Microunity Systems Engineering, Inc v. Acer Inc. et al
Filing
131
RESPONSE to 112 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim Plaintiff's Answer to Defendant Apple Inc.'s Counterclaims by Microunity Systems Engineering, Inc. (Grinstein, Joseph)
Microunity Systems Engineering, Inc v. Acer Inc. et al
Doc. 131
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSFIALL DIVISION
MICROUNITY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, INC., a California corporation,
Plaintiff, ACER fNC., et al.
Defendants.
$ $ $ $
$
$
Civil ActionNo. 2:10-cv-000185 TJW-CE
$
$
PLAINTIF'F'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT APPLE INC.'S COT]NTERCLAIMS Plaintiff MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc. ("MicroUnity") files its answer to the
Connterclaims stated by defendant Apple, Inc. ("Apple") in its Answer to MicroUnity's Complaint
þr
Patent Infringement and Counterclaims, f:Ired August 11,
2010. MicroUnity denies the
allegations in Apple's Counterclaims unless expressly admitted in the following paragraphs.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
MicroUnity admits the allegations of paragraph46. MicroUnity admits the allegations of paragraph4T.
In
response
to the allegations of paragraph 48, MicroUnity admits that these
cowrterclaims arise under the United States patent laws and that they seek declaratory relief.
MicroUnity admits the allegations of paragraph49. FACTS CONCERNING T]NITED STATES PATENT NO. 5.742.840 MicroUnity admits the allegations of paragraph 50. FACTS CONCERNING T]NITED STATES PATENT NO. 5.794.061 MicroUnity admits the allegations of paragraph 51.
Cl
Cl
COUNT ONE
- UNITED
STATES PATENT NO. 5.742.840 NONINFRINGEMENT
Cl_ DECLARATION OF
1253991v1/0t1876
Dockets.Justia.com
7
.
In response to the allegations of paragraph 52, MicroUnity repeats and realleges its
responses to the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 51 as
if fully
set forth herein.
8.
In response to the allegations of paragraph 53, MicroUnity admits thaf ajusticiable
conhoversy exists between the parties regarding Apple's infringement of the '840 patent and
denies the rest of the allegations.
9. 10.
MicroUnity denies the allegations of paragraphí4. MicroUnity denies the allegations of paragraph 55.
COT]NT TWO
-
TINITED STATES PATENT NO. 7.730.287 B1 NONINFRINGEMENT
- DECLARATION OF
1
1.
In response to the allegations of paragraph 56, Microunity repeats and realleges its
responses to the allegations in paragraphs 46 through 55 as
if fully
set forth herein.
12.
In response to the allegations of paragraph 57, MicroUnity admits that a justiciable
controversy exists between the parties regarding Apple's infringement
denies the rest of the allegations.
of the '287 patent and
13. 14.
MicroUnity denies the allegations of paragraph 58. MicroUnity denies the allegations of paragraph 59.
COUNT THREE _ T]NITED STATES PATENT NO. 5,742.840 CI _ DECLARATION OF IIWALIDITY
15. 16.
In response to the allegations of paragraph 60, MicroUnity repeats and realleges its
responses to the allegations in paragraphs 46 through 59 as
if fully
set forth herein.
In response to the allegations of paragraph 61, MicroUnity admits that a justiciable
controversy exists between the parties with respect to the validity of the claims of the '840 Patent
and denies the rest of the allegations.
17. 18.
125399lvll0ll876
MicroUnity denies the allegations of paragraph62. MicroUnity denies the allegations of paragraph63.
INVALIDITY
19. 20.
In response to the allegations of paragraph 64, MicroUnity repeats and realleges its
responses to the allegations in paragraphs 46 through 63 as
if fully
set forth herein.
In response to the allegations of paragraph 65, MicroUnity admits that a justiciable
controversy exists between the parties with respect to the validity of the claims of the '287 Patent
and denies the rest of the allegations.
21. 22.
MicroUnity denies the allegations of paragraph 66. MicroUnity denies the allegations of paragtaph6T. REQUEST FOR RELIEF
Therefore, MicroUnity requests the following relief:
a. b. c.
that the Court enter
a
judgment in favor of MicroUnity on all claims asserted
against it by Apple that the Court award MicroUnity its attorneys' fees and costs of court, together pre-
judgment and post-judgment interest in the maximum amount provided by law; and
that the Court award MicroUnity all other relief to which it may be entitled.
DATED: September l, 2010
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ Joseph S. Grinstein Stephen D. Susman, Attorney-in-Charge State BarNo. 1952100 ssusman@susmangodfrey. com Max L. Tribble, Jr. State Bar No. 20213950 mtribble@susmangodfr ey. com Joseph S. Grinstein State Bar No. 24002188 j grinstein@ susman godfr ey. com
SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. 1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5100 Houston, Texas 77002
125399tv1/0r1876
Telephone: (7 13) 651-9366 Facsimile: (713) 654-6666
Sidney Calvin Capshaw State Bar No. 03783900 ccapshaw@capshawlaw. com CAPSFIAW DERIEIIX, L.L.P. 1127 Judson Rd - Ste220 PO Box 3999 Longview, TX 7 5601 -51 57 (903) 236-9800 Fax: (903) 236-8787
Otis W. Canoll State 8arNo.00794219 nancy@icklaw.com
IRELAND, CARROLL &.I
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?