Wilan, Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Filing 1

COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against Apple Inc. ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0974-7143914.), filed by Wilan, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Civil Cover Sheet)The new case number is 3:14-cv-1507-BAS-DHB. Judge Cynthia Bashant and Magistrate Judge David H. Bartick are assigned to the case. (Goddard, Allison)(dlg) (av1).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Allison H. Goddard (211098) ali@pattersonlawgroup.com PATTERSON LAW GROUP 402 West Broadway, 29th Floor San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 398-4760 (619) 756-6991 (facsimile) Larry M. Hadley (157728) lhadley@mckoolsmithhennigan.com MCKOOL SMITH HENNIGAN, P.C. 865 South Figueroa Street Suite 2900 Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 694-1200 (213) 694-1234 (facsimile) Attorneys for Plaintiff, WiLAN, Inc. 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 14 WILAN, INC., Plaintiff, 15 16 17 18 vs. APPLE INC., Defendant. 19 20 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) '14CV1507 BAS DHB Case No. ____________________ COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL ) 21 22 Plaintiff WiLAN, Inc. files this complaint against Defendant Apple Inc. and 23 makes the following statements with personal knowledge as to its own actions and 24 25 upon information and belief as to other matters: 26 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT -1- CASE NO. _____________________ PARTIES 1 2 3 4 A. WiLAN 1. Plaintiff WiLAN, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the 5 laws of Canada with its principal place of business at 303 Terry Fox Drive, Ottawa, 6 ON Canada. Plaintiff WiLAN, Inc. is referred to herein as “WiLAN.” 7 8 9 10 11 12 2. WiLAN’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Cygnus Broadband, Inc. (“Cygnus Broadband”) has its principal place of business at 15090 Ave of Science, San Diego, California. 3. Cygnus Broadband is a company dedicated to developing advanced 4G 13 technologies and products for WiLAN and others in the wireless industry that enhance 14 the capacity, quality of user experience, and connectivity of 4G (and next generation 15 16 17 18 5G) mobile devices and networks. 4. The 4G patents asserted in this action, which are assigned to WiLAN (to hold for the benefit of all WiLAN companies and licensees), were developed by 19 20 21 22 WiLAN’s own Ken Stanwood, the CEO of Cygnus Broadband, and his team. 5. Mr. Stanwood has played a leadership role in the development of 4G technologies and standards for more than a decade, starting with the industry’s first 23 24 25 26 major 4G cellular initiative, referred to as WiMAX. He served as Vice Chair of the IEEE 802.16 standards committee for WiMAX from 2003-2006 and as principal author of the original IEEE 802.16 standard for 4G cellular networks and mobile 27 28 devices. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -2- CASE NO. _____________________ 6. 1 2 3 4 5 authoring a popular textbook on the subject, and has been awarded 87 U.S. patents, with more than 100 patent applications currently pending before the United States Patent Office and worldwide, many of which relate to 4G technologies. 6 7 8 9 10 Mr. Stanwood has written extensively on 4G technologies, including co- 7. Like Ken Stanwood, WiLAN’s founders, Michel Fattouche and Hatim Zaghloul, are widely recognized and acknowledged as wireless industry pioneers. Their technologies, patents and writings have been cited in patents and publications written by thousands of engineers and scientists in the wireless industry. 11 8. 12 WiLAN’s founders sought to achieve−and did achieve−for wireless data 13 what Qualcomm’s founders did for cellular “voice” communication. Qualcomm’s 14 founders developed key CDMA technologies that became the foundational air 15 16 interface for 2G and 3G cellular networks and mobile devices. 9. 17 18 Just as importantly, WiLAN’s founders developed key cellular “data” technologies, including the W-OFDM air interface, to enable data to be exchanged at 19 20 desktop speeds over a wireless channel, such as in Wi-Fi networks, or from mobile 21 devices in 4G cellular networks. WiLAN’s technologies have made Wi-Fi and 4G in 22 mobile devices possible.1 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 See, e.g., Ergen, Mustafa, Mobile Broadband: Including WiMAX and LTE, John Wiley & Sons, 2009 at p. 110, Section 4.1 “Principles of OFDM: Introduction” (recognizing one of WiLAN’s first patents, U.S. Patent No. 5,282,222, to W-OFDM as a major milestone in the development of Wi-Fi and 4G technologies, turning a single lane wireless communication channel into a multi-lane super highway, and enabling mobile devices to transmit and receive data at desktop speeds). COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -3- CASE NO. _____________________ 10. 1 2 3 4 The WiLAN success story is featured in major publications worldwide, including in such publications as Scientific American2 and Time Magazine,3 and in many others. WiLAN and its founders have also been the subject of numerous 5 industry awards for their wireless innovations, and for their contribution to the growth 6 in wireless data capability present in today’s smartphones, tablets, and other mobile 7 8 devices. 11. 9 10 11 12 One of WiLAN’s co-founders is featured in one of Canada’s leading business publications as among the Top 100 Canadians of the 20th century for WiLAN’s wireless innovations.4 And WiLAN’s original wireless designs and first 13 wireless mobile device have been displayed in the Canadian equivalent of the 14 Smithsonian Institution. 15 16 17 18 19 2 22 The Future of Wireless, Scientific American, October 2000 at p. 57 (“To date, wireless multiplexing hasn’t been exploited for cellular systems…. That may change soon…. WiLAN holds a number of key patents for multiplexing technology known as wideband orthogonal frequency division multiplexing, or W-OFDM”). 23 3 20 21 24 WiLAN Shows How to be Successful-and Canadian-in the Global Economy, Time Magazine, April 3, 2000. 25 4 26 27 28 Great Canadians, Maclean’s, July 1, 2000 (“Riding the wave of invention ... WiLAN is one of those next generation companies. Its technology may well become the base for what some call the coming wireless revolution: the ability to e-mail, surf the Net, adjust the lights in your home and order theater tickets from a cellphone or hand-held computer.”) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -4- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 12. Enabling high-speed wireless data capability in mobile devices was no small task–it posed incredible challenges–something we take for granted today with desktop speeds now standard in 4G mobile devices. 13. Over the years, WiLAN, Cygnus Broadband, and their predecessors have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in developing, making and selling many of the world’s first fixed and mobile devices capable of transmitting and receiving wireless data at desktop speeds. 14. WiLAN’s 4G products include, among others, the I.WILL, BWS 300, LIBRA 3000, LIBRA 5800, LIBRA MX, and the LIBRA Mobilis. 15. WiLAN was the first company in the world to build Wi-Fi and 4G data speeds into mobile devices, with speeds reaching up to 100 megabits per second (Mbps), and it did so a decade before 4G would become the standard in the wireless industry that it is today. 16. WiLAN is a company ahead of its time, and through the courage, 19 20 21 22 perseverance, and tireless efforts of its co-founders (immigrants of modest means when they started WiLAN), the wireless industry that exists today was born, connecting people across the globe like never before. 23 24 25 26 17. A number of WiLAN’s advanced 4G technologies have their origin in work started by WiLAN’s Ken Stanwood and his team while at Ensemble Communications (“Ensemble”), another San Diego company that Mr. Stanwood 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -5- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 helped grow (then, as Ensemble’s Chief Technology Officer) to over 200 engineers, 2 scientists, and support personnel. 3 4 18. The advanced 4G technologies developed by Mr. Stanwood and his team 5 were employed in the network stacks utilizing the 4G WiMAX cellular standard, and 6 were subsequently adopted for use in the network stacks utilizing the 4G LTE 7 8 9 10 cellular standard used in today’s 4G mobile devices. 19. These advanced 4G technologies, developed by Ken Stanwood and his team, include: 11 (i) 12 the bandwidth-on-demand and periodic bandwidth services built 13 into 4G mobile devices to enable apps installed on such devices to have exactly the 14 bandwidth they need, when they need it, in real-time; 15 (ii) 16 the multi-tasking and app management technologies in 4G mobile 17 devices that enable such devices to run multiple apps simultaneously, including 18 foreground and background apps, without degrading the user experience; and 19 (iii) 20 21 22 the adaptive modulation capabilities in 4G mobile devices that allow such devices to operate in all kinds of variable wireless conditions due to interference, noise, and user mobility. 23 24 25 26 20. The efforts of Mr. Stanwood and his team in developing these advanced 4G technologies have enabled 4G mobile devices to support a variety of services popular among users of Apple 4G LTE mobiles devices, such as voice, conversational 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -6- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 video, live streaming of video and music, real-time gaming, video and photo sharing, 2 email, and instant messaging, all in the palm of your hand (“4G Network Services”). 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 B. Apple 21. Defendant Apple Inc. (“Apple” or “Defendant”), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, with its principal place of business at 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino, California. 22. WiLAN’s advanced 4G technologies that are the subject of the patents asserted in this action enable Apple’s 4G LTE smartphones, tablets, and other 4G LTE mobile devices to provide Apple users with the 4G Network Services that have made Apple’s products so popular, and to operate with desktop speeds anywhere, anytime. 23. WiLAN’s wireless technologies and patents, including its advanced 4G technologies, have been licensed by nearly all companies in the wireless industry, 17 comprising more than 130 companies. Apple is the only major company that has not 18 respected WiLAN’s intellectual property and its contribution to the growth and 19 20 21 22 success of the wireless industry. 24. Apple’s infringement gives Apple an unfair advantage over its competitors, all of whom have chosen to do the right thing and license their use of 23 24 25 26 WiLAN’s wireless technologies and patents. 25. All of Apple’s major competitors in the mobile device industry, including Samsung, HTC, LG, Nokia, RIM, and Motorola have licensed WiLAN’s wireless 27 28 technologies and patents. To encourage licensing of WiLAN’s technologies and COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -7- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 patents in mobile devices and growth of the wireless industry, WiLAN has set its 2 licensing rates at a fraction of the rates that Apple charges companies for use of 3 4 Apple’s technologies and patents. 26. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 WiLAN has made numerous efforts to license the unauthorized use of its wireless technologies and patents by Apple, but Apple has consistently refused to take a license, choosing to use WiLAN’s 4G technologies without paying anything for that right. 27. Apple has willfully chosen to not respect the intellectual property of WiLAN, including the five 4G patents asserted in this action directed to WiLAN’s 13 advanced 4G technologies, and it does so despite understanding the importance of 14 intellectual property and insisting that other companies respect Apple’s own 15 16 17 18 intellectual property. 28. Indeed, Apple has vigorously pursued litigations and patent enforcement proceedings against anyone it believes is using Apple’s patented technology without a 19 20 21 22 license. For example, from 2011 through 2014 Apple prosecuted massive and wellpublicized litigations against Samsung for various Apple patents, and Apple was awarded hundreds of millions of dollars in damages for five of its user interface 23 24 25 26 patents on inventions as simple as the “bounce-back” feature of its touch screen iPhones and the curved shape of the corners of the icons used in its displays. 29. In its patent litigations against Samsung, Apple asked Samsung for as 27 28 much as $40 per mobile device for use of its five interface patents–elements that may COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -8- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 subtly differentiate Apple’s products from its competitors but that do not touch on the 2 fundamental wireless data communication technologies, including WiLAN’s Wi-Fi 3 4 5 and 4G technologies and patents, that underlie and make possible all of the core functions of Apple’s mobile devices that have made them so desirable to consumers. 6 7 8 30. WiLAN is not the only company that has had to deal with Apple’s disrespect for the intellectual property rights of others. Many well-known and well- 9 respected companies in the wireless industry, including Samsung, Nokia, Motorola 10 Mobility, HTC, Eastman Kodak, and Pitney-Bowes have had to sue Apple for alleged 11 12 13 infringement of their patented technologies and use of their patented technologies without paying for that right. 14 15 16 17 31. Notably, when Apple’s co-founder Steve Jobs discussed Apple’s success in a PBS documentary entitled “Triumph of the Nerds,” he said, “We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas.” 18 32. In early meetings between WiLAN and Apple, years before Apple would 19 20 21 22 introduce its 4G LTE mobile devices, WiLAN presented Apple with a detailed blueprint of WiLAN’s wireless technologies and how they would enable Apple’s computers and mobile devices to provide 4G Network Services, such as streaming 23 24 25 movies and videos, sharing pictures, surfing the internet, and chatting online with friends.5 26 27 28 5 See The Future of Wireless Data Communications, Network Living, WiLAN 1999 Annual Report at 9-33 (“This is no longer a remote possibility-the technology needed COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -9- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 2 3 4 33. Apple arrogantly dismissed WiLAN’s wireless technologies and vision at the time, believing that if it was not invented by Apple it was not possible. 34. Yet today, after WiLAN has proven the promise of its wireless 5 technologies to the world, Apple is riding the wave in growth of the wireless industry, 6 in particular with its 4G LTE smartphones, tablets, and other 4G LTE mobile devices 7 8 9 10 11 12 that use WiLAN’s great ideas, including WiLAN’s advanced 4G capabilities, and Apple is making billions of dollars in profits doing so. 35. Before initiating litigation, WiLAN made substantial efforts for more than a year to license Apple’s use of WiLAN’s advanced 4G technologies and patents 13 in its 4G LTE mobile devices, expecting that Apple would proceed in good faith, 14 which it has not done. 15 16 36. Most recently, in a written communication to Apple on June 16, 2014, 17 WiLAN requested a meeting with Apple to resolve this matter and WiLAN provided 18 significant details concerning the relevance of the five 4G patents asserted herein to 19 20 21 22 Apple’s 4G LTE mobile devices. 37. Three days later, on June 19, 2014, rather than provide dates for a meeting, Apple initiated litigation against WiLAN in the Northern District of 23 24 25 26 27 28 California involving the five 4G patents asserted in this action in a clear attempt at gamesmanship to remove this matter from this Court, which is presently handling a to make this reality is available… where we all live with the ease of wireless communication in our every day tasks; anytime, anywhere, to anyone. And its WOFDM technology that will fuel this new way of life.”) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -10- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 related dispute between the parties involving overlapping 4G patents and technologies 2 and the same Apple 4G LTE products. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 38. Apple’s actions have forced WiLAN’s hand, leaving it with no choice but to protect its intellectual property through litigation. NATURE OF THE ACTION 39. This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the United States, including 35 U.S.C. § 271. 40. Apple has committed acts of patent infringement within this district. Apple, directly or through intermediaries, imports, manufactures, uses, sells, and/or 13 offers to sell infringing products within this district. 14 voluntarily places infringing products into the stream of commerce with the 15 16 Apple also purposely and expectation that they will be purchased by consumers in this district. Apple 17 reasonably should have anticipated being subject to suit in this district. Apple’s acts 18 of patent infringement are aimed at this district and/or have effect in this district. 19 20 21 22 41. This is a civil action in which WiLAN seeks damages and other relief against Apple for acts of patent infringement in violation of the Patent Laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 et seq. 23 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 24 25 26 42. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction of the federal question claims raised in this Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -11- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 2 3 4 43. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b), in that the acts and transactions complained of herein were conceived, carried out, made effective, or had effect within the State of California and within this district, 5 among other places. Apple conducts business activities in this district, including 6 regularly doing or soliciting business, engaging in conduct and/or deriving substantial 7 8 9 10 11 12 revenue from goods and services provided to consumers in the State of California and in this district. 44. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Apple. Apple: (a) has operated, conducted, engaged in, and/or carried on a business or business venture in California 13 and this district; (b) has at least an office or agent in California and this district; (c) 14 has committed one or more tortious acts within California and this district; and (d) has 15 16 17 18 been and is engaged in substantial and not isolated activity within California and this district. 45. Apple has been registered to do business in the State of California since 19 20 1977 and currently has a registered agent in the State of California. 21 22 DEFENDANT’S PRODUCTS 46. Apple directly or indirectly through subsidiaries or affiliated companies 23 24 25 26 markets, distributes, manufactures, imports, sells, and/or offers for sale wireless communication products, such as products compliant with the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (“3GPP”) 4G LTE standard, including but not limited to the 27 28 iPhone 5, iPhone 5S, iPhone 5C, iPad (3rd Generation), iPad with Retina display (WiCOMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -12- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 Fi + 4G Cellular), iPad mini (Wi-Fi + 4G Cellular), iPad mini with Retina display 2 (Wi-Fi + 4G Cellular), and the iPad Air (Wi-Fi +4G Cellular), in the United States and 3 4 in this district. Apple’s products support at least Release 8, et seq. of the 4G LTE 5 standard. 6 47. 7 8 9 10 Upon information and belief, Apple’s products also include software and associated hardware that prioritize the transmission of data generated by various applications that run on these Apple products, and in doing such prioritization utilize the claimed inventions of the patents asserted in this action. 11 COUNT I: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,457,145 12 13 14 15 16 48. The allegations of all foregoing paragraphs are re-alleged as if fully set forth herein. 49. On June 4, 2013, the United States Patent and Trademark Office 17 (“USPTO”) duly and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 8,457,145 (the “’145 patent”), 18 entitled “Method and apparatus for bandwidth request/grant protocols in a wireless 19 20 21 22 communication system” after a full and fair examination. 50. The ’145 patent relates to, among other things, multitasking and management of apps using periodic bandwidth requests. 23 24 25 26 51. WiLAN, Inc. is the sole owner of the ’145 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’145 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 52. Apple has been and is now infringing, literally and/or under the doctrine 27 28 of equivalents, the ’145 patent in this district and elsewhere by making, using, offering COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -13- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 for sale, importing, and/or selling, without authority from WiLAN, products that fall 2 within the scope of one or more of the claims of the ’145 patent. 3 53. 4 Apple had actual notice of the ’145 patent and that its actions constitute 5 direct and indirect infringement of the ’145 patent. The most recent written 6 communication to Apple providing notice of its infringement is dated June 16, 2014. 7 54. 8 Apple has been and is now indirectly infringing at least one claim of the 9 ’145 patent in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) in this district and elsewhere in the 10 United States. More specifically, Apple has been and is now actively inducing direct 11 12 infringement by other persons – i.e. Apple’s customers who use, sell or offer for sale 13 products that embody and/or otherwise practice one or more claims of the ’145 patent. 14 Apple had knowledge of the ’145 patent, and that its actions resulted in a direct 15 16 infringement of the ’145 patent, prior to the filing of this complaint, and knew or was 17 willfully blind that its actions would induce direct infringement by others and 18 intended that its actions would induce direct infringement by others. 19 55. 20 21 22 23 24 Apple actively induces such infringement by, among other things, providing user manuals and other instruction material for Apple’s devices that induce Apple’s customers to use Apple’s devices in their normal and customary way to infringe the ’145 patent.6 Through its manufacture and sales of its devices, Apple 25 26 27 28 6 See, e.g., Apple’s website for the iPhone, https://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/ (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPhone User Guide For iOS 7.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1565/en_US/iphone_user_guide. pdf (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPhone User Guide For iOS 6.1 Software, COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -14- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 specifically intended its customers to infringe the ’145 patent. Further, Apple was 2 aware that these normal and customary activities would infringe the ’145 patent. 3 4 Apple performed the acts that constitute induced infringement, and that would induce 5 actual infringement, with knowledge of the ’145 patent and with the knowledge or 6 willful blindness that the induced acts would constitute direct infringement. 7 8 56. Accordingly, a reasonable inference is that Apple specifically intends for 9 others, such as its customers, to directly infringe one or more claims of the ’145 patent 10 in the United States because Apple has knowledge of the ’145 patent and Apple 11 12 13 14 15 16 actively induces others (i.e. its customers) to directly infringe the ’145 patent by using, selling, or offering to sell Apple’s devices. 57. Apple has been and is now indirectly infringing at least one claim of the ’145 patent in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) in this district and elsewhere in the 17 United States. More specifically, Apple has been and is now providing non-staple 18 articles of commerce to others for use in an infringing system or method with 19 20 21 knowledge of the ’145 patent, and with knowledge that the use of its products resulted in a direct infringement of the ’145 patent by its customers, and with knowledge that 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1658/en_US/iphone_ios6_user_g uide.pdf (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); Apple’s website for the iPad, https://www.apple.com/ipad/compare/ (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPad User Guide For iOS 7.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1595/en_US/ipad_user_guide.pd f (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4211 (instructing use of multitasking). COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -15- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 these non-staple articles of commerce are used as a material part of the claimed 2 invention of the ’145 patent. 3 4 58. Apple’s devices compliant with 4G LTE include components comprising 5 an application processor and a baseband processor specifically designed to support 6 communication and transmission of data over 4G LTE-compliant networks. These 7 8 components are mounted to a circuit board in Apple’s accused devices and, absent 9 these components, Apple’s devices compliant with 4G LTE would not function in an 10 acceptable manner to send or receive data over 4G LTE networks. A reasonable 11 12 inference to be drawn from the facts set forth is that these components in Apple’s 13 devices are especially made or especially adapted to operate in the accused Apple 14 devices to provide wireless communication, including the transmission of data in 15 16 accordance with the 4G LTE standard. Further, a reasonable inference to be drawn 17 from the facts is that these components comprising an application processor and a 18 baseband processor are intended to support communication of data over a 4G LTE 19 20 21 22 network and are not staple articles or commodities of commerce, and that the use of the components is required for operation of the Apple devices to send or receive data over a 4G LTE-compliant network. Any other use would be unusual, far-fetched, 23 24 25 26 illusory, occasional, aberrant, or experimental. 59. The components comprising an application processor and a baseband processor designed to support communication of data using 4G LTE in Apple’s 27 28 devices are each a material part of the invention of the ’145 patent and are especially COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -16- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 made for the infringing manufacture, sale, and use of Apple’s accused devices. 2 Apple’s devices, including those components, are especially made or adapted to 3 4 infringe the ’145 patent, and have no substantial non-infringing uses. 5 60. The ’145 patent is valid and enforceable. 6 61. By way of its infringing activities, Apple has caused and continues to 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 cause WiLAN to suffer damages, and WiLAN is entitled to recover from Apple damages in an amount to be determined at trial. COUNT II: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,462,723 62. The allegations of all foregoing paragraphs are re-alleged as if fully set forth herein. 63. On June 11, 2013, the USPTO duly and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 8,462,723 (the “’723 patent”), entitled “Methods and systems for transmission of multiple modulated signals over wireless networks” after a full and fair examination. 64. The ’723 patent relates to, among other things, multitasking and 19 20 21 22 management of apps using non-contention bandwidth-on-demand requests. 65. WiLAN, Inc. is the sole owner of the ’723 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’723 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit B. 23 24 25 26 66. Apple has been and is now infringing, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, the ’723 patent in this district and elsewhere by making, using, offering for sale, importing, and/or selling, without authority from WiLAN, products that fall 27 28 within the scope of one or more of the claims of the ’723 patent. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -17- CASE NO. _____________________ 67. 1 2 3 4 direct and indirect infringement of the ’723 patent. The most recent written communication to Apple providing notice of its infringement is dated June 16, 2014. 68. 5 6 7 8 Apple had actual notice of the ’723 patent and that its actions constitute Apple has been and is now indirectly infringing at least one claim of the ’723 patent in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) in this district and elsewhere in the United States. More specifically, Apple has been and is now actively inducing direct 9 infringement by other persons – i.e. Apple’s customers who make, use, sell or offer 10 for sale products that embody and/or otherwise practice one or more claims of the 11 12 ’723 patent. Apple had knowledge of the ’723 patent, and that its actions resulted in a 13 direct infringement of the ’723 patent, prior to the filing of this complaint, and knew 14 or was willfully blind that its actions would induce direct infringement by others and 15 16 intended that its actions would induce direct infringement by others. 69. 17 18 Apple actively induces such infringement by, among other things, providing user manuals and other instruction material for Apple’s devices that induce 19 20 21 Apple’s customers to use Apple’s accused devices in their normal and customary way to infringe the ’723 patent. 7 Through its manufacture and sales of its accused devices, 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7 See, e.g., Apple’s website for the iPhone, https://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/ (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPhone User Guide For iOS 7.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1565/en_US/iphone_user_guide. pdf (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPhone User Guide For iOS 6.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1658/en_US/iphone_ios6_user_g uide.pdf (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); Apple’s website for the iPad, https://www.apple.com/ipad/compare/ (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPad User Guide For iOS 7.1 Software, COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -18- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 Apple specifically intended its customers to infringe the ’723 patent. Further, Apple 2 was aware that these normal and customary activities would infringe the ’723 patent. 3 4 Apple performed the acts that constitute induced infringement, and would induce 5 actual infringement, with the knowledge of the ’723 patent and with the knowledge or 6 willful blindness that the induced acts would constitute direct infringement. 7 8 70. Accordingly, a reasonable inference is that Apple specifically intends for 9 others, such as its customers, to directly infringe one or more claims of the ’723 patent 10 in the United States because Apple has knowledge of the ’723 patent and Apple 11 12 13 14 15 16 actively induces others (i.e. its customers) to directly infringe the ’723 patent by using, selling, or offering to sell Apple’s devices. 71. Apple has been and is now indirectly infringing at least one claim of the ’723 patent in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) in this district and elsewhere in the 17 United States. More specifically, Apple has been and is now providing non-staple 18 articles of commerce to others for use in an infringing system or method with 19 20 21 22 knowledge of the ’723 patent, and with knowledge that the use of its accused products results in a direct infringement of the ’723 patent by its customers, and with knowledge that these non-staple articles of commerce are used as a material part of the 23 24 claimed invention of the ’723 patent. 25 26 27 28 http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1595/en_US/ipad_user_guide.pd f (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4211 (instructing use of multitasking). COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -19- CASE NO. _____________________ 72. 1 2 3 4 Apple’s accused devices include components comprising an application processor and a baseband processor designed to support communication of data on 4G LTE-compliant networks. These components are mounted to a circuit board in 5 Apple’s accused devices and, absent these components, Apple’s accused devices 6 would not function in an acceptable manner to send or receive data over 4G LTE- 7 8 compliant networks. A reasonable inference to be drawn from the facts set forth is 9 that these components in Apple’s accused devices are especially made or especially 10 adapted to provide wireless communication, including the transmission of data, in 4G 11 12 LTE-compliant networks. Further, a reasonable inference to be drawn from the facts 13 is that these components are not staple articles or commodities of commerce, and that 14 the use of these components is required for operation of the Apple devices to send or 15 16 17 receive data in a 4G LTE-compliant network. Any other use would be unusual, farfetched, illusory, occasional, aberrant, or experimental. 18 73. The components comprising the application processor and the baseband 19 20 21 22 processor in Apple’s accused devices are each a material part of the invention of the ’723 patent and are especially made for use in devices that infringe one or more claims of the ’723 patent. Apple’s accused devices have no substantial non-infringing 23 24 25 uses. 74. The ’723 patent is valid and enforceable. 26 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -20- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 75. By way of its infringing activities, Apple has caused and continues to cause WiLAN to suffer damages, and WiLAN is entitled to recover from Apple damages in an amount to be determined at trial. COUNT III: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,537,757 76. The allegations of all foregoing paragraphs are re-alleged as if fully set forth herein. 77. On June 11, 2013, the USPTO duly and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 8,537,757 (the “’757 patent”), entitled “Method and system for adaptively obtaining bandwidth allocation requests” after a full and fair examination. 78. The ’757 patent relates to, among other things, adaptive modulation for variable condition wireless channels due to interference, noise, and mobility. 79. WiLAN, Inc. is the sole owner of the ’757 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’757 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit C. 80. Apple has been and is now infringing, literally and/or under the doctrine 19 20 21 22 of equivalents, the ’757 patent in this district and elsewhere by making, using, offering for sale, importing, and/or selling, without authority from WiLAN, products that fall within the scope of one or more of the claims of the ’757 patent. 23 24 25 26 81. Apple had actual notice of the ’757 patent and that its actions constitute direct and indirect infringement of the ’757 patent. The most recent written communication to Apple providing notice of its infringement is dated June 16, 2014. 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -21- CASE NO. _____________________ 82. 1 2 3 4 Apple has been and is now indirectly infringing at least one claim of the ’757 patent in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) in this district and elsewhere in the United States. More specifically, Apple has been and is now actively inducing direct 5 infringement by other persons – i.e. Apple’s customers who use, sell or offer for sale 6 products that embody and/or otherwise practice one or more claims of the ’757 patent. 7 8 Apple had knowledge of the ’757 patent by others, and that its actions resulted in a 9 direct infringement of the ’757 patent, prior to the filing of this complaint, and knew 10 or was willfully blind that its actions would induce direct infringement by others and 11 12 intended that its actions would induce direct infringement by others. 83. 13 14 15 16 Apple actively induces such infringement by, among other things, providing user manuals and other instruction material for Apple’s devices that induce Apple’s customers to use Apple’s devices in their normal and customary way to 17 infringe the ’757 patent. 8 Through its manufacture and sales of its devices, Apple 18 specifically intended its customers to infringe the ’757 patent. Further, Apple was 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 aware that these normal and customary activities when undertaken by its customer 8 See, e.g., Apple’s website for the iPhone, https://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/ (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPhone User Guide For iOS 7.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1565/en_US/iphone_user_guide. pdf (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPhone User Guide For iOS 6.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1658/en_US/iphone_ios6_user_g uide.pdf (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); Apple’s website for the iPad, https://www.apple.com/ipad/compare/ (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPad User Guide For iOS 7.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1595/en_US/ipad_user_guide.pd f (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4211 (instructing use of multitasking). COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -22- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 would result in a direct infringement of the ’757 patent. Apple performed the acts that 2 constitute induced infringement, and that would induce actual infringement, with the 3 4 5 6 7 8 knowledge of the ’757 patent and with the knowledge or willful blindness that the induced acts would constitute direct infringement. 84. Accordingly, a reasonable inference is that Apple specifically intends for others, such as its customers, to directly infringe one or more claims of the ’757 patent 9 in the United States because Apple has knowledge of the ’757 patent and Apple 10 actively induces others (i.e. its customers) to directly infringe the ’757 patent by using, 11 12 13 14 15 16 selling, or offering to sell Apple’s devices. 85. Apple has been and is now indirectly infringing at least one claim of the ’757 patent in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) in this district and elsewhere in the United States. More specifically, Apple has been and is now providing non-staple 17 articles of commerce to others for use in an infringing system or method with 18 knowledge of the ’757 patent, and with knowledge that the use of its products results 19 20 21 22 in a direct infringement of the ’757 patent by its customers, and with knowledge that these non-staple articles of commerce are used as a material part of the claimed invention of the ’757 patent. 23 24 25 26 86. Apple’s devices include components comprising an application processor and a baseband processor designed to support communication of data in an LTEcompliant network. These components are mounted to a circuit board in Apple’s 27 28 accused devices and, absent these components, Apple’s accused devices would not COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -23- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 function in an acceptable manner to send or receive data in a 4G LTE-compliant 2 network. A reasonable inference to be drawn from the facts set forth is that these 3 4 components in Apple’s accused devices are especially made or especially adapted to 5 operate in a manner that results in a direct infringement of the ’757 patent. Further, a 6 reasonable inference to be drawn from the facts is that the components are not a staple 7 8 articles or commodities of commerce and that the use of the components is required 9 for the accused Apple devices to send or receive data in a 4G LTE-compliant network. 10 Any other use would be unusual, far-fetched, illusory, occasional, aberrant, or 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 experimental. 87. The components comprising an application processor and a baseband processor in Apple’s accused devices are each a material part of the invention of the ’757 patent and are especially made or adapted to infringe the ’757 patent. Apple’s accused devices products have no substantial uses that do not infringe the ’757 patent. 88. The ’757 patent is valid and enforceable. 89. By way of its infringing activities, Apple has caused and continues to 19 20 21 22 cause WiLAN to suffer damages, and WiLAN is entitled to recover from Apple damages in an amount to be determined at trial. 23 24 25 26 COUNT IV: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,615,020 90. The allegations of all foregoing paragraphs are re-alleged as if fully set forth herein. 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -24- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 91. On December 24, 2013, the USPTO duly and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 8,615,020 (the “’020 patent”), entitled “Method and System for Adaptively Obtaining Bandwidth Allocation Requests” after a full and fair examination. 92. The ’020 patent relates to, among other things, multitasking and management of apps using non-contention bandwidth-on-demand requests. 93. WiLAN, Inc. is the sole owner of the ’020 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’020 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit D. 94. Apple has been and is now infringing, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, the ’020 patent in this district and elsewhere by making, using, offering 13 for sale, importing, and/or selling, without authority from WiLAN, products that fall 14 within the scope of one or more of the claims of the ’020 patent. 15 16 95. Apple had actual notice of the ’020 patent and that its actions constitute 17 direct and indirect infringement of the ’020 patent. The most recent written 18 communication to Apple providing notice of its infringement is dated June 16, 2014. 19 20 21 22 96. Apple has been and is now indirectly infringing at least one claim of the ’020 patent in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) in this district and elsewhere in the United States. More specifically, Apple has been and is now actively inducing direct 23 24 25 26 infringement by other persons – i.e. Apple’s customers who use, sell or offer for sale products that embody and/or otherwise practice one or more claims of the ’020 patent. Apple had knowledge of the ’020 patent by others, and that its actions resulted in a 27 28 direct infringement of the ’020 patent, prior to the filing of this complaint, and knew COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -25- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 or was willfully blind that its actions would induce direct infringement by others and 2 intended that its actions would induce direct infringement by others. 3 97. 4 Apple actively induces such infringement by, among other things, 5 providing user manuals and other instruction material for Apple’s devices that induce 6 Apple’s customers to use Apple’s devices in their normal and customary way to 7 8 infringe the ’020 patent. 9 Through its manufacture and sales of its devices, Apple 9 specifically intended its customers to infringe the ’020 patent. Further, Apple was 10 aware that these normal and customary activities when undertaken by its customer 11 12 would result in a direct infringement of the ’020 patent. Apple performed the acts that 13 constitute induced infringement, and that would induce actual infringement, with the 14 knowledge of the ’020 patent and with the knowledge or willful blindness that the 15 16 induced acts would constitute direct infringement. 98. 17 18 Accordingly, a reasonable inference is that Apple specifically intends for others, such as its customers, to directly infringe one or more claims of the ’020 patent 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 in the United States because Apple has knowledge of the ’020 patent and Apple 9 See, e.g., Apple’s website for the iPhone, https://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/ (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPhone User Guide For iOS 7.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1565/en_US/iphone_user_guide. pdf (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPhone User Guide For iOS 6.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1658/en_US/iphone_ios6_user_g uide.pdf (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); Apple’s website for the iPad, https://www.apple.com/ipad/compare/ (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPad User Guide For iOS 7.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1595/en_US/ipad_user_guide.pd f (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4211 (instructing use of multitasking). COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -26- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 actively induces others (i.e. its customers) to directly infringe the ’020 patent by using, 2 selling, or offering to sell Apple’s devices. 3 4 99. Apple has been and is now indirectly infringing at least one claim of the 5 ’020 patent in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) in this district and elsewhere in the 6 United States. More specifically, Apple has been and is now providing non-staple 7 8 articles of commerce to others for use in an infringing system or method with 9 knowledge of the ’020 patent, and with knowledge that the use of its products results 10 in a direct infringement of the ’020 patent by its customers, and with knowledge that 11 12 13 14 15 16 these non-staple articles of commerce are used as a material part of the claimed invention of the ’020 patent. 100. Apple’s devices include components comprising an application processor and a baseband processor designed to support communication of data in a 4G LTE- 17 compliant network. These components are mounted to a circuit board in Apple’s 18 accused devices and, absent these components, Apple’s accused devices would not 19 20 21 22 function in an acceptable manner to send or receive data in a 4G LTE-compliant network. A reasonable inference to be drawn from the facts set forth is that these components in Apple’s accused devices are especially made or especially adapted to 23 24 25 26 operate in a manner that results in a direct infringement of the ’020 patent. Further, a reasonable inference to be drawn from the facts is that the components are not a staple articles or commodities of commerce and that the use of the components is required 27 28 for the accused Apple devices to send or receive data in a 4G LTE-compliant network. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -27- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 Any other use would be unusual, far-fetched, illusory, occasional, aberrant, or 2 experimental. 3 4 101. The components comprising an application processor and a baseband 5 processor in Apple’s accused devices are each a material part of the invention of the 6 ’020 patent and are especially made or adapted to infringe the ’020 patent. Apple’s 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 accused devices products have no substantial uses that do not infringe the ’020 patent. 102. The ’020 patent is valid and enforceable. 103. By way of its infringing activities, Apple has caused and continues to cause WiLAN to suffer damages, and WiLAN is entitled to recover from Apple damages in an amount to be determined at trial. COUNT V: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,462,761 104. The allegations of all foregoing paragraphs are re-alleged as if fully set forth herein. 105. On June 11, 2013, the USPTO duly and legally issued U.S. Patent No. 19 20 21 22 8,462,761 (the “’761 patent”), entitled “Method and system for adaptively obtaining bandwidth allocation requests” after a full and fair examination. 106. The ’761 patent relates to, among other things, multitasking and 23 24 25 26 management of apps using non-contention bandwidth-on-demand requests or periodic bandwidth requests. 107. WiLAN, Inc. is the sole owner of the ’761 patent. A true and correct 27 28 copy of the ’761 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit D. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -28- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 108. Apple has been and is now infringing, literally and/or under the doctrine 2 of equivalents, the ’761 patent in this district and elsewhere by making, using, offering 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 for sale, importing, and/or selling, without authority from WiLAN, products that fall within the scope of one or more of the claims of the ’761 patent. 109. Apple had actual notice of the ’761 patent and that its actions constitute direct and indirect infringement of the ’761 patent. The most recent written communication to Apple providing notice of its infringement is dated June 16, 2014. 110. Apple has been and is now indirectly infringing at least one claim of the ’761 patent in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) in this district and elsewhere in the 13 United States. More specifically, Apple has been and is now actively inducing direct 14 infringement by other persons – i.e. Apple’s customers who use, sell or offer for sale 15 16 products that embody and/or otherwise practice one or more claims of the ’761 patent. 17 Apple had knowledge of the ’761 patent by others, and that its actions resulted in a 18 direct infringement of the ’761 patent, prior to the filing of this complaint, and knew 19 20 21 22 or was willfully blind that its actions would induce direct infringement by others and intended that its actions would induce direct infringement by others. 111. Apple actively induces such infringement by, among other things, 23 24 25 providing user manuals and other instruction material for Apple’s devices that induce Apple’s customers to use Apple’s devices in their normal and customary way to 26 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -29- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 infringe the ’761 patent. 10 Through its manufacture and sales of its devices, Apple 2 specifically intended its customers to infringe the ’761 patent. Further, Apple was 3 4 aware that these normal and customary activities when undertaken by its customer 5 would result in a direct infringement of the ’761 patent. Apple performed the acts that 6 constitute induced infringement, and that would induce actual infringement, with the 7 8 9 knowledge of the ’761 patent and with the knowledge or willful blindness that the induced acts would constitute direct infringement. 10 11 12 112. Accordingly, a reasonable inference is that Apple specifically intends for others, such as its customers, to directly infringe one or more claims of the ’761 patent 13 in the United States because Apple has knowledge of the ’761 patent and Apple 14 actively induces others (i.e. its customers) to directly infringe the ’761 patent by using, 15 16 selling, or offering to sell Apple’s devices. 17 113. Apple has been and is now indirectly infringing at least one claim of the 18 ’761 patent in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) in this district and elsewhere in the 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 United States. More specifically, Apple has been and is now providing non-staple 10 See, e.g., Apple’s website for the iPhone, https://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/ (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPhone User Guide For iOS 7.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1565/en_US/iphone_user_guide. pdf (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPhone User Guide For iOS 6.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1658/en_US/iphone_ios6_user_g uide.pdf (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); Apple’s website for the iPad, https://www.apple.com/ipad/compare/ (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); iPad User Guide For iOS 7.1 Software, http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1595/en_US/ipad_user_guide.pd f (instructing use on 4G LTE networks); http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4211 (instructing use of multitasking). COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -30- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 articles of commerce to others for use in an infringing system or method with 2 knowledge of the ’761 patent, and with knowledge that the use of its products results 3 4 in a direct infringement of the ’761 patent by its customers, and with knowledge that 5 these non-staple articles of commerce are used as a material part of the claimed 6 invention of the ’761 patent. 7 8 114. Apple’s devices include components comprising an application processor 9 and a baseband processor designed to support communication of data in a 4G LTE- 10 compliant network. These components are mounted to a circuit board in Apple’s 11 12 accused devices and, absent these components, Apple’s accused devices would not 13 function in an acceptable manner to send or receive data in a 4G LTE-compliant 14 network. A reasonable inference to be drawn from the facts set forth is that these 15 16 components in Apple’s accused devices are especially made or especially adapted to 17 operate in a manner that results in a direct infringement of the ’761 patent. Further, a 18 reasonable inference to be drawn from the facts is that the components are not a staple 19 20 21 22 articles or commodities of commerce and that the use of the components is required for the accused Apple devices to send or receive data in a 4G LTE-compliant network. Any other use would be unusual, far-fetched, illusory, occasional, aberrant, or 23 24 25 26 experimental. 115. The components comprising an application processor and a baseband processor in Apple’s accused devices are each a material part of the invention of the 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -31- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 ’761 patent and are especially made or adapted to infringe the ’761 patent. Apple’s 2 accused devices products have no substantial uses that do not infringe the ’761 patent. 3 4 116. The ’761 patent is valid and enforceable. 5 117. By way of its infringing activities, Apple has caused and continues to 6 cause WiLAN to suffer damages, and WiLAN is entitled to recover from Apple 7 8 damages in an amount to be determined at trial. WILLFUL INFRINGEMENT 9 10 11 12 118. The allegations of all foregoing paragraphs are re-alleged as fully set forth herein. 13 119. Before initiating litigation, WiLAN made substantial efforts to license 14 Apple’s use of WiLAN’s advanced 4G technologies and patents used in Apple’s 4G 15 16 17 18 LTE mobile devices, expecting that Apple would proceed in good faith. 120. On June 16, 2014, WiLAN expressly provided notice to Apple that it infringes the five 4G patents-in-suit. WiLAN provided detailed information 19 20 21 22 concerning the pioneering nature of Ken Stanwood’s inventions that are claimed in the patents-in-suit, and explained that these fundamental inventions, which are implemented in products compliant with the 4G LTE standard, enable advanced 23 24 25 26 features of Apple’s 4G LTE mobile products. 121. On June 17, 2014, Apple responded to WiLAN’s notice communication, admitting that it had not studied the patents-in-suit. 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -32- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 122. Two days later, instead of following through on its commitment to meet 2 in order to negotiate a license, Apple filed suit against WiLAN. Given that the 3 4 inventions claimed in the five 4G patents-in-suit are fundamental to implementation of 5 products compliant with the 4G LTE standard, an objectively defined risk exists that 6 Apple infringes the patents-in-suit. Furthermore, upon information and belief, prior to 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 initiating suit against WiLAN, Apple did not conduct a reasonable investigation to ascertain whether it infringes the patents-in-suit. 123. Apple’s infringement of the patents-in-suit thus occurs with knowledge of and/or objective recklessness and has been and continues to be willful and deliberate. 124. Apple’s willful and deliberate infringement entitles WiLAN to enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 285. IRREPARABLE HARM TO WILAN 125. WiLAN has been irreparably harmed by Apple’s acts of infringement, 19 20 21 22 and will continue to be harmed unless and until Apple’s acts of infringement are enjoined by this Court. Apple has no adequate remedy at law to redress Apple’s continuing acts of infringement. The hardships that would be imposed upon Apple 23 24 25 26 by an injunction are less than those faced by WiLAN should an injunction not issue. Furthermore, the public interest would be served by issuance of an injunction. As a result of Apple’s acts of infringement, WiLAN has suffered and will continue to 27 28 suffer damages in an amount to be proved at trial. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -33- CASE NO. _____________________ PRAYER FOR RELIEF 1 2 3 4 WHEREFORE, WiLAN prays for judgment against Apple as follows: 126. Declaring that Apple has been and is now infringing, literally and/or 5 under the doctrine of equivalents, one or more claims of each of U.S. Patent No. 6 8,457,145, U.S. Patent No. 8,462,723, U.S. Patent No. 8,537,757, U.S. Patent No. 7 8 8,615,020, and U.S. Patent No. 8,462,761; 9 127. Declaring that Apple has been and is now contributorily infringing one or 10 more claims of each of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,145, U.S. Patent No. 8,462,723, U.S. 11 12 Patent No. 8,537,757, U.S. Patent No. 8,615,020, and U.S. Patent No. 8,462,761; 13 128. Declaring that Apple has been and is now inducing infringement of U.S. 14 Patent No. 8,457,145, U.S. Patent No. 8,462,723, U.S. Patent No. 8,537,757, U.S. 15 16 Patent No. 8,615,020, and U.S. Patent No. 8,462,761; 17 129. Permanently enjoining Apple and its officers, directors, agents, servants, 18 employees, affiliates, divisions, branches, subsidiaries, parents and all others acting in 19 20 21 22 concert or privity with any of them from infringing, inducing the infringement of, or contributing to the infringement of one or more of each of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,145, U.S. Patent No. 8,462,723, U.S. Patent No. 8,537,757, U.S. Patent No. 8,615,020, and 23 24 25 26 U.S. Patent No. 8,462,761; 130. Declaring that Apple’s infringement is willful and that this is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and awarding attorneys’ fees and costs in this 27 28 action; COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -34- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 131. Awarding to WiLAN damages arising out of Apple’s infringement of one 2 or more of each of U.S. Patent No. 8,457,145, U.S. Patent No. 8,462,723, U.S. Patent 3 4 No. 8,537,757, U.S. Patent No. 8,615,020, and U.S. Patent No. 8,462,761, together 5 with prejudgment and post-judgment interest, in an amount to be determined at trial; 6 132. Awarding to WiLAN its costs in connection with this action; and 7 8 9 10 133. Such other and further relief in law or in equity to which WiLAN may be justly entitled. Dated: June 23, 2014 11 12 13 14 15 16 By: /s/ Allison H. Goddard Allison H. Goddard (SBN 211098) ali@pattersonlawgroup.com PATTERSON LAW GROUP 402 West Broadway, 29th Floor San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 398-4760 Facsimile: (619) 756-6991 Larry M. Hadley (SBN 157728) lhadley@mcksoolsmithhennigan.com MCKOOL SMITH HENNIGAN, P.C. 865 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2900 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 694-1200 17 18 19 20 Robert A. Cote rcote@mckoolsmith.com Kevin Schubert kschubert@mckoolsmith.com Jonathan Yim jyim@mckoolsmith.com MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. One Bryant Park, 47th Floor New York, New York 10036 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Seth Hasenour 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -35- CASE NO. _____________________ shasenour@mckoolsmith.com MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. 300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500 Dallas, TX 75201 1 2 3 4 Dirk D. Thomas dthomas@mckoolsmith.com MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. 1999 K Street, NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20006 5 6 7 8 Attorneys for Plaintiff, WiLAN, Inc. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -36- CASE NO. _____________________ 1 2 3 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL WiLAN hereby demands a jury trial pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as to all issues in this lawsuit. 4 5 Dated: June 23, 2014 6 7 8 9 10 By: /s/ Allison H. Goddard Allison H. Goddard (SBN 211098) ali@pattersonlawgroup.com PATTERSON LAW GROUP 402 West Broadway, 29th Floor San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 398-4760 Facsimile: (619) 756-6991 Larry M. Hadley (SBN 157728) lhadley@mcksoolsmithhennigan.com MCKOOL SMITH HENNIGAN, P.C. 865 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2900 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 694-1200 11 12 13 14 15 Robert A. Cote rcote@mckoolsmith.com Kevin Schubert kschubert@mckoolsmith.com Jonathan Yim jyim@mckoolsmith.com MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. One Bryant Park, 47th Floor New York, New York 10036 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Seth Hasenour shasenour@mckoolsmith.com MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. 300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500 Dallas, TX 75201 23 24 25 26 Dirk D. Thomas dthomas@mckoolsmith.com MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -37- CASE NO. _____________________ 1999 K Street, NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20006 1 2 Attorneys for Plaintiff, WiLAN, Inc. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IF "" = "6" "Error! Unknown document property name. -38- CASE NO. _____________________

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?