Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al

Filing 107

ANSWER to 1 Complaint,, by Citigroup Inc..(Cowie, Roger)

Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al

Doc. 107

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff, v. ADOBE SYSTEMS, INC., et al., Defendants. § § § § § § § § §

No. 6:09-cv-00446-LED Jury Trial Demanded

CITIGROUP INC.'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Defendant Citigroup Inc. ("Citigroup") answers Plaintiff's Complaint for Patent Infringement as follows: I. 1. PARTIES

Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 1. 2. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 2. 3. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 3. 4. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 4. 5. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 5. 6. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 6.

Dockets.Justia.com

7.

Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 7. 8. Citigroup admits that it is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of

business at 399 Park Avenue, New York, New York, but otherwise denies Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 8. 9. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 9. 10. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 10. 11. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 11. 12. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 12. 13. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 13. 14. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 14. 15. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 15. 16. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 16. 17. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 17.

2

18.

Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 18. 19. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 19. 20. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 20. 21. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 21. 22. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 22. 23. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 23. 24. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 24. II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 25. In response to paragraph 25, Citigroup incorporates by reference its responses to

paragraphs 1-24 as if fully set forth herein. 26. With respect to Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 26, Citigroup does not contest

that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction with respect to this matter. Citigroup otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 26 and specifically denies committing, or being liable for, any act of infringement. 27. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 27 are directed against defendants other

than Citigroup, Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

3

truth of those allegations. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 27 are directed against Citigroup, Citigroup does not contest personal jurisdiction with respect to this matter but otherwise denies the allegations in paragraph 27. 28. Citigroup denies the allegations in paragraph 28. III. 29. [ALLEGED] PATENT INFRINGEMENT

In response to paragraph 29, Citigroup incorporates by reference its responses to

paragraphs 1-28 as if fully set forth herein. 30. Citigroup admits only that the `906 Patent issued on November 17, 1998 and the

`985 Patent issued on October 6, 2009. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of Plaintiff's remaining allegations in paragraph 30. 31. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 31. 32. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 32. 33. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 33. 34. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 34. 35. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 35. 36. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 36.

4

37.

Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 37. 38. 39. Citigroup denies Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 38. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 39. 40. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 40. 41. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 41. 42. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 42. 43. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 43. 44. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 44. 45. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 45. 46. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 46. 47. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 47. 48. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 48.

5

49.

Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 49. 50. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 50. 51. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 51. 52. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 52. 53. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 53. 54. Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of Plaintiff's allegations in paragraph 54. 55. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 55 are directed against defendants other

than Citigroup, Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 55 are directed against Citigroup, Citigroup denies the allegations. 56. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 56 are directed against defendants other

than Citigroup, Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 56 are directed against Citigroup, Citigroup denies the allegations. 57. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 57 are directed against defendants other

than Citigroup, Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

6

truth of those allegations. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 57 are directed against Citigroup, Citigroup denies the allegations. 58. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 58 are directed against defendants other

than Citigroup, Citigroup lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of those allegations. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 58 are directed against Citigroup, Citigroup denies the allegations. IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Citigroup denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any of the relief requested in paragraphs A-E of its Prayer for Relief, or to any relief whatsoever from Citigroup. Citigroup specifically denies committing, or being liable for, any act of infringement. V. JURY DEMAND

No response is required to Plaintiff's jury demand. CITIGROUP ADDITIONAL DEFENSES 1. Citigroup has not infringed and is not infringing any valid claim(s) of the `906

Patent or the `985 Patent. 2. The claims of the `906 Patent and the `985 Patent are invalid, void and/or

unenforceable for failure to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102, 103 and/or 112. 3. Plaintiff's claims are barred, in whole or in part, under the doctrine of laches,

waiver, and/or estoppel. 4. hands. 5. Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted. Plaintiff's claims are barred, in whole or in part, under the doctrine of unclean

7

6.

Plaintiff's claims are barred, in whole or in part, due to Plaintiff's failure to

reasonably mitigate its damages, if any. Date: December 17, 2009 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Roger B. Cowie Edwin R. DeYoung Texas Bar No. 05673000 Roy W. Hardin Texas Bar No. 08968300 Roger Brian Cowie Texas Bar No. 00783886 M. Scott Fuller Texas Bar No. 24036607 Galyn Gafford Texas Bar No. 24040938 LOCKE LORD BISSELL & LIDDELL LLP 2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 2200 Dallas, Texas 75201-6776 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail] ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT CITIGROUP, INC.

8

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies 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 CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3) this 16th day of December, 2009.

/s/ Roger B. Cowie

9