Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al

Filing 107

ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand , COUNTERCLAIM against Apple Inc. bySamsung Telecommunications America, LLC, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8)(Shields, Patrick) (Filed on 4/18/2012)

1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP Charles K. Verhoeven (Bar No. 170151)  charlesverhoeven@quinnemanuel.com Kevin A. Smith (Bar No. 250814)  kevinsmith@quinnemanuel.com 50 California Street, 22nd Floor  San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 875-6600  Facsimile: (415) 875-6700  Kevin P.B. Johnson (Bar No. 177129) kevinjohnson@quinnemanuel.com  Victoria F. Maroulis (Cal. Bar No. 202603) victoriamaroulis@quinnemanuel.com th  555 Twin Dolphin Drive 5 Floor Redwood Shores, California 94065  Telephone: (650) 801-5000 Facsimile: (650) 801-5100  William C. Price (Bar No. 108542)  williamprice@quinnemanuel.com Patrick M. Shields (Bar No. 204739)  patrickshields@quinnemanuel.com 865 S. Figueroa St., 10th Floor  Los Angeles, California 90017 Telephone: (213) 443-3000  Facsimile: (213) 443-3100  Attorneys for SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS  AMERICA, INC. and SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC  [additional counsel listed on signature page]  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT  NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION  APPLE INC., a California corporation,   Plaintiff, vs.  SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a Korean corporation; SAMSUNG  ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New York corporation; SAMSUNG  TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,  Defendants.  CASE NO. 12-CV-00630-LHK SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS TO APPLE INC.’S COMPLAINT; AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL  Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 2 I. ANSWER Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (“SEC”), Samsung Electronics America, Inc. 3 (“SEA”), and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (“STA”) (collectively, the “Samsung 4 Defendants”) by and through their undersigned counsel, in response to the Complaint of Apple 5 Inc. (“Apple”) deny Apple’s allegations of patent infringement and answer Apple’s Complaint 6 (“Complaint”) as follows: 7 8 THE NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. The Samsung Defendants deny knowledge or information sufficient to form a 9 belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations in paragraph 1 of the Complaint and therefore 10 deny them. 11 2. Denied. 12 3. The Samsung Defendants admit that Apple sued Samsung in April 2011 in a case 13 entitled Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al., Case No. 5:11-cv-01846-LHK, which 14 case is currently set for trial before the Honorable Lucy H. Koh on July 30, 2012 (“Earlier Case”). 15 The Samsung Defendants further admit that Samsung has released new products since the Earlier 16 Case was filed. The Samsung Defendants deny that they have engaged in any illegal conduct 17 alleged in the Complaint. Except as expressly admitted, the Samsung Defendants deny the 18 remaining allegations of paragraph 3 of the Complaint. 19 4. 20 21 Denied. THE PARTIES 5. The Samsung Defendants deny knowledge or information sufficient to form a 22 belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations in paragraph 5 of the Complaint and therefore 23 deny them. 24 6. The Samsung Defendants deny that SEC’s principal offices are at the location 25 specified in paragraph 6 of the Complaint. The Samsung Defendants admit that SEC is South 26 Korea’s largest company and one of Asia’s largest electronics companies. The Samsung 27 Defendants admit that SEC designs, manufactures and provides to the U.S. and world markets a 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -1SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 wide range of products, including consumer electronics, computer components, and mobile and 2 entertainment products. 3 7. The Samsung Defendants admit that SEA is a New York corporation, was formed 4 in 1978, and is a subsidiary of SEC. The Samsung Defendants admit that SEA’s principal offices 5 are located at 85 Challenger Road, Ridgefield Park, NJ, 07660. The Samsung Defendants admit 6 that SEA offers a full range of award-winning consumer electronics and IT products including, but 7 not limited to, televisions, Blu-ray disc players, digital cameras and camcorders, certain memory 8 storage devices, portable audio devices, printers and monitors. The Samsung Defendants admit 9 that STA, Samsung Electronics Canada, and Samsung Electronics Mexico S.A. de C.V. are 10 affiliates of SEA. The Samsung Defendants deny the remaining allegations of paragraph 7 of the 11 Complaint. 12 8. 13 of SEC. The Samsung Defendants admit that STA was formed in 1996 and is a subsidiary The Samsung Defendants admit that STA is a Delaware limited liability company with 14 its principal place of business at 1301 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, Texas 75082. The 15 Samsung Defendants admit that STA researches, develops, markets, sells and offers for sale a 16 variety of personal and business communications products throughout North America, including 17 handheld wireless phones, wireless communications infrastructure systems, fiber optics and 18 enterprise communication systems. 19 20 JURISDICTION 9. The Samsung Defendants admit that the Complaint purports to allege claims over 21 which this Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a). 22 Except as expressly admitted, the Samsung Defendants deny the remaining allegations of 23 paragraph 9 of the Complaint. 24 10. The Samsung Defendants will not challenge personal jurisdiction over them by this 25 Court for purposes of this action. Except as expressly admitted, the Samsung Defendants deny the 26 remaining allegations of paragraph 10 of the Complaint. 27 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -2SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 2 VENUE AND INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT 11. The Samsung Defendants will not contest the propriety of venue or intradistrict 3 assignment. The Samsung Defendants admit that pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-2(c), Intellectual 4 Property Actions are assigned on a district-wide basis and admits, on information and belief, that 5 Apple’s principal place of business is within this District. The Samsung Defendants admit that 6 SEC has filed counterclaims against Apple in this District. Except as expressly admitted, the 7 Samsung Defendants deny the remaining allegations of paragraph 11 of the Complaint. 8 BACKGROUND 9 Apple’s Alleged Intellectual Property Rights 10 Apple’s Alleged Utility Patents 11 12. The Samsung Defendants admit that Apple purports to have attached as Exhibits 1- 12 8 to its Complaint U.S. Patent Nos. 5,946,647 (the “’647 Patent”), 6,847,959 (the “’959 Patent”), 13 8,046,721 (the “’721 Patent”), 8,074,172 (the “’172 Patent”), 8,014,760 (the “’760 Patent”), 14 5,666,502 (the “’502 Patent”), 7,761,414 (the “’414 Patent”), and 8,086,604 (the “’604 Patent”). 15 The Samsung Defendants deny knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth 16 or falsity of the remaining allegations in paragraph 12 of the Complaint and therefore deny them. 17 Samsung’s Accused Products 18 13. Denied. 19 14. The Samsung Defendants admit to having released products in 2010 and early 20 2011. The Samsung Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 14 of the 21 Complaint. 22 15. Denied. 23 16. The Samsung Defendants deny that any of the products listed in paragraph 16 of 24 the Complaint infringe any of the alleged patent rights Apple purports to assert in the Complaint. 25 The Samsung Defendants admit that the following devices are Samsung products: Galaxy S II 26 Skyrocket, Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch, Galaxy S II – T-Mobile, Galaxy S II – AT&T, Galaxy 27 Nexus, Illusion, Captivate Glide, Exhibit II 4G, Stratosphere, Transform Ultra, Admire, Conquer 28 4G, Dart, Galaxy Player 4.0, Galaxy Player 5.0, Galaxy Tab 7.0 Plus, and Galaxy Tab 8.9. SEA Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -3SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 denies that it has sold in the United States any of the mobile phones listed in paragraph 16 of the 2 Complaint. Except as expressly admitted, the Samsung Defendants deny the remaining 3 allegations in paragraph 16 of the Complaint. 4 5 Apple’s Infringement Allegations 17. The Samsung Defendants deny that they have infringed any of the Apple utility 6 patents identified in the Complaint. The Samsung Defendants aver that they do not infringe any 7 of the Apple utility patents identified in the Complaint, and therefore deny the implication that 8 they needed to obtain permission from Apple. Except as expressly admitted, the Samsung 9 Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 17 of the Complaint. 10 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF 11 (Infringement of the ’647 Patent) 12 18. The Samsung Defendants repeat and incorporate the admissions and denials of 13 paragraphs 1 through 17 above as if fully set forth herein. 14 19. Denied. 15 20. Denied. 16 21. Denied. 17 22. Denied. 18 23. Denied. 19 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF 20 (Infringement of the ’959 Patent) 21 24. The Samsung Defendants repeat and incorporate the admissions and denials of 22 paragraphs 1 through 23 above as if fully set forth herein. 23 25. Denied. 24 26. Denied. 25 27. Denied. 26 28. Denied. 27 29. Denied. 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -4SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF 2 (Infringement of the ’721 Patent) 3 30. The Samsung Defendants repeat and incorporate the admissions and denials of 4 paragraphs 1 through 29 above as if fully set forth herein. 5 31. Denied. 6 32. Denied. 7 33. Denied. 8 34. Denied. 9 35. Denied. 10 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 11 (Infringement of the ’172 Patent) 12 36. The Samsung Defendants repeat and incorporate the admissions and denials of 13 paragraphs 1 through 35 above as if fully set forth herein. 14 37. Denied. 15 38. Denied. 16 39. Denied. 17 40. Denied. 18 41. Denied. 19 FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 20 (Infringement of the ’760 Patent) 21 42. The Samsung Defendants repeat and incorporate the admissions and denials of 22 paragraphs 1 through 41 above as if fully set forth herein. 23 43. Denied. 24 44. Denied. 25 45. Denied. 26 46. Denied. 27 47. Denied. 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -5SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 2 (Infringement of the ’502 Patent) 3 48. The Samsung Defendants repeat and incorporate the admissions and denials of 4 paragraphs 1 through 47 above as if fully set forth herein. 5 49. Denied. 6 50. Denied. 7 51. Denied. 8 52. Denied. 9 53. Denied. 10 SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 11 (Infringement of the ’414 Patent) 12 54. The Samsung Defendants repeat and incorporate the admissions and denials of 13 paragraphs 1 through 53 above as if fully set forth herein. 14 55. Denied. 15 56. Denied. 16 57. Denied. 17 58. Denied. 18 59. Denied. 19 EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 20 (Infringement of the ’604 Patent) 21 60. The Samsung Defendants repeat and incorporate the admissions and denials of 22 paragraphs 1 through 59 above as if fully set forth herein. 23 61. Denied. 24 62. Denied. 25 63. Denied. 26 64. Denied. 27 65. Denied. 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -6SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 The Samsung Defendants deny that Apple is entitled to the judgment sought, set forth in 2 paragraphs 1–9 on pages 11–12 of its Complaint. 3 4 5 II. 66. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES By alleging the Affirmative Defenses set forth below, the Samsung Defendants do 6 not agree or concede that they bear the burden of proof or the burden of persuasion on any of these 7 issues, whether in whole or in part. For their Affirmative Defenses to the Complaint, the 8 Samsung Defendants allege as follows: 9 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 10 (Failure to State a Claim) 11 67. Apple’s Complaint, on one or more claims for relief set forth therein, fails to state a 12 claim upon which relief can be granted. 13 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 (Non-Infringement) 15 68. The Samsung Defendants have not infringed, and currently do not infringe, the 16 ’647 Patent, ’959 Patent, ’721 Patent, ’172 Patent, ’760 Patent, ’502 Patent, ’414 Patent, or ’604 17 Patent (collectively, the “Apple Patents In Suit”) directly, indirectly, contributorily, by 18 inducement, under the doctrine of equivalents, or in any other manner. 19 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 20 (Invalidity) 21 69. The claims of the Apple Patents In Suit are invalid for failure to satisfy one or more 22 of the conditions for patentability specified in Title 35 of the United States Code, including 23 without limitation §§ 101, 102, 103, and/or 112. 24 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 25 (Waiver, Acquiescence, and Estoppel) 26 70. Each of the purported claims set forth in Apple’s Complaint is barred by the 27 doctrines of waiver, acquiescence, and estoppel. 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -7SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (Laches) 3 71. The Apple Patents In Suit are unenforceable, in whole or in part, against the 4 Samsung Defendants under the doctrine of laches. 5 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 6 (Failure to Mitigate) 7 72. The claims made in the Complaint are barred, in whole or in part, because of 8 Apple’s failure to mitigate damages, if such damages exist. 9 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 10 (Prosecution History Estoppel) 11 73. The relief sought by Apple as to the claims of one or more of the Apple Patents In 12 Suit is barred under the doctrine of prosecution history estoppel. 13 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 (Prosecution Laches) 15 74. One or more of the Apple Patents In Suit are unenforceable, in whole or in part, 16 against the Samsung Defendants under the doctrine of prosecution laches. 17 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 18 (Acts of Plaintiff) 19 75. On information and belief, the damages, if any, that were allegedly sustained by 20 Apple as a result of the acts complained of in the Complaint were caused in whole or in part or 21 were contributed to by reason of the acts, omissions, negligence, and/or intentional misconduct of 22 Apple, its agents, predecessors, and/or related entities. 23 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 24 (No Equitable Relief) 25 76. As a result of Apple’s actions, Apple is not entitled to equitable relief, including 26 but not limited to Apple’s request for injunctive relief as it has an adequate remedy at law. 27 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -8SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (No Willful Infringement) 3 77. Apple’s claims for enhanced damages and an award of fees and costs against the 4 Samsung Defendants have no basis in fact or law and should be denied. 5 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 6 (Actions of Others) 7 78. The claims made in the Complaint are barred, in whole or in part, because the 8 Samsung Defendants are not liable for the acts of others over whom it has no control. 9 THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 10 (No Causation) 11 79. Apple’s claims against the Samsung Defendants are barred because Apple’s 12 damages, if any, were not caused by the Samsung Defendants. 13 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 (No Damage) 15 80. Without admitting that the Complaint states a claim, there has been no damage in 16 any amount, manner or at all by reason of any act alleged against the Samsung Defendants in the 17 Complaint, and the relief prayed for in the Complaint therefore cannot be granted. 18 FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 19 (No Irreparable Harm) 20 81. Apple’s claims for injunctive relief are barred because Apple cannot show that it 21 will suffer any irreparable harm from the Samsung Defendants’ actions. 22 SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 (Adequate Remedy at Law) 24 82. The alleged injury or damage suffered by Apple, if any, would be adequately 25 compensated by damages. Accordingly, Apple has a complete and adequate remedy at law and 26 is not entitled to seek equitable relief. 27 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -9SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (Duplicative Claims) 3 83. Without admitting that the Complaint states a claim, any remedies are limited to the 4 extent that there is sought an overlapping or duplicative recovery pursuant to the various claims 5 against the Samsung Defendants or others for any alleged single wrong. 6 7 ADDITIONAL DEFENSES 84. The Samsung Defendants reserve the right to assert additional defenses based on 8 information learned or obtained during discovery. 9 10 11 III. 1. COUNTERCLAIMS SEC and STA (collectively, the “Samsung Patent Counterclaimants”), by and 12 through their undersigned counsel, seek declarations and judgments that Apple infringes U.S. 13 Patent No. 7,756,087 (the “’087 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 7,551,596 (the “’596 patent”), U.S. 14 Patent No. 7,672,470 (the “’470 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 7,577,757 (the “’757 patent”), U.S. 15 Patent No. 7,232,058 (the “’058 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 6,292,179 (the “’179 patent”), U.S. 16 Patent No. 6,226,449 (the “’449 patent”), and U.S. Patent No. 5,579,239 (the “’239 patent”). 17 2. SEC, SEA and STA (collectively, the “Samsung Counterclaimants”), by and 18 through their undersigned counsel, also seek declarations that each of the Apple Patents In Suit is 19 invalid and has not been and is not infringed by them. 20 21 NATURE OF THE ACTION 3. This is an action for patent infringement. Apple has infringed and continues to 22 infringe, contribute to the infringement of, and/or actively induce others to infringe Samsung’s 23 patents-in-suit. 24 4. This is also an action for a declaratory judgment of invalidity and non-infringement 25 of patents Apple purports to own. 26 27 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -10SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 2 THE PARTIES 5. Counterclaimant SEC is a corporation organized under the laws of Korea, with its 3 principal place of business at 416 Maetan-3dong, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon-City, Gyeonggi-do, 4 Korea 443-742. 5 6. Counterclaimant SEA is a New York corporation, with its principal place of 6 business at 85 Challenger Road, Ridgefield Park, NJ, 07660. 7 7. Counterclaimant STA is a limited liability company organized under the laws of 8 Delaware, with its principal place of business at 1301 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, Texas 9 75082. 10 8. Upon information and belief, Apple is a corporation organized under the laws of 11 the state of California and has its principal place of business at 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino, 12 California 95014. Upon information and belief, Apple imports into the United States, offers for 13 sale, sells and/or uses in the United States mobile electronic devices. 14 15 JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT 9. The Samsung Patent Counterclaimants’ patent infringement counterclaims arise 16 under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq. The Samsung 17 Counterclaimants’ counterclaims for declaratory relief arise under the Declaratory Judgment Act, 18 28 U.S.C. § 2201, et seq. and the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 1, et seq. 19 10. The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338(a), 20 2201(a) and 2202. 21 11. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Apple for at least the following reasons: 22 (i) Apple maintains its principal place of business in this District; (ii) Apple has designated an 23 agent for service of process in the state of California; (iii) Apple regularly does business or solicits 24 business, engages in other persistent courses of conduct, and/or derives substantial revenue from 25 products and/or services provided to individuals in this District and in this state; and (iv) Apple 26 has initiated litigation in this judicial District in connection with this dispute. 27 12. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b)-(c) and 1400(b). 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -11SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 13. An immediate, real, and justiciable controversy exists between the Samsung 2 Counterclaimants and Apple as to whether the Apple Patents In Suit are invalid and have not been 3 infringed. 4 5 FACTUAL BACKGROUND 14. From its inception as a small business in Taegu, Korea, SEC and its subsidiary, 6 Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”), has grown to become 7 one of the world’s leading electronics companies, specializing in digital products and media, 8 semiconductors, memory, and system integration. Today Samsung’s innovative and top quality 9 consumer products are widely recognized and appreciated across the globe. 10 15. Samsung has a long history of groundbreaking innovation across a wide range of 11 technologies. Samsung’s commitment to innovation is demonstrated in part by the billions of 12 dollars in research and development expenditures incurred over the years. From 2005 through 13 2011 alone, Samsung invested more than $43.6 billion in research and development. More than 14 a quarter of all Samsung employees—over 55,300 engineers overall, including about 15,600 in 15 telecommunications—daily engage in cutting-edge research and development projects. 16 16. Samsung’s commitment to innovation and investment in research and development 17 is demonstrated by the fact that, as of April 18, 2012, Samsung has in its portfolio 30,665 United 18 States patents, including 6,238 in the telecommunications field. Samsung is consistently ranked 19 ahead of other technology companies in terms of the number of issued patents obtained in the 20 United States. 21 17. Samsung’s research and development successes have propelled the company to its 22 status as the largest provider by volume of mobile devices in the world in 2011. 23 sells more Android-based devices worldwide than any other company. Samsung also In January 2012, a study 24 by research firm iGR found that Samsung is the most preferred seller of Android-based devices 25 among consumers. 26 18. Samsung has been a pioneer in the mobile device business sector since the 27 inception of the mobile device industry. In 1999, Samsung introduced its first multi-function 28 “smart phone” that provided both internet access (for sending e-mails and for electronic chatting) Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -12SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 and personal digital assistant (“PDA”) features. In 2000, Samsung introduced the Samsung 2 Uproar SPH-M100, the first cell phone with MP3-playback functionality. In 2001 Samsung 3 introduced into the United States the first PDA phone with a 256-color screen, selected as one of 4 the Best Products of 2001 by BusinessWeek magazine. 5 19. Also in 2001, Samsung broke the 1 cm technological barrier and stunned the 6 industry with an ultra-slim, lightweight flip phone that was only 9.8 mm thick. This innovation 7 sparked the ultra-portable mobile phone revolution spurring dozens of competitors to slim down 8 the design form factors and develop their own portable mobile phone technology design. In 9 2002, Samsung unleashed the world’s first high-definition color LCD display suitable for mobile 10 devices. Now users could browse the web and view images directly from their mobile devices in 11 true color. In 2004, after selling over 20 million mobile handsets in the United States, Samsung 12 announced the first mobile phone that supported digital multimedia broadcast via satellite. Users 13 could now watch streaming high-quality multimedia content wherever they traveled. 14 20. Samsung announced the world’s first five and seven megapixel camera phones in 15 late 2004 and early 2005, respectively. Now, mid- to high-range digital camera functionality 16 could be integrated with mobile handsets, allowing users to snap life-like photos on-the-go. In 17 2008, Samsung became the leading mobile handset vendor in the United States. 18 21. Samsung has also continuously innovated in the area of mobile phone displays. In 19 2008 and 2009, Samsung released the industry’s first high resolution AMOLED display for a 20 mobile phone. The new display featured a 180-degree viewing angle and reduced power 21 consumption when compared to traditional LCD displays. Samsung’s clearer and brighter Super 22 AMOLED displays continued to improve mobile phone displays with 30% better color 23 reproduction over the best quality LCD displays. 24 22. Samsung’s innovative features, including the integrated high resolution cameras 25 and displays, were the result of the exceptional creativity and ingenuity of thousands of Samsung 26 engineers across the globe engaged in cutting-edge research and development projects. 27 23. Samsung’s innovative contributions to the mobile device industry have been 28 recognized through numerous awards for excellence in mobile device design. For example, Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -13SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 Samsung has received numerous “Red Dot Design Awards” in one of the largest international 2 design competitions. Similarly, a number of Samsung mobile devices have been awarded the “iF 3 Design Award” from the iF Industrie Forum Design e.V., based in Germany, for features such as 4 the user interface. The iF Designs Awards are among the most important in the world, as 5 evidenced by more than 11,000 annual entries from almost 50 countries. Samsung has also 6 received a number of “Good Design Awards” from the Japan Industrial Design Promotion 7 Organization (JIDPO). Overall, Samsung’s mobile phones and devices have won close to 60 8 awards between 2007 and the beginning of 2011. 9 24. Samsung has consistently introduced market-relevant and innovative products, 10 including over 1,600 mobile phone models incorporating Samsung patented technology into the 11 U.S. marketplace since 1997. Over 332 million Samsung mobile devices have been sold since 12 1997. 13 25. Without the ability to enforce its intellectual property rights, such as those relating 14 to mobile device technology at issue in this action, Samsung would not be able to sustain the 15 extensive commitment to research and development that has enabled it to lead the way into 16 numerous improvements across a broad range of technologies, including the mobile device 17 technologies at issue in this action. 18 19 SAMSUNG’S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 26. Samsung’s patents relate to fundamental innovations that increase mobile device 20 reliability, efficiency, and quality, and improve user interface in mobile handsets and other 21 products. These innovations are critical to the user’s ability to communicate with family, friends, 22 and business associates reliably and effectively. 23 27. In communications systems, standards that prescribe the formats for sending 24 information are essential to ensure that mobile devices made by different manufacturers are 25 capable of interacting within a network. Because interoperability is key for communications, the 26 development of protocols that ultimately result in a technical standard is very important to 27 ensuring an efficient and functional system. As modern wireless networks carry more data at 28 higher data rates and service more users than their predecessors, continued innovation is essential Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -14SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 to keep pace with the increased demands on cellular networks. Samsung has been a leader in 2 developing the ideas and protocols needed to increase the efficiency, reliability, and functionality 3 of standards-based networks and the features available in these networks. 4 28. In the United States, one of the key standards governing cellular communications, 5 known as Wideband Code-Division Multiple-Access (W-CDMA), is published by 3GPP (Third 6 Generation Partnership Project). W-CDMA is one of the main technologies for the 7 implementation of third-generation (3G) and more advanced cellular networks such as those of 8 AT&T and T-Mobile. W-CDMA is the most common form of air interface standard within the 9 Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) telecommunications technologies 10 standard. Samsung has made key inventions that are part of these standards. 11 29. The Samsung W-CDMA and UMTS patents at issue in this action relate to 12 reliability, capacity, efficiency, compatibility, and functioning of mobile devices in W-CDMA and 13 UMTS networks. 14 30. Samsung’s technology increases the reliability of high speed communication and 15 enables mobile devices to handle higher data and voice transmissions and receptions. 16 31. Samsung’s technology increases the throughput and capacity of mobile device 17 networks. The rapid increase in usage of the mobile device networks has led to unprecedented 18 demand for increased capacity and throughput, particularly as data-demanding applications such 19 as video have become widespread. Samsung’s technology enables a given network to pack in 20 more users’ data without increasing the size of the frequency band used, and can therefore 21 accommodate a larger number of users. 22 32. Samsung’s patents also involve popular features used by many users today. For 23 example, Samsung’s patents involve the ability to control audio, synchronizing data across more 24 than one device, novel ways to display data, a touchscreen keyboard, and recording and 25 transmitting images, video, and speech. 26 33. Samsung has sold millions of mobile phones in the United States incorporating the 27 patented technology at issue here. For example, in 2010, Samsung sold over 24 million mobile 28 phones incorporating Samsung’s innovations. Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -15SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 34. The Samsung Galaxy S 4G, which incorporates the patented technologies at issue, 2 has been heralded by CNET as a “fantastic Android smartphone” that delivers “fast data speeds,” 3 and PC Magazine named the Samsung Galaxy S 4G one of the best T-Mobile phones. 4 Samsung’s Captivate and Vibrant mobile phone models, which also incorporate the patented 5 technologies at issue here, were both named to PC Magazine’s Top 10 Smartphones list, with the 6 Samsung Captivate being described as a “super-phone,” and the Samsung Vibrant being described 7 as T-Mobile’s “top smartphone.” 8 35. Apple has copied many of Samsung’s innovations in its Apple iPhone, iPod, and 9 iPad products. Apple continues to violate Samsung’s patent rights by using these patented 10 technologies without a license. 11 36. SEC is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in the ’087 patent, titled “Method 12 and Apparatus for Performing Non-Scheduled Transmission in a Mobile Communication System 13 for Supporting an Enhanced Uplink Data Channel,” which was duly and properly issued by the 14 United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) on July 13, 2010. A copy of the ’087 15 patent is attached as Ex. 1. 16 37. SEC is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in the ’596 patent, titled “Method 17 and Apparatus for Signaling Control Information of Uplink Packet Data Service in Mobile 18 Communication System,” which was duly and properly issued by the USPTO on June 23, 2009. 19 A copy of the ’596 patent is attached as Ex. 2. 20 38. SEC is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in the ’470 patent, titled 21 “Audio/Video Device Having a Volume Control Function for an External Audio Reproduction 22 Unit by Using Volume Control Buttons of a Remote Controller and Volume Control Method 23 Therefor,” which was duly and properly issued by the USPTO on March 2, 2010. A copy of the 24 ’470 patent is attached as Ex. 3. 25 39. SEC is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in the ’757 patent, titled 26 “Multimedia Synchronization Method and Device,” which was duly and properly issued by the 27 USPTO on August 18, 2009. A copy of the ’757 patent is attached as Ex. 4. 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -16SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 40. SEC is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in the ’058 patent, titled “Data 2 Displaying Apparatus and Method,” which was duly and properly issued by the USPTO on June 3 19, 2007. 4 41. A copy of the ’058 patent is attached as Ex. 5. SEC is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in the ’179 patent, titled “Software 5 Keyboard System Using Trace of Stylus on a Touch Screen and Method for Recognizing Key 6 Code Using the Same,” which was duly and properly issued by the USPTO on September 18, 7 2001. A copy of the ’179 patent is attached as Ex. 6. 8 42. SEC is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in the ’449 patent, titled 9 “Apparatus for Recording and Reproducing Digital Image and Speech,” which was duly and 10 properly issued by the USPTO on May 1, 2001. 11 43. A copy of the ’449 patent is attached as Ex. 7. SEC is the owner of all rights, title, and interest in the ’239 patent, titled “Remote 12 Video Transmission System,” which was duly and properly issued by the USPTO on November 13 26, 1996. 14 15 A copy of the ’239 patent is attached as Ex. 8. APPLE’S ALLEGED CLAIMS AGAINST SAMSUNG 44. Apple claims to own the Apple Patents In Suit, which purport to cover technologies 16 relating to mobile electronic devices and tablet computers. 17 45. Apple has accused the Samsung Counterclaimants of infringing the Apple Patents 18 In Suit through the Samsung Counterclaimants’ alleged using, selling and/or offering to sell, in the 19 United States and/or importing into the United States one or more of the products known as the 20 Galaxy S II Skyrocket, Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch, Galaxy S II – T-Mobile, Galaxy S II – AT&T, 21 Galaxy Nexus, Illusion, Captivate Glide, Exhibit II 4G, Stratosphere, Transform Ultra, Admire, 22 Conquer 4G, Dart, Galaxy Player 4.0, Galaxy Player 5.0, Galaxy Tab 7.0 Plus, and Galaxy Tab 23 8.9 (collectively, the “Accused Products”). 24 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF 25 (Declaration of Non-Infringement) 26 46. The Samsung Counterclaimants restate and incorporate by reference each of the 27 allegations of paragraphs 1 through 45 of these Counterclaims as though fully set forth herein. 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -17SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 47. Apple claims to be the owner and assignee of all rights, title and interest in and 2 under the Apple Patents In Suit. 3 48. Apple has accused the Samsung Counterclaimants of infringing the Patents In Suit 4 and has created a substantial, immediate, and real controversy between the parties as to the non5 infringement of each of the Patents In Suit. 6 49. The Samsung Counterclaimants do not infringe and have not infringed the Patents 7 In Suit through their using, selling, and/or offering to sell, in the United States and/or importing 8 into the United States, one or more of the Accused Products. 9 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF 10 (Declaration of Invalidity) 11 50. The Samsung Counterclaimants restate and incorporate by reference each of the 12 allegations of paragraphs 1 through 49 of these Counterclaims as though fully set forth herein. 13 51. Apple contends that the Apple Patents In Suit are valid and has created a 14 substantial, immediate, and real controversy between the parties as to the invalidity of these 15 patents. 16 52. Each and every claim of each of the Apple Patents In Suit are invalid for failing to 17 satisfy one or more of the conditions for patentability specified in Title 35 of the United States 18 Code, including without limitation Sections 101, 102, 103, and 112. 19 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF 20 (Infringement of the ’087 Patent) 21 53. The Samsung Patent Counterclaimants re-allege and incorporate by reference the 22 allegations of Paragraphs 1-52 of these Counterclaims as though fully set forth herein. 23 54. Upon information and belief, Apple is infringing and has infringed the ’087 patent 24 through the manufacture, use, importation, offer for sale, or sale of at least the iPhone 4, iPhone 25 4S, iPad 2, and New iPad (collectively, “’087 Accused Products”). 26 55. Upon information and belief, Apple will continue to infringe the ’087 patent unless 27 and until they are enjoined by this Court. 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -18SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 56. Apple had actual notice of its infringement of the ’087 patent, including a detailed 2 explanation of how Apple’s customers and/or end users of Apple’s products directly infringe the 3 method claims of the ’087 patent by using the ’087 Accused Products, no later than October 2010, 4 and when Samsung declared the ’087 patent to ETSI no later than May 16, 2006. 5 Notwithstanding Apple’s actual notice of infringement, Apple has continued to manufacture, use, 6 import, offer for sale, or sell the ’087 Accused Products with the knowledge or willful blindness 7 that its actions will induce Apple’s customers and end users to infringe the ’087 patent. 8 57. Apple has also induced and continues to induce others to infringe the ’087 patent in 9 violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271 by encouraging and facilitating others to perform actions known by 10 Apple to be acts of infringement of the ’087 patent with intent that those performing the acts 11 infringe the ’087 patent. Upon information and belief, Apple performed these acts with 12 knowledge of the ’087 patent and with the knowledge or willful blindness that such induced acts 13 would constitute infringement. Upon information and belief, Apple, inter alia, advertises 14 regarding the ’087 Accused Products, publishes specifications and promotional literature 15 describing the operation of those devices, creates and/or distributes user manuals for the Accused 16 Products, and offers support and technical assistance to its customers. Consumers of these 17 products then directly infringe the ’087 patent. 18 58. The Accused Products were especially made or especially adapted for use in 19 infringement of the claims of the ’087 patent, and are not a staple article or commodity of 20 commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Therefore, Apple contributed to the 21 infringement of the claims of the ’087 patent. 22 59. Upon information and belief, as of the date Apple received knowledge of its 23 infringement of the ’087 patent, Apple’s infringement is, and has been willful. 24 60. Apple has caused, and will continue to cause, Samsung irreparable injury and 25 damages by infringing the ’087 patent. Samsung will suffer further irreparable injury, for which 26 it has no adequate remedy at law, unless and until Apple is enjoined from infringing the ’087 27 patent. 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -19SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 2 (Infringement of the ’596 Patent) 3 61. The Samsung Patent Counterclaimants re-allege and incorporate by reference the 4 allegations of Paragraphs 1-60 of these Counterclaims as though fully set forth herein. 5 62. Upon information and belief, Apple is infringing and has infringed the ’596 patent 6 through the manufacture, use, importation, offer for sale, or sale of at least the iPhone 4, iPhone 7 4S, iPad 2, and New iPad (collectively, “’596 Accused Products”). 8 63. Upon information and belief, Apple will continue to infringe the ’596 patent unless 9 and until they are enjoined by this Court. 10 64. Apple had actual notice of its infringement of the ’596 patent, including a detailed 11 explanation of how Apple’s customers and/or end users of Apple’s products directly infringe the 12 method claims of the ’596 patent by using the ’596 Accused Products, no later than the filing date 13 of these counterclaims, and when Samsung declared the ’596 patent to ETSI, no later than May 6, 14 2010. Notwithstanding Apple’s actual notice of infringement, Apple has continued to 15 manufacture, use, import, offer for sale, or sell the ’596 Accused Products with the knowledge or 16 willful blindness that its actions will induce Apple’s customers and end users to infringe the ’596 17 patent. 18 65. Apple has also induced and continues to induce others to infringe the ’596 patent in 19 violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271 by encouraging and facilitating others to perform actions known by 20 Apple to be acts of infringement of the ’596 patent with intent that those performing the acts 21 infringe the ’596 patent. Upon information and belief, Apple performed these acts with 22 knowledge of the ’596 patent and with the knowledge or willful blindness that such induced acts 23 would constitute infringement. Upon information and belief, Apple, inter alia, advertises 24 regarding the ’596 Accused Products, publishes specifications and promotional literature 25 describing the operation of those devices, creates and/or distributes user manuals for the Accused 26 Products, and offers support and technical assistance to its customers. Consumers of these 27 products then directly infringe the ’596 patent. 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -20SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 66. The Accused Products were especially made or especially adapted for use in 2 infringement of the claims of the ’596 patent, and are not a staple article or commodity of 3 commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Therefore, Apple contributed to the 4 infringement of the claims of the ’596 patent. 5 67. Upon information and belief, as of the date Apple received knowledge of its 6 infringement of the ’596 patent, Apple’s infringement is, and has been willful. 7 68. Apple has caused, and will continue to cause, Samsung irreparable injury and 8 damages by infringing the ’596 patent. Samsung will suffer further irreparable injury, for which 9 it has no adequate remedy at law, unless and until Apple is enjoined from infringing the ’596 10 patent. 11 FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 12 (Infringement of the ’470 Patent) 13 69. The Samsung Patent Counterclaimants re-allege and incorporate by reference the 14 allegations of Paragraphs 1-68 of these Counterclaims as though fully set forth herein. 15 70. Upon information and belief, Apple is infringing and has infringed the ’470 patent 16 through the manufacture, use, importation, offer for sale, or sale of at least all iPhones, all iPads, 17 and all iPod touches (collectively, “’470 Accused Products”). 18 71. Upon information and belief, Apple will continue to infringe the ’470 patent unless 19 and until they are enjoined by this Court. 20 72. Apple had actual notice of its infringement of the ’470 patent, including a detailed 21 explanation of how Apple’s customers and/or end users of Apple’s products directly infringe the 22 method claims of the ’470 patent by using the ’470 Accused Products, no later than the filing date 23 of these counterclaims. Notwithstanding Apple’s actual notice of infringement, Apple has 24 continued to manufacture, use, import, offer for sale, or sell the ’470 Accused Products with the 25 knowledge or willful blindness that its actions will induce Apple’s customers and end users to 26 infringe the ’470 patent. 27 73. Apple has also induced and continues to induce others to infringe the ’470 patent in 28 violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271 by encouraging and facilitating others to perform actions known by Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -21SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 Apple to be acts of infringement of the ’470 patent with intent that those performing the acts 2 infringe the ’470 patent. Upon information and belief, Apple performed these acts with 3 knowledge of the ’470 patent and with the knowledge or willful blindness that such induced acts 4 would constitute infringement. Upon information and belief, Apple, inter alia, advertises 5 regarding the ’470 Accused Products, publishes specifications and promotional literature 6 describing the operation of those devices, creates and/or distributes user manuals for the Accused 7 Products, and offers support and technical assistance to its customers. Consumers of these 8 products then directly infringe the ’470 patent. 9 74. The Accused Products were especially made or especially adapted for use in 10 infringement of the claims of the ’470 patent, and are not a staple article or commodity of 11 commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Therefore, Apple contributed to the 12 infringement of the claims of the ’470 patent. 13 75. Upon information and belief, as of the date Apple received knowledge of its 14 infringement of the ’470 patent, Apple’s infringement is, and has been willful. 15 76. Apple has caused, and will continue to cause, Samsung irreparable injury and 16 damages by infringing the ’470 patent. Samsung will suffer further irreparable injury, for which 17 it has no adequate remedy at law, unless and until Apple is enjoined from infringing the ’470 18 patent. 19 SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 20 (Infringement of the ’757 Patent) 21 77. The Samsung Patent Counterclaimants re-allege and incorporate by reference the 22 allegations of Paragraphs 1-76 of these Counterclaims as though fully set forth herein. 23 78. Upon information and belief, Apple is infringing and has infringed the ’757 patent 24 through the manufacture, use, importation, offer for sale, or sale of at least all iPhones, all iPads, 25 all iPods, all Apple computers, Apple TV, iCloud, and iTunes (collectively, “’757 Accused 26 Products”). 27 79. Upon information and belief, Apple will continue to infringe the ’757 patent unless 28 and until they are enjoined by this Court. Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -22SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 80. Apple had actual notice of its infringement of the ’757 patent, including a detailed 2 explanation of how Apple’s customers and/or end users of Apple’s products directly infringe the 3 method claims of the ’757 patent by using the ’757 Accused Products, no later than the filing date 4 of these Counterclaims. Notwithstanding Apple’s actual notice of infringement, Apple has 5 continued to manufacture, use, import, offer for sale, or sell the ’757 Accused Products with the 6 knowledge or willful blindness that its actions will induce Apple’s customers and end users to 7 infringe the ’757 patent. 8 81. Apple has also induced and continues to induce others to infringe the ’757 patent in 9 violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271 by encouraging and facilitating others to perform actions known by 10 Apple to be acts of infringement of the ’757 patent with intent that those performing the acts 11 infringe the ’757 patent. Upon information and belief, Apple performed these acts with 12 knowledge of the ’757 patent and with the knowledge or willful blindness that such induced acts 13 would constitute infringement. Upon information and belief, Apple, inter alia, advertises 14 regarding the ’757 Accused Products, publishes specifications and promotional literature 15 describing the operation of those devices, creates and/or distributes user manuals for the Accused 16 Products, and offers support and technical assistance to its customers. Consumers of these 17 products then directly infringe the ’757 patent. 18 82. The Accused Products were especially made or especially adapted for use in 19 infringement of the claims of the ’757 patent, and are not a staple article or commodity of 20 commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Therefore, Apple contributed to the 21 infringement of the claims of the ’757 patent. 22 83. Upon information and belief, as of the date Apple received knowledge of its 23 infringement of the ’757 patent, Apple’s infringement is, and has been willful. 24 84. Apple has caused, and will continue to cause, Samsung irreparable injury and 25 damages by infringing the ’757 patent. Samsung will suffer further irreparable injury, for which 26 it has no adequate remedy at law, unless and until Apple is enjoined from infringing the ’757 27 patent. 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -23SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 2 (Infringement of the ’058 Patent) 3 85. The Samsung Patent Counterclaimants re-allege and incorporate by reference the 4 allegations of Paragraphs 1-84 of these Counterclaims as though fully set forth herein. 5 86. Upon information and belief, Apple is infringing and has infringed the ’058 patent 6 through the manufacture, use, importation, offer for sale, or sale of at least all iPads (collectively, 7 “’058 Accused Products”). 8 87. Upon information and belief, Apple will continue to infringe the ’058 patent unless 9 and until they are enjoined by this Court. 10 88. Apple had actual notice of its infringement of the ’058 patent, including a detailed 11 explanation of how Apple’s customers and/or end users of Apple’s products directly infringe the 12 method claims of the ’058 patent by using the ’058 Accused Products, no later than the filing date 13 of these Counterclaims. Notwithstanding Apple’s actual notice of infringement, Apple has 14 continued to manufacture, use, import, offer for sale, or sell the ’058 Accused Products with the 15 knowledge or willful blindness that its actions will induce Apple’s customers and end users to 16 infringe the ’058 patent. 17 89. Apple has also induced and continues to induce others to infringe the ’058 patent in 18 violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271 by encouraging and facilitating others to perform actions known by 19 Apple to be acts of infringement of the ’058 patent with intent that those performing the acts 20 infringe the ’058 patent. Upon information and belief, Apple performed these acts with 21 knowledge of the ’058 patent and with the knowledge or willful blindness that such induced acts 22 would constitute infringement. Upon information and belief, Apple, inter alia, advertises 23 regarding the ’058 Accused Products, publishes specifications and promotional literature 24 describing the operation of those devices, creates and/or distributes user manuals for the Accused 25 Products, and offers support and technical assistance to its customers. Consumers of these 26 products then directly infringe the ’058 patent. 27 90. The Accused Products were especially made or especially adapted for use in 28 infringement of the claims of the ’058 patent, and are not a staple article or commodity of Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -24SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Therefore, Apple contributed to the 2 infringement of the claims of the ’058 patent. 3 91. Upon information and belief, as of the date Apple received knowledge of its 4 infringement of the ’058 patent, Apple’s infringement is, and has been willful. 5 92. Apple has caused, and will continue to cause, Samsung irreparable injury and 6 damages by infringing the ’058 patent. Samsung will suffer further irreparable injury, for which 7 it has no adequate remedy at law, unless and until Apple is enjoined from infringing the ’058 8 patent. 9 EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 10 (Infringement of the ’179 Patent) 11 93. The Samsung Patent Counterclaimants re-allege and incorporate by reference the 12 allegations of Paragraphs 1-92 of these Counterclaims as though fully set forth herein. 13 94. Upon information and belief, Apple is infringing and has infringed the ’179 patent 14 through the manufacture, use, importation, offer for sale, or sale of at least all iPhones, all iPads, 15 and iPod touches (collectively, “’179 Accused Products”). 16 95. Upon information and belief, Apple will continue to infringe the ’179 patent unless 17 and until they are enjoined by this Court. 18 96. Apple had actual notice of its infringement of the ’179 patent, including a detailed 19 explanation of how Apple’s customers and/or end users of Apple’s products directly infringe the 20 method claims of the ’179 patent by using the ’179 Accused Products, no later than October 2010. 21 Notwithstanding Apple’s actual notice of infringement, Apple has continued to manufacture, use, 22 import, offer for sale, or sell the ’179 Accused Products with the knowledge or willful blindness 23 that its actions will induce Apple’s customers and end users to infringe the ’179 patent. 24 97. Apple has also induced and continues to induce others to infringe the ’179 patent in 25 violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271 by encouraging and facilitating others to perform actions known by 26 Apple to be acts of infringement of the ’179 patent with intent that those performing the acts 27 infringe the ’179 patent. Upon information and belief, Apple performed these acts with 28 knowledge of the ’179 patent and with the knowledge or willful blindness that such induced acts Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -25SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 would constitute infringement. Upon information and belief, Apple, inter alia, advertises 2 regarding the ’179 Accused Products, publishes specifications and promotional literature 3 describing the operation of those devices, creates and/or distributes user manuals for the Accused 4 Products, and offers support and technical assistance to its customers. Consumers of these 5 products then directly infringe the ’179 patent. 6 98. The Accused Products were especially made or especially adapted for use in 7 infringement of the claims of the ’179 patent, and are not a staple article or commodity of 8 commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Therefore, Apple contributed to the 9 infringement of the claims of the ’179 patent. 10 99. Upon information and belief, as of the date Apple received knowledge of its 11 infringement of the ’179 patent, Apple’s infringement is, and has been willful. 12 100. Apple has caused, and will continue to cause, Samsung irreparable injury and 13 damages by infringing the ’179 patent. Samsung will suffer further irreparable injury, for which 14 it has no adequate remedy at law, unless and until Apple is enjoined from infringing the ’179 15 patent. 16 NINTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 17 (Infringement of the ’449 Patent) 18 101. The Samsung Patent Counterclaimants re-allege and incorporate by reference the 19 allegations of Paragraphs 1-100 of these Counterclaims as though fully set forth herein. 20 102. Upon information and belief, Apple is infringing and has infringed the ’449 patent 21 through the manufacture, use, importation, offer for sale, or sale of at least all iPhones, all iPads, 22 iPod touches, and Apple computers (collectively, “’449 Accused Products”). 23 103. Upon information and belief, Apple will continue to infringe the ’449 patent unless 24 and until they are enjoined by this Court. 25 104. Apple had actual notice of its infringement of the ’449 patent, including a detailed 26 explanation of how Apple’s customers and/or end users of Apple’s products directly infringe the 27 method claims of the ’449 patent by using the ’449 Accused Products, no later than the filing date 28 of these counterclaims. Notwithstanding Apple’s actual notice of infringement, Apple has Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -26SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 continued to manufacture, use, import, offer for sale, or sell the ’449 Accused Products with the 2 knowledge or willful blindness that its actions will induce Apple’s customers and end users to 3 infringe the ’449 patent. 4 105. Apple has also induced and continues to induce others to infringe the ’449 patent in 5 violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271 by encouraging and facilitating others to perform actions known by 6 Apple to be acts of infringement of the ’449 patent with intent that those performing the acts 7 infringe the ’449 patent. Upon information and belief, Apple performed these acts with 8 knowledge of the ’449 patent and with the knowledge or willful blindness that such induced acts 9 would constitute infringement. Upon information and belief, Apple, inter alia, advertises 10 regarding the ’449 Accused Products, publishes specifications and promotional literature 11 describing the operation of those devices, creates and/or distributes user manuals for the Accused 12 Products, and offers support and technical assistance to its customers. Consumers of these 13 products then directly infringe the ’449 patent. 14 106. The Accused Products were especially made or especially adapted for use in 15 infringement of the claims of the ’449 patent, and are not a staple article or commodity of 16 commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Therefore, Apple contributed to the 17 infringement of the claims of the ’449 patent. 18 107. Upon information and belief, as of the date Apple received knowledge of its 19 infringement of the ’449 patent, Apple’s infringement is, and has been willful. 20 108. Apple has caused, and will continue to cause, Samsung irreparable injury and 21 damages by infringing the ’449 patent. Samsung will suffer further irreparable injury, for which 22 it has no adequate remedy at law, unless and until Apple is enjoined from infringing the ’449 23 patent. 24 TENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 25 (Infringement of the ’239 Patent) 26 109. The Samsung Patent Counterclaimants re-allege and incorporate by reference the 27 allegations of Paragraphs 1-108 of these Counterclaims as though fully set forth herein. 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -27SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 110. Upon information and belief, Apple is infringing and has infringed the ’239 patent 2 through the manufacture, use, importation, offer for sale, or sale of at least all iPhones, and all 3G 3 iPads with cameras (collectively, “’239 Accused Products”). 4 111. Upon information and belief, Apple will continue to infringe the ’239 patent unless 5 and until they are enjoined by this Court. 6 112. Apple had actual notice of its infringement of the ’239 patent, including a detailed 7 explanation of how the ’239 Accused Products directly infringe the claims of the ’239 patent, no 8 later than the filing date of these counterclaims. Notwithstanding Apple’s actual notice of 9 infringement, Apple has continued to manufacture, use, import, offer for sale, or sell the ’239 10 Accused Products with the knowledge or willful blindness that those products infringe the ’239 11 patent. 12 113. Upon information and belief, as of the date Apple received knowledge of its 13 infringement of the ’239 patent, Apple’s infringement is, and has been willful. 14 114. Apple has caused, and will continue to cause, Samsung irreparable injury and 15 damages by infringing the ’239 patent. Samsung will suffer further irreparable injury, for which 16 it has no adequate remedy at law, unless and until Apple is enjoined from infringing the ’239 17 patent. 18 19 PRAYER FOR RELIEF FOR SAMSUNG COUNTERCLAIMANTS WHEREFORE, the Samsung Counterclaimants respectfully request entry of judgment as 20 follows: 21 A. That the Court dismiss with prejudice any and all claims of Apple’s Complaint and 22 order that Apple take nothing as a result of the Complaint and that all of Apple’s prayers for relief 23 are denied; 24 B. That the Court find and declare, and enter judgment, in favor of the Samsung 25 Counterclaimants and against Apple that the Samsung Counterclaimants have not infringed any of 26 the Apple Patents In Suit; 27 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -28SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 C. That the Court find and declare, and enter judgment, in favor of the Samsung 2 Counterclaimants and against Apple that each and every claim of the Apple Patents In Suit is 3 invalid; 4 D. That this case be declared “exceptional” under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and that the 5 Samsung Counterclaimants be awarded their attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs incurred in this 6 action; 7 E. That Apple be ordered to pay all costs associated with this action; and 8 F. That the Court grant to the Samsung Counterclaimants such other and further relief 9 as may be deemed just and appropriate. 10 PRAYER FOR RELIEF FOR SAMSUNG PATENT COUNTERCLAIMANTS 11 WHEREFORE, the Samsung Patent Counterclaimants respectfully request entry of 12 judgment as follows: 13 A. That Apple be declared to have infringed, induced others to infringe and/or 14 committed acts of contributory infringement with respect to the claims of Samsung’s Patents In 15 Suit as alleged above; 16 B. That Apple and its officers, agents, servants, employees, and all those persons 17 acting or attempting to act in active concert or in participation with them or acting on their behalf 18 be immediately, preliminarily and permanently enjoined from further infringement of Samsung’s 19 Patents In Suit; 20 C. That Apple be ordered to account for and pay to the Samsung Patent 21 Counterclaimants all damages caused to them by reason of Apple’s infringement of Samsung’s 22 Patents In Suit pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284; 23 D. That Apple be ordered to pay treble damages for willful infringement of each of 24 Samsung’s Patents In Suit pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284; 25 E. That this case be declared “exceptional” under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and that the 26 Samsung Patent Counterclaimants be awarded their attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs incurred 27 in this action; and 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -29SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS 1 F. That the Samsung Patent Counterclaimants be granted pre-judgment and post- 2 judgment interest on the damages caused to them by reason of Apple’s infringement of Samsung’s 3 Patents In Suit. 4 5 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL SEC, SEA, and STA hereby demand a jury trial on all issues. 6 7 DATED: April 18, 2012 8 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 By /s/ Patrick M. Shields Charles K. Verhoeven Kevin A. Smith Kevin P.B. Johnson Victoria F. Maroulis William C. Price Patrick M. Shields John Caracappa (pro hac vice application pending) Steptoe & Johnson, LLP 1330 Connecticut Avenue, NW Washington DC 20036 TEL: 202-429-6267 FAX: 202-429-3902 Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaimants SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., and SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case No. 12-CV-00630-LHK -30SAMSUNG DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS