Voip-Pal.com, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 1

COMPLAINT against Voip-Pal.com, Inc. (Filing fee $400 receipt number 0978-3994067), filed by Voip-Pal.com, Inc.. Certificate of Interested Parties due by 2/19/2016. Proof of service due by 6/8/2016. (Attachments: # 1 Index, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit D-(Chart 1), # 7 Exhibit D-(Chart 2), # 8 Exhibit D-(Chart 3), # 9 Exhibit D-(Chart 4), # 10 Exhibit E, # 11 Exhibit F, # 12 Exhibit F-Addendum 1, # 13 Civil Cover Sheet, # 14 Summons) (Bonds, Kurt)

Exhibit D

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

ALVERSON, TAYLOR,
MORTENSEN & SANDERS
KURT R. BONDS, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 6228
ADAM R. KNECHT, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 13166
7401 W. Charleston Boulevard
Las Vegas, NV 89117
[phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

DISTRICT OF NEVADA
*

*

*

11
12
LAWYERS
7401 WEST CHARLESTON BOULEVARD
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89117-1401
[phone]

ALVERSON, TAYLOR, MORTENSEN & SANDERS

10

VOIP-PAL.COM, INC, a Nevada corporation,

CASE NO.:

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.

15

APPLE, INC, a California corporation,

16

ASSERTED CLAIMS AND
INFRINGEMENT CONDITIONS

Defendants.

17
18
Plaintiff, Voip-Pal.com, Inc.’s (“VPLM”) provides the following Asserted Claims and
19
Infringement Contentions for Apple, Inc. (“Apple”). These contentions are preliminary, and based
20
solely on public information obtained by VPLM. VPLM reserves the right to supplement these
21
claims and contentions as appropriate based upon the opening of discovery in this case. VPLM
22
provides the following preliminary disclosures
23
A.

PRELIMINARY DISCLOSURES

24
(a)

Identification of each claim of each patent in suit that is allegedly infringed by

25
Apple, including for each claim the applicable statutory subsection of 35 .S.C. § 271;
26
27
28
1

VPLM00295
2/9/2016 3:30:22 P

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

In the claim charts below, VPLM has identified claims of the patents in suit that are infringed
by Apple. For each claim in the chart below the applicable statutory subsection of 35 U.S.C.
§ 271 is subsection (a).
(b)

Separately for each asserted claim, identification of each accused apparatus,

product, device, process, method, act, or other instrumentality (“Accused Device”) of the opposing
party of which the party claiming infringement is aware. This identification shall be as specific as
possible. Each Accused Device must be identified by name or model number, if known. Each
method or process shall be identified by name, if known, or by any product, device, or apparatus
which, when used, allegedly results in the practice of the claimed method or process;
1.

Asserted Claims with respect to Apple’s iMessage System

11
12
LAWYERS
7401 WEST CHARLESTON BOULEVARD
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89117-1401
[phone]

ALVERSON, TAYLOR, MORTENSEN & SANDERS

10

a.

Asserted Claim No. 1 regarding iMessage (the ‘815 patent)

13

Apple Inc. (“Apple”) supports and operates iMessage, the first Accused Device, which is an

14

instant messaging service supported by the Messages application that allows smartphone and desktop

15

users to send messages including text, images, video and audio to other users. The iMessage

16

software application runs on Apple desktop computers, laptops, tablets and mobile devices running

17

OS X, iOS and watchOS operating systems. iMessage practices directly and/or indirectly certain

18

claims of the ‘815 patent by utilizing a caller dialing profile comprising a plurality of calling

19

attributes to form network classification criteria. See Chart 1, Claim Chart, attached hereto.

20

b.

Asserted Claim No. 2 regarding iMessage (the ‘005 patent)

21

Apple Inc. (“Apple”) supports and operates iMessage, the first Accused Device, which is an

22

instant messaging service supported by the Messages application that allows smartphone and desktop

23

users to send messages including text, images, video and audio to other users. The iMessage

24

software application runs on Apple desktop computers, laptops, tablets and mobile devices running

25

OS X, iOS and watchOS operating systems. iMessage practices directly and/or indirectly certain

26

claims of the ‘005 patent by utilizing a caller dialing profile comprising a plurality of calling

27

attributes to form network classification criteria. See Chart 3, Claim Chart, attached hereto.

28
2

VPLM00296
2/9/2016 3:30:22 P

1

2.

2
3
4
5
6

a.

9

11
12
LAWYERS
7401 WEST CHARLESTON BOULEVARD
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89117-1401
[phone]

ALVERSON, TAYLOR, MORTENSEN & SANDERS

10

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Asserted Claim No. 3 regarding WiFi Calling (the ‘815 patent)

Apple also supports “Wi-Fi Calling” on desktop computers, laptops, tablets and mobile
devices. Wi-Fi Calling practices directly and/or indirectly certain claims of the ‘815 patent by
utilizing a caller dialing profile comprising a plurality of calling attributes to form network
classification criteria. See Chart 2, Claim Chart, attached hereto.

7
8

Asserted Claims with respect to Apple’s WiFi Calling Platform

b.

Asserted Claim No. 4 regarding WiFi Calling (the ‘005 patent)

Apple also supports “Wi-Fi Calling” on desktop computers, laptops, tablets and mobile
devices. Wi-Fi Calling practices directly and/or indirectly certain claims of the ‘005 patent by
utilizing a caller dialing profile comprising a plurality of calling attributes to form network
classification criteria. See Chart 4, Claim Chart, attached hereto.
(c)

A chart identifying specifically where each element of each asserted claim is found

within each Accused Device, including for each element that such party contends is governed by
35 U.S.C. § 112(6), the identity of the structure(s), act(s), or material(s) in the Accused Device that
performs the claimed function;
Claim Charts, collectively attached hereto as Chart 1 and Chart 2, regarding the Apple’s
iMessage System, and Chart 3 and Chart 4, regarding the Apple’s WiFi Platform, specifically
identify where each element of each asserted claim is found within each Accused Device. To
simplify issues, and to conserve the time and resources of the parties and the Court, VPLM has not
asserted any means plus function claims at this time.
(d)

For each claim that is alleged to have been indirectly infringed, an identification of

any direct infringement and a description of the acts of the alleged indirect infringer that
contribute to or are inducing that direct infringement. Insofar as alleged direct infringement is
based on joint acts of multiple parties, the role of each such party in the direct infringement must
be described;
VPLM alleges that indirect infringement occurred.
(e)

Whether each limitation of each asserted claim is alleged to be literally present or

present under the doctrine of equivalents in the Accused Device;
3

VPLM00297
2/9/2016 3:30:22 P

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

11
12
LAWYERS
7401 WEST CHARLESTON BOULEVARD
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89117-1401
[phone]

ALVERSON, TAYLOR, MORTENSEN & SANDERS

10

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

In the Claim Charts below, VPLM asserts that the claims are literally infringed by the
Accused Device. VPLM has therefore not made any claims under the doctrine of equivalents at this
time.
(f)

For any patent that claims priority to an earlier application, the priority date to

which each asserted claim allegedly is entitled;
The priority date for each asserted claim in the Claim Charts is November 2, 2006.
(g)

If a party claiming patent infringement wishes to preserve the right to rely, for any

purpose, on the assertion that is own apparatus, product, device, process, method, act, or other
instrumentality practices the claimed invention, the party shall identify, separately for each
asserted claim, each such apparatus, product, device, process, method, act, or other
instrumentality that incorporates or reflects that particular claim; and,
(h)

If a party claiming patent infringement alleges willful infringement, the basis for

such allegation.
VPLM is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Apple’s infringement of the
‘815 patent and the ‘005 patent has been and continues to be intentional, willful, and without regard
to VPLM’s rights, because it had actual knowledge of the identified patents through direct or indirect
communications with VPLM and/or as a result of its participation in the Internet Protocol
communications industry.
DATED this ____ day of February, 2016.

20
21

ALVERSON, TAYLOR,
MORTENSEN & SANDERS

22
23

_______________________________
Nevada Bar No. 6228
ADAM R. KNECHT, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 13166
7401 W. Charleston Boulevard
Las Vegas, NV 89117
Attorneys for Plaintiff

24
25
26
27
28
4

VPLM00298
2/9/2016 3:30:22 P