Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 58

First Amended ANSWER to #1 Complaint , Affirmative Defenses, and, COUNTERCLAIM against Mirror Worlds Technologies, Inc., Mirror Worlds, LLC by Apple, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Mehta, Sonal)

Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc.

Doc. 58

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

MIROR WORLDS, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
APPLE

Civil Action No. 6:08-CV -88 LED

JURY TRI DEMAED
INC.,

Defendant.

APPLE

INC.,

Counterclaim Plaintiff,
v.

MIROR WORLS LLC, MIROR WORLS TECHNOLOGIES,
INC.

Counterclaim Defendants.

APPLE INC.'S FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMTIVE DEFENSES AND COUNTERCLAIMS
Apple Inc. ("Apple") respectfully submits this First Amended Answer,
Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims in response to the Complaint ("Complaint") of
Plaintiff Mirror Worlds, LLC ("Mirror Worlds (Texas)") as follows:

PARTIES
1. Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the truth of the statements in Paragraph 1 of the Complaint, and, on that basis,
denies the same.
2. Apple admits the allegations in Paragraph 2 of the Complaint. 3. Apple admits the allegations in Paragraph 3 of the Complaint.

Dockets.Justia.com

JURSDICTION
4. Apple admits that Mirror Worlds (Texas)'s Complaint purports to

be an action that arses under the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 271 et seq., but denies any
wrongdoing or liability on its own behalf for the reasons stated herein. Apple admits that
this Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.c. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).

5. Apple admits that the Court has personal jurisdiction over it.
Apple admits that it has and does sell products and provide services to persons within the

State of Texas and this District. Apple denies that it has commtted any acts of
infringement within this District of the State of Texas, and specifically denies any

wrongdoing, infringement, inducement of infringement or contribution to infringement.

VENU
6. Apple admits that it has and does sell products and provide

services to persons within the State of Texas and this District, but it denies that it has

commtted any acts of infringement within this District or the State of Texas, and
specifically denies any wrongdoing, infringement, inducement of infringement or
contribution to infringement. Apple admts that venue is proper as to Apple in this

District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b), (c) and 1400(b). To the extent not expressly
admitted herein, Apple denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph 6 of the Complaint.
THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
7. Apple admits that a document purporting to be United States

Patent Number 6,006,227 ("the '227 patent") was attached as Exhibit 1 to Mirror Worlds

(Texas)'s Complaint. Apple states that the '227 patent on its face is entitled "Document

Stream Operating System" and identifies Eric Freeman and David H. Gelernter as
inventors. Apple states that the '227 patent on its face identifies Yale University of New

Haven, Connecticut as the assignee of the '227 patent. Apple is without knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations concerning Mirror

Worlds (Texas)'s purported ownership in the '227 patent and, therefore, denies those
2

allegations. To the extent not expressly admitted herein, Apple denies the remaining

allegations of Paragraph 7 of the Complaint.
8. Apple admits that a document purporting to be United States

Patent Number 6,638,313 ("the '313 patent") was attached as Exhibit 2 to Mirror Worlds

(Texas)'s Complaint. Apple states that the '313 patent on its face is entitled "Document

Stream Operating System" and identifies Eric Freeman and David H. Gelernter as
inventors. Apple states that the '313 patent on its face identifies Mirror Worlds
Technologies, Inc. of New Haven, Connecticut as the assignee of the '313 patent. Apple
is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations concerning Mirror Worlds (Texas)'s purported ownership in the '313 patent
and, therefore, denies those allegations. To the extent not expressly admitted herein,

Apple denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph 8 of the Complaint.

9. Apple admts that a document purporting to be United States
Patent Number 6,725,427 ("the' 427 patent") was attached as Exhibit 3 to Mirror Worlds
(Texas)' s Complaint. Apple states that the '427 patent on its face is entitled "Document

Stream Operating System with Document Organizing and Display Facilities" and
identifies Eric Freeman and David H. Gelernter as inventors. Apple states that the '427
patent on its face identifies Mirror Worlds Technologies, Inc. of New Haven, Connecticut
as the assignee of the '427 patent. Apple is without know ledge or information sufficient

to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations concerning Mirror Worlds (Texas)'s

purported ownership in the '427 patent and, therefore, denies those allegations. To the
extent not expressly admitted herein, Apple denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph
9 of the Complaint.

10. Apple admits that a document purporting to be United States
Patent Number 6,768,999 ("the '999 patent") was attached as Exhibit 4 to Mirror Worlds

(Texas)'s Complaint. Apple states that the '999 patent on its face is entitled "Enterprise,
Stream-Based, Information Management System" and identifies Randy Prager and Peter
3

Sparago as inventors. Apple states that the '999 patent on its face identifies Mirror

Worlds Technologies, Inc. of New Haven, Connecticut as the assignee of the' 999 patent.
Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of

the allegations concerning Mirror Worlds (Texas)'s purported ownership in the '999
patent and, therefore, denies those allegations. To the extent not expressly admitted

herein, Apple denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph 10 of the Complaint.

11. Apple admts that the Complaint identifies the '227 patent, the
'313 patent, the' 427 patent, and the '999 patent as the "Patents-in-Suit," and adopts the
same termnology in this Answer.

COUNT I - ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,006,227

12. Apple refers to and incorporates herein its answers as provided in
Paragraphs 1-11 above.

13. Apple admits that it makes, uses and sells Mac computers,
iPhones, iPods, and Mac OS X. To the extent not expressly admitted herein, Apple

denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph 13 of the Complaint.

14. Apple is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the truth of the statements in Paragraph 14 of the Complaint, and, on that
basis, denies the same.

15. Apple admits that, by 2002, it was aware of a product called
Scopeware, which was sold by Mirror Worlds Technologies, Inc. To the extent not

expressly admitted herein, Apple denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph 15 of the
Complaint.

16. Apple denies all allegations set forth in Paragraph 16 of the
Complaint.

4

COUNT II - ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,638,313
17. Apple refers to and incorporates herein its answers as provided in
Paragraphs 1-16 above.
18. Apple admits that it makes, uses and sells Mac computers and Mac

OS X. To the extent not expressly admitted herein, Apple denies the remaining
allegations of Paragraph 18 of the Complaint.

19. Apple admits that, by 2002, it was aware of a product called
Scopeware, which was sold by Mirror Worlds Technologies, Inc.. To the extent not

expressly admitted herein, Apple denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph 19 of the
Complaint.

20. Apples denies all allegations set forth In Paragraph 20 of the
Complaint.

COUNT III - ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,725,427

21. Apple refers to and incorporates herein its answers as provided in
Paragraphs 1-20 above.

22. Apple admits that it makes, uses and sells Mac computers, iPods,
iPhones, and Mac OS X. To the extent not expressly admitted herein, Apple denies the
remaining allegations of Paragraph 22 of the Complaint.

23. Apple admits that, by 2002, it was aware of a product called
Scopeware, which was sold by Mirror Worlds Technologies, Inc. To the extent not

expressly admitted herein, Apple denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph 23 of the
Complaint.

24. Apples denies all allegations set forth in Paragraph 24 of the
Complaint.

5

COUNT iv - ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OF u.s. PATENT NO. 6,768,999
25. Apple refers to and incorporates herein its answers as provided in
Paragraphs 1-24 above.

26. Apple admits that it makes, uses and sells Mac computers, iPods,
iPhones, and Mac OS X. To the extent not expressly admitted herein, Apple denies the
remaining allegations of Paragraph 26 of the Complaint.

27. Apple admits that, by 2002, it was aware of a product called

Scopeware, which was sold by Mirror Worlds Technologies, Inc.. To the extent not
expressly admitted herein, Apple denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph 27 of the
Complaint.
28. Apple denies all allegations set forth in Paragraph 28 of the

Complaint.

ALLEGED DAMAGES AND FIRST PRAYER FOR RELIEF

29. Apple refers to and incorporates herein its answers as provided in
Paragraphs 1-28 above. Apple denies all allegations set forth in Paragraph 29 of the
Complaint.
30. Apple denies all allegations set forth in Paragraph 30 of the

Complaint.

RESPONSE TO PRAYER FOR RELIEF
31. Apple denies that Mirror Worlds (Texas) is entitled to any of the

relief sought in its prayer for relief against Apple, its agents, employees, representatives,

successors and assigns, and those acting in privity or concert with Apple. Apple has not

directly, indirectly, contributorily, and/or by inducement, infringed the Patents-in-Suit,

either literally or by the doctrine of equivalents, wilfully or otherwise. Mirror Worlds
(Texas) is not entitled to recover statutory damages, compensatory damages, or

accounting, injunctive relief, costs, fees, interest, or any other type of recovery from

6

Apple. Mirror Worlds (Texas)'s prayer should, therefore, be denied in its entirety and

with prejudice, and Mirror Worlds (Texas) should take nothing. Apple asks that
judgment be entered for Apple and that this action be found to be an exceptional case
entitling Apple to be awarded attorneys' fees in defending against Mirror Worlds

(Texas)'s Complaint, together with such other and further relief the Court deems
appropriate.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
32. Apple does not object to a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

AFFIRM TIVE DEFENSES
As and for its affirmative defenses, Apple alleges as follows:

First Affirmative Defense - Failure to State a Claim
33. The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be

granted because Apple has not performed any act or thing and is not proposing to
perform any act or thing in violation of any rights validly belonging to Mirror Worlds
(Texas).

Second Affrmative Defense - Noninfringement
34. Apple does not infringe and has not infringed, either directly,

indirectly, contributorily, or by inducement, any claims of the Patents-in-Suit, either
literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, wilfully or otherwise.

Third Affrmative Defense - Patent Invalidity

35. Mirror Worlds (Texas)'s alleged claims for infringement of the
Patents-in-Suit are bared because each and every claim of the Patents-in-Suit is invalid

for failure to comply with the requirements of Title 35 of the United States Code,
including but not limited to Sections 102, 103, and/or 112.

Fourth Affirmative Defense - Laches

36. Mirror Worlds (Texas)'s claims for relief are bared in whole or in
par by the equitable doctrine of laches.
7

Fifth Affirmative Defense - Time Limitation on Damages

37. Mirror Worlds (Texas)'s claims for relief and prayer for damages
are limited by 35 U.S.C. § 286, which prohibits recovery for any infringement commtted

more than six years prior to the filng of the complaint.

Sixth Affrmative Defense - Estoppel
38. The Patents-in-Suit are limited and/or unenforceable by reason of
estoppel.

Seventh Affirmative Defense - Lack of Standing

39. Mirror Worlds (Texas) lacks standing to bring this suit because, as
shown on the faces of the Patents-in-Suit, Mirror Worlds (Texas) is not the assignee of
the Patents-in-Suit.

Eighth Affrmative Defense - Marking
40. Mirror Worlds (Texas) is bared in whole or in par from

recovering damages under 35 U.S.c. § 287.

COUNTERCLAIMS

COUNT ONE - UNTED STATES PATENT NO. 6,006,227

41. Mirror Worlds (Texas) claims to be the owner of the '227 patent,
entitled "Document Stream Operating System," filed on June 28, 1996 and issued on
December 21, 1999. The '227 patent on its face identifies as inventors Eric Freeman and

David H. Gelernter. The '227 patent on its face identifies as assignee Yale University of
New Haven, Connecticut. See Exhibit 1 of Mirror Worlds (Texas)'s Complaint.
A. Declaration of Noninfringement

42. Apple realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set
forth in Paragraphs 1-41 above as if fully set forth herein.

43. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between Apple and
Mirror Worlds (Texas) with respect to the '227 patent because Mirror Worlds (Texas) has

8

brought the action against Apple alleging that Apple infringes the '227 patent, which
allegation Apple denies. Absent a declaration of noninfringement, Mirror Worlds

(Texas) wil continue to wrongfully assert the '227 patent against Apple, and thereby
cause Apple irreparable injury and damage.

44. Apple has not infringed the '227 patent, either directly or
indirectly, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, wilfully, or otherwise, and is
entitled to a declaration to that effect.
45. This is an exceptional case entitling Apple to an award of its

attorneys' fees incurred in connection with this action pursuant to 35 U.S.c. § 285.
B. Declaration of Invalidity

46. Apple realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set
forth in Paragraphs 1-45 above as if

fully set forth herein.

47. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between Apple and
Mirror Worlds (Texas) with respect to the '227 patent because Mirror Worlds (Texas) has

brought the action against Apple alleging that Apple infringes the '227 patent, which
allegation Apple denies. Absent a declaration of invalidity, Mirror Worlds (Texas) wil

continue to wrongfully assert the '227 patent against Apple, and thereby cause Apple
irreparable injury and damage.

48. The '227 patent is invalid under the provisions of Title 35 of the
United States Code, including but not limited to Sections 102, 103, and/or 112, and Apple
is entitled to a declaration to that effect.
49. This is an exceptional case entitling Apple to an award of its

attorneys' fees incurred in connection with this action pursuant to 35 U.S.c. § 285.

COUNT TWO - UNTED STATES PATENT NO. 6,638,313

50. Mirror Worlds (Texas) claims to be the owner of the '313 patent,
entitled "Document Stream Operating System," filed on September 17, 1999 and issued

9

on October 28, 2003. The '313 patent on its face identifies as inventors Eric Freeman
and David H. Gelernter. The '313 patent on its face identifies as assignee Mirror Worlds

Technologies, Inc. of New Haven, Connecticut. See Exhibit 2 of Mirror Worlds
(Texas)'s Complaint.
A. Declaration of Noninfringement

51. Apple realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set
forth in Paragraphs 1-50 above as if fully set forth herein.

52. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between Apple and
Mirror Worlds (Texas) with respect to the '313 patent because Mirror Worlds (Texas) has

brought the action against Apple alleging that Apple infringes the '313 patent, which
allegation Apple denies. Absent a declaration of noninfringement, Mirror Worlds

(Texas) wil continue to wrongfully assert the '313 patent against Apple, and thereby
cause Apple irreparable injury and damage.

53. Apple has not infringed the '313 patent, either directly or
indirectly, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, wilfully, or otherwise, and is
entitled to a declaration to that effect.
54. This is an exceptional case entitling Apple to an award of its

attorneys' fees incurred in connection with this action pursuant to 35 U.S.c. § 285.
B. Declaration of Invalidity

55. Apple realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set
forth in Paragraphs 1-54 above as if fully set forth herein.

56. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between Apple and
Mirror Worlds (Texas) with respect to the '313 patent because Mirror Worlds (Texas) has
brought the action against Apple alleging that Apple infringes the '313 patent, which

allegation Apple denies. Absent a declaration of invalidity, Mirror Worlds (Texas) wil

10

continue to wrongfully assert the '313 patent against Apple, and thereby cause Apple
irreparable injury and damage.

57. The '313 patent is invalid under the provisions of Title 35 of the
United States Code, including but not limited to Sections 102, 103, and/or 112, and Apple
is entitled to a declaration to that effect.
58. This is an exceptional case entitling Apple to an award of its

attorneys' fees incurred in connection with this action pursuant to 35 U.S.c. § 285.

COUNT THREE - UNTED STATES PATENT NO. 6,725,427

59. Apple realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set
forth in Paragraphs 1-58 above as if

fully set forth herein.

60. Mirror Worlds (Texas) claims to be the owner of the '427 patent,
entitled "Document Stream Operating System with Document Organizing and Display
Facilities," filed on December 10, 2001 and issued on April

20, 2004. The '427 patent on

its face identifies as inventors Eric Freeman and David H. Gelernter. The' 427 patent on

its face identifies as assignee Mirror Worlds Technologies, Inc. of New Haven,
Connecticut. See Exhibit 3 of Mirror Worlds (Texas)' s Complaint.

A. Declaration of Noninfringement

61. Apple realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set
forth in Paragraphs 1-60 above as if fully set forth herein.

62. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between Apple and
Mirror Worlds (Texas) with respect to the '427 patent because Mirror Worlds (Texas) has

brought the action against Apple alleging that Apple infringes the '427 patent, which
allegation Apple denies. Absent a declaration of noninfringement, Mirror Worlds

(Texas) wil continue to wrongfully assert the '427 patent against Apple, and thereby
cause Apple irreparable injury and damage.

11

63. Apple has not infringed the '427 patent, either directly or
indirectly, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, wilfully, or otherwise, and is
entitled to a declaration to that effect.
64. This is an exceptional case entitlng Apple to an award of its

attorneys' fees incurred in connection with this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285.
B. Declaration of Invalidity

65. Apple realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set
forth in Paragraphs 1-64 above as if fully set forth herein.

66. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between Apple and
Mirror Worlds (Texas) with respect to the' 427 patent because Mirror Worlds (Texas) has

brought the action against Apple alleging that Apple infringes the '427 patent, which
allegation Apple denies. Absent a declaration of invalidity, Mirror Worlds (Texas) wil

continue to wrongfully assert the '427 patent against Apple, and thereby cause Apple
irreparable injury and damage.

67. The '427 patent is invalid under the provisions of Title 35 of the
United States Code, including but not limited to Sections 102, 103, and/or 112, and Apple
is entitled to a declaration to that effect.
68. This is an exceptional case entitling Apple to an award of its

attorneys' fees incurred in connection with this action pursuant to 35 U.S.c. § 285.

COUNT FOUR - UNITED STATES PATENT NO. 6,768,999

69. Mirror Worlds (Texas) claims to be the owner of the '999 patent,
entitled "Enterprise, Stream-Based, Information Management System," filed on June 26,
2001 and issued on July 27, 2004. The '999 patent on its face identifies as inventors

Randy Prager and Peter Sparago. The '999 patent on its face identifies as assignee
Mirror Worlds Technologies, Inc. of New Haven, Connecticut. See Exhibit 4 of Mirror
Worlds (Texas)'s Complaint.

12

C. Declaration of Noninfringement

70. Apple realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set
forth in Paragraphs 1-69 above as if fully set forth herein.

71. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between Apple and
Mirror Worlds (Texas) with respect to the '999 patent because Mirror Worlds (Texas) has
brought the action against Apple alleging that Apple infringes the '999 patent, which

allegation Apple denies. Absent a declaration of noninfringement, Mirror Worlds

(Texas) wil continue to wrongfully assert the '999 patent against Apple, and thereby
cause Apple irreparable injury and damage.

72. Apple has not infringed the '999 patent, either directly or
indirectly, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, wilfully, or otherwise, and is
entitled to a declaration to that effect.
73. This is an exceptional case entitling Apple to an award of its

attorneys' fees incurred in connection with this action pursuant to 35 U.S.c. § 285.

D. Declaration of Invalidity
74. Apple realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set
forth in Paragraphs 1-73 above as if fully set forth herein.

75. An actual and justiciable controversy exists between Apple and
Mirror Worlds (Texas) with respect to the '999 patent because Mirror Worlds (Texas) has
brought the action against Apple alleging that Apple infringes the '999 patent, which

allegation Apple denies. Absent a declaration of invalidity, Mirror Worlds (Texas) wil

continue to wrongfully assert the '999 patent against Apple, and thereby cause Apple
irreparable injury and damage.

76. The '999 patent is invalid under the provisions of Title 35 of the
United States Code, including but not limited to Sections 102, 103, and/or 112, and Apple
is entitled to a declaration to that effect.

13

77. This is an exceptional case entitling Apple to an award of its

attorneys' fees incurred in connection with this action pursuant to 35 US.c. § 285.

COUNT FIVE - INFRINGEMENT OF UNITED STATES PATENT NO. 6,613,101
A. The Parties

78. Apple is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
California with its principal place of business in Cupertino, California.

79. Mirror Worlds LLC ("Mirror Worlds (Texas)") is a Texas limited
liability corporation, having its principal place of business at 4540 Kinsey Drive, Tyler,
TX 75703, as averred by Mirror Worlds (Texas) in Paragraph 1 of the Complaint. Mirror

Worlds (Texas) was assigned the patents-in-suit by Plainfield Specialty Holdings I, Inc.
on March 5, 2008.

80. Upon information and belief, Mirror Worlds Technologies, Inc.
("Mirror Worlds (DeL.)") is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the

State of Delaware. Mirror Worlds (DeL.) was the assignee of the '227 patent from
December 17, 1999 to June 18, 2004, the '313 patent from December 17, 1999 to

November 27, 2007, the '999 patent from November 16, 2001 to July 28, 2004, and the
'427 patent from December 10, 2001 to June 18, 2004. Mirror Worlds (DeL.) may be

served with process by serving its registered agent for service of process, Corporation
Service Company, 2711 Centervile Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, DE 19808.
B. Other Relevant Entities

81. Upon information and belief, one or more of Abacus Ventures LP

or Abacus Ventures LLC (together "Abacus Ventures"), and Abacus & Associates, Inc.

or Abacus & Associates LP (together "Abacus & Associates") are or were entities
organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware that funded Mirror Worlds
(DeL.) before March 20, 2001. Upon information and belief, Frank Weil, who was a

14

director of Mirror Worlds (DeL.), was also with Abacus Ventures and is the Chairman of
Abacus & Associates.

82. Upon information and belief, Abacus Ventures and/or Abacus &

Associates also funded, directly or indirectly, Recognition Interface, Inc. or Recognition

Interface, LLC. Recognition Interface, Inc. and/or Recognition Interface, LLC were the

assignees of the '227 patent from June 18, 2004 to December 24,2007, the '313 patent
from November 27, 2007 to December 24, 2007, the '999 patent from July 28, 2004 to

December 24, 2007, and the '427 patent from June 18, 2004 to December 24, 2007.
Upon information and belief, Recognition Interface, Inc. was converted to Recognition
Interface, LLC on September 26, 2005 and is its successor-in-interest; the conversion was

recorded on March 13,2008..
83. Upon information and belief, Plainfield Specialty Holdings I, Inc.

is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware. Upon

information and belief, Plainfield Specialty Holdings I, Inc. is the sole shareholder of

Mirror Worlds (Texas). Plainfield Specialty Holdings I, Inc. was the assignee of the
patents-in-suit from December 24, 2007 to March 5, 2008.

84. In sum, upon information and belief, by virtue of agreements
purporting to transfer the patents-in-suit from Mirror Worlds (DeL.) to Recognition

Interface, to Plainfield Specialty Holdings I, and then to Mirror Worlds (Texas), Mirror

Worlds (Texas) is a successor-in-interest to Mirror Worlds (DeL.) and/or is liable for
patent infringement associated with the Scopeware products, including but not limited to
Scopeware Vision ProfessionaL.
C. Jurisdiction And Venue

85. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Apple's claim of

patent infringement, which arses under the patent laws of the United States, pursuant to
28 US.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202.

15

86. Upon information and belief, Mirror Worlds (DeL.) is subject to

personal jurisdiction in this district arsing out of its systematic and continuous contacts

with this district, including in paricular, its past and ongoing infringing conduct, as set
forth herein.

87. Upon information and belief, Mirror Worlds (Del.) is subject to
personal jurisdiction in this district based on its contacts with this district. Upon

information and belief, Mirror Worlds (DeL.) has commtted purposeful acts and/or
transactions directed toward this district, including paricipating in the transfer of the
patents in suit to Mirror Worlds (Texas), for the purpose of enabling this lawsuit to be
brought in this district.

88. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
1391(b)(2), (c), (d) and/or 28 U.S.c. § 1400 because the infringement of Apple's patent
has occurred within this district, as set forth herein, and because Mirror Worlds (Texas)
fied this lawsuit in this district.
D. Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,613,101

89. Apple Inc. is the owner of the entire right, title and interest in and

to U.S. Patent No. 6,613,101 ("the '101 patent") entitled "Method and Apparatus for
Organizing Information in a Computer System," which was duly and legally issued on
September 2, 2003 in the name of inventors Richard Mander, Daniel E. Rose, Gitta

Salomon, Yin Yin Wong, Timothy Oren, Susan Booker, and Stephanie Houde. A copy
of the' 101 patent is attached as Exhibit A hereto.

90. Upon information and belief, Mirror Worlds (Del.) has infringed,
and is currently infringing, claims 1 - 12 of the '10 1 patent, in violation of 35 US.C.
§ 271 through its actions and conduct in connection with the Scopeware products,

including but not limited to Scopeware Vision ProfessionaL.

16

91. Upon information and belief, Mirror Worlds (DeL.) had actual
knowledge of US. Patent No. 6,243,724, the parent of the' 101 patent, no later than June

2003. Upon information and belief, Mirror Worlds (Del.) had actual knowledge of the
'101 patent no later than September 2003.

92. Upon information and belief, Mirror Worlds (Texas) is legally
responsible for the infringement alleged in paragraph 90, either as a successor-in-interest

to Mirror Worlds (DeL.), or by actively inducing infringing actions and conduct in
connection with the Scopeware products.

93. Upon information and belief, infringement of the' 101 patent by
Mirror Worlds (DeL.) and/or Mirror Worlds (Texas) has been wilful and deliberate.

RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Apple seeks the following relief:
a. That each and every claim of

the '227 patent, the '313 patent, the '427 patent, and

the '999 patent be declared not infringed and invalid;
b. That each and every claim of the '227 patent be declared unenforceable;

c. That Mirror Worlds (Texas) take nothing by its Complaint and that Mirror Worlds

(Texas)'s Complaint be dismissed with prejudice;
d. That pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285 and/or other applicable laws, Mirror Worlds

(Texas)'s conduct in commencing and pursuing this action be found to render this
an exceptional case and that Apple be awarded its attorneys' fees incurred in

connection with this action;
e. That Apple be awarded its cost of suit incurred herein;
f. That Mirror Worlds (DeL.) and/or Mirror Worlds (Texas) be declared to have

infringed, directly or indirectly, claims 1 - 12 of the' 101 patent under 35 U.S.C.
§ 271; and,

g. That Apple be granted such other and additional relief as this Court deems just
and proper.
17

Date: December 23,2008

Respectfully submitted,

lsI Sonal N. Mehta Matthew D. Powers Lead Attorney Steven S. Cherensky
Sonal N. Mehta (Pro Hac Vice) Stefani C. Smith (Pro Hac Vice)

WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 201 Redwood Shores Parkway Redwood Shores, CA 94065
650-802- 3000 (Telephone) 650-802-3100 (Facsimile)

matthew. powers (g weil.com steven.cherenskly(g weil.com sonal.mehta (gweil.com stefani. smith (gweil.com

Eric M. Albritton Texas State Bar No. 00790215

ALBRITTON LAW FIM
P.O. Box 2649 Longview, Texas 75606 [phone] (Telephone)
[phone] (Facsimile)
ema (gemafirm.com

Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaim
Plaintif Apple Inc.

18

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that all counsel of record who are deemed to have
consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the
Court's CMlCF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3) on this the 23rd day of December,
2008.

lsI Sonal N. Mehta

19