Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/132965480/Magna-Electronics-v-Valeo-et-al
Timestamp: 2017-02-27 04:57:57
Document Index: 436668364

Matched Legal Cases: ['§1', '§ 2201', '§1', '§1331', '§1391', 'art0']

Magna Electronics v. Valeo et. al. | Patent Infringement
BrowseInterestsBiography & MemoirBusiness & LeadershipFiction & LiteraturePolitics & EconomyHealth & WellnessSociety & CultureHappiness & Self-HelpMystery, Thriller & CrimeHistoryYoung AdultBrowse byBooksAudiobooksNews & MagazinesSheet MusicBrowse allUploadSign inJoinIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN -------) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) VALEO, INC.; VALEO S.A.; ) VALEO GMBH; ) VALEO SHALTER UND SENSOR GMBH;) VALEO VISION SYSTEMS; ) CONNAUGHT ELECTONICS LTD. ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) MAGNA ELECTRONICS INC.
Civil Action No. Honorable COMPLAINT and JURY DEMAND
COMPLAINT Magna Electronics Inc. hereby complains of Valeo, Inc., Valeo S.A., Valeo GmbH, Valeo Shalter und Sensor GmbH, Valeo Vision Systems, and Connaught Electronics Ltd. and alleges as follows: THE PARTIES 1. Magna Electronics Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
the State of Delaware, registered to do business in the State of Michigan with a registered office of 601 Abbott Road, East Lansing, MI 48823, and a place of business at 2050 Auburn Hills, Michigan 48326, and is doing business in this District (hereinafter “Magna” or “Plaintiff”). 2. Defendant Valeo, Inc. (“VALEO US”), upon information and belief, is a New
York corporation registered to do business in the State of Michigan, with a principal executive office at 150 Stephenson Highway, Troy, MI 48083, and is doing business in this District. Upon information and belief, VALEO US does business under various assumed names and through various operating divisions and companies.
Defendant VALEO S.A. (“VALEO FRANCE”), upon information and belief, is a
French corporation, with a business address of 43, rue Bayen, Paris, France 75848. Upon information and belief, VALEO France does business under various assumed names and through various operating divisions and companies. 4. Defendant VALEO GMBH (“VALEO GERMANY”), upon information and
belief, is a German corporation, with a business address of Benzstrasse 33, 38446, Wolfsburg, Germany. Upon information and belief, VALEO GERMANY does business under various assumed names and through various operating divisions and companies. 5. Defendant VALEO SHALTER UND SENSOREN GMBH (“VALEO
SHALTER”), upon information and belief, is a German corporation, with a business address of Valeostrasse 1, 86650, Wemding, Germany. Upon information and belief, VALEO SHALTER does business under various assumed names and through various operating divisions and companies. 6. Defendant VALEO VISION SYSTEMS (“VALEO VISION”), upon information
and belief, is a German corporation, with a business address of Laiernstrasse 12, 74321, Bietigheim-Bissingen, Germany. Upon information and belief, VALEO VISION does business under various assumed names and through various operating divisions and companies. 7. Defendant CONNAUGHT ELECTRONICS LTD. (“VALEO CONNAUGHT”),
upon information and belief, is an Irish corporation, with a business address of IDA Business Park, Dunmore Road, Tuam, County Galway, Ireland. Upon information and belief, VALEO CONNAUGHT does business as Valeo Vision Systems and/or has changed its name to Valeo Vision Systems/formerly Connaught Electronics Ltd., and does business under various assumed names and through various operating divisions and companies.
On information and belief, Defendants VALEO US, VALEO FRANCE, VALEO
GERMANY, VALEO SHALTER, VALEO VISION and VALEO CONNAUGHT are related companies. On information and belief, VALEO US, VALEO GERMANY, VALEO SHALTER, VALEO VISION and VALEO CONNAUGHT report to VALEO FRANCE, either directly or indirectly, and are ultimately controlled by VALEO FRANCE. (The defendants are hereinafter collectively referred to as “VALEO,” “Defendants VALEO” or “Defendants.”) 9. Defendants VALEO US, VALEO FRANCE, VALEO GERMANY, VALEO
SHALTER, VALEO VISION and VALEO CONNAUGHT, upon information and belief, are doing business within the State of Michigan and within this District, directly and/or by the placing of products into the stream of commerce targeting the State of Michigan and this District, and are engaged in continuous and systematic business with and within this District, conduct and solicit business within this District and derive substantial revenue from the sales of their products and/or services within this District and elsewhere in Michigan, and including the commission of acts of infringement as hereinafter stated. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 10. This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the
United States Code, §§1 et seq. This action also arises under the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, Title 28 of the United States Code, §§ 2201 and 2202, for a declaration pursuant to the Patent Laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. §§1 et seq. 11. This Court has jurisdiction in this action under 28 U.S.C. §§1331 and 1338.
Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1391 and 1400. BACKGROUND ALLEGATIONS 12. On December 28, 2010, United States Letters Patent No. 7,859,565 was duly and
legally issued to the predecessor in interest to Magna, as owner by assignment thereof, for an
invention entitled “Vision System for a Vehicle Including Image Processor.” A true and correct copy of United States Patent No. 7,859,565 is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 (hereinafter the “’565 Patent”). 13. On January 25, 2011, United States Letters Patent No. 7,877,175 was duly and
legally issued to the predecessor in interest to Magna, as owner by assignment thereof, for an invention entitled “Imaging System for Vehicle.” A true and correct copy of United States Patent No. 7,877,175 is attached hereto as Exhibit 2 (hereinafter the “’175 Patent”). 14. On August 2, 2011, United States Letters Patent No. 7,991,522 was duly and
legally issued to the predecessor in interest to Magna, as owner by assignment thereof, for an invention entitled “Imaging System for Vehicle.” A true and correct copy of United States Patent No. 7,991,522 is attached hereto as Exhibit 3 (hereinafter the “’522 Patent”). 15. On February 26, 2013, United States Letters Patent No. 8,386,114 was duly and
legally issued to the predecessor in interest to Magna, as owner by assignment thereof, for an invention entitled “Imaging System for Vehicle.” A true and correct copy of United States Patent No. 8,386,114 is attached hereto as Exhibit 4 (hereinafter the “’114 Patent”). 16. Magna is the owner, by valid assignment, of all right, title, and interest in and to
the ‘565, ‘175, ‘522 and ‘114 Patents, including the right to seek remedies and relief for past infringement thereof. 17. Magna and its predecessors in interest have provided actual notice to Defendants
VALEO of the ‘565, ‘175, ‘522 and ‘114 Patents. The filing and Notice of this action and the Complaint in this action also provides actual notice to Defendants VALEO of the ‘565, ‘175, ‘522 and ‘114 Patents. Defendants have notice of the ‘565, ‘175, ‘522 and ‘114 Patents.
An actual and justiciable controversy exists between Magna and Defendants
VALEO concerning whether the actions of Defendants VALEO infringe, contributorily infringe and/or induce infringement of the ‘114 patent. An actual and justiciable controversy likewise exists between Magna and Defendants VALEO concerning whether the actions of Defendants VALEO infringe, contributorily infringe and/or induce infringement of the other asserted patents in suit, namely the ‘565, ‘175 and ‘522 Patents. 19. VALEO has marketed, and upon information and belief offered for sale and sold,
vision-based vehicle driver assistance systems utilizing what VALEO refers as a "multi-camera system," including but not limited to systems that include the VALEO system referred to as "360VUE®" (hereinafter referred to as the "VALEO Multi-Camera System"). Upon information and belief, VALEO Multi-Camera Systems include front, rear, and side view automotive cameras and associated electronic control units (ECU). Upon information and belief, VALEO has designed Multi-Camera Systems to have overlapping camera fields of view in order to provide a surround view around the vehicle. 20. Upon information and belief, VALEO Multi-Camera Systems include at least a
CMOS camera disposed at the driver-side exterior mirror assembly of an equipped vehicle and a CMOS camera disposed at the passenger-side exterior mirror assembly of the equipped vehicle and a rear-viewing CMOS camera disposed a rear portion of the equipped vehicle. 21. Upon information and belief, VALEO Multi-Camera Systems produce a
synthesized composite image from image data captured by multiple cameras for display on a single display screen, and include correction of camera misalignment and include object detection. 22. Upon information and belief, VALEO has installed and utilizes VALEO Multi-
Camera Systems in one or more vehicles to develop and establish the operability of VALEO
Multi-Camera Systems and for purposes of offering for sale and sale of VALEO Multi-Camera Systems. Upon information and belief, at least one customer of VALEO has entered into an agreement with VALEO to purchase VALEO Multi-Camera Systems adapted to vehicles of said customer, and said customer has installed one or more VALEO Multi-Camera Systems into vehicles and tested systems for purposes of engaging in sales to end users of vehicles equipped with VALEO Multi-Camera Systems. Upon information and belief, VALEO has continued, including continuing after notice, with the use of VALEO Multi-Camera Systems, delivery of VALEO Multi-Camera Systems and in the making of offers for sale of VALEO Multi-Camera Systems to automobile manufacturers. COUNT I Infringement of United States Patent No. 7,859,565 23. 24. Plaintiff incorporates and reasserts paragraphs 1-22 herein by reference. Defendants VALEO have, on information and belief, in the past been and still are
infringing United States Letters Patent 7,859,565 by making, importing, using, selling, and/or offering for sale in and to the United States products incorporating Vision Systems for a Vehicle Including Image Processor embodying the patented invention of the ‘565 Patent. Upon information and belief Defendants VALEO have individually and jointly combined to engage in acts of direct infringement by themselves and through agents acting in combination. 25. Upon information and belief, with knowledge and/or reckless disregard
amounting to knowledge of the infringement by the aforesaid products of the ‘565 Patent, Defendants have provided Vision Systems for a Vehicle Including Image Processor to at least one third party for use in infringement of the ‘565 Patent. Use by third parties of the aforesaid Vision Systems for a Vehicle Including Image Processor obtained from or through Defendants VALEO, upon information and belief, infringes the ‘565 Patent. The actions of Defendants VALEO constitute inducement of infringement of United States Letters Patent No. 7,859,565. 6
Upon information and belief, Defendants VALEO manufacture, import, sell,
and/or offer to sell Vision Systems for a Vehicle Including Image Processor and/or components thereof with knowledge and/or reckless disregard amounting to knowledge that said Vision Systems for a Vehicle Including Image Processor and/or components thereof constitute a material part of the invention of the ‘565 Patent and that are specially made or specially adapted for use in the infringement of the ‘565 Patent, and said Vision Systems for a Vehicle Including Image Processor and/or components thereof are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. The actions of Defendants VALEO constitute contributory infringement of United States Letters Patent No. 7,859,565. 27. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ infringement, contributory
infringement, and inducement of infringement have been willful. 28. Despite any statement to the contrary, upon information and belief, Defendants
VALEO will continue to infringe, contributorily infringe and induce the infringement of the ‘565 Patent unless enjoined by this Court. 29. Upon information and belief, Defendants' infringement, contributory
infringement, and inducement of infringement have resulted in damage to Plaintiff and will continue to do so unless enjoined by this Court. 30. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law, and is, therefore, entitled to a permanent
injunction prohibiting further infringement by Defendants. 31. Plaintiff has been damaged by past activities of Defendants, and is entitled to
damages for past infringement, contributory infringement and inducement of infringement. 32. In the alternative, Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration from the Court establishing
that the actions of Defendants VALEO are infringing, contributorily infringing, and inducing infringement of the ‘565 Patent.
COUNT II Infringement of United States Patent No. 7,877,175 33. 34. Plaintiff incorporates and reasserts paragraphs 1-32 herein by reference. Defendants VALEO have, on information and belief, in the past been and still are
infringing United States Letters Patent 7,877,175 by making, importing, using, selling, and/or offering for sale in and to the United States products incorporating Imaging Systems for Vehicles embodying the patented invention of the ‘175 Patent. Upon information and belief Defendants VALEO have individually and jointly combined to engage in acts of direct infringement by themselves and through agents acting in combination. 35. Upon information and belief, with knowledge and/or reckless disregard
amounting to knowledge of the infringement by the aforesaid products of the ‘175 Patent, Defendants have provided Imaging Systems for Vehicles to at least one third party for use in infringement of the ‘175 Patent. Use by third parties of the aforesaid Imaging Systems for Vehicles obtained from or through Defendants VALEO, upon information and belief, infringes the ‘175 Patent. The actions of Defendants VALEO constitute inducement of infringement of United States Letters Patent No. 7,877,175. 36. Upon information and belief, Defendants VALEO manufacture, import, sell,
and/or offer to sell Imaging Systems for Vehicles and/or components thereof with knowledge and/or reckless disregard amounting to knowledge that said Imaging Systems for Vehicles and/or components thereof constitute a material part of the invention of the ‘175 Patent and that are specially made or specially adapted for use in the infringement of the ‘175 Patent, and said Imaging Systems for Vehicles and/or components thereof are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. The actions of Defendants VALEO constitute contributory infringement of United States Letters Patent No. 7,877,175.
infringement, and inducement of infringement have been willful. 38. Despite any statement to the contrary, upon information and belief, Defendants
VALEO will continue to infringe, contributorily infringe and induce the infringement of the ‘175 Patent unless enjoined by this Court. 39. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ infringement, contributory
infringement, and inducement of infringement have resulted in damage to Plaintiff and will continue to do so unless enjoined by this Court. 40. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law, and is, therefore, entitled to a permanent
injunction prohibiting further infringement by Defendants. 41. Plaintiff has been damaged by past activities of Defendants, and is entitled to
damages for past infringement, contributory infringement and inducement of infringement. 42. In the alternative, Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration from the Court establishing
that the actions of Defendants VALEO are infringing, contributorily infringing, and inducing infringement of the ‘175 Patent. COUNT III Infringement of United States Patent No. 7,991,522 43. 44. Plaintiff incorporates and reasserts paragraphs 1-42 herein by reference. Defendants VALEO have, on information and belief, in the past been and still are
infringing United States Letters Patent 7,991,522 by making, importing, using, selling, and/or offering for sale in and to the United States products incorporating Imaging Systems for Vehicles embodying the patented invention of the ‘522 Patent. Upon information and belief Defendants VALEO have individually and jointly combined to engage in acts of direct infringement by themselves and through agents acting in combination.
Upon information and belief, with knowledge and/or reckless disregard
amounting to knowledge of the infringement by the aforesaid products of the ‘522 Patent, Defendants have provided Imaging Systems for Vehicles to at least one third party for use in infringement of the ‘522 Patent. Use by third parties of the aforesaid Imaging Systems for Vehicles obtained from or through Defendants VALEO, upon information and belief, infringes the ‘522 Patent. The actions of Defendants VALEO constitute inducement of infringement of United States Letters Patent No. 7,991,522. 46. Upon information and belief, Defendants VALEO manufacture, import, sell,
and/or offer to sell Imaging Systems for Vehicles and/or components thereof with knowledge and/or reckless disregard amounting to knowledge that said Imaging Systems for Vehicles and/or components thereof constitute a material part of the invention of the ‘522 Patent and that are specially made or specially adapted for use in the infringement of the ‘522 Patent, and said Imaging Systems for Vehicles and/or components thereof are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. The actions of Defendants VALEO constitute contributory infringement of United States Letters Patent No. 7,991,522. 47. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ infringement, contributory
infringement, and inducement of infringement have been willful. 48. Despite any statement to the contrary, upon information and belief, Defendants
VALEO will continue to infringe, contributorily infringe and induce the infringement of the ‘522 Patent unless enjoined by this Court. 49. Upon information and belief, Defendants' infringement, contributory
infringement, and inducement of infringement have resulted in damage to Plaintiff and will continue to do so unless enjoined by this Court.
Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law, and is, therefore, entitled to a permanent
injunction prohibiting further infringement by Defendants. 51. Plaintiff has been damaged by past activities of Defendants, and is entitled to
damages for past infringement, contributory infringement and inducement of infringement. 52. In the alternative, Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration from the Court establishing
that the actions of Defendants VALEO are infringing, contributorily infringing, and inducing infringement of the ‘522 Patent. COUNT IV Infringement of United States Patent No. 8,386,114 53. 54. Plaintiff incorporates and reasserts paragraphs 1-52 herein by reference. Defendants VALEO have, on information and belief, in the past been and still are
infringing United States Letters Patent 8,386,114 by making, importing, using, selling, and/or offering for sale in and to the United States products incorporating Imaging Systems for Vehicles embodying the patented invention of the ‘114 Patent. Upon information and belief Defendants VALEO have individually and jointly combined to engage in acts of direct infringement by themselves and through agents acting in combination. 55. Upon information and belief, with knowledge and/or reckless disregard
amounting to knowledge of the infringement by the aforesaid products of the ‘149 Patent, Defendants have provided Imaging Systems for Vehicles to at least one third party for use in infringement of the ‘114 Patent. Use by third parties of the aforesaid Imaging Systems for Vehicles obtained from or through Defendants VALEO, upon information and belief, infringes the ‘114 Patent. The actions of Defendants VALEO constitute inducement of infringement of United States Letters Patent No. 8,386,114. 56. Upon information and belief, Defendants VALEO manufacture, import, sell,
and/or offer to sell Imaging Systems for Vehicles and/or components thereof with knowledge 11
and/or reckless disregard amounting to knowledge that said Imaging Systems for Vehicles and/or components thereof constitute a material part of the invention of the ‘114 Patent and that are specially made or specially adapted for use in the infringement of the ‘114 Patent, and said Imaging Systems for Vehicles and/or components thereof are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. The actions of Defendants VALEO constitute contributory infringement of United States Letters Patent No. 8,386,114. 57. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ infringement, contributory
infringement, and inducement of infringement have been willful. 58. Despite any statement to the contrary, upon information and belief, Defendants
VALEO will continue to infringe, contributorily infringe and induce the infringement of the ‘114 Patent unless enjoined by this Court. 59. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ infringement, contributory
infringement, and inducement of infringement have resulted in damage to Plaintiff and will continue to do so unless enjoined by this Court. 60. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law, and is, therefore, entitled to a permanent
injunction prohibiting further infringement by Defendants. 61. Plaintiff has been damaged by past activities of Defendants, and is entitled to
damages for past infringement, contributory infringement and inducement of infringement. 62. In the alternative, Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration from the Court establishing
that the actions of Defendants VALEO are infringing, contributorily infringing, and inducing infringement of the ‘114 Patent.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Magna demands that judgment be entered in its favor against Defendants VALEO, as follows: A. Entering an order determining and/or declaring that Defendants VALEO, and
each of them, infringe, contributorily infringe and induce infringement of the ‘565, ‘175, ‘522 and ‘114 Patents. B. Permanently enjoining Defendants VALEO, their officers, agents, servants,
employees, attorneys, and all those persons in privity or in active concert or participation with them, and each of them, from further manufacture, importation, sale, offer for sale, and/or use of an apparatus which infringes, contributorily infringes, or induces infringement of the ‘565, ‘175, ‘522 and/or ‘114 Patents. C. Permanently enjoining Defendants VALEO, their officers, agents, servants,
employees, attorneys, and all those persons in privity or in active concert or participation with it, and each of them, from further acts of infringement of the ‘565, ‘175, ‘522 and/or ‘114 Patents. D. E. Ordering an accounting. Awarding damages adequate to compensate Plaintiff for Defendants’
infringement, contributory infringement, and inducement of infringement of the ‘565, ‘175, ‘522 and/or ‘114 Patents. F. Increasing the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed for
Defendants’ willful acts of infringement. G. H. Plaintiff. I. Such other and further relief as is necessary and appropriate. Awarding prejudgment interest and costs. Finding this to be an exceptional case and awarding reasonable attorney’s fees to
JURY DEMAND Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues triable by jury in this action.
Sign up to vote on this titleUsefulNot usefulMagna Electronics v. Valeo et. al. by PriorSmart0.0 (0)EmbedDownloadDescriptionOfficial Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 2:13-cv-11376: Magna Electronics, Inc. v. Valeo, Incorporated et. al. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michiga...Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 2:13-cv-11376: Magna Electronics, Inc. v. Valeo, Incorporated et. al. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l7T8 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
RelatedMagna Electronics v. Hyundai Mobis et. al.by PriorSmartKolcraft Enterprises v. Artsana Et. Al.by PatentBlastCharge Lion v. STMicroelectronics N.V. et. al.by PriorSmartLodsys Group v. BullionVault et. al.by PriorSmartProctor & Gamble Company et. al. v. Enhanced Image Technologies et. al.by PriorSmartKarl Storz Endoscopy-America v. Stryker Et. Al.by PatentBlastQuest Nettech v. US Sweepstakes & Fulfillmentby PriorSmartRichmond v. Winchance Solar Fujian Technology et. al.by PriorSmartPeschke Map Technologies v. Glimcher Colonial Park Mall Et. Al.by PatentBlaste.Digital v. SanDiskby PriorSmartCreateAds v. Wix.comby PriorSmartCreateAds LLCby PriorSmartCreateAds v. Mediacom Communicationsby PriorSmartIntellectual Ventures I LLC, et al. v. Toshiba Corp., et al., C.A. No. 13-453-SLR (D. Del. Sept. 3, 2014).by YCSTBlogCRFD Research Inc.by PriorSmartXlear et. al. v. Nutri-Dyn Midwestby PriorSmartMannatech v. Wellness Quest Et. Al.by PatentBlastAdaptix v. HTC et. al.by PatentBlastXlear et. al. v. Biogenesis Nutraceuticalsby PriorSmartConair Et. Al. v. Barbar Et. Al.by PatentBlastJoao Control and Monitoring Systems v. Ford Motor Companyby PriorSmartLodsys Group v. PopCap Gamesby PriorSmartCreateAds LLCby PriorSmartCreateAds LLCby PriorSmarte.Digital v. Dropcamby PriorSmartLodsys Group v. Gameloftby PriorSmartLodsys Group v. Gamevilby PriorSmartNeatfreak Group v. Whitmor - Complaintby slbursteinSimilar to Magna Electronics v. Valeo et. al.Skip carouselMagna Electronics v. Hyundai Mobis et. al.Kolcraft Enterprises v. Artsana Et. Al.Charge Lion v. STMicroelectronics N.V. et. al.Lodsys Group v. BullionVault et. al.Proctor & Gamble Company et. al. v. Enhanced Image Technologies et. al.Karl Storz Endoscopy-America v. Stryker Et. Al.Quest Nettech v. US Sweepstakes & FulfillmentRichmond v. Winchance Solar Fujian Technology et. al.Peschke Map Technologies v. Glimcher Colonial Park Mall Et. Al.e.Digital v. SanDiskCreateAds v. Wix.comCreateAds LLCCreateAds v. Mediacom CommunicationsIntellectual Ventures I LLC, et al. v. Toshiba Corp., et al., C.A. No. 13-453-SLR (D. Del. Sept. 3, 2014).CRFD Research Inc.Xlear et. al. v. Nutri-Dyn MidwestMannatech v. Wellness Quest Et. Al.Adaptix v. HTC et. al.Xlear et. al. v. Biogenesis NutraceuticalsConair Et. Al. v. Barbar Et. Al.Joao Control and Monitoring Systems v. Ford Motor CompanyLodsys Group v. PopCap GamesCreateAds LLCCreateAds LLCe.Digital v. DropcamLodsys Group v. GameloftLodsys Group v. GamevilNeatfreak Group v. Whitmor - ComplaintWyncomm LLCBrandywine Communications Technologies v. Precision Communiciatons, Inc. dba PCI SystemsMagna Electronics v. Valeo et. al.