Klausner Technologies Inc v. Verizon Wireless et al

Filing 109

ANSWER to 105 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim (Plaintiff Klausner Technologies, Inc.'s Reply to RingCentral, Inc.'s Counterclaim) by Klausner Technologies Inc.(DeRieux, Elizabeth)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION KLAUSNER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a New York corporation, Plaintiff, vs. Verizon Wireless (Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless), a Delaware general partnership; Verizon Data Services LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; Bell Atlantic Communications, Inc., a Delaware corporation; Citrix Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation; Comverse, Inc., a Delaware corporation; Cox Communications, Inc., a Delaware corporation; Embarq Communications, Inc., a Delaware corporation; Google Inc., a Delaware corporation; GrandCentral Communications, Inc., a Delaware corporation; LG Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc., a California Corporation; PhoneFusion, Inc., a Delaware corporation; RingCentral, Inc., a California Corporation, Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § §

Case No. 6:08-cv-341 (LED) (JURY TRIAL)

PLAINTIFF KLAUSNER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.'S REPLY TO COUNTERCLAIMS OF RINGCENTRAL, INC. Plaintiff Klausner Technologies, Inc. ("Klausner") hereby answers the counterclaims of Defendant RingCentral, Inc. ("RingCentral"). The paragraphs in this reply are numbered to correspond with the paragraph numbers in RingCentral's counterclaims; accordingly, the first numbered paragraph is number 36. All of the allegations of the counterclaims not specifically admitted herein are specifically denied.

The Parties 36. Upon information and belief, Klausner admits the allegations contained in

paragraph 36 of RingCentral's counterclaims. 37. counterclaims. 38. counterclaims. 39. counterclaims. Klausner admits the allegations contained in paragraph 39 of RingCentral's Klausner admits the allegations contained in paragraph 38 of RingCentral's Klausner denies the allegations contained in paragraph 37 of RingCentral's

Jurisdiction 40. Klausner admits that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§

1331 and 1338. 41. counterclaims. Klausner admits the allegations contained in paragraph 41 of RingCentral's

Venue 42. Court. Klausner admits that venue over these counterclaims is proper in this District

Count 1: Declaratory Relief Regarding the `576 Patent 43. counterclaims. 44. counterclaims. 45. counterclaims. Klausner denies the allegations contained in paragraph 45 of RingCentral's Klausner denies the allegations contained in paragraph 44 of RingCentral's Klausner admits the allegations contained in paragraph 43 of RingCentral's

-2-

Count 2: Declaratory Relief Regarding the `818 Patent 46. counterclaims. 47. counterclaims. 48. counterclaims. Prayer for Judgment Klausner denies that RingCentral is entitled to the judgment it seeks or any relief for the allegations made in its counterclaims. Jury Demand Klausner demands trial by jury of all issues. Klausner denies the allegations contained in paragraph 48 of RingCentral's Klausner denies the allegations contained in paragraph 47 of RingCentral's Klausner admits the allegations contained in paragraph 46 of RingCentral's

Dated: January 15, 2009

Respectfully submitted, By: /s/ Elizabeth L. DeRieux S. Calvin Capshaw State Bar No. 03783900 Elizabeth L. DeRieux State Bar No. 05770585 N. Claire Abernathy State Bar No. 24053063 CAPSHAW DERIEUX, LLP 1127 Judson Road, Suite 220 Longview, Texas 75601 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail] E-mail: [e-mail] E-mail: [e-mail]

-3-

Gregory S. Dovel California State Bar No. 135387 Sean A. Luner California State Bar No. 165443 Christin K. Cho California State Bar No. 238173 DOVEL & LUNER, LLP 201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600 Santa Monica, California 90401 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail] E-mail: [e-mail] E-mail: [e-mail] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF, KLAUSNER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served this 15th day of January, 2009, with a copy of this document via the Court's CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3). Any other counsel of record will be served via electronic mail, facsimile transmission and/or first class mail on this same date. /s/ Elizabeth L. DeRieux

-4-