsHand-picked favorites from our editorsEditors' Picks Sheet MusicHand-picked favorites from our editorsTop BooksWhat's trending, bestsellers, award-winners & moreTop AudiobooksWhat's trending, bestsellers, award-winners & moreTop ComicsWhat's trending, bestsellers, award-winners & moreTop Sheet MusicWhat's trending, bestsellers, award-winners & moreCategoriesArts & IdeasBiography & MemoirBusiness & LeadershipChildren'sComputers & TechnologyCooking & FoodCrafts & HobbiesFantasyFiction & LiteratureHappiness & Self-HelpHealth & WellnessHistoryHome & GardenHumorLGBTMystery, Thriller & CrimePolitics & EconomyReferenceReligionRomanceScience & NatureScience FictionSociety & CultureSports & AdventureTravelYoung AdultCategoriesArts & IdeasBiography & MemoirBusiness & LeadershipChildren'sComputers & TechnologyCooking & FoodFantasyFiction & LiteratureHappiness & Self-HelpHealth & WellnessHistoryHome & GardenHumorLGBTMystery, Thriller & CrimePolitics & EconomyReferenceReligionRomanceScience & NatureScience FictionSociety & CultureSports & AdventureTravelYoung AdultCategoriesAdaptationsChildren’sCrime & MysteryFictionHumorMangaNonfictionRomanceSciFi, Fantasy & HorrorSuperheroesYoung AdultPublishersArcanaArchie ComicsBOOM! StudiosDynamiteIDW PublishingKingstone ComicsMarvel ComicsSpace Goat ProductionsTop Cow ComicsValiant ComicsZenescopeDifficultyBeginnerIntermediateAdvancedMixedInstrumentBrassDrums & PercussionGuitar, Bass, and FrettedPianoStringsVocalWoodwindsGenreClassicalCountryFolkJazz & BluesMovies & MusicalsPop & RockReligious & HolidayStandardsWelcome to Scribd! Start your free trial and access books, documents and more.Find out moreCase 6:11-cv-00530-LED Document 1Filed 10/07/11 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1
SMARTPHONE TECHNOLOGIES LLC, Plaintiff, v.
AMAZON.COM, INC. and AMAZON DIGITAL SERVICES, INC., Defendants.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:11cv530 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff SmartPhone Technologies LLC (“SmartPhone”) files this Original Complaint against Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon Digital Services, Inc. for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,950,645 (“the ’645 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 7,506,064 (“the ’064 patent”), U.S. Reissue Patent No. 40,459 (“the ’459 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 6,956,562 (“the ’562 patent”), and/or U.S. Patent No. 6,466,236 (“the ’236 patent”). THE PARTIES 1. SmartPhone is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of
business in Frisco, Texas. 2. Amazon.com, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business Amazon.com, Inc.’s registered agent for service in Delaware is
Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware 19808.
1 Case 6:11-cv-00530-LED Document 1 3.
Filed 10/07/11 Page 2 of 9 PageID #: 2
Amazon Digital Services, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place
of business in Seattle, Washington and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Amazon.com, Inc. Amazon Digital Service, Inc.’s registered agent for service in Delaware is Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware 19808. Defendants
Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon Digital Services, Inc. are collectively referred to as “Amazon.” 4. On information and belief, this Court has personal jurisdiction over Amazon
because Amazon has committed, and continues to commit, acts of infringement in this judicial district, has conducted business in this judicial district and/or has engaged in continuous and systematic activities in this judicial district. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 5. This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the
1400(b). On information and belief, Amazon is deemed to reside in this judicial district, has committed acts of infringement in this judicial district, has purposely transacted business in this judicial district and, upon information and belief, has regular and established places of business in this judicial district. 7. Amazon is subject to this Court’s specific and general personal jurisdiction
pursuant to due process and/or the Texas Long Arm Statute, due at least to its substantial business in this State and judicial district, including: (A) at least part of its infringing activities alleged herein; and (B) regularly doing or soliciting business and, accordingly, deriving substantial revenue from goods and services provided to Texas residents.
2 Case 6:11-cv-00530-LED Document 1
Filed 10/07/11 Page 3 of 9 PageID #: 3
COUNT I (INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,950,645) 8. 9. Smartphone incorporates paragraphs 1 through 7 herein by reference. This cause of action arises under the patent laws of the United States, and in
particular, 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, et seq. 10. SmartPhone is the exclusive licensee of the ’645 patent, entitled “Power-
Conserving Intuitive Device Discovery Technique In A Bluetooth Environment,” with ownership of all substantial rights in the ’645 patent, including the right to exclude others and to enforce, sue and recover damages for the past and future infringement. A true and correct copy of the ’645 patent is attached as Exhibit A. 11. The ’645 patent is valid, enforceable and was duly issued in full compliance with
Title 35 of the United States Code. 12. Amazon is directly and/or indirectly infringing one or more claims of the ’645
patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas and the United States, including at least claim 18, by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing ereader devices and tablet computers, including, without limitation, the Kindle 3G + Wi-Fi and, upon information and belief, the Kindle Fire. Amazon (and customers who use such devices) directly infringe the ’645 patent. Amazon is thereby liable for its direct infringement and/or for its indirect infringement (by virtue of its customers’ use of such devices). 13. SmartPhone has been damaged as a result of Amazon’s infringing conduct
described in this Count. Amazon is, thus, liable to SmartPhone in an amount that adequately compensates it for its infringements, which, by law, cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by this Court under 35 U.S.C. § 284.
3 Case 6:11-cv-00530-LED Document 1
Filed 10/07/11 Page 4 of 9 PageID #: 4
COUNT II (INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,506,064) 14. 15. SmartPhone incorporates paragraphs 1 through 13 herein by reference. This cause of action arises under the patent laws of the United States, and in
particular, 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, et seq. 16. SmartPhone is the exclusive licensee of the ’064 patent, entitled “Handheld
Computer System That Attempts To Establish An Alternative Network Link Upon Failing To Establish A Requested Network Link,” with ownership of all substantial rights in the ’064 patent, including the right to exclude others and to enforce, sue and recover damages for the past and future infringement. A true and correct copy of the ’064 patent is attached as Exhibit B. 17. The ’064 patent is valid, enforceable and was duly issued in full compliance with
Title 35 of the United States Code. 18. Amazon is directly and/or indirectly infringing one or more claims of the ’064
patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas and the United States, including at least claim 17, by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing ereader devices, including, without limitation, the Kindle 3G + Wi-Fi. Amazon (and customers who use such devices) directly infringe the ’064 patent. Amazon is thereby liable for its direct infringement and/or for its indirect infringement (by virtue of its customers’ use of such devices). 19. SmartPhone has been damaged as a result of Amazon’s infringing conduct
4 Case 6:11-cv-00530-LED Document 1
Filed 10/07/11 Page 5 of 9 PageID #: 5
COUNT III (INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. RE 40,459) 20. 21. SmartPhone incorporates paragraphs 1 through 19 herein by reference. This cause of action arises under the patent laws of the United States, and in
particular, 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, et seq. 22. SmartPhone is the exclusive licensee of the ’459 patent, entitled “Method And
Apparatus For Communicating Information Over Low Bandwidth Communications Networks,” with ownership of all substantial rights in the ’459 patent, including the right to exclude others and to enforce, sue and recover damages for the past and future infringement thereof. A true and correct copy of the ’459 patent is attached as Exhibit C. 23. The ’459 patent is valid, enforceable and was duly issued in full compliance with
Title 35 of the United States Code. 24. Amazon is directly and/or indirectly infringing one or more claims of the ’459
patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas and the United States, including at least claim 1, by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing ereader devices and tablet computers, including, without limitation, the Kindle 3G + Wi-Fi and, upon information and belief, the Kindle Fire. Amazon (and customers who use such devices) directly infringe the ’459 patent. Amazon is thereby liable for its direct infringement and/or for its indirect infringement (by virtue of its customers’ use of such devices). 25. SmartPhone has been damaged as a result of Amazon’s infringing conduct
5 Case 6:11-cv-00530-LED Document 1
Filed 10/07/11 Page 6 of 9 PageID #: 6
COUNT IV (INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,956,562) 26. 27. SmartPhone incorporates paragraphs 1 through 25 herein by reference. This cause of action arises under the patent laws of the United States, and in
particular, 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, et seq. 28. SmartPhone is the exclusive licensee of the ’562 patent, entitled “Method For
Controlling A Handheld Computer By Entering Commands Onto A Displayed Feature Of The Handheld Computer,” with ownership of all substantial rights in the ’562 patent, including the right to exclude others and to enforce, sue and recover damages for the past and future infringement thereof. A true and correct copy of the ’562 patent is attached as Exhibit D. 29. The ’562 patent is valid, enforceable and was duly issued in full compliance with
Title 35 of the United States Code. 30. Amazon is directly and/or indirectly infringing, upon information and belief, one
or more claims of the ’562 patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas and the United States, including at least claim 47, by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing e-reader devices and tablet computers, including, without limitation, the Kindle Touch, the Kindle Touch 3G, and the Kindle Fire. Amazon (and customers who use such devices) directly infringe the ’562 patent. Amazon is thereby liable for its direct infringement and/or for its indirect infringement (by virtue of its customers’ use of such devices). 31. SmartPhone has been damaged as a result of Amazon’s infringing conduct
6 Case 6:11-cv-00530-LED Document 1
Filed 10/07/11 Page 7 of 9 PageID #: 7
COUNT V (INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,466,236) 32. 33. SmartPhone incorporates paragraphs 1 through 31 herein by reference. This cause of action arises under the patent laws of the United States, and in
particular, 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, et seq. 34. SmartPhone is the exclusive licensee of the ’236 patent, entitled “System And
Method For Displaying And Manipulating Multiple Calendars On A Personal Digital Assistant,” with ownership of all substantial rights in the ’236 patent, including the right to exclude others and to enforce, sue and recover damages for the past and future infringement thereof. A true and correct copy of the ’236 patent is attached as Exhibit E. 35. The ’236 patent is valid, enforceable and was duly issued in full compliance with
Title 35 of the United States Code. 36. Amazon is directly and/or indirectly infringing, upon information and belief, one
or more claims of the ’236 patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas and the United States, including at least claim 1, by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing tablet computers, including, without limitation, the Kindle Fire. Amazon (and customers who use such devices) directly infringe the ’236 patent. Amazon is thereby liable for its direct infringement and/or for its indirect infringement (by virtue of its customers’ use of such devices). 37. SmartPhone has been damaged as a result of Amazon’s infringing conduct
7 Case 6:11-cv-00530-LED Document 1
Filed 10/07/11 Page 8 of 9 PageID #: 8
JURY DEMAND SmartPhone hereby requests a trial by jury pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. PRAYER FOR RELIEF SmartPhone requests that the Court find in its favor and against Amazon, and that the Court grant SmartPhone the following relief: a. Judgment that one or more claims of the ’645, ’064, ’459, ’562, and/or ’236 patents have been infringed, either literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, by Amazon and/or by others to whose infringements Amazon has contributed and/or by others whose infringements have been induced by Amazon; Judgment that Amazon account for and pay to SmartPhone all damages to and costs incurred by SmartPhone because of Amazon’s infringing activities and other conduct complained of herein; Judgment that Amazon account for and pay to SmartPhone a reasonable, ongoing, post judgment royalty because of Amazon’s infringing activities and other conduct complained of herein; That SmartPhone be granted pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the damages caused by Amazon’s infringing activities and other conduct complained of herein; and That SmartPhone be granted such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper under the circumstances. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Edward R. Nelson, III (w/permission John Ward, Jr.) Edward R. Nelson, III enelson@nbclaw.net Texas State Bar No. 00797142 Christie B. Lindsey clindsey@nbclaw.net Texas State Bar No. 24041918 S. Brannon Latimer blatimer@nbclaw.net Texas State Bar No. 24060137 NELSON BUMGARDNER CASTO, P.C. 3131 West 7th Street, Suite 300
Case 6:11-cv-00530-LED Document 1
Filed 10/07/11 Page 9 of 9 PageID #: 9 Fort Worth, Texas 76107 Phone: (817) 377-9111 Fax: (817) 377-3485 Anthony G. Simon asimon@simonlawpc.com Timothy E. Grochocinski teg@simonlawpc.com THE SIMON LAW FIRM, P.C. 701 Market Ste 1450 St. Louis MO 63101 Phone: (314) 241-2929 Fax: (314) 241-2029 T. John Ward, Jr. Texas State Bar No. 00794818 J. Wesley Hill Texas State Bar No. 24032294 WARD & SMITH LAW FIRM 111 W. Tyler Street Longview, Texas 75601 (903) 757-6400 (903) 757-2323 (fax) jw@wsfirm.com wh@wsfirm.com Attorneys for Plaintiff SmartPhone Technologies LLC
9 More From This UserMichael Hastings toxicology report04.26.12 IRS 501(c)(4) Response to Hatch March 14th Letter (1)AlanONeill_PCDocuementsAlanONeill J&SDocumentsMcGinn SPD Letter02McGinn Ltr Re Public Statement 12 19 11 Sign Ons (2)Moxie Media SettlementDOJ SPD InvestigationCary Griffin SPCSenate Letter to Clinton Nov2011McGinn SPD LetterCrystal Cox OpinionKenneth Leaming Charging DocsDOJ SPD LetterLee StatementHarpham affidavit01Richard Finger Charging DocsJohn Chase Charging DocsReardon Itemized Trip RecieptsReardon Unite Mi Zed Trip RecieptsMccarthy InformationPC JordanBradburn v NCRLJarlik Bell IndictmentDiscriminatory Renters
Kind Fire Lawsuit by Curtis Cartier213 viewsEmbedDownloadRead on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.Copyright: Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)Download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentMore informationShow less
RelatedPatent Judgements (1)by Rehan SadiqLocata LBS v. Factual.pdfby PatentBlastReplevin - Digestedby Jasmin Canones-KimUy v Capulongby Ruab PlosEMG Technology v. Vanguard Groupby PriorSmartUnified Messaging Solutions v. BB&T et. al.by PriorSmartNorton v Blaha (19.11.13) (Jud)by Solomon IonRECUSAL MOTION & MEMO (3)by GRANADAFRAUDSpecpro Cases Part 1by Avien Rainell GarciaApple Computer, Inc. v. Podfitness, Inc. - Document No. 56by Justia.comSP- Stronghold v Republic Asahiby Czar Ian AgbayaniMicrosoft v. Motoroalby Markman AdvisorsCaladiao v de Blasby naldsdomingoMagnetic Products, Incorporated v. Trestain - Document No. 6by Justia.comSps. Bautista, Eday Ragadio and Francing Galgalan v. Atty. Cefraby Kim David ObejasMosley ruling on costs in robocalls caseby kady23Memory Integrity LLCby PriorSmartMERS Fraud Upon the Courtby Tim BryantADR CASESby Jerraemie Nikka Cipres PatulotAM No. 10-3-10 SC Proposed Special Rules on Intellectual Property Litigation (October 3, 2011)by gs_humboldtJust Truffles, Inc. v. Nonnie Waller's Traditional Southern - Document No. 2by Justia.comPALE Agpalo Reviewer III-!Vby Jennifer DeleonDahl v. Bain, Memorandum and Order partly allowing and denying motion to unseal Fifth Amended Complaintby darwinbondgrahamRexford Kipps Et Al. v. James Caillerby MikeInRacinedigest (1)by joffrey_caguiaJury Nullification Complaint: Motion for Preliminary Injunctionby Michael_Lee_RobertsReyes vs de La Rosa - 2by Arkhaye SalvatoreAberca v Ver_Case Digest_pby ryelie04Similar to Kind Fire LawsuitPatent Judgements (1)Locata LBS v. Factual.pdfReplevin - DigestedUy v CapulongEMG Technology v. Vanguard GroupUnified Messaging Solutions v. BB&T et. al.Norton v Blaha (19.11.13) (Jud)RECUSAL MOTION & MEMO (3)Specpro Cases Part 1Apple Computer, Inc. v. Podfitness, Inc. - Document No. 56SP- Stronghold v Republic AsahiMicrosoft v. MotoroalCaladiao v de BlasMagnetic Products, Incorporated v. Trestain - Document No. 6Sps. Bautista, Eday Ragadio and Francing Galgalan v. Atty. CefraMosley ruling on costs in robocalls caseMemory Integrity LLCMERS Fraud Upon the CourtADR CASESAM No. 10-3-10 SC Proposed Special Rules on Intellectual Property Litigation (October 3, 2011)Just Truffles, Inc. v. Nonnie Waller's Traditional Southern - Document No. 2PALE Agpalo Reviewer III-!VDahl v. Bain, Memorandum and Order partly allowing and denying motion to unseal Fifth Amended ComplaintRexford Kipps Et Al. v. James Caillerdigest (1)Jury Nullification ComplaintReyes vs de La Rosa - 2Aberca v Ver_Case Digest_pSelex Communications, Inc. v. Jajah, Inc. - Document No. 28