Clouding IP LLC v. Oracle Corporation

Filing 1

COMPLAINT FOR PATENET INFRINGEMENT filed with Jury Demand against Oracle Corporation - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 311-1078455.) - filed by STEC IP LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A Part 1 of 2, # 2 Exhibit A Part 2 of 2, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit E, # 7 Exhibit F Part 1 of 2, # 8 Exhibit F Part 2 of 2, # 9 Exhibit G Part 1 of 2, # 10 Exhibit G Part 2 of 2, # 11 Exhibit H, # 12 Exhibit I, # 13 Civil Cover Sheet)(dmp, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
STEC IP, LLC,
Civil Action No. _________

Plaintiff,

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

v.
ORACLE CORPORATION,
Defendant.

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
This is an action for patent infringement arising under the Patent Laws of the United
States of America, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. in which Plaintiff STEC IP, LLC makes the following
allegations against Defendant Oracle Corporation:
PARTIES
1.

Plaintiff STEC IP, LLC (“STEC”) is a Delaware limited liability company having

a principal place of business at 2 Terrace Way, Suite C, Greensboro, North Carolina 27403.
2.

On information and belief, Defendant Oracle Corporation (“Oracle”) is a

Delaware corporation with its principal executive offices at 500 Oracle Parkway, Redwood City,
California, 94065. On information and belief, Defendant may be served via its registered agent,
Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware, 19808.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3.

This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the

United States Code. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1331 and 1338(a).
4.

On information and belief, Oracle is subject to this Court's specific and general

personal jurisdiction pursuant to due process and/or the Delaware Long Arm Statute, due to

having availed itself of the rights and benefits of Delaware by incorporating under Delaware law
and due to its substantial business in this forum, including: (i) at least a portion of the
infringements alleged herein; and (ii) regularly doing or soliciting business, engaging in other
persistent courses of conduct, and/or deriving substantial revenue from goods and services
provided to individuals in Delaware and in this Judicial District.
5.

Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b), 1391(c), 1391(d), and

1400(b). Oracle is incorporated in this District, and on information and belief, has transacted
business in this district and has committed and/or induced acts of patent infringement in this
district.
COUNT I
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,596,784
6.

Plaintiff STEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-5 above, as if

fully set forth herein.
7.

Plaintiff STEC is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No. 7,596,784

(“the ’784 patent”) titled “Method System and Apparatus for Providing Pay-Per-Use Distributed
Computing Resources.” The ’784 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent
and Trademark Office on September 29, 2009. STEC is the owner by assignment from
Symantec Corporation of the ’784 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’784 patent is included
as Exhibit A.
8.

Oracle makes, uses, sells, and offers for sale in the United States products and/or

services for cloud computing. On information and belief, at least some of Oracle’s cloud
computing products and/or services provide or support pay-per-use cloud computing.
9.

On information and belief, Oracle has infringed and continues to infringe the ’784

patent by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling pay-per-use cloud

2

computing products and/or services patented under the ’784 patent. Such pay-per-use cloud
computing products and/or services include, by way of example and without limitation, Oracle
Enterprise Manager 12c, which is covered by one or more claims of the ’784 patent, including
but not limited to claim 1. By making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling pay-per-use cloud
computing products and/or services patented under the ’784 patent, Oracle has injured STEC and
is liable to STEC for infringement of the ’784 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
10.

As a result of Oracle’s infringement of the ’784 patent, Plaintiff STEC has

suffered monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Oracle’s infringement, but
in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Oracle, together
with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
COUNT II
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,065,637
11.

Plaintiff STEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-10 above, as

if fully set forth herein.
12.

Plaintiff STEC is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No. 7,065,637

(“the ’637 patent”) titled “System for Configuration of Dynamic Computing Environments
Using a Visual Interface.” The ’637 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States
Patent and Trademark Office on June 20, 2006. STEC is the owner by assignment from
Symantec Corporation of the ’637 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’637 patent is included
as Exhibit B.
13.

Oracle makes, uses, sells, and offers for sale in the United States products and/or

services for cloud computing. On information and belief, at least some of Oracle’s cloud
computing products and/or services provide or support use of a visual interface to configure
cloud computing resources.

3

14.

On information and belief, Oracle has infringed and continues to infringe the ’637

patent by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling cloud computing
products and/or services covered by one or more claims of the ’637 patent. Such cloud
computing products and/or services include, by way of example and without limitation, cloud
computing products and/or services configurable through Oracle VM Manager, which are
covered by one or more claims of the ’637 patent, including but not limited to claim 1. By
making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling such products and services covered by one or
more claims of the ’637 patent, Oracle has injured STEC and is liable to STEC for infringement
of the ’637 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
15.

As a result of Oracle’s infringement of the ’637 patent, Plaintiff STEC has

suffered monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Oracle’s infringement, but
in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Oracle, together
with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
COUNT III
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,738,799
16.

Plaintiff STEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-15 above, as

if fully set forth herein.
17.

Plaintiff STEC is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No. 6,738,799

(“the ’799 patent”) titled “Methods and Apparatuses for File Synchronization and Updating
Using a Signature List.” The ’799 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent
and Trademark Office on May 18, 2004. STEC is the owner by assignment from Symantec
Corporation of the ’799 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’799 patent is included as Exhibit
C.

4

18.

Oracle makes, uses, sells, offers for sale, and/or imports into the United States

products and/or services that provide or support synchronization of files. On information and
belief, at least some of such products and/or services perform synchronization of files between
networked computers by providing updates.
19.

On information and belief, Oracle has infringed and continues to infringe the ’799

patent by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing products
and/or services into the United States that are covered by one or more claims of the ’799 patent.
Such products and/or services include, by way of example and without limitation, Oracle Could
File System, the use of which is covered by one or more claims of the ‘799 patent, including but
not limited to claim 37. By making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing into the
United States such products and/or service that are covered by one or more claims of the ’799
patent, Oracle has injured STEC and is liable to STEC for infringement of the ’799 patent
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
20.

As a result of Oracle’s infringement of the ’799 patent, Plaintiff STEC has

suffered monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Oracle’s infringement, but
in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Oracle, together
with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
COUNT IV
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,944,839
21.

Plaintiff STEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-20 above, as

if fully set forth herein.
22.

Plaintiff STEC is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No. 5,944,839

(“the ’839 patent”) titled “System and Method for Automatically Maintaining A Computer
System.” The ’839 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and

5

Trademark Office on August 31, 1999. STEC is the owner by assignment from Symantec
Corporation of the ’839 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’839 patent is included as Exhibit
D.
23.

Oracle makes, uses, sells, offers for sale, and/or imports in the United States

products and/or services for cloud computing. On information and belief, at least some of
Oracle’s products and/or services provide or support automatic detection, diagnosis, and
isolation of system and software faults.
24.

On information and belief, Oracle has infringed and continues to infringe the ’839

patent by, among other things, making, importing, using, offering for sale, and/or selling
products and/or services covered by one or more claims of the ’839 patent. Such products and/or
services include, by way of example and without limitation, Oracle Solaris 10 Operating System,
the use of which is covered by one or more claims of the ’839 patent, including but not limited to
claim 6. By making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling such products and/or services
covered by one or more claims of the ’839 patent, Oracle has injured STEC and is liable to
STEC for infringement of the ’839 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
25.

As a result of Oracle’s infringement of the ’839 patent, Plaintiff STEC has

suffered monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Oracle’s infringement, but
in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Oracle, together
with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
COUNT V
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,825,891
26.

Plaintiff STEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-25 above, as

if fully set forth herein.

6

27.

Plaintiff STEC is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No. 5,825,891

(“the ’891 patent”) titled “Key Management for Network Communication.” The ’891 patent was
duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on October 20, 1998.
STEC is the owner by assignment from Symantec Corporation of the ’891 patent. A true and
correct copy of the ’891 patent is included as Exhibit E.
28.

Oracle makes, uses, sells and/or offers for sale in the United States products

and/or services that provide for or support establishing Internet Protocol Security/Internet Key
Exchange-based Virtual Private Network tunnels.
29.

On information and belief, Oracle has infringed and continues to infringe the ’891

patent by, among other things, using methods covered by one or more claims of the ’891 patent.
Such methods include, by way of example and without limitation, use of SunScreen 3.2, which is
covered by one or more claims of the ’891 patent, including but not limited to claim 1. By using
such methods covered by one or more claims of the ’891 patent, Oracle has injured STEC and is
liable to STEC for infringement of the ’891 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
30.

As a result of Oracle’s infringement of the ’891 patent, Plaintiff STEC has

suffered monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Oracle’s infringement, but
in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Oracle, together
with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
COUNT VI
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,678,042
31.

Plaintiff STEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-30 above, as

if fully set forth herein.
32.

Plaintiff STEC is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No. 5,678,042

(“the ’042 patent”) titled “Network Management System Having Historical Virtual Catalog

7

Snapshots for Overview of Historical Changes to Files Distributively Stored Across Network
Domain.” The ’042 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and
Trademark Office on October 14, 1997. STEC is the owner by assignment from Symantec
Corporation of the ’042 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’042 patent is included as Exhibit
F.
33.

Oracle makes, uses, sells, and/or offers for sale in the United States products

and/or services that provide or support data storage deployment and management.
34.

On information and belief, Oracle has infringed and continues to infringe the ’042

patent by, among other things, using methods covered by one or more claims of the ’042 patent.
Such methods include, by way of example and without limitation, use of DTrace Storage
Analytics in conjunction with Oracle Sun ZFS Storage Appliance, which is covered by one or
more claims of the ’042 patent, including but not limited to claim 1. By using such methods
covered by one or more claims of the ’042 patent, Oracle has injured STEC and is liable to
STEC for infringement of the ’042 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
35.

As a result of Oracle’s infringement of the ’042 patent, Plaintiff STEC has

suffered monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Oracle’s infringement, but
in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Oracle, together
with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
COUNT VII
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,495,607
36.

Plaintiff STEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-35 above, as

if fully set forth herein.
37.

Plaintiff STEC is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No. 5,495,607

(“the ’607 patent”) titled “Network Management System Having Virtual Catalog Overview of

8

Files Distributively Stored Across Network Domain.” The ’607 patent was duly and legally
issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on February 27, 1996. STEC is the
owner by assignment from Symantec Corporation of the ’607 patent. A true and correct copy of
the ’607 patent is included as Exhibit G.
38.

Oracle operates one or more server farms (comprising, inter alia, servers and

computers on a network) that are located in data centers in the United States. Oracle’s server
farms provide and support cloud computing services, including at least Oracle Cloud Computing
Services. On information and belief, Oracle makes and/or uses a system for monitoring the
health of at least some of Oracle’s servers and computers over a network in its data centers.
39.

On information and belief, Oracle has infringed and continues to infringe the ’607

patent by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling systems, and
products and/or services related thereto, covered by one or more claims of the ’607 patent. Such
systems include, by way of example and without limitation, a system made and/or used by
Oracle to monitor the health of servers and computers running Oracle Cloud Computing service,
which is covered by one or more claims of the ’607 patent, including but not limited to claim 9.
By making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling such systems, and products and/or services
related thereto, covered by one or more claims of the ’607 patent, Oracle has injured STEC and
is liable to STEC for infringement of the ’607 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
40.

As a result of Oracle’s infringement of the ’607 patent, Plaintiff STEC has

suffered monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Oracle’s infringement, but
in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Oracle, together
with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.

9

COUNT VIII
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,254,621
41.

Plaintiff STEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-40 above, as

if fully set forth herein.
42.

Plaintiff STEC is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No. 7,254,621

(“the ’621 patent”) titled “Technique for Enabling Remote Data Access And Manipulation From
A Pervasive Device.” The ’621 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent
and Trademark Office on August 7, 2007. STEC is the owner by assignment from Symantec
Corporation of the ’621 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’621 patent is included as Exhibit
H.
43.

Oracle makes, uses, sells, offers for sale, and/or imports products and/or services

in the United States that provide or support remote data access by a mobile device, such as
Oracle Business Intelligence Foundation Suite.
44.

On information and belief, Oracle has infringed and continues to infringe the ’621

patent by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing products
and/or services that are covered by one or more claims of the ’621 patent. Such products and/or
services include, by way of example and without limitation, Oracle Business Intelligence
Foundation Suite, which is covered by one or more claims of the ’621 patent, including but not
limited to claim 1. By making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling such products and/or
services covered by one or more claims of the ’621 patent, Oracle has injured STEC and is liable
to STEC for infringement of the ’621 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.
45.

As a result of Oracle’s infringement of the ’621 patent, Plaintiff STEC has

suffered monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Oracle’s infringement, but

10

in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Oracle, together
with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
COUNT IX
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,925,481
46.

Plaintiff STEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-45 above, as

if fully set forth herein.
47.

Plaintiff STEC is the owner by assignment of United States Patent No. 6,925,481

(“the ’481 patent”) titled “Technique for Enabling Remote Data Access And Manipulation From
A Pervasive Device.” The ’481 patent was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent
and Trademark Office on August 2, 2005. STEC is the owner by assignment from Symantec
Corporation of the ’481 patent. A true and correct copy of the ’481 patent is included as Exhibit
I.
48.

Oracle makes, uses, sells, offers for sale, and/or imports products and/or services

in the United States that provide or support remote data access by a mobile device, such as
Oracle Business Intelligence Foundation Suite.
49.

On information and belief, Oracle has infringed and continues to infringe the ’481

patent by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing products
and/or services that are covered by one or more claims of the ’481 patent. Such products and/or
services include, by way of example and without limitation, Oracle Business Intelligence
Foundation Suite, which is covered by one or more claims of the ’481 patent, including but not
limited to claim 1. By making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling such products and/or
services covered by one or more claims of the ’481 patent, Oracle has injured STEC and is liable
to STEC for infringement of the ’481 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.

11

50.

As a result of Oracle’s infringement of the ’481 patent, Plaintiff STEC has

suffered monetary damages in an amount adequate to compensate for Oracle’s infringement, but
in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by Oracle, together
with interest and costs as fixed by the Court.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff STEC respectfully requests that this Court enter:
1.

A judgment in favor of Plaintiff that Oracle has infringed, either literally and/or

under the doctrine of equivalents, the ’784 patent, the ’637 patent, the ’799 patent, the ’839
patent, the ’891 patent, the ’042 patent, the ’607 patent, the ’621 patent, and the ’481 patent;
2.

A judgment and order requiring Oracle to pay Plaintiff its damages, costs,

expenses, and pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as provided under 35 U.S.C. § 284 for
Oracle’s infringement of the ’784 patent, the ’637 patent, the ’799 patent, the ’839 patent, the
’891 patent, the ’042 patent, the ’607 patent, the ’621 patent, and the ’481 patent; and
3.

Any and all other relief as the Court may deem appropriate and just under the

circumstances.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff, under Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, requests a trial by jury of
any issues so triable by right.

12

Date: May 22, 2012

BAYARD, P.A.
/s/ Richard D. Kirk
Richard D. Kirk (rk0922)
Stephen B. Brauerman (sb4952)
Vanessa R. Tiradentes (vt5398)
222 Delaware Avenue, Suite 900
P.O. Box 25130
Wilmington, DE 19899
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

OF COUNSEL:
SNR DENTON US LLP
Mark L. Hogge
Shailendra K. Maheshwari
1301 K Street, NW, Suite 600, East Tower
Washington, DC 20005-3364
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Plaintiff STEC IP, LLC

13