Rotatable Technologies LLC v. Acer America Corporation et al
Filing
1
COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 350 receipt number 0540-3568823.), filed by Rotatable Technologies LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Ni, Hao)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
ROTATABLE TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
1. ACER AMERICA CORPORATION;
2. ADOBE SYSTEMS
INCORPORATED
3. ARCHOS S.A.;
4. ARCHOS, INC.;
5. ASUSTEK COMPUTER INC.;
6. ASUS COMPUTER
INTERNATIONAL;
7. MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC.;
8. OPERA SOFTWARE
INTERNATIONAL ASA.;
9. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS, USA,
INC.; AND
10. SONY MOBILE
COMMUNICATIONS (USA) INC.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:12-CV-263
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Defendants.
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
This is an action for patent infringement in which Rotatable Technologies LLC
(“Rotatable Technologies”) makes the following allegations against Acer America Corporation;
Adobe Systems Incorporated; Archos S.A.; Archos, Inc.; ASUSTek Computer Inc.; ASUS
Computer International; Motorola Mobility, Inc.; Opera Software International ASA; Samsung
Electronics USA, Inc., and Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc. (collectively,
“Defendants”):
PARTIES
1.
Rotatable Technologies is a limited liability company formed under the laws of
the State of Texas with a principle place of business located at 815 Brazos Street, Suite 500,
Austin, Texas 78701.
2.
Defendant Acer America Corporation (“Acer”) is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the State of California with a principle place of business located at 333
W. San Carlos Street, Suite 1500, San Jose, California 95110. Acer can be served via its
registered agent for service of process: C T Corporation System, 818 W. Seventh St., Los
Angeles, California 90017.
3.
Defendant Archos S.A. is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
France with a principle place of business located at 12, rue Ampere, Igny, 91430 France.
4.
Defendant Archos, Inc. (“Archos”) is a corporation organized and existing under
the laws of the State of California, and a subsidiary of Archos SA, with a principle place of
business located at 7951 E. Maplewood Avenue, Suite 260, Greenwood Village, Colorado
80111. Archos can be served via its registered agent for service of process: National Registered
Agents, Inc., 2875 Michelle Dr., Ste. 100, Irvine, California 92606.
5.
Defendant Adobe Systems Incorporated (“Adobe”) is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with a principle place of business located at 345
Park Ave, Mailstop A15-TAX, San Jose, California 95110. Adobe can be served via its
registered agent for service of process: Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Rd., Ste.
400, Wilmington, Delaware.
6.
Defendant ASUSTek Computer Inc. (“ASUSTek”) is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of Taiwan with a principle place of business located at 4f, 150, Li-Te
Road, Beitou District, Taipei City, Taiwan.
7.
Defendant ASUS Computer International (“Asus”) is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the State of California, and a subsidiary of ASUSTek, with a principle
place of business located at 800 Corporate Way, Fremont, California 94539. Asus can be served
via its registered agent for service of process: Godwin Yan, 800 Corporate Way, Fremont,
California 94539.
8.
Defendant Motorola Mobility, Inc. (“Motorola”) is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with a principal place of business located at 600
North U.S. Highway 45, Libertyville, Illinois 60048. Motorola can be served via its registered
agent for service of process: The Corporation Trust Company, Corporation Trust Center, 1209
Orange Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801.
9.
Defendant Opera Software International ASA. (“Opera”) is a corporation
organized and existing under the laws Norway with a principal place of business located at 1875
South Grant Street, Suite #750, San Mateo, California 94402. Opera can be served via its
registered agent for service of process: CT Corporation System, 818 W. Seventh St., Los
Angeles, California 90017.
10.
Defendant Samsung Electronics, USA, Inc.
(“Samsung”) is a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with a principal place of business
located at 105 Challenger Road, Ridgefield Park, New Jersey 07660. Samsung can be served via
its registered agent for service of process: The Corporation Trust Company, Corporation Trust
Center, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801.
11.
Defendant Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc., (“Sony Mobile”) is a
corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with a principle place
of business located at 3333 Piedmont Rd., Ste. 600, Atlanta, Georgia 30305. Sony Mobile can be
served via its registered agent for service of process: Capitol Services, Inc., 1675 South State
Street, Suite B, Dover, Delaware 19901.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
12.
This is an action for infringement of a United States patent arising under 35
U.S.C. §§ 271, 281, and 284 - 85, among others. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over
this action under 28 U.S.C. §1331 and §1338(a).
13.
Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b). Upon
information and belief, each Defendant has transacted business in this district, and has
committed and/or induced acts of patent infringement in this district.
14.
Defendants are subject to this Court’s specific and general personal jurisdiction
pursuant to due process and/or the Texas Long Arm Statute, due at least to each Defendant’s
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
Texas and in this district.
15.
Joinder of the Defendants is proper pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 299(a) at least
because each Defendant’s infringing products includes, complies with, and/or utilizes the
android operating system, the practice of which by each Defendant necessarily results in
infringement of the patent-in-suit. In addition, questions of fact common to all of the Defendants
will arise in the action at least because, upon information and belief, Defendants’ infringing acts
arise from their common acts of including, complying with and/or utilizing the android operating
system.
COUNT I
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,326,978
16.
On December 4, 2001, United States Patent No. 6,326,978 (the “’978 patent”)
was duly and legally issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office for an invention
entitled “Display Method for Selectively Rotating Windows on a Computer Display”. A true and
correct copy of the ’978 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
17.
Rotatable Technologies is the owner of the ’978 patent with all substantive rights
in and to that patent, including the sole and exclusive right to prosecute this action and enforce
the ’978 patent against infringers, and to collect damages for all relevant times.
18.
Acer directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported,
provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including
at least its Iconia Tablet) that infringed one or more claims of the ’978 patent.
19.
Adobe directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported,
provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including
at least its Adobe Reader for Android) that infringed one or more claims of the ’978 patent.
20.
Archos S.A. and Archos directly or through intermediaries, made, had made,
used, imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or
systems (including at least its 101 G9 Tablet) that infringed one or more claims of the ’978
patent.
21.
Asus and ASUSTek directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used,
imported, provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems
(including at least its Asus EEE Pad TF201 Tablet) that infringed one or more claims of the ’978
patent.
22.
Motorola directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported,
provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including
at least its Droid XyBoard 8.2 Tablet) that infringed one or more claims of the ’978 patent.
23.
Opera directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported,
provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including
at least its Opera Mini Web Browser software) that infringed one or more claims of the ’978
patent.
24.
Samsung directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported,
provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including
at least its Nexus S) that infringed one or more claims of the ’978 patent.
25.
Sony Mobile directly or through intermediaries, made, had made, used, imported,
provided, supplied, distributed, sold, and/or offered for sale products and/or systems (including
at least its Xperia Play 4G) that infringed one or more claims of the ’978 patent.
JURY DEMAND
Rotatable Technologies hereby requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable by right.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Rotatable Technologies requests that the Court find in its favor and against Defendants,
and that the Court grant Rotatable Technologies the following relief:
a.
Judgment that one or more claims of the ’978 patent have been infringed, either
literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, by Defendants and/or by others to whose
infringement Defendants have contributed and/or by others whose infringement has been
induced by Defendants;
b.
A permanent injunction enjoining Defendants and their officers, directors, agents,
servants, affiliates, employees, divisions, branches, subsidiaries, parents, and all others acting in
active concert therewith from infringement, inducing infringement of, or contributing to
infringement of the ’978 patent;
c.
Judgment that Defendants account for and pay to Rotatable Technologies all
damages and costs incurred by Rotatable Technologies, caused by Defendants’ infringing
activities and other conduct complained of herein;
d.
That Rotatable Technologies be granted pre-judgment and post-judgment interest
on the damages caused by Defendants’ infringing activities and other conduct complained of
herein;
e.
That this Court declare this an exceptional case and award Rotatable
Technologies reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 285; and
f.
That Rotatable Technologies be granted such other and further relief as the Court
may deem just and proper under the circumstances.
Dated: May 1, 2012
Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ Hao Ni
Hao Ni
Texas Bar No. 24047205
hni@nilawfirm.com
Timothy T. Wang
Texas Bar No. 24067927
twang@nilawfirm.com
Stevenson Moore V
Texas Bar No. 24076573
smoore@nilawfirm.com
Ni Law Firm, PLLC
3102 Maple Ave., Ste. 400
Dallas, TX 75201
Telephone: 214/800-2208
Fax: 214/800-2209
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
ROTATABLE TECHNOLOGIES LLC
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?