Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/234170742/Digital-Air-Technologies-v-Volkswagen-Group-of-America
Timestamp: 2016-07-23 09:17:27
Document Index: 26876485

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1', '§ 1391', '§ 287', '§ 271', '§ 287', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 284', '§ 284', '§285', 'art24', 'art11', 'art2011']

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 more1 Case No.: 2:14-CV-05525
COMPLAINT FOR WILLFUL PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Shawn G. Hansen (SBN 197033)
shansen@nixonpeabody.com
Telephone: (213) 629-6190
Facsimile: (855) 780-9262
DIGITAL AIR TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
Case No. 2:14-CV-05525
COMPLAINT FOR WILLFUL
Plaintiff Digital Air Technologies, LLC alleges as follows for its Complaint
for Willful Patent Infringement under the Patent Laws of the United States,
35 U.S.C. § 1, et seq., against Defendant Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.:
1. Plaintiff Digital Air Technologies, LLC (“Digital Air”) is a limited
liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of California
with an address of 511 Avenue of the Americas, #36, New York, New York 10011.
2. Defendant Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. (“VW”) is a
corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New Jersey with a
principal place of business at 2200 Ferdinand Porsche Drive, Herndon, Virginia
- 2 - Case No. 2:14-CV-05525
3. On information and belief, VW has been registered to do business in
the State of California for almost 60 years and has continuously and systematically
transacted business in the State of California related to, among other things, the
design, testing, marketing, distribution, sales, and service of automobiles.
According to the VW web site, VW operates multiple facilities in the Central
District of California including, without limitation, Western Region offices in
Woodland Hills, a Design Center in Santa Monica, a Technical Center in Oxnard,
and a Parts Distribution Center in Ontario. See:
http://www.volkswagengroupamerica.com/locations.html.
4. On information and belief, VW also uses the alternate name
Volkswagen of America, Inc. Accordingly, “VW” as used herein refers to the
entity known as both Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. and Volkswagen of
5. This action arises under the Patent Laws of the United States,
6. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to
7. This Court has personal jurisdiction over VW because it has multiple
regular and established places of business in the Central District of California and
regularly, continuously, and systematically conducts business in the Central District
of California, thus purposefully availing itself of the privileges of conducting
business in the Central District of California. VW’s contacts with the Central
District of California include, without limitation, operating the facilities noted
above and employing residents of the Central District of California therein;
soliciting customers through one or more Internet web sites, television, radio, and
print advertisements directed at residents of the Central District of California;
- 3 - Case No. 2:14-CV-05525
designing, testing, marketing, distributing, and selling vehicles and vehicle parts in
the Central District of California; and providing warranty services in the Central
District of California. This Court also has personal jurisdiction over VW with
respect to the specific subject matter of this action because VW has directly and
indirectly performed acts of infringement of the Patents-in-Suit in the Central
8. Venue is proper in the Central District of California pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and 1400(b).
9. Unites States Patent Number 6,154,251 (“ ‘251 patent”) is titled
“System for Producing Time-Independent Virtual Camera Movement in Motion
Pictures and Other Media” and was duly and validly issued by the United States
Patent and Trademark Office on November 28, 2000. A true and correct copy of
the ‘251 patent is attached to and incorporated herein as Exhibit A.
10. Unites States Patent Number 6,331,871 (“ ‘871 patent”) is titled
Patent and Trademark Office on December 18, 2001. A true and correct copy of
the ‘871 patent is attached to and incorporated herein as Exhibit B.
11. Unites States Patent Number 6,933,966 (“ ‘966 patent”) is titled
Patent and Trademark Office on August 23, 2005. A true and correct copy of the
‘966 patent is attached to and incorporated herein as Exhibit C. The ‘251, ‘871, and
‘966 patents are referred to collectively herein as the “Patents-in-Suit”.
12. The Patents-in-Suit each name Dayton V. Taylor as the sole inventor.
13. The Patents-in-Suit are entitled to an effective filing date of December
21, 1994, as a series of continuations of Mr. Taylor’s United States Patent
- 4 - Case No. 2:14-CV-05525
Application Serial Number 08/362,653, now United States Patent Number
5,659,323.
14. Digital Air is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the
Patents-in-Suit by assignment from Digital Air, Inc., of which Digital Air is a
wholly-owned subsidiary. This assignment was recorded in the United States
Patent and Trademark Office on July 2, 2014 at reel/frame 033235/0647. Digital
Air, Inc. received all right, title, and interest in and to the Patents-in-Suit by an
assignment from the sole inventor, Mr. Taylor, that was recorded in the United
States Patent and Trademark Office on April 17, 1995 at reel/frame 007444/0059.
DIGITAL AIR’S PATENTED TECHNOLOGY
15. The Patents-in-Suit relate to Mr. Taylor’s pioneering and highly
acclaimed inventions related to producing virtual camera motion in a motion picture
medium. The patented inventions produce motion pictures that convey the illusion
of a single camera moving around a scene in which time is frozen.
16. Mr. Taylor invented the patented technology no later than April 3,
1994 and, as noted above, filed the application for the parent of the Patents-in-Suit
later that same year. Mr. Taylor founded Digital Air, Inc. in 1995 to commercialize
the inventions and since then has practiced them in connection with providing
industry leading visual effects services. Examples of Digital Air, Inc.’s work are
available on its website at http://www.digitalair.com/work.html, which is marked
with the numbers of the Patents-in-Suit in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 287.
17. Digital Air’s patented inventions have enjoyed great commercial
success and have been honored with extensive recognition in the cinematography
18. For example, Digital Air, Inc. has practiced the patented technology to
create effects for hundreds of commercial productions around the world, including
works for many of the world’s most recognizable brands.
19. As another example, Mr. Taylor’s first Timetrack™camera reflecting
- 5 - Case No. 2:14-CV-05525
an embodiment of the Patents-in-Suit was accepted in the permanent collection of
the Smithsonian National Museum of American History in Washington, D.C.
20. And as a further example, the Royal Photographic Society in London
honored Mr. Taylor with the 2007 Saxby Award for achievement in the field of
three-dimensional imaging. The Royal Photographic Society press release
announcing this award stated:
Dayton could be called the new Muybridge, as he is one of the leading
inventors of camera array based image capture and processing
technology. Dayton’s technology has to be the most perfect use of
still photography in the cinematography arena.
VW’S WILLFUL INFRINGEMENT
21. VW has willfully infringed the Patents-in-Suit in connection with
making and using motion pictures in its web campaign regarding its 2013 Beetle
Coupe and 2013 Beetle Convertible vehicles (“2013 Beetle web campaign”). Some
VW documents refer to the campaign as “vw.com: 2013 Beetle Site Experience”
and to the incorporated infringing motion pictures as “Freeze Frame 360”. After
Digital Air, Inc. gave notice of infringement of the Patents-in-Suit to VW, VW
and/or its agents made and/or instructed others to make the infringing motion
pictures by actions that directly infringe the Patents-in-Suit. The infringing motion
pictures are the featured element of the 2013 Beetle web campaign and were used
by VW until at least approximately April or May 2014 on the vw.com web site at
http://web.vw.com/coupe/beetle/ and http://web.vw.com/convertible/beetle/.
22. On information and belief, VW and/or its agent(s) met each limitation
of one or more of the claims of the ‘251 and ‘966 patents in connection with
making the 2013 Beetle web campaign.
23. To the extent that one or more limitation(s) of methods claimed in the
‘251 and ‘966 patents was not met by VW and/or its agent(s), VW and/or its
agent(s) met at least one limitation and controlled or directed others to meet the
- 6 - Case No. 2:14-CV-05525
remaining limitations.
24. In addition to VW, others involved in meeting the limitations of the
Patents-in-Suit include Deutsch LA, Inc., Untitled, Inc., and Reel EFX, Inc.
25. The 2013 Beetle web campaign is a product made by processes
claimed in the ‘251 and ‘966 patents, which VW used within the United States
during the term of the ‘251 and ‘966 patents.
26. The 2013 Beetle web campaign, including specifically the so-called
Freeze Frame 360 motion pictures, comprises motion pictures as claimed in the
‘871 patent.
27. Accordingly, VW has directly infringed the Patents-in-Suit under 35
U.S.C. §§ 271(a) and/or 271(g) by making and/or using the 2013 Beetle web
28. Constructive notice of the Patents-in-Suit was given by marking the
Digital Air, Inc. web site, media containing motion pictures, and quotations and
invoices with the numbers of the Patents-in-Suit in accordance with 35 U.S.C.
§ 287. Actual notice of the Patents-in-Suit was given to VW and/or its agents in
connection with Digital Air, Inc.’s submission in September 2012 of at least two
quotations to provide services for the production of the 2013 Beetle web campaign.
29. After Digital Air, Inc. was informed that it had not been selected to
provide services for the production of the 2013 Beetle web campaign, actual notice
of infringement of the Patents-in-Suit was given to VW before the 2013 Beetle web
campaign was made and used in a letter dated October 3, 2012 addressed to VW’s
Chief Product and Marketing Officer, Tim Mahoney, and its General Manager,
Brand Marketing, Brian Thomas.
30. VW has indirectly infringed each of the Patents-in-Suit by inducement
under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by instructing and encouraging Deutsch LA, Inc.,
Untitled, Inc., and/or Reel EFX, Inc.to directly infringe the Patents-in-Suit after
VW was on notice of infringement of the Patents-in-Suit. As a result of VW’s
- 7 - Case No. 2:14-CV-05525
inducement, Deutsch LA, Inc., Untitled, Inc., and/or Reel EFX, Inc. directly
infringed each of the Patents-in-Suit in connection with making the 2013 Beetle
web campaign. On information and belief, VW specifically intended to encourage
direct infringement by Deutsch LA, Inc., Untitled, Inc., and/or Reel EFX, Inc.
31. VW was on notice of infringement of the Patents-in-Suit before the
infringement began and failed to provide any reason why making and using the
2013 Beetle web campaign would not infringe Digital Air’s valid patent claims.
32. VW acted with reckless disregard of the Patents-in-Suit by proceeding
to make and use the 2013 Beetle web campaign after it was on notice of
infringement. VW knew or should have known that there was an objectively high
likelihood that making and using the 2013 Beetle web campaign would infringe
Digital Air’s valid Patents-in-Suit.
(Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,154,251)
33. Digital Air repeats and realleges the allegations of the foregoing
Paragraphs 1 through 32 as if fully set forth herein.
34. VW directly infringed at least claim 5 of the ‘251 patent under 35
U.S.C. §§ 271(a) and 271(g), literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, by
making and using the 2013 Beetle web campaign.
35. VW indirectly infringed at least claim 5 of the ‘251 patent by
inducement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by instructing and encouraging Deutsch LA,
Inc., Untitled, Inc., and/or Reel EFX, Inc. to directly infringe the ‘251 patent,
literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents. VW did so with knowledge of the
Patents-in-Suit and specific intent to encourage Deutsch LA, Inc., Untitled, Inc.,
and/or Reel EFX, Inc. to directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of
equivalents. Deutsch LA, Inc., Untitled, Inc., and/or Reel EFX, Inc. directly
infringed the ‘251 patent, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, in
connection with making the 2013 Beetle web campaign.
- 8 - Case No. 2:14-CV-05525
36. VW’s infringement was willful.
37. Digital Air has been damaged, in an amount to be determined, as a
direct and proximate result of VW’s infringement of the ‘251 patent.
(Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,331,871)
38. Digital Air repeats and realleges the allegations of the foregoing
Paragraphs 1 through 37 as if fully set forth herein.
39. VW directly infringed at least claim 8 of the ‘871 patent under 35
U.S.C. § 271(a), literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making and
using the 2013 Beetle web campaign.
40. VW indirectly infringed at least claim 8 of the ‘871 patent by
Inc., Untitled, Inc., and/or Reel EFX, Inc. to directly infringe the ‘871 patent,
infringed the ‘871 patent, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, in
41. VW’s infringement was willful.
42. Digital Air has been damaged, in an amount to be determined, as a
direct and proximate result of VW’s infringement of the ‘871 patent.
(Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,933,966)
43. Digital Air repeats and realleges the allegations of the foregoing
Paragraphs 1 through 42 as if fully set forth herein.
44. VW directly infringed at least claim 16 of the ‘966 patent under 35
- 9 - Case No. 2:14-CV-05525
45. VW indirectly infringed at least claim 16 of the ‘966 patent by
Inc., Untitled, Inc., and/or Reel EFX, Inc. to directly infringe the ‘966 patent,
infringed the ‘966 patent, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, in
46. VW’s infringement was willful.
47. Digital Air has been damaged, in an amount to be determined, as a
direct and proximate result of VW’s infringement of the ‘966 patent.
WHEREFORE, Digital Air respectfully requests the Court to enter judgment
in favor of Digital Air and against VW as to all claims asserted herein as follows:
A. Granting a judgment that VW has directly infringed the Patents-
in-Suit in violation of 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(a) and 271(g);
B. Granting a judgment that VW has indirectly infringed the
Patents-in-Suit by inducement in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b);
C. Ordering VW to pay to Digital Air damages adequate to
compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a
reasonable royalty for the use made of the patented inventions by VW,
together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest and costs as
fixed by the Court, in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 284;
D. Granting a judgment that VW’s infringement was willful and
ordering VW to pay to Digital Air increased damages of three times
the compensatory damages, in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 284;
- 10 - Case No. 2:14-CV-05525
E. Granting a judgment that this case is exceptional under 35
U.S.C. §285 and ordering VW to pay to Digital Air reasonable
F. Granting Digital Air such other and further relief as this Court
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38 and Central District of
California L.R. 38-1, Digital Air demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable.
Dated: July 16, 2014 NIXON PEABODY LLP
By: /s/ Shawn G. Hansen
Digital Air Technologies v. Volkswagen Group of America by PriorSmart24 viewsEmbedDownloadDescriptionOfficial Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 2:14-cv-05525: Digital Air Technologies, LLC v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Central Distric...Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 2:14-cv-05525: Digital Air Technologies, LLC v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-laHT for more info.Categories: 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
RelatedNite Glow Industries et. al. v. Central Garden & Pet Company et. al.by PriorSmartAmeranth v. Wanderspotby PriorSmartIntegrated Claims Systems v. Wellcare of Texasby PatentBlastDDR Holdings v. Digital Riverby PriorSmartInnovative Display Technologies v. Research in Motion Et. Al.by PatentBlastAdvanced Processor Technologies v. Creative Technology et. al.by PriorSmartTrend Micro Incorporated v. RPost Holdings et. al..pdfby PatentBlastEnglishtown v. Rosetta Stoneby PriorSmartYieldboost Tech v. Applied Materialsby PriorSmartApollo Intellectual Properties v. Panamax et. al.by PatentBlastEnergy Sciences v. PCT Engineered Systemsby PatentBlast1st Technology v. OfficeMaxby PriorSmartDaramic et. al. v. Entek Internationalby PriorSmart11-11432-WGYby barzilay123VirnetX et. al. v. Appleby PriorSmartUMF et. al. v. Norwex et. al.by PriorSmartINP Syllabus under atty. Salaoby Bojy Domingo12-10162-RWZby barzilay123Cephalon v. Accord Healthcare Et. Al.by PatentBlastRockwell Automation v. Beckhoff Automation et. al.by PriorSmartSteelhead Licensing LLCby PriorSmart2011 05-17 California vs. Overstock.com - Motion to Compel Grantedby Sam E. AntarMacNeil IP v. United Brokerage Company et. al.by PriorSmartClassification of Remedies (Outline)by Ronnie Barcena Jr.Similar to Digital Air Technologies v. Volkswagen Group of AmericaNite Glow Industries et. al. v. Central Garden & Pet Company et. al.Ameranth v. WanderspotIntegrated Claims Systems v. Wellcare of TexasDDR Holdings v. Digital RiverInnovative Display Technologies v. Research in Motion Et. Al.Advanced Processor Technologies v. Creative Technology et. al.Trend Micro Incorporated v. RPost Holdings et. al..pdfEnglishtown v. Rosetta StoneYieldboost Tech v. Applied MaterialsApollo Intellectual Properties v. Panamax et. al.Energy Sciences v. PCT Engineered Systems1st Technology v. OfficeMaxDaramic et. al. v. Entek International11-11432-WGYVirnetX et. al. v. AppleUMF et. al. v. Norwex et. al.INP Syllabus under atty. Salao12-10162-RWZCephalon v. Accord Healthcare Et. Al.Rockwell Automation v. Beckhoff Automation et. al.Steelhead Licensing LLC2011 05-17 California vs. Overstock.com - Motion to Compel GrantedMacNeil IP v. United Brokerage Company et. al.Classification of Remedies (Outline)Red Carpet Studios v. Midwest Trading Group et. al.