Parallel Networks, LLC v. Adidas America, Inc. et al

Filing 392

Plaintiff's ANSWER to #315 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim of Harley-Davidson, Inc. and H-D Michigan, Inc. by Parallel Networks, LLC.(Tadlock, Charles)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION Parallel Networks, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Adidas America, Inc. et al. Defendants PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO THE COUNTERCLAIMS OF HARLEY-DAVIDSON, INC. AND H-D MICHIGAN, INC. Plaintiff Parallel Networks, LLC ("Parallel Networks") hereby Answers the Counterclaims [Dkt. No. 315] of Defendants Harley-Davidson, Inc. and H-D Michigan, Inc. (collectively "Harley-Davidson"), by corresponding paragraph number as follows: ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIMS NATURE OF THE LAWSUIT Admitted that the counterclaim is an action for a declaration of patent non-infringement, patent invalidity, and unenforceability, but denies that Harley-Davidson is entitled to such relief, or any further relief. THE PARTIES 1. 2. 3. Admitted. Admitted. Admitted. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4. 5. Admitted. Admitted. 1 No. 6:10-cv-00491-LED Jury Trial Demanded

6.

Admitted.

COUNT 1 ­ INVALIDITY ­ NON-INFRINGEMENT - UNENFORCEABILITY 7. Parallel Networks incorporates by reference its statements in and responses to the

preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein. 8. Admits that Harley-Davidson seeks a declaration that the products and services

made, used, imported, sold or offered for sale by Harley-Davidson have not and do not infringe, directly or indirectly, any valid and enforceable claim of the `111 patent and/or that the `111 patent is either invalid or otherwise unenforceable, but denies that Harley-Davidson is entitled to such relief, or any further relief. 9. Denied with respect to Harley-Davidson, but admitted with respect to Parallel

Networks' allegation that this case is exceptional. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Parallel Networks denies that Harley-Davidson is entitled to any relief, including that requested in its Prayer for Relief. JURY DEMAND Harley-Davidson's Jury Demand is an averment to which no responsive pleading is required.

Dated: December 16, 2010

Respectfully submitted, By: /s/ Charles Craig Tadlock Charles Craig Tadlock Texas State Bar No. 00791766 TADLOCK LAW FIRM 400 E. Royal Lane, Suite 290 Irving, Texas 75039 214-785-6014 (phone) [e-mail] 2

and 315 N. Broadway, Suite 307 Tyler, Texas 75702 903-283-2758 (phone) George S. Bosy (pro hac vice) David R. Bennett (pro hac vice) Bosy & Bennett 300 N. La Salle St. 49th Floor Chicago, IL 60654 Telephone: [phone] Email: [e-mail] [e-mail] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF PARALLEL NETWORKS, LLC

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served this 16th day of December, 2010, 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 by electronic mail, facsimile transmission and/or first class mail on this same date. /s/ Charles Craig Tadlock One of the Attorneys for Parallel Networks, LLC

3