DSS Technology Management, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.
Filing
1
COMPLAINT Complaint for Patent Infringement against Apple, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0540-4420499.), filed by DSS Technology Management, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Joe, Christopher)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
)
DSS TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, INC., )
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
APPLE, INC.,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
C.A. No.__________
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Plaintiff DSS Technology Management, Inc. (“DSS”) files this Complaint for patent
infringement against Defendant Apple, Inc. (“Apple” or “Defendant”) and alleges as follows:
PARTIES
1.
Plaintiff DSS Technology Management, Inc. is a Delaware corporation having its
principal place of business at 1650 Tyson’s Blvd, Suite 1580, Tyson’s Corner, Virginia 22102.
2.
On information and belief, Apple Inc. is a corporation organized under the laws
of the State of California, and has a principal place of business at 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino,
California 95014 and/or is conducting business through an affiliate located at this address.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3.
This civil action for patent infringement arises under the Patent Laws of the
United States, 35 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq. This Court has jurisdiction over the claims presented herein
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 1
4.
DSS has an office in this District located at 3200 Troup Highway, Ste. 228,
Tyler, Texas 75701.
5.
On information and belief, Apple makes, imports, uses, sells, and/or offers for
sale the Accused Instrumentalities (as defined below) within the United States, including this
District, that infringe one or more claims of United States Patent No. 6,128,290 entitled
“Personal Data Network” (the “'290 Patent”). The '290 Patent was duly and legally issued by
the United States Patent and Trademark Office on October 3, 2000. A true and correct copy of
the '290 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
6.
On information and belief, Apple makes, imports, uses, sells, and/or offers for
sale the Accused Instrumentalities (as defined below) within the United States, including this
District, that infringe one or more claims of United States Patent No. 5,699,357 entitled
“PERSONAL DATA NETWORK” (the “'357 Patent”). The '357 Patent was duly and legally
issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on December 16, 1997. A true and
correct copy of the '357 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.
7.
The '290 Patent and '357 Patent are collectively referred to herein as the
“Asserted Patents.”
8.
DSS is the owner by assignment of all rights, title, and interests in the Asserted
Patents, and is entitled to sue for past and future infringement thereof.
9.
On information and belief, Apple is engaged in the business of developing and
selling computers and consumer electronics. More particularly, Apple offers Mac Mini and
iMac computers that provide wireless Bluetooth connections to a plurality of peripheral devices,
namely
a
keyboard
and
a
mouse.
See
http://www.apple.com/mac-mini/
and
http://www.apple.com/imac/ (last visited November 20, 2013). Additionally, Apple advertises
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 2
the Mac Pro computer that will be offered for sale beginning in December 2013 that will also
have a plurality of wireless peripheral devices. See http://www.apple.com/mac-pro/ (last visited
November 20, 2013). The Mac Mini, iMac, and Mac Pro computers are referred to herein as the
“Accused Computer Instrumentalities.”
10.
On information and belief, Apple sells a number of consumer electronic products
that include the capability of using a plurality of Bluetooth wireless peripherals. These products
include the iPhone product line, iPad product line, iPod Touch product line, and iPod Nano
product line (these product lines are referred to herein as the “Accused Consumer Electronics
Instrumentalities”). At least by the filing of this action, Apple has been given actual notice of the
existence of the '290 Patent and the '357 Patent. In spite of having received such notice, Apple
has intended, and continues to intend, to induce patent infringement by its customers, and, as of
at least the filing date of this action, has had knowledge that the inducing acts would cause
infringement or, alternatively, has been willfully blind to the possibility that its inducing acts
would cause infringement. The Accused Computer Instrumentalities and the Accused Consumer
Electronics Instrumentalities comprise the Accused Instrumentalities.
11.
On information and belief, Apple, offers for sale, and sells the Accused
Instrumentalities in this District via an interactive website, http://store.apple.com/us, that
encourages a website visitor to purchase directly from Apple. On information and belief,
Apple also markets, offers for sale, and sells the Accused Instrumentalities via retailers in
this District.
12.
On information and belief, Apple directly and/or indirectly imports,
manufactures, uses, offers for sale, and/or sells the Accused Instrumentalities within the
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 3
United States, including this District, that infringe one or more claims of the Asserted
Patents.
13.
Apple is a foreign corporation transacting business within the state of Texas;
is causing tortious injury to DSS by committing all or part of the tortious acts described
herein within the State of Texas, including this District; is causing tortious injury to DSS in
the State of Texas, including this District, by committing all or part of the tortious acts or
omissions described herein outside the state of Texas; and/or is causing tortious injury by
committing all or part of the tortious acts or omissions described herein outside the state of
Texas while regularly conducting or soliciting business or deriving revenue from goods used
or consumed or services rendered within the State of Texas, including this District. Apple
has transacted and continues to transact business in this District, and has committed acts of
patent infringement in this District. Therefore, this Court has general and specific personal
jurisdiction over each of the Paradigm Entities under the Texas long-arm statute, TEX. CIV.
PRAC. & REM. CODE §17.042.
14.
Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) and 1391(c).
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
15.
On information and belief, Apple is engaged in the business of developing,
making or having made, using, offering for sale and selling the Accused Instrumentalities.
Among the many features of the Accused Instrumentalities is the ability to connect to a plurality
of wireless peripherals.
On information and belief, each of the Accused Instrumentalities
constitute an integrated hardware and software solution that acts, among other capacities, as a
data network system in which the server and the peripherals communicate in low duty cycle RF
bursts.
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 4
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Infringement of the '290 Patent)
16.
DSS incorporates paragraphs 1 through 15 as though fully set forth herein.
17.
Upon information and belief, Apple has been and now is directly infringing one
or more claims of the '290 Patent by making, importing, using, offering for sale, and/or selling
the patented inventions, and/or indirectly infringing one or more claims of the '290 Patent by
actively inducing others to use the patented inventions.
18.
More particularly, without limitation, Apple is now directly infringing one or
more claims of the '290 Patent by making, importing, using (including use for testing purposes),
offering for sale, and/or selling the Accused Computer Instrumentalities, all in violation of 35
U.S.C. § 271(a). The Accused Computer Instrumentalities provide a system for communicating
data in which the server and the peripherals communicate in low duty cycle RF bursts as claimed
in one or more claims of the '290 Patent. As shown by Apple’s technical publications, the
Accused Instrumentalities can be configured to perform the method(s) claimed in one or more
claims of the '290 Patent.
19.
In addition and/or in the alternative, Apple has been and/or now is indirectly
infringing one or more claims of the Asserted Patents by inducing customers to use the Accused
Instrumentalities to directly infringe one or more claims of the Asserted Patents in violation of
35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
20.
At least by the filing of this action, Apple has been given actual notice of the
existence of the '290 Patent. In spite of having received such notice, Apple has intended, and
continues to intend, to induce patent infringement by its customers, and, as of at least the filing
date of this action, has had knowledge that the inducing acts would cause infringement or,
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 5
alternatively, has been willfully blind to the possibility that its inducing acts would cause
infringement.
21.
The Accused Instrumentalities comprise the systems claimed in one or more
claims of the '290 Patent. Apple has engaged in indirect infringement by its post-complaint
conduct of providing its customers with the infringing Accused Instrumentalities, and/or by
providing the Accused Instrumentalities and providing instructions to enable those customers to
use the Accused Instrumentalities, each of which constitute the system claimed in one or more
claims of the '290 Patent.
22.
By way of example, and not as a limitation, Apple induces such infringement by
at least making its website available to customers and providing links and/or other directions on
its website and/or the internet to instruct and teach users to use the Accused Instrumentalities in
an infringing manner. Apple engages in such activities knowingly and, at least from the time of
receipt of the present Complaint, has done so with the knowledge that such activities induce
customers to directly infringe the Asserted Patents. In addition, or, in the alternative, Apple
engages in such activities knowingly, and, at least from the time of receipt of the present
Complaint, has sold or distributed the Accused Instrumentalities knowing that such Accused
Instrumentalities are especially made or adapted for use by its customers in an infringing use of
one or more claims of the Accused Instrumentalities.
On information and belief, Apple’s
customers configure the Accused Instrumentalities to communicate as described and claimed in
the Asserted Patents. Thus, Apple’s customers, by using the Accused Instrumentalities, directly
infringe the claimed method(s) of the Asserted Patents.
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 6
23.
DSS has been damaged by the infringing activities of Apple, and will be
irreparably harmed unless those infringing activities are preliminarily and permanently enjoined
by this Court. DSS does not have an adequate remedy at law.
24.
By the filing of this action, Apple has been given actual notice of the existence of
the '290 Patent. Despite such notice, Apple continues in acts of infringement without regard to
the '290 Patent, and will likely continue to do so unless otherwise enjoined by this Court. DSS is
not presently seeking damages against Apple for indirect infringement for the period prior to the
filing of this Complaint. However, in the event that DSS learns through discovery that Apple
had actual notice of the ‘290 Patent prior to the filing of this Complaint, DSS reserves the right
to seek damages for Apple’s activities prior to filing.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Infringement of the '357 Patent)
25.
DSS incorporates paragraphs 1 through 15 as though fully set forth herein.
26.
Upon information and belief, Apple has been and now is directly infringing one
or more claims of the '570 Patent by making, importing, using, offering for sale, and/or selling
the patented inventions, and/or indirectly infringing one or more claims of the '570 Patent by
actively inducing others to use the patented inventions.
27.
More particularly, without limitation, Apple is now directly infringing one or
more claims of the '357 Patent by making, importing, using (including use for testing purposes),
offering for sale, and/or selling the Accused Consumer Electronics Instrumentalities, all in
violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). The Accused Consumer Electronics Instrumentalities provide a
battery powered system for communicating data in which the server and the peripherals
communicate in low duty cycle RF bursts as claimed in one or more claims of the '357 Patent.
As
shown
by
Apple’s
technical
publications,
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
the
Accused
Consumer
Electronics
Page 7
Instrumentalities can be configured to as systems described in one or more claims of the '357
Patent.
28.
In addition and/or in the alternative, Apple has been and/or now is indirectly
infringing one or more claims of the Asserted Patents by inducing customers to use the Accused
Instrumentalities to directly infringe one or more claims of the Asserted Patents in violation of
35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
29.
At least by the filing of this action, Apple has been given actual notice of the
existence of the '357 Patent. In spite of having received such notice, Apple has intended, and
continues to intend, to induce patent infringement by its customers, and, as of at least the filing
date of this action, has had knowledge that the inducing acts would cause infringement or,
alternatively, has been willfully blind to the possibility that its inducing acts would cause
infringement.
30.
The Accused Instrumentalities comprise the systems claimed in one or more
claims of the '357 Patent, and, when configured and used as described in Apple’s technical
publications, perform the method(s) described and claimed in the Asserted Patents. Apple has
engaged in indirect infringement by its post-complaint conduct of providing its customers with
the infringing Accused Instrumentalities, and/or by providing the Accused Instrumentalities and
providing instructions to enable those customers to use the Accused Instrumentalities, in
configurations which constitute the system claimed in one or more claims of the '357 Patent.
31.
By way of example, and not as a limitation, Apple induces such infringement by
at least making its website available to customers and providing links and/or other directions on
its website and/or the internet to instruct and teach users to use the Accused Instrumentalities in
an infringing manner. Apple engages in such activities knowingly and, at least from the time of
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 8
receipt of the present Complaint, has done so with the knowledge that such activities induce
customers to directly infringe the Asserted Patents. In addition, or, in the alternative, Apple
engages in such activities knowingly, and, at least from the time of receipt of the present
Complaint, has sold or distributed the Accused Instrumentalities knowing that such Accused
Instrumentalities are especially made or adapted for use by its customers in an infringing use of
one or more claims of the Accused Instrumentalities.
On information and belief, Apple’s
customers configure the Accused Consumer Electronics Instrumentalities as a battery powered
system for communicating data in which the server and the peripherals communicate in low duty
cycle RF bursts as described and claimed in the Asserted Patents. Thus, Apple’s customers, by
using the Accused Instrumentalities, directly infringe the system claims of the Asserted Patents.
32.
DSS has been damaged by the infringing activities of Apple, and will be
irreparably harmed unless those infringing activities are preliminarily and permanently enjoined
by this Court. DSS does not have an adequate remedy at law.
33.
By the filing of this action, Apple has been given actual notice of the existence of
the '357 Patent. Despite such notice, Apple continues in acts of infringement without regard to
the '357 Patent, and will likely continue to do so unless otherwise enjoined by this Court. DSS is
not presently seeking damages against Apple for indirect infringement for the period prior to the
filing of this Complaint. However, in the event that DSS learns through discovery that Apple
had actual notice of the '357 Patent prior to the filing of this Complaint, DSS reserves the right to
seek damages for Apple’s activities prior to filing.
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 9
REQUEST FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, DSS requests the following relief:
(a)
A judgment in favor of DSS that Apple has directly infringed, and/or has
indirectly infringed by way of inducement, one or more claims of the Asserted Patents;
(b)
A judgment that DSS has been irreparably harmed by the infringing activities of
Apple and is likely to continue to be irreparably harmed by Defendant’s continued infringement;
(c)
Preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting Apple and its officers, agents,
servants, employees and those persons in active concert or participation with any of them, as
well as all successors or assignees of the interests or assets related to the Accused
Instrumentalities, from further infringement, direct and indirect, of the Asserted Patents;
(d)
A judgment and order requiring Apple to pay DSS damages adequate to
compensate for infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 284, which damages may include lost profits but
in no event shall be less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the inventions of the
Asserted Patents, including pre- and post-judgment interest and costs, including expenses and
disbursements; and
(e)
Any and all such further necessary or proper relief as this Court may deem just.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Pursuant to Rule 38(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, DSS hereby demands a
trial by jury of all issues so triable.
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 10
Dated: November 26, 2013
/s/ Christopher M. Joe
BUETHER JOE & CARPENTER, LLC
Eric W. Buether
State Bar No. 03316880
Eric.Buether@BJCIPLaw.com
Christopher M. Joe
State Bar No. 00787770
Chris.Joe@BJCIPLaw.com
Brian A. Carpenter
State Bar No. 03840600
Brian.Carpenter@BJCIPLaw.com
Mark D. Perantie
State Bar No. 24053647
Mark.Perantie@BJCIPLaw.com
Michael D. Ricketts
State Bar No.24079208
Mickey.Ricketts@BJCIPLaw.com
Timothy J.H. Craddock
State Bar No. 24082868
Tim.Craddock@BJCIPLaw.com
1700 Pacific Avenue
Suite 4750
Dallas, TX 75201
Direct:
(214) 466-1272
Facsimile: (214) 635-1828
Attorneys for Plaintiff
DSS Technology Management, Inc.
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Page 11
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?