Source: https://www.scribd.com/doc/201747867/Intellectual-Ventures-vs-Motorola-Mobility-complaint-as-filed-in-Florida
Timestamp: 2017-03-24 08:18:42
Document Index: 633450125

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1', '§1331', '§1391', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 284']

Intellectual Ventures vs Motorola Mobility complaint as filed in Florida
BrowseInterestsStay InformedCareerPersonal GrowthFiction & BiographiesHealth & FitnessLifestyleCultureBrowse byBooksAudiobooksNews & MagazinesSheet MusicBrowse allUploadSign inJoinCase 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 1 of 19UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC, Plaintiffs, v. Motorola Mobility LLC, Defendant. ________________________________________/ COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiffs Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC hereby sue Motorola Mobility LLC (“Motorola Mobility”) and allege as follows: THE PARTIES 1. Intellectual Ventures I LLC (“Intellectual Ventures I”) is a Delaware limited
liability company having its principal place of business located at 3150 139th Avenue SE, Bellevue, Washington, 98005. 2. Intellectual Ventures II LLC (“Intellectual Ventures II”) is a Delaware limited
liability company having its principal place of business located at 3150 139th Avenue SE, Bellevue, Washington, 98005. 3. Upon information and belief, Motorola Mobility is a Delaware limited liability
company with its principal place of business at 600 North U.S. Highway 45, Libertyville, Illinois 60048 as well as substantial operations at 8000 W. Sunrise Blvd., Plantation, Florida 33322. On information and belief, Motorola Mobility has substantial ties to this district. See, e.g., Motorola
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 2 of 19
Mobility, Inc. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 10-CV-23580, Dkt. No. 47, which details Motorola Mobility’s substantial ties to the district. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4. This is a civil action for patent infringement under the Patent Laws of the United
States, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et. seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§1331 and 1138(a). 5. This Court has general personal jurisdiction over Motorola Mobility because it is
engaged in substantial and not isolated activity in this judicial district. This Court has specific jurisdiction over Motorola Mobility because it has committed acts giving rise to this action and has established minimum contacts within this judicial district such that the exercise of jurisdiction over Motorola Mobility would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. 6. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1391(b)-(c) and
1400(b) because Motorola Mobility has conducted business in this district and/or provided services to its customers within this judicial district, and has committed acts of patent infringement within this district giving rise to this action. INTELLECTUAL VENTURES AND THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT 7. Intellectual Ventures Management, LLC (“Intellectual Ventures”) was founded in
2000. Since its founding, Intellectual Ventures has been deeply involved in the business of invention. Intellectual Ventures creates inventions and files patent applications for those
inventions; collaborates with others to develop and patent inventions; and acquires and licenses patents from individual inventors, universities and other institutions. A significant aspect of
Intellectual Ventures' business is managing the Plaintiffs in this case, Intellectual Ventures I and Intellectual Ventures II. 8. Intellectual Ventures' business includes purchasing important inventions from
individual inventors and institutions and then licensing the inventions to those who need them. Through this business, Intellectual Ventures allows inventors to reap a financial reward from their innovations, which is frequently difficult for individual inventors to do. To date, Intellectual Ventures has acquired more than 70,000 IP assets and, in the process, has paid individual inventors hundreds of millions of dollars for their inventions. Intellectual Ventures, in turn, has earned more than $3 billion by licensing these patents to some of the world's most innovative and successful technology companies who continue to use them to make computer equipment, software, semiconductor devices, and a host of other products. 9. Intellectual Ventures also creates inventions. Intellectual Ventures has a staff of
scientists and engineers who develop ideas in a broad range of fields, including agriculture, computer hardware, life sciences, medical devices, semiconductors, and software. Intellectual Ventures has invested millions of dollars developing such ideas and has filed hundreds of patent applications on its inventions every year, making it one of the top patent filers in the world. Intellectual Ventures has also invested in laboratory facilities to assist with the development and testing of new ideas. 10. Intellectual Ventures also creates inventions by collaborating with inventors and For example, Intellectual Ventures has developed
inventions by selecting a technical challenge, requesting proposals for inventions to solve the challenge from inventors and institutions, selecting the most promising ideas, rewarding the inventors and institutions for their contributions, and filing patent applications on the ideas.
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 4 of 19
Intellectual Ventures has invested millions of dollars in this way and has created a network of more than 4,000 inventors worldwide. 11. On August 4, 1998, U.S. Patent No. 5,790,793 (“the ’793 Patent”), titled “Method
and System To Create, Transmit, Receive and Process Information, Including An Address To Further Information,” was duly and lawfully issued by the United States patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”). A copy of the ’793 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 12. Intellectual Ventures I is the owner and assignee of all right, title and interest in
and to the ’793 Patent and holds the right to sue and recover damages for infringement thereof, including past damages. 13. On November 14, 2006, U. S. Patent No. 7,136,392 (“the ’392 Patent”), titled
“System and Method For Ordering Data Messages Having Differing Levels of Priority For Transmission Over A Shared Communication Channel,” was duly and lawfully issued by the PTO. A copy of the ’392 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B. 14. Intellectual Ventures I is the owner and assignee of all right, title and interest in
and to the ’392 Patent and holds the right to sue and recover damages for infringement thereof, including past damages. 15. On September 19, 2000, U.S. Patent No. 6,121,960, (“the ’960 Patent”), titled
“Touch Screen Systems and Methods,” was duly and lawfully issued by the PTO. A copy of the ’960 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit C. 16. Intellectual Ventures II is the owner and assignee of all right, title and interest in
and to the ’960 Patent and holds the right to sue and recover damages for infringement thereof, including past damages.
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 5 of 19
On June 3, 2008, U.S. Patent No. 7,382,771 (“the ’771 Patent”), titled “Mobile
Wireless Hotspot System,” was duly and lawfully issued by the PTO. A copy of the ’771 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit D. 18. Intellectual Ventures II is the owner and assignee of all right, title and interest in
and to the ’771 Patent and holds the right to sue and recover damages for infringement thereof, including past damages. 19. On July 21, 2009, U.S. Patent No. 7,564,784 (“the ’784 Patent”), titled “Method
and Arrangement For Transferring Information In A Packet Radio Service,” was duly and lawfully issued by the PTO. A copy of the ’784 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit E. 20. Intellectual Ventures I is the owner and assignee of all right, title and interest in
and to the ’784 Patent and holds the right to sue and recover damages for infringement thereof, including past damages. 21. On January 2, 2001, U.S. Patent No. 6,170,073 (“the ’073 Patent”), titled
“Method And Apparatus For Error Detection In Digital Communications,” was duly and lawfully issued by the PTO. A copy of the ’073 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit F. 22. Intellectual Ventures I is the owner and assignee of all right, title and interest in
and to the ’073 Patent and holds the right to sue and recover damages for infringement thereof, including past damages. 23. On December 7, 2010, U.S. Patent No. 7,848,353 (“the ’353 Patent”), titled
“Method, Communication System And Communication Unit For Synchronisation For MultiRate Communication,” was duly and lawfully issued by the PTO. A copy of the ’353 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 6 of 19
Intellectual Ventures II is the owner and assignee of all right, title and interest in
and to the ’353 Patent and holds the right to sue and recover damages for infringement thereof, including past damages. COUNT I INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,790,793 25. 26. Paragraphs 1-24 are reincorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least claim 30 of the ’793 Patent by making, using, selling, offering to sell and/or importing products implementing multimedia messaging service (“MMS”) technology, including but not limited to the Photon Q 4G LTE, Atrix HD and Electrify M. 27. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility also has and continues to indirectly infringe at least claim 30 of the ’793 Patent by inducing others to infringe and/or contributing to the infringement of others, including third party users of such products in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States. Specifically, Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility has actively induced and continues to induce the infringement of at least claim 30 of the ’793 Patent at least by actively inducing the infringing use of such products by third party users in the United States. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility knew or should have known that its conduct would induce others to use the MMS functionality in a manner that infringes the ’793 Patent. Intellectual Ventures I is
informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will continue to infringe the ’793 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 7 of 19
products. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility through at least its website at https://www.motorola.com, its online user manuals, marketing materials and help materials actively induced its customers to infringe the ’793 Patent. 28. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has contributorily infringed and continues to contributorily infringe at least claim 30 of the ’793 Patent by importing, selling and/or offering to sell within the United States infringing products that constitute a material part of the claimed invention and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Intellectual Ventures I is
informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’793 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing system and services. 29. Intellectual Ventures I has provided written notice via a letter dated June 18, 2013
from counsel for Intellectual Ventures I to Renny Hwang and Brett Roesslein advising Motorola Mobility of its infringement of at least claim 30, and Motorola Mobility also has written notice of its infringement by virtue of the filing and service of this Complaint. 30. Intellectual Ventures I has suffered damages as a result of Motorola Mobility’s
infringement of the ’793 Patent in an amount to be proven at trial. COUNT II INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,136,392 31. 32. Paragraphs 1-24 are reincorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least claim 9 of the ’392 Patent by making, using, selling, offering
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 8 of 19
to sell and/or importing products that implement and/or are compliant with the 802.11n Wi-Fi standard, including but not limited to the Photon Q 4G LTE, Atrix HD and Electrify M. 33. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility also has and continues to indirectly infringe at least claim 9 of the ’392 Patent by inducing others to infringe and/or contributing to the infringement of others, including third party users of its products in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States. Specifically, Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility has actively induced and continues to induce the infringement of at least claim 9 of the ’392 Patent at least by actively inducing the infringing use of its products by third party users in the United States. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility knew or should have known that its conduct would induce others to use the Wi-Fi functionality in a manner that infringes the ’392 Patent. Intellectual Ventures I is
informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’392 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing products. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility through at least its website at https://www.motorola.com, its online user manuals, marketing materials and help materials actively induced its customers to infringe the ’392 Patent. 34. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has contributorily infringed and continues to contributorily infringe at least claim 9 of the ’392 Patent by importing, selling and/or offering to sell within the United States infringing products that constitute a material part of the claimed invention and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Intellectual Ventures I is
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 9 of 19
informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’392 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing products. 35. Intellectual Ventures I has provided written notice via a letter dated June 18, 2013
from counsel for Intellectual Ventures I to Renny Hwang and Brett Roesslein advising Motorola Mobility of its infringement of at least claim 9, and Motorola Mobility also has written notice of its infringement by virtue of the filing and service of this Complaint. 36. Intellectual Ventures I has suffered damages as a result of Motorola Mobility’s
infringement of the ’392 Patent in an amount to be proven at trial. COUNT III INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,121,960 37. 38. Paragraphs 1-24 are reincorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least claim 19 of the ’960 Patent by making, using, selling, offering to sell and/or importing products with the Android operating system, including but not limited to the Photon Q 4G LTE, Atrix HD and Electrify M. 39. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility also has and continues to indirectly infringe at least claim 19 of the ’960 Patent by inducing others to infringe and/or contributing to the infringement of others, including third party users of its products in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States. Specifically, Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility has actively induced and continues to induce the infringement of at least claim 19 of the ’960 Patent at least by actively inducing the infringing use of its products by third party users in
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 10 of 19
the United States. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility knew or should have known that its conduct would induce others to use its Android based products in a manner that infringes the ’960 Patent. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’960 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing products. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility through at least its website at https://www.motorola.com, its online user manuals, marketing materials and help materials actively induced its customers to infringe the ’960 Patent. 40. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has contributorily infringed and continues to contributorily infringe at least claim 19 of the ’960 Patent by importing, selling and/or offering to sell within the United States infringing systems and services that constitute a material part of the claimed invention and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’960 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing system. 41. Intellectual Ventures II has provided written notice via a letter dated June 18,
2013 from counsel for Intellectual Ventures II to Renny Hwang and Brett Roesslein advising Motorola Mobility of its infringement of at least claim 19, and Motorola Mobility also has written notice of its infringement by virtue of the filing and service of this Complaint. 42. Intellectual Ventures II has suffered damages as a result of Motorola Mobility’s
infringement of the ’960 Patent in an amount to be proven at trial.
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 11 of 19
COUNT IV INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,382,771 43. 44. Paragraphs 1-24 are reincorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least claim 1 of the ’771 Patent by making, using, selling, offering to sell and/or importing products that provide Wi-Fi Internet access to other devices (i.e.,
"hotspot" functionality), including but not limited to the Photon Q 4G LTE, Atrix HD and
Electrify M. 45. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility also has and continues to indirectly infringe at least claim 1 of the ’771 Patent by inducing others to infringe and/or contributing to the infringement of others, including third party users of such products in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States. Specifically, Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility has actively induced and continues to induce the infringement of at least claim 1 of the ’771 Patent at least by actively inducing the infringing use of such products in the United States. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility knew or should have known that its conduct would induce others to use the hotspot functionality in a manner that infringes the ’771 Patent. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’771 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing products. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility through at least its website at
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 12 of 19
https://www.motorola.com, its online user manuals, marketing materials and help materials actively induced its customers to infringe the ’771 Patent. 46. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has contributorily infringed and continues to contributorily infringe at least claim 1 of the ’771 Patent by importing, selling and/or offering to sell within the United States infringing systems and services that constitute a material part of the claimed invention and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’771 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing system. 47. Intellectual Ventures II has provided written notice via a letter dated June 18,
2013 from counsel for Intellectual Ventures II to Renny Hwang and Brett Roesslein advising Motorola Mobility of its infringement of at least claim 1, and Motorola Mobility also has written notice of its infringement by virtue of the filing and service of this Complaint. 48. Intellectual Ventures II has suffered damages as a result of Commerce’s
infringement of the ’771 Patent in an amount to be proven at trial. COUNT V INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,564,784 49. 50. Paragraphs 1-24 are reincorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least claims 1 and 7 of the ’784 Patent by making, using, selling, offering to sell and/or importing all products implementing GPRS and/or compliant with 3GPP GPRS specifications, including but not limited to the Photon Q 4G LTE and Atrix HD.
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 13 of 19
Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility also has and continues to indirectly infringe at least claims 1 and 7 of the ’784 Patent by inducing others to infringe and/or contributing to the infringement of others, including third party users of its products in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States. Specifically, Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility has actively induced and continues to induce the infringement of at least claims 1 and 7 of the ’784 Patent at least by actively inducing the infringing use of its products by third party users in the United States. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility knew or should have known that its conduct would induce others to use GPRS and 3GPP GPRS standard compliant products in a manner that infringes the ’784 Patent. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’784 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing products. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility through at least its website at https://www.motorola.com, its online user manuals, marketing materials and help materials actively induced its customers to infringe the ’784 Patent. 52. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has contributorily infringed and continues to contributorily infringe at least claims 1 and 7 of the ’784 Patent by importing, selling and/or offering to sell within the United States infringing products that constitute a material part of the claimed invention and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’784 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing system.
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 14 of 19
Intellectual Ventures I has provided written notice via a letter dated June 18, 2013
from counsel for Intellectual Ventures I to Renny Hwang and Brett Roesslein advising Motorola Mobility of its infringement of at least claims 1 and 7, and Motorola Mobility also has written notice of its infringement by virtue of the filing and service of this Complaint. 54. Intellectual Ventures I has suffered damages as a result of Motorola Mobility’s
infringement of the ’784 Patent in an amount to be proven at trial. COUNT VI INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,170,073 55. 56. Paragraphs 1-24 are reincorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least claim 35 of the ’073 Patent by making, using, selling, offering for sale and/or importing products implementing and/or compliant with at least 3GPP and/or 4G LTE standards, including but not limited to the Photon Q 4G LTE, Atrix HD and Electrify M. 57. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility also has and continues to indirectly infringe at least claim 35 of the ’073 Patent by inducing others to infringe and/or contributing to the infringement of others, including third party users of its products in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States. Specifically, Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility has actively induced and continues to induce the infringement of at least claim 35 of the ’073 Patent at least by actively inducing the infringing use of its products by third party users in the United States. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 15 of 19
Motorola Mobility knew or should have known that its conduct would induce others to use 3GPP and 4G LTE standard compliant products in a manner that infringes the ’073 Patent. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’073 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing products. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility through at least its website at https://www.motorola.com, its online user manuals, marketing materials and help materials actively induced its customers to infringe the ’073 Patent. 58. Intellectual Ventures I is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has contributorily infringed and continues to contributorily infringe at least claim 35 of the ’073 Patent by importing, selling and/or offering to sell within the United States infringing products that constitute a material part of the claimed invention and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Intellectual Ventures I is
informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’073 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing products. 59. Intellectual Ventures I has provided written notice via a letter dated June 18, 2013
from counsel for Intellectual Ventures I to Renny Hwang and Brett Roesslein advising Motorola Mobility of its infringement of at least claim 35, and Motorola Mobility also has written notice of its infringement by virtue of the filing and service of this Complaint. 60. Intellectual Ventures I has suffered damages as a result of Motorola Mobility’s
infringement of the ’073 Patent in an amount to be proven at trial. COUNT VII INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,848,353 61. Paragraphs 1-24 are reincorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 16 of 19
Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least claims 1 and 21 of the ’353 Patent by making, using, selling, offering to sell and/or importing products compliant with and/or implementing the LTE standard, including but not limited to the Photon Q 4G LTE, Atrix HD and Electrify M. 63. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility also has and continues to indirectly infringe at least claims 1 and 21 of the ’353 Patent by inducing others to infringe and/or contributing to the infringement of others, including third party users of such products in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States. Specifically, Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility has actively induced and continues to induce the infringement of at least claims 1 and 21 of the ’353 Patent at least by actively inducing the infringing use of such products in the United States. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility knew or should have known that its conduct would induce others to use its LTE standard compliant products in a manner that infringes the ’353 Patent. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’353 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing products. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Motorola Mobility through at least its website at https://www.motorola.com, its online user manuals, marketing materials and help materials actively induced its customers to infringe the ’353 Patent. 64. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Motorola Mobility has contributorily infringed and continues to contributorily infringe at least
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 17 of 19
claims 1 and 21 of the ’353 Patent by importing, selling and/or offering to sell within the United States infringing products that constitute a material part of the claimed invention and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Intellectual Ventures II is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these third parties have infringed and will infringe the ’353 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by using the infringing products. 65. Intellectual Ventures II has provided written notice via a letter dated June 18,
2013 from counsel for Intellectual Ventures II to Renny Hwang and Brett Roesslein advising Motorola Mobility of its infringement of at least claims 1 and 21, and Motorola Mobility also has written notice of its infringement by virtue of the filing and service of this Complaint. 66. Intellectual Ventures II has suffered damages as a result of Motorola Mobility’s
infringement of the ’353 Patent in an amount to be proven at trial. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Intellectual Ventures I and Intellectual Ventures II respectfully pray that this Court: A. Enter judgment in favor of Intellectual Ventures I that Motorola Mobility has infringed the ’793 Patent; B. Enter judgment in favor of Intellectual Ventures I that Motorola Mobility has infringed the ’392 Patent; C. Enter judgment in favor of Intellectual Ventures II that Motorola Mobility has infringed the ’960 Patent; D. Enter judgment in favor of Intellectual Ventures II that Motorola Mobility has infringed the ’771 Patent;
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 18 of 19
E. Enter judgment in favor of Intellectual Ventures I that Motorola Mobility has infringed the ’784 Patent; F. Enter judgment in favor of Intellectual Ventures I that Motorola Mobility has infringed the ’073 Patent; G. Enter judgment in favor of Intellectual Ventures II that Motorola Mobility has infringed the ’353 Patent; H. Enter judgment that Intellectual Ventures I and Intellectual Ventures II be awarded damages adequate to compensate them for Motorola Mobility’s past infringement and any continuing or future infringement of the Patents-in-Suit up until the date such judgment is entered, including pre-judgment and postjudgment interest, costs and disbursements as justified under 35 U.S.C. § 284 and, if necessary, to adequately compensate Intellectual Ventures I and Intellectual Ventures II for Motorola Mobility’s infringement, an accounting; I. Enter judgment that Intellectual Ventures I and Intellectual Ventures II be awarded attorney fees, costs and expenses incurred in prosecuting this action; and J. Order that Intellectual Ventures I and Intellectual Ventures II be granted such other, different, and additional relief as this Court deems equitable and proper under the circumstances. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiffs Intellectual Ventures I and Intellectual Ventures II hereby demand trial by jury as to all issues so triable in this civil action.
Case 0:13-cv-61358-RSR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 19 of 19
s/ Lance A. Harke Lance A. Harke, P.A. Florida Bar No. 863599 lharke@harkeclasby.com Sarah Clasby Engel, P.A. Florida Bar No. 991030 sengel@harkeclasby.com Howard M. Bushman, P.A. Florida Bar No. 0364230 hbushman@harkeclasby.com HARKE CLASBY & BUSHMAN LLP 9699 NE Second Avenue Miami Shores, FL 33138 Telephone: (305) 536-8220 Facsimile: (305) 536-8229 OF COUNSEL: Ian Feinberg, Esq. ifeinberg@feinday.com Elizabeth Day, Esq. eday@feinday.com David Alberti, Esq. dalberti@feinday.com Clayton Thompson, Esq. cthompson@feinday.com Sal Lim, Esq. slim@feinday.com Yakov Zolotorev, Esq. yzolotorev@feinday.com Marc Belloli, Esq. mbelloli@feinday.com Peter Mikhail, Esq. pmikhail@feinday.com FEINBERG DAY ALBERTI & THOMPSON LLP 1600 El Camino Real, Suite 280 Menlo Park, CA 94025 Telephone: 650-618-4360 Facsimile: 650-618-4368 (pro hac vice applications forthcoming) Counsel for Plaintiff
More From This UserSkip carouselWhat China Loves [infographic]Leaked NSA Hacks Huawei Powerpoint SlidesGarmin Head Up Display Plus specs (anewdomain)Ultimate Guide to SXSW 2014Olympic Medals Through TimeReview of the Mac Plus Original Macintosh Review by Larry PressHere's the jury selection -- voir dire -- memo on the Intellectual Ventures vs Google Motorola Mobility case.Motorola's Motion for Reconsideration Google Motorola vs Intellectual Ventures patent case -- Exhibit List Motorola Defense Exhibits for Intellectual Ventures I and II vs Google Motorola Mobility patent infringement trialMotorola Mobility Defense Exhibits in IV vs Google Motorola Mobility trialUnmonday Tekniset TiedotPartial Solar Eclipse November 03 2013 -- Will You See It? List of Cities Worldwide ...Google-Reported Government Requests -- USA vs. other countries. Analysis.Iowa Startup Comments to DOJ on Patent TrollsSXSW_2013-Infographic-All-Details-Demographics
Sign up to vote on this titleUsefulNot usefulIntellectual Ventures vs Motorola Mobility complaint as filed in Florida by Gina Smith0.0 (0)EmbedDownloadDescriptionIV has filed suit against Google Motorola Mobility in two states. Here's the patent infringement case it filed in Florida. For more, check out aNewDomain.netIV has filed suit against Google Motorola Mobility in two states. Here's the patent infringement case it filed in Florida. For more, check out aNewDomain.netRead on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.Copyright: Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)Download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentShow moreShow less
Related13-08-26 First Amended IV Complaint (S.D. Fla.) Against Motorolaby Florian MuellerGoogle HTC SAP Rackspace Red Hat Amicus Brief Supporting Samsung Against Appleby Florian Mueller13-05-23 Nokia v HTC Patent Complaintby Florian Mueller13-05-10 Letter to ITC on SEPs From House of Representatives Subcommittee Leadersby Florian MuellerSamsung Submission to USTR Re. ITC Exclusion Orderby Florian MuellerApple Submission to USTR Re. ITC Exclusion Orderby Florian Mueller13-10-31 Rockstar Patent Complaint Against Googleby Florian MuellerIntellectual Ventures et. al. v. Motorola Mobilityby PriorSmartIntellectual Ventures et. al. v. Motorola Mobilityby PriorSmartIntellectual Ventures vs. Best Buy, Dell, HPby Jonathan FingasRothchild Storage Retrieval Innovations v. Motorola Mobilityby PatentBlastGould v. Rees, 82 U.S. 187 (1872)by Scribd Government DocsGuttag Transnational Patent Infringementby Paul ChancellorBlue Calypso v. Izeaby PatentBlast10-cv-00885-1by dinatale1Trustees of Boston University v. Canon Et. Al.by PatentBlastZiplink v. Googleby PriorSmartSmart Plates, LLC et. al.by PriorSmartGS_Cleantech-v-Little_Sioux_Complaint.pdfby Marco RaymondInnovative Display Technologies v. Toyota Motor Et. Al.by PatentBlastBlue Rhino Global Sourcing v. Crown Verityby PatentBlastpatweb05by rrkraoPower Management Enterprises v. Toshiba America Information Systemsby PriorSmartEagle Harbor Holdings, LLC and MediusTech v. Ford Motor Companyby PriorSmartGlobeTecTrust v. RCN Telecom Servicesby PatentBlast92028427-Patens-Fullby TC Nihal AlcansoyAcademic Inventiveness and Entrepreneurshipby Norazlina Mohd YasinCigarette Racing v. Mystic Powerboats - Complaintby slbursteinSimilar To IV's second complaint against MotorolaSkip carousel13-08-26 First Amended IV Complaint (S.D. Fla.) Against MotorolaGoogle HTC SAP Rackspace Red Hat Amicus Brief Supporting Samsung Against Apple13-05-23 Nokia v HTC Patent Complaint13-05-10 Letter to ITC on SEPs From House of Representatives Subcommittee LeadersSamsung Submission to USTR Re. ITC Exclusion OrderApple Submission to USTR Re. ITC Exclusion Order13-10-31 Rockstar Patent Complaint Against GoogleIntellectual Ventures et. al. v. Motorola MobilityIntellectual Ventures et. al. v. Motorola MobilityIntellectual Ventures vs. Best Buy, Dell, HPRothchild Storage Retrieval Innovations v. Motorola MobilityGould v. Rees, 82 U.S. 187 (1872)Guttag Transnational Patent InfringementBlue Calypso v. Izea10-cv-00885-1Trustees of Boston University v. Canon Et. Al.Ziplink v. GoogleSmart Plates, LLC et. al.GS_Cleantech-v-Little_Sioux_Complaint.pdfInnovative Display Technologies v. Toyota Motor Et. Al.Blue Rhino Global Sourcing v. Crown Veritypatweb05Power Management Enterprises v. Toshiba America Information SystemsEagle Harbor Holdings, LLC and MediusTech v. Ford Motor CompanyGlobeTecTrust v. RCN Telecom Services92028427-Patens-FullAcademic Inventiveness and EntrepreneurshipCigarette Racing v. Mystic Powerboats - ComplaintMacroSolve v. Nordstrom Et. AlEffective Exploration LLCIV's second complaint against Motorola