Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al

Filing 338

ANSWER to 306 Answer to Amended Complaint, Counterclaim by Eolas Technologies Incorporated.(McKool, Mike)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION Eolas Technologies Incorporated, Plaintiff, vs. Adobe Systems Inc., Amazon.com, Inc., Apple Inc., Blockbuster Inc., CDW Corp., Citigroup Inc., eBay Inc., Frito-Lay, Inc., The Go Daddy Group, Inc., Google Inc., J.C. Penney Company, Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., New Frontier Media, Inc., Office Depot, Inc., Perot Systems Corp., Playboy Enterprises International, Inc., Rent-A-Center, Inc., Staples, Inc., Sun Microsystems Inc., Texas Instruments Inc., Yahoo! Inc., and YouTube, LLC Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § §

Civil Action No. 6:09-cv-446

JURY TRIAL

EOLAS' REPLY TO ORACLE AMERICA, INC'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff Eolas Technologies Incorporated ("Eolas" or "Plaintiff") hereby replies to the counterclaims set forth in Defendant Oracle America, Inc.'s ("OAI"), formerly known as Sun Microsystems, Inc., Answer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint for Patent Infringement (dkt. 306, hereinafter "Answer and Counterclaims") as follows: COUNTERCLAIMS The Parties 1. On information and belief, based solely on OAI's response to paragraph 20 of

Eolas' Complaint, Eolas admits the allegations in paragraph 1 of OAI's Counterclaims.

1

2.

Eolas admits the allegations in paragraph 2 of OAI's Counterclaims. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3. 4. 5.

Eolas admits the allegations in paragraph 3 of OAI's Counterclaims. Eolas admits the allegations in paragraph 4 of OAI's Counterclaims. Eolas admits that OAI's counterclaims arise under the Patent Laws of the United

States, Title 35, United States Code. Eolas admits that the jurisdiction of this court is proper over these counterclaims. Eolas admits that there is an actual and justiciable controversy

between Eolas and OAI. Except as so admitted, Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 5 of OAI's Counterclaims. 6. Eolas admits that this Court has personal jurisdiction over it. Except as so

admitted, Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 6 of OAI's Counterclaims. 7. Eolas admits that venue is proper in this District, and in the Tyler Division.

Except as so admitted, Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 7 of OAI's Counterclaims. FIRST COUNTERCLAIM Declaration of Non-Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,838,906 8. Paragraph 8 of OAI's Counterclaims does not contain a statement which warrants

an affirmance or denial. To the extent any response is warranted, Eolas responds as follows: denied. 9. Eolas admits that it filed a First Amended Complaint against OAI and other

defendants on May 20, 2010 and that the First Amended Complaint as filed on May 20, 2010 alleges Sun Microsystems has directly and/or indirectly infringed (by inducement and/or contributory infringement), and is continuing to infringe, directly and/or indirectly, the '906 Patent and/or the '985 Patent in this District or otherwise within the United States by making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or

2

importing in or into the United States, without authority: (i) web pages and content to be interactively presented in browsers, including, without limitation, the web pages and content accessible via www.sun.com and maintained on servers located in and/or accessible from the United States under the control of Sun Microsystems; (ii) software, including, without limitation, software that allows content to be interactively presented in and/or served to browsers, including, without limitation, Java and JavaFX; and/or (iii) computer equipment, including, without limitation, computer equipment that stores, serves, and/or runs any of the foregoing. Except as so admitted, Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 9 of OAI's Counterclaims. 10. Eolas admits that it filed a First Amended Complaint against OAI and other

defendants on May 20, 2010 and that the First Amended Complaint as filed on May 20, 2010 alleges Sun Microsystems indirectly infringes one or more claims of the '906 Patent and/or the '985 Patent by active inducement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Sun Microsystems has induced and continues to induce users of the web pages, software, and computer equipment identified above to directly infringe one or more claims of the '906 Patent and/or the '985 Patent. Sun Microsystems indirectly infringes one or more claims of the '906 Patent and/or the '985 Patent by contributory infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c). By providing the web pages, software, and computer equipment identified above, Sun Microsystems contributes to the direct infringement of users of said web pages, software, and computer equipment. Except as so admitted, Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 10 of OAI's Counterclaims. 11. Eolas admits that it filed a First Amended Complaint against OAI and other

defendants on May 20, 2010 and that the First Amended Complaint as filed on May 20, 2010 contains the allegations recited. Except as so admitted, Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 11 of OAI's Counterclaims.

3

12.

Paragraph 12 of OAI's Counterclaims does not contain a statement which

warrants an affirmance or denial. To the extent any response is warranted, Eolas responds as follows: denied. 13. Paragraph 13 of OAI's Counterclaims does not contain a statement which

warrants an affirmance or denial. To the extent any response is warranted, Eolas responds as follows: denied. 14. 15. Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 14 of OAI's Counterclaims. Paragraph 15 of OAI's Counterclaims does not contain a statement which

warrants an affirmance or denial. To the extent any response is warranted, Eolas responds as follows: denied. SECOND COUNTERCLAIM Declaration of Invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 5,838,906 16. Paragraph 16 of OAI's Counterclaims does not contain a statement which

warrants an affirmance or denial. To the extent any response is warranted, Eolas responds as follows: denied. 17. 18. 19. Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 17 of OAI's Counterclaims. Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 18 of OAI's Counterclaims. Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 19 of OAI's Counterclaims. THIRD COUNTERCLAIM Declaration of Non-Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,599,985 20. Paragraph 20 of OAI's Counterclaims does not contain a statement which

warrants an affirmance or denial. To the extent any response is warranted, Eolas responds as follows: denied.

4

21.

Eolas admits that it filed a First Amended Complaint against OAI and other

defendants on May 20, 2010 and that the First Amended Complaint as filed on May 20, 2010 alleges Sun Microsystems has directly and/or indirectly infringed (by inducement and/or contributory infringement), and is continuing to infringe, directly and/or indirectly, the '906 Patent and/or the '985 Patent in this District or otherwise within the United States by making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing in or into the United States, without authority: (i) web pages and content to be interactively presented in browsers, including, without limitation, the web pages and content accessible via www.sun.com and maintained on servers located in and/or accessible from the United States under the control of Sun Microsystems; (ii) software, including, without limitation, software that allows content to be interactively presented in and/or served to browsers, including, without limitation, Java and JavaFX; and/or (iii) computer equipment, including, without limitation, computer equipment that stores, serves, and/or runs any of the foregoing. Except as so admitted, Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 21 of OAI's Counterclaims. 22. Eolas admits that it filed a First Amended Complaint against OAI and other

defendants on May 20, 2010 and that the First Amended Complaint as filed on May 20, 2010 alleges Sun Microsystems indirectly infringes one or more claims of the '906 Patent and/or the '985 Patent by active inducement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Sun Microsystems has induced and continues to induce users of the web pages, software, and computer equipment identified above to directly infringe one or more claims of the '906 Patent and/or the '985 Patent. Sun Microsystems indirectly infringes one or more claims of the '906 Patent and/or the '985 Patent by contributory infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c). By providing the web pages, software, and computer equipment identified above, Sun Microsystems contributes to the direct infringement of users of said web pages, software, and computer equipment. Except as so admitted, Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 22 of OAI's Counterclaims.

5

23.

Eolas admits that it filed a First Amended Complaint against OAI and other

defendants on May 20, 2010 and that the First Amended Complaint as filed on May 20, 2010 contains the allegations recited. Except as so admitted, Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 23 of OAI's Counterclaims. 24. Paragraph 24 of OAI's Counterclaims does not contain a statement which

warrants an affirmance or denial. To the extent any response is warranted, Eolas responds as follows: denied. 25. Paragraph 25 of OAI's Counterclaims does not contain a statement which

warrants an affirmance or denial. To the extent any response is warranted, Eolas responds as follows: denied. 26. 27. Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 26 of OAI's Counterclaims. Paragraph 27 of OAI's Counterclaims does not contain a statement which

warrants an affirmance or denial. To the extent any response is warranted, Eolas responds as follows: denied. FOURTH COUNTERCLAIM Declaration of Invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 7,599,985 28. Paragraph 28 of OAI's Counterclaims does not contain a statement which

warrants an affirmance or denial. To the extent any response is warranted, Eolas responds as follows: denied. 29. 30. 31. Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 29 of OAI's Counterclaims. Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 30 of OAI's Counterclaims. Eolas denies the allegations in paragraph 31 of OAI's Counterclaims.

6

OAI'S JURY DEMAND OAI's jury demand does not contain a statement which warrants an affirmance or denial. OAI'S REQUESTED RELIEF Eolas denies that OAI is entitled to the relief requested in paragraphs A-F of its Answer and Counterclaims or any other relief on its Counterclaims. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Eolas Technologies Incorporated, prays for the following relief against Defendant Oracle America, Inc.: A. B. that all relief requested by Eolas in its Complaint be granted; that all relief requested by OAI in its Answer and Counterclaims be denied and

that OAI take nothing by way of its Counterclaims; C. that OAI be ordered to pay the costs of this action (including all disbursements)

and attorney fees as provided by 35 U.S.C. § 285 and all other applicable statutes, rules, and common law; and D. such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Eolas demands a trial by jury of any and all issues triable of right before a jury.

7

DATED: June 24, 2010.

Respectfully submitted, MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. /s/ Mike McKool Mike McKool Lead Attorney Texas State Bar No. 13732100 [e-mail] Douglas Cawley Texas State Bar No. 04035500 [e-mail] Luke McLeroy Texas State Bar No. 24041455 [e-mail] MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. 300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500 Dallas, Texas 75201 Telephone: [phone] Telecopier: [phone] Sam F. Baxter Texas State Bar No. 01938000 [e-mail] MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. 104 E. Houston St., Ste. 300 P.O. Box O Marshall, Texas 75670 Telephone: [phone] Telecopier: [phone] Kevin L. Burgess Texas State Bar No. 24006927 [e-mail] Steven J. Pollinger Texas State Bar No. 24011919 [e-mail] Josh W. Budwin Texas State Bar No. 24050347 [e-mail] MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. 300 West Sixth Street, Suite 1700 Austin, Texas 78701 Telephone: [phone] Telecopier: [phone] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a). As such, this document was served on all counsel who have consented to electronic services on this the 24th day of June, 2010. Local Rule CV5(a)(3)(A). /s/ Josh Budwin Josh Budwin