Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc.
STIPULATION re 105 SEALED MOTION to Dismiss Apple, Inc.'s Infringement Counterclaim by Mirror Worlds Technologies, Inc., Mirror Worlds, LLC, Apple, Inc.. (Smith, Stefani)
Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION MIRROR WORLDS, LLC, Plaint iff, v. APPLE INC., Defendant. APPLE INC., Counterclaim Plaintiff, v. MIRROR WORLDS LLC, MIRROR WORLDS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Counterclaim Defendants. Civil Action No. 6:08-CV-88 LED JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
STIPULATION OF FACTS 1. The sole connection between Plaintiff Mirror Worlds, LLC ("Mirror Worlds") and Mirror Worlds Technologies, Inc. ("MWT") is that both entities at one time owned the patents-in-suit and had or have the right to use the name "Mirror Worlds." 2. Mirror Worlds did not assume any rights or liabilities that ever belonged to MWT, and believes to the best of its knowledge that it does not have any such rights or liabilities, with the sole exception of those rights summarized above, which are specifically set forth in the Patent Purchase Agreement between Recognition Interface, LLC and Plainfield
Specialt y Holdings I, Inc. ("PSH I"), dated December 24, 2007, and the Patent Assignment Agreement between PSH I and Mirror Worlds." 3. Plaintiff Mirror Worlds, which was formed in March 2008, had nothing to do with the Scopeware products accused of infringement in Apple's counterclaim, or any other related products of MWT. The Scopeware products were sold by MWT in the early 2000s. Plaintiff Mirror Worlds never sold or offered to sell the Scopeware products, and had nothing to do with the development of Scopeware or the development of the patents-in-suit, which had issued before Mirror Worlds was formed. 4. Plaintiff Mirror Worlds did not purchase the patents-in-suit from MWT. Plaintiff Mirror Worlds, which was formed in March 2008, did not exist when MWT sold the patents-in-suit to Recognition Interface, Inc. in June 2004. 5. MWT ceased business operations, including sales of Scopeware products, in the fall of 2004. 6. In June 2004, the assets of MWT, including the patents-in-suit, were sold to Recognition Interface, Inc. pursuant to the Sale Agreement between Recognition Interface, Inc. and MWT, dated June, 2004. 7. Recognition Interface, Inc. changed forms and became Recognition Interface, LLC in September 2005. Recognition Interface, LLC continued to own the assets of MWT, including the patents-in-suit. 8. On December 24, 2007, PSH I and Recognition Interface, LLC entered into a Patent Purchase Agreement under which PSH I purchased from Recognition Interface, LLC the patents-in-suit and related patent applications, related rights in those patents and applications
(including the right to sue for past, present and future infringement), and the right to use the name "Mirror Worlds." 9. Other than those patents, patent applications and related rights (including the right to sue for past, present and future infringement), and the right to use the name "Mirror Worlds," as specifically set forth in the Patent Purchase Agreement between Recognition Interface, LLC and PSH I, dated December 24, 2007, PSH I purchased no other assets from Recognition Interface LLC, and no other rights or liabilities of Recognition Interface, LLC, were conveyed to PSH I. PSH I did not purchase or acquire any assets relating to the Scopeware products, such as the Scopeware software itself or any copyrights thereto or any trademarks to the name Scopeware. Those assets are still owned by Recognition Interface LLC. 10. PSH I is a completely separate and distinct entity from Recognition Interface, LLC and shares no common owners, directors, managers, or employees with Recognition Interface, LLC. 11. In March 2008, PSH I formed Plaintiff Mirror Worlds as a wholly-owned subsidiary of PSH I. PSH I then assigned the patents in suit (including the right to sue for past, present and future infringement) to Plaintiff Mirror Worlds. 12. Neither PSH I nor Plaintiff Mirror Worlds had anything to do with the Scopeware products accused of infringement in Apple's counterclaim, or any other related products of MWT. They never sold or offered to sell Scopeware products, and had nothing to do with the development of Scopeware.
Dated: September 10, 2009
/s/ Richard An Joseph Diamante (Pro Hac Vice) Kenneth Stein (Pro Hac Vice) Richard An (Pro Hac Vice) STROOCK & STROOCK & LAVAN LLP 180 Maiden Lane New York, NY 10038 212-806-5400 (Telephone) 212-806-6006 (Facsimile) email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendants, MIRROR WORLDS, LLC, MIRROR WORLDS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court's CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3) on this day, September 10, 2009. /s/ Stefani C. Smith Stefani C. Smith
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.