complaint for smartphone lawsuit: nokia apple micounity samrtphone technology

Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 1 of 38

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTzuCT COURTFOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSI{ALL DTVISION

MICROUNITY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, $

INC., a California corporation, $Plaintiff, $

v.$(1) ACER INC., a Republic of China corporation, $(2) ACER AMERICA CORPORATION, a $

Califomia corporation, (3) APPLE, INC., $

a California corporation, (4) AT&T INC., a $

Delaware corporation, (5) AT&T MOBILITY $

LLC,aDelaware limited liability company, $(6) CELLCO PARTNERSHIP, aDelaware $

parbrership, (7) ÐGDEA, INC., a Texas $

corporation, (8) GOOGLE INC., aDelaware $

corporation, (9) HTC CORPORATION, a Republic $

of China corporation, (10) HTC AMERICA' INC., $

a Texas corporatior¡ (11) LG Electronics, Inc., a $

Koreanlimitedcompany, (Lz)LcElectronics $

Mobilecornm U.S.A.,Inc., a Califomia corporation, $

(13) MOTOROLA,INC., aDelaware corporatior¡ $

(14) NOKIA CORPORATION a Finnishcorporation, (15) NOKIA INC., a Delawarecorporation, (16) PALM, INC., a Delawarecorporation, (17) QUALCOMM INC., aDelaware $

corporation, ( 1 8) SAMSI-ING ELECTRONICS CO., $LTD., aKorean limited company, (19) SAMSUNG, $

SEMICONDUCTOR INC., a California $

corporation, (20) SAMSUNG $

TELECOMMIINICATIONSAMERICA,LLC, $

aDelaware limited liability company, (21) SPRINT $

NEXTEL CORPORATION, aKansas corporation, $

QT)TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC., a Delaware $

corporation,Defendants.

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT I¡¡'FRINGEMENT

PlaintitrMicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc., for its complaint against Defendants Acer,

Inc., Acer America Corporation, Apple, Inc., AT&T Inc., AT&T Mobility LLC, Cetlco Parbrership,

Exede4 Inc., Google Inc., HTC Corporation, HTC America, Inc., LG Elecfronics, lnc., LG

CivilActionNo. 10-91

JURY

$

$

$

1019509v1/07503-01 1876

Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 2 of 38

Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc., Motorola, Inc., Nokia Corporation, Nokia Inc., Palm, Inc.,

Qualcomm Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., LTD., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc', Samsung

Telecommunications Americ4 LLC, SprintNextel Corporation, and Texas Instruments Inc., alleges:

TIIE PARTIES

1. MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc. ('MicroUnity") is a corporation duly

organrzed and existing under the laws of the State of Califomia, with its principal place of business

at376 Martin Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050.

2. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant

Texas Instruments Inc. ('TI") is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state

of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 12500 TI Blvd., Dallas, TX 75226; that TI has

developed, manufactures, and sells its OMAP3 series of processors to the suppliers of cell phones

and other products; that TI has announced that it is developing its OMAP4 series of processors; that

OMAP3 and OMAP4 processors are designed, used, offered for sale and sold in this disúict; and that

products implementing such processors are designed, used, offered for sale and sold in this district

and throughout the United States and imported into the United States.


Qualcomm, Inc. ('Qualcomm") is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the

state of Delaware, with its principat place of business at 5775 Morehouse Drive, San Diego, CA

9212I; that Qualcomm has developed, manufactures, and sells its Snapdragon series of processors,

including but not limited to its QSD8250 processors, to the suppliers of cell phones and other

products; and that products implementing such processors ate used, offered for sale and sold in this

district and throughout the United States and imported into the United States.


Samsung Elecfionics Co., Ltd. ("Samsung") is a public limited company duly organized attd existing


under the laws of South Korea, with its principal place of business at#24 Nongseo-Dong, Kiheung-

Gu, Yongin-City, Kyungg-Do, Korea; that Defendant Samsung Semiconductor, Inc-, ("SSI") is a

wholly owned subsidiary of Samsung, and is a corporation duly organized and existing under the

laws of the state of Californi4 with its principal place of business at 3655 N. l't St', San Jose, CA

95134;that Sagsung and SSI have developed, manufacture, and sell processors such as the S5PCI00

to the suppliers of cell phones and other products; and that products implementing zuch processors

are used, offered for sale and sold in this disüict and throughout the United States and imported into

the United States.


Motorola, Inc. ('Motorola") is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state

of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 1303 E. Algonquin Rd., Schaumburg, IL 60196;

and that cell phones such as the Droid are manufactured by Motorola and are used, offered for sale

and sold in this district and tluoughout the United States and imported into the United States by

Motorola.


Nokia Corporation is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of Finland, with its

principal place of business at Keilalahdentie2-4, Espoo, FI-02-150, Finland; and that Defendant

Nokia Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Nokia Corporation, and is a corporation duly organized

and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 6000

Connection Drive, Irving, TX 75039. Nokia Corporation and Nokia Inc. are individually and

collectively referred to herein as 'Î.{okiâ-" MicroUnity is informed a¡rd believes, and on that basis

alleges, thæ cell phones such as the N900 are manufactured by Nokia and are used, offered for sale


and sold in this district and throughout the United States and imported into the United States by

Nokia.


Palm, Inc. ('Palm") is a corporation duty organized and existing under the laws of the state of

Delaware, with its principal place of business at 950 W. Maude Ave., Sruuryvale, CA 94085; and

that cell phones such as the Pre are manufactured by Palm and are used, offered for sale and sold in

this district and throughout the United States and imported into the United States by Palm.

B. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant

Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC, ("STA") is wholly owned by Samsung, and is a

limited liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delawæe, with

its principat place of business at 1301 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, Collin County, TX75082;

that Samsung and STA manufacture cell phones such as the Galæry Spica GT-i5700 and OmniaHD

i89I0; and that such cell phones are used, offered for sale and sold in this district and throughout the

united staæs and imported into the united states by samsung and sTA.

g. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and onthat basis alleges, that Defendant Acer

Inc. is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the Republic of China (Taiwan),

with its principal place of business at 8F, 88, Sec. 1, Hsin Tai \Mu Rd., Hsichih, Taipei Z2l,Tuwan,

ROC; and that Defendant Acer America Corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of Acer Inc., and

is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of California with its

principal place of business at 333 W. San Carlos St., Ste. 1 500, San Jose, CA 951 1 0. Acer Inc. and

Acer America Corporation are individually and collectively refened to herein as "Acer." MicroUnity

is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that cell phones such as the Liquid A1 and

4


neoTouch are manufactured by Acer and are used, offered for sale and sold in this distict and

throughout the United States and imported into the United States by Acer'

10. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant HTC

Corporation, also known as High Tech Computer Corporation, is a public limited liability company

d¡ly organized and existing gnder the laws of the Republic of Chin4 with its principal place of

business at 23 Xnghua Rd., Taoyuan 330, Taiwan, Republic of China; that Defendant HTC

America, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of HTC Corporation, tlrough an inærmediary

corporation, and is a corporation duly oryatized and existing under the laws of the state of Texas,

with its principal place of business at L3920 SE Eastgate Way, Suite 400, Bellevue, WA 98005; and

that Exedea, Inc., is a wholly owned subsidiary of HTC Corporation, through an intermediary

corporation, and is a corporation duty organized and existing under the laws of the state of Texas,

with its principat place of business at 5950 Corporate Drive, Houston, Texas 77036. HTC

Corporation, HTC America, Inc. and Exedea are individually and collectively referred to herein as

..HTC,'

. 11. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant

Google Inc. ("Google") is a corporation duly organized, and existing under the laws of the state of

Delaware, with its principal place of business at 1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy', Mountain View, CA

94043;that HTC manufactures and Google sells cell phones such as the Nexus One; that such cell

phones are used, oflered for sale and sold in this disûict and throughout the United States and

imported into the United States by Google and HTC; and that Google makes software for Nexus One

and other cell phones that is used, offered for sale and sold in this distict and ttfoughout the United

States and imported into ttre United States by Google.


lZ. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant LG

Electronics, Inc., is a public limited company duly organized and existing under the laws of South

Kore4 with its principal place of business at LG T\¡/in Towers, 20 Yeouido-dong, Yeoungdeuagpo-

gu, Seoul, 750-7-2l,South Korea; and that Defendant LG Electonics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc. is a

wholly owned subsidiary of LG Electonics, Inc., and is a corporation duly organized and existing

under the laws of the state of California with its principal place of business at 10101 Old Grove

Road, San Diego, CAgZl3l. LG Electronics, Inc. and LG Electonics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc. are

individually and collectively referred to herein as "LG." MicroUnity is informed.and believes, and

on that basis alleges, that LG manufactures and selis cell phones such as the eXpo and IQ; and that

such cell phones are used, offered for sale and sold in this distict and throughout the United States

and imported into the United States by LG.


Apple, Inc. ('Apple') is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of

Califomia" with its principal place of business at 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino, CA 95014; that Apple

manufactures and sells products such as the iPhone 3GS cell phone and iPod Touch 32 arñ 64GB

(,ipod Touch 3G") and provides software for such products; and that such cell phones and other

products and software are used, offered for saie and sold in this district and throughout the United

States and imported into the United States by Apple.


Cellco Partnership (Yerizon'), doing business as Verizon Wireless, is a general parbrership, duly

organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, between Verizon Communications

Inc., a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, and

Vodafone Group plc, a public liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of the


United Kingdom, with Verizon's principal place of business at 1 Verizon Way, Basking Ridge, NJ

07920; that Verizon sells cell phones such as the Motorola Droid and Palm Pre and other products,

and services utilizing and softwa¡e utilized by such products; and that such cell phones and other

products, services and software are used, offered for sale and sold in this district and tlrroughout the

United States and imported into the United States by Verizon.


Sprint Nextel Corporation ("Sprint") is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of

the state of Kansas, with its princtpal place of business at 6500 Sprint Pkwy., Overland Park, KS

6625I; that Sprint sells cell phones and other products such as the Palm Pre, and services utilizing

and software utilized by such products; and that such cell phones and other products, services and

software are used, offered for sale and sold in this distict and throughout the United States and

imported into the United States by Sprint.


AT&T Inc. is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, with

its principal place of business at 208 S Akard St., Dallas, TX 75201; and that Defendant AT&T

Mobilþ LLC is wholly owned by AT&T Inc., and is a limited tiability company duly organirndatñ

existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 5565

Glenridge Connector, Atlant4 GA30342. AT&T Inc. and AT&T Mobility LLC are individually and

collectively refened to herein as "AT&T." MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis

alleges, that AT&T sells cell phones and other products such as the LG eXpo and IQ and Apple

iPhone 3GS, and services utilizing and software utilized by such products; and that such cell phones

and other products, services and software ate used, offlered for sale and sold in this dishict and

throughout the United States and imported into ttre United States by AT&T.


JI]RISDICTION AI\D VENTIE

17. The Court has subject matter jwisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $$ 1331 and

1338(a) because this action arises under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. $$ I et seq.

Venue is proper in this Federal District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $$ 1391(b)-(c) and 1400(b) in that the

defendants reside in this disftict, a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred in

this dishict, and the defendants have a regular and established place of business in this district and

have committed acts of infringement inthis district.

18. This case is related to, and involves some of the same patents involved in prior

actions, Micro(lnity Systems Engìneering, Inc. v. Intel Corporation and Dell, Inc.,C.A.No' 2-04CV-

120; MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc. v. Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc., C.A. No.

2-05CV-505; MitoUnity Systems Engineering, Inc. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., C.A'. No. 2-

06CV-486, all of which were filed in the United States Distict Court for the Eastem Distict of

Texas, Marshall Division.

INFRTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.5,737,547 Cl

19. On April 7, 1998, United States Patent No. 5,737,5 47 (the"'547 patenf') was duly

and legally issued for an invention entitled "system for Placing Entries of an Outstanding Processor

Request into a Free Pool After the Request Is Accepted by a Correqponding Peripheral Device."

MicroUnity was assigned the '547 patent and continues to hold all rights and interest tn lhe '547

patent. A true and correct copy of the '547 pa,ærrt.is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

20. Tlrrc'547 patent has been the subject of a reexamination proceeding, reexamination

request number 90/008,23fl in which the patentability of claims 10-16, 19 and 20 is confirmed,

claims 4-7 , 18 and 2l-25 are determined to be patentable as amended, claims 8, 9, 17 , 26 arñ 27 arc

dependent on an amended claim and are determined to be patentable, claims 28-48 have been added


and a¡e determined to be patentable, and claims 1-3 are canceled. A copy of Reexamination

Certificate 5,737,547 C1 is attached hereto as Exhibit B.

Zl. TI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the

claims of the '547 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their

infringing processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors and

Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors. TI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the'547

patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C . ç 27L.

22, Motorol4 Nokia, Palm, samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google and LG have

infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '547 patentby their manufacture,

use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their infringing cell phones and other products, including

but not limited to the Motorola Droid, NokiaN900, Palm Pre, Samsrurg Galaxy Spica GT-i5700 and

OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, Google/tlTC Nexus One, and LG eXpo and IQ.

Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google and LG are liable for their infringement

ofthe'547 patentpursuantto 35 U.S.C. ç271'

23. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of

the claims of the '547 patentby their use, sa1e, importration, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones

and other products. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '547 patent

pursuant to 35 U.S.C . 5 271.

24. TI, Qualcomm, Motorolq Nokia" Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG

Verizon, AT&T and Sprint's acts of infringement have caused darnage to MicroUnity, and

MicroUnity is entitled to recover from TI, Qualcomm, Motorol4 Nokia" Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer,

HTC, Google, LG Verizon, AT&T and Sprint the darnages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of

their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. TI, Qualcomm, Motorola, Nokia, Palm,

9


Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG Verizon, AT&T and Sprint's infringement of MicroUnity's

exclusive rights under the'547 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm

for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless e4joined by this Court.

25. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that TI, Samsung

and Motorola have had communications and contact with Microunity and are fully aware of

MicroUnity's technology and patent portfolio including the'547 patent; that TI, Samsung and

Motorola have proceeded to infringe the'547 patent vvith full and complete knowledge of the patent

and its applicability to their products without any attempt to take a license under the'547 patent and

without a good faith belief thaf the'547 patent is invalid or not infringed, and thus TI, Samsung and

Motorola's infringement of the '547 pafent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to

increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this

action under 35 U.S.C. $ 2S5. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the

remaining defendants' infringement of the '547 patentis willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity

to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting

this action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285.

INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,742,840

26. On April 2I,lgg8, United States Patent No. 5,742,840 (the "'840 patent") was duly

and legally issued for an invention entitled "General Purpose, Multiple Precision Parallel Operation,

Programmable Media Processor." MicroUnity was assigned the '840 patent and continues to hold all

rights and interest in the '840 patent. A true and corect copy of the '840 patent is attached hereto as

Exhibit C.

27. The '840 patent has been the subject of a reexamination proceeding, reexamination

request number 901007,583, in which the patentability of cLaim 11 is confirmed, claim 1 is

10


determined to be patentable as amended, claims 2-6,8 and 9 are dependent on an amended claim and

are determined to be patentable, and claims 7 and 10 are canceled. A notice of intent to issue a

reexamination certificate has been issued by the Patent Office, and receipt of the reexamination

cefüftcate is pending.

28. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or

more of the claims of the '840 patent by their manufacûre, use, sale, importation, and/or offler to sell

their infringing processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors,

Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors. TI, Samsung,

SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '840 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. ç271.

29. Motorol4 Noki4 Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have

infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '840 patent by their manufacture,


but not limited to the Motorola Droid, NokiaN900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700 and

OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ, and

Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC,

Google, LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the '840 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C.

527r.


the claims of the '840 patent by their use, salg importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones


pursuantto 35 U.S.C. ç271.

31. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, md

MicroUnity is entitled to recover from defendants the damages sustained by MicroUnity as aresult of

11


their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at tial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's

exclusive rights under the '840 patent will continue to darnage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm

for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.

32. MicroUnity is informed and believeso and on that basis alleges, that TI, Samsung

and Motorola have had communications and contact with Microunity and are fully aware of

MicroUnity's technology and patent portfolio including the '840 patent; that TI, Samsung and

Motorola have proceeded to infringe the '840 patent with full and complete knowledge of the patent

and its applicability to their products without any attempt to take a license under the '840 patent and

without a good faith belief that the '840 patent is invalid or not infringed, and thus TI, Samsung and

Motorola's inûingement of the '840 patent is willflrl and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to

increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this

action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the

remaining defendants' infringement of the '840 patent is willftt and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity

to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incured in prosecuting


rNT'RTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.5,794,061 Cl

33. OnAugust 11, 1998, United States PatentNo.5,794,061 (the "'061 patenf) was

duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "General Purpose, Multiple Precision Parallel

Operation, Prograrnmable Media Processor." MicroUnity was assigned the '061 patent and continues

to hold all rights and interest in the '061 patent. A true and correct copy of the '061 patent is attached

hereto as Exhibit D.

34. The '061 patent has been the zubject of a reexamination proceeding, reexamination

request number 901007 ,563 , in which the patentability of claims 14, I 5 md 17 is confirmed, claim 16

12


is determined to be patentable as amended, claims 31-47 have been added and are determined to be

patentable, and claims 1-13 and 18-30 are canceled. A copy of Reexamination Certificate 5,794,06I

Cl is attached hereto as Exhibit E.


more of the claims of the '061 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell


Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processoïs, and Quatcomm's Snapdragon processors. TI, Samsung,

SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '061 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C . ç 271.

36. Motorol4 Nokia" Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have


use, sale, importation, and/or offler to sell their infringing cell phones and other products, including

but not limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700 and

OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid Al and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ, and

Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Motorol4 Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC,

Google, LG and Appte a¡e liable for their infringement of the '061 patent pursuant to 35 U'S.C.

$ 271.


the claims of the '061 patent by their use, sale, imporüation, and./or offer to sell infringing cell phones


pursuant to 35 U.S.C . 5 271.

38. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, ffid

MicroUnity is entitled to recover from defendants the damages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of

their wrongf,rl acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's

13


exclusive rights under the '061 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing ineparable harm

for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court'

39. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that TI, Samsung

and Motorola have had communications and contact with MicroUnity and are fully aware of


Motorola have proceeded to infringe the '061 patent with full and complete knowledge of the patent

and its applicabilþ to their products without any attempt to take a license under the '061 patent and


Motorola's infringement of the '061 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to

increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees and costs incured in prosecuting this

action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285, MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the

remaining defendants' infringement of the'061 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity

to increased damages urder 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting

this actionunder 35 U.S.C. $ 285.

INFRTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,812,799 Ct

40. On September 2,1998, United States Patent No. 5,812,799 (the "'799 patent') was

duly and legally issued for an invention entitled'lrlon-Blocking Load Buffer and a Multiple-Priority

Memory System for Real-Time Multiprocessing." MicroUnity was assigned the '799 patent and

continues to hold all rights and interest tnlhe'799 patent. A true and conect copy of the '799 paræfi

is attached hereto as Exhibit F.

41. the'799 patent has been the subject of a reexamination proceeding, reexamination

request number 901008,232, in which the patentability of claims 1-34 is confirmed. A copy of

Reexamination Certificate 5,812,799 Cl is attached hereto as Exhibit G.

t4

Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/1 6/10 Page 15 of 38

42. Qualcomm has infringed and continues to infringe one or more of the claims of the

'799 patentby its manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell its processors, including but

not limited to its Snapdragon processors, and by its knowingly contributing to and inducing others to

manufacture, use, sell, import, and/or offer to sell cell phones and other products that infringe one or

more of the claims of the '799 patent Qualcomm is liable for its infringement of the '799 patent

pursuant to 35 U.S.C. ç271.

43. Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google and LG have infünged and continue to

infringe one or more of the claims of the '799 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation,

and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones and other products, including but not limited to the

Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, and LG

eXpo and IQ, and by their knowingly contibuting to and inducing others to manufacture, use, sell,

import and/or offer to sell products and services which practice processes that infringe one or more of

the claims of the '799 patent Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google and LG are liable for their

infringement of the '799 patent pusuant to 35 U'S'C ' ç 27I.

44. AT&T has infringed and continues to infringe one or more of the claims of the'799

patent by its use, sale, importatior¡ and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones and other products

which infringe and which practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '799

patent. AT&T is liable for its infringement of the '799 paßrrtpursuant to 35 U.S.C . 5 27I.

45. Qualcomm, Samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and AT&T's acts of

infringement have caused darnage to MicroUnity, and Microunity is entitled to recover from

Qualcormr, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and AT&T the damages sustained by

MicroUnity as a result of their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. Qualcomm,

Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and AT&T's infringement of MicroUnity's exclusive rights

15


under the,799 paûent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing ineparable harm for which there

is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.

46. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Samsung has

had communications and contact with MicroUnity and is frrlly aware of MicroUnity's technology and

patent portfolio including the '799 patent; that Samsung has proceeded to infringe the '799 patent

with full and complete knowledge of the patent and its applicability to its products without any

attempt to take a license under the'799 patent and without a good faith belief that the '799 patent is

invalid or not infringed, and thus Samsung's infringement of the '799 patent is willful and deliberate,

entitling MicroUnity to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs

incurred in prosecuting this action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege,

afrer discovery, that the remaining defendants' inûingement of the '799 patent is willful and

deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees

and costs incuned inprosecuting this action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285'

Ii\FRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,006'318 Cl

47. On Decemb er 2\,1999, United States Patent No. 6,006,318 Cl (the "'318 patenf)

was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "General Purpose, Dynamic Partitioning,

programmable Media processor." MicroUnity was assigned the '318 patent and continues to hold all

rights and interest in the '3 18 patent. A true and correct copy of the '3 1 8 patent is attached hereto as

ExhibitH.

48. The '318 patent has been the subject of a reexamination proceeding, reexamination

request number 90/008,512, in whichthe patentability of claim 5 is con-firrned, claims 2-3,6-8 and 11

are determined to be patentable as amended, claims 4,9-10 and 12 are dependent on an amended

claim and are determined to be patentable, claims 17-19 have been added and are detennined to be

16


patentable, and claims 1 and 13-16 are canceled. A copy of Reexamination Certificate 6,006,318 Cl

is atüached hereto as Exhibit I.



their infringing processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors'

Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors. TI, Samsung,

SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '318 patent pursuant to 35 U.S'C. 5271.

50. Motorola, Noki4 Palm, samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have

infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '318 patent by their manufactwe,


but not limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galuy Spica GT-i5700 and


Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC,

Google, LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the'318 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C.

927t.

51. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to inûinge one or more of

the claims of the '318 patent by their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones


pursuant to 35 U.S.C. ç 27L.

52. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnit}, and


their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's

t7


exclusive rights under the '318 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm


53. MicroUnity is infomred and believes, and on that basis alleges, that TI, Samsung

and Motorola have had communications and contact with MicroUnity and are frrlly aware of


Motorola have proceeded to infringe the '318 patent vt'ith full and complete knowledge of the patent

and its applicability to their products without any attempt to take a license under the '318 patent and


Motorola's infringement of the '318 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to

increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this

action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the

remaining defendants' infringement of the '318 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity

to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting


r¡IFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. RE39'500 E

54. On July 30,111z,United St¿tes Patent No. 6,427,190 was duly and legally issued

for an invention entitled "Configurable Cache Altowing Cache-Type and Buffer-Type Access." On

February TI,2007,United States PatentNo. 6,427,190 was duly and legally reissued as United States

Reissue patent No. RE39,500 E (the "500 patenf). MicroUnity was assigned the '500 patent and

continues to hold alt rights and interest in the '500 patent. A true and conect copy of the '500 patent

is attached hereto as Exhibit J.

55. TI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the

claims of the '500 patent by their manufactwe, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their

l8


processors, inctuding but not timited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors and Qualcomm's

Snapdragon processors, and by their knowingly contributing to and inducing others to manufacture,

use, sell, import and/or offer to sell cell phones and other products and services and software which

infringe and which practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '500 patent. TI

and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '500 patent prusuantto 35 U.S'C' 527I.

56. Motorola, Nokia, Palm, samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google and LG have


use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their cell phones and other products, including but not

limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galæ<y Spica GT-i5700 and

Ornnial{D i8910, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, Google/HTC Nexus One, and LG eXpo and IQ, by

providing software for use on such cell phones and other products, and by their knowingly

contributing to and inducing others to manufacture, use, sell, import and-/or offer to sell products and

services and software which infringe and which practice processes that infringe one or more of the

claims of the '500 patent. Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google and LG are

liable for their infringement of the '500 patent pwsuant to 35 U.S.C. g 27L


the claims of the '500 patent by their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to setl infringing cell phones

and other products and software which inÊinge and which practice processes that inûinge one or

more of the claims of the '500 patent, and by their knowingly contributing to and inducing their

customers to purchase arìd use services which practice processes that infringe one or more of the

claims of the ,500 patent. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the'500

patent ptrsuantto 35 U.S.C. 927I.

t9


58. TI, Qualcomm, Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG,

Verizon, AT&T and Sprint's acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnitY, and

MicroUnity is entitled to recover from TI, Qualcomm, Motorol4 Nokia, Patrn, Samsung, STA, Acer,

HTC, Google, LG, Verizon, AT&T and Sprint the damages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of

their wrongflrl acts in an amount subject to proof at ftial. TI, Qualcomm, Motorola, Nokia, Palm,

Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG Verizon, AT&T and Sprint's infringement of MicroUnity's

exclusive rights under the '500 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing inepæable harm

for which there is no adequate remedy af law, unless enjoined by this Court.

59. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that TI and

Motorola have had communications and contact with MicroUnity and æe fully aware of

MicroUnity's technology and patent portfolio including United States Patent No. 6,427,190 from

which the '500 patent was reissued without change to many of the original claims; that TI and

Motorola have proceeded to infringe the '500 patent \¡vith full and complete knowledge of the patent

and its applicabilþ to their products without any attempt to take a license under the '500 patent and

without a good faith belief that the '500 patent is invalid or not infringed, and thus TI and Motorola's

infringement of the '500 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to increased damages

under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incuned in prosecuting this action under 35

U.S.C. $ 2S5. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the remaining defendants'


under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this action under 35

u.s.c. $ 285.

20


TNFRTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.6,725,356 C1

60. On April 20,2004, United States Patent No. 6,725,356 Ct (the "'356 patenf') was

duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "system with Wide Operand Architecture, and

Method." MicroUnity was assigned the '356 patent and continues to hold all rights and interest in the

'356 patent. A true and correct copy of the '356 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit K.

6 1 . The ' 3 56 patent has been the subject of a reexamination proceeding, reexamination

request number 951000,100, in which the patentability of claims 30 and 44 is confirmed, claims 1, 2,

7, 8, 13, 15, 16, lg, 27-29, 31, 37, 39-43 and 45-48 are determined to be patentable as amended,

claims 3-6,9-12,14,!7,20-26,32-35and3Saredependentonanamendedclaimandaredetermined

to be patentable, claims 49-104 have been added and are detennined to be patentable, and claims 18

and 36 are canceled. A copy of Reexamination Certifi caÍe 6,725,356 Ct is attached hereto as Exhibit

L.


more of the claims of the '356 patentby their manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell

their processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors, Samsung

and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors, and by their knowingly

contributing to and inducing others to manufacturs, use, sell, import and/or offer to sell cell phones

and other products and services which practice processes that infringe one or more of tlre claims of

the '356 patent. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '356 patent


63. Motorola, Nokia" Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have

infringed and continue to infünge one or more of the claims of the '356 patentby their manufacture,


limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700 and

21

Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/1 0 Page 22 of 38


Apple iphone 3GS, and by their knowingly contibuting to and inducing others to manufacture, use'

sell, import and/or offer to sell products and services which practice processes that infringe one or

more of the claims of the '356 patent. Motorol4 Nokia, Palm, Sarnsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google,

LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the '356 patent pwsuant to 35 U.S.C . S 271-


the claims of the ,356 patent by their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell cell phones and other

products which practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '356 patent, and by

their knowingly contributing to and inducing their customers to purchase and use services which

practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '356 patent' Verizon, AT&T and

Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '356 patent pursuant to 35 U.S'C . ç 271-

65, Defendants' acts of infringement have caused darnage to MicroUnity, ffid


their wrongfrrl acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's


for which there is no adequate remedy af law, unless enjoined by this Court'

66. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, ttrat TI and

Motorola have had communications and contact with Microunity and are fully aware of

MicroUnity's technology and patent portfolio including the '356 patent; that TI and Motorola have

proceeded to infringe the '356 patent with full and complete knowledge of the patent and its

applicability to their products without any attempt to take a license under the '356 patent and without

a good faith belief that the '356 patent is invalid or not infünged, and thus TI and Motorola's

infringement of the ,356 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to increased damages

22



U.S.C. $ 285. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the remaining defendants'

infringement of the ,356 patent is wi[fu] and deliberate, entitling Microunity to increased damages

under 35 U.S.C. $ 2g4 and to attomey's fees and costs incuned in prosecuting this action under 35

u.s.c. $ 285.

INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT N0. 7,213'13182

67. On May l,2007,United States Patent No. 7,213,131B2 (the "'131 patent") was

duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "Programmable Processor and Method for

partitioned Group Element Selection Operation." MicroUnity was assigned the '131 patent and

continues to hold all rights and interest in the ' 13 1 patent. A tue and correct copy of the '131 patent

is attached hereto as Exhibit M.

68. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and contin-ue to infringe one or


their infringing processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors'

Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors, and by

knowingty contributing to and inducing others to manufacture, use, sell, import, and/or offer to sell

cell phones and other products that infringe one or more of the claims of the '131 patent. TI,

Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '131 patent pursuant to 35

u.s.c. 527r.

69. Motorola" Noki4 Palm, Samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have


use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones and other products, including but not


23



Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Motorol4 Nokia" Palm, Sarnsung, STA, Acer, HTC,

Google, LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the'l3l patent pwsuant to 35 U.S.C.

s27t.


the claims of the ' 1 3 1 patent by their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones


pursuantto 35 U.S.C. $ 271.

71. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, md





72. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that TI has had

communications and contact with MicroUnity and is fully aware of MicroUnity's technology and

patent portfolio including the '131 patent; that TI has proceeded to infringe the 'l3l patent'with fifl

and complete knowledge of the patent and its applicability to its products without any attempt to take

a license under the 'l3l patent and without a good faith belief that the '131 patent is invalid or not

infringed, and thus TI's infringement of the '131 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity

to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting

this action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the

remaining defendants' infringement of the '131 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity

24


to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting

r this actionunder 35 U'S.C. $ 285.

INT'RTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.7,216'2L7 82

73. On May B, 2007, United States Patent No. 7,216,217 BZ (the "'217 patenf') was

duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "Programmable Processor with Group Floating-Point

Operations.,, MicroUnity was assigne dthe'217 patent and continues to hold all rights and interest in

the,2l7 patent. A true and correct copy of the '217 patentis attached hereto as ExhibitN'


more of the claims of the '277 patent by knowingly conÍibuting to and inducing others to

manufactwe, use, sell, import, and/or offer to sell cell phones and other products that infringe one or

more of the claims of the '217 patent,by providing infringing processors' including but not limited to

TI,s OMAp3 and OMAP4 series processors, Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and

Qualcomm',s Snapdragon pfocessors. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their

infringement of the'217 patentpursuant to 35 U'S'C' ç 27 l'

75. Motorol4 Noki4 Palm, sarnsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have



limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galæq' Spica GT-i5700 and

omniaHD igglg, Acer Liquid Al and neoTouct¡ GooglelHTC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ, and

Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G, Motorol4 Nokia" Palm, Samsung, STA' Acer' HTC'

Google, LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the '217 patent pursuant to 35 U'S'C'

s271.

25



the claims of the '217 patentby their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones

and other products. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '2I7 paten|

pursuant to 35 U.S.C . ç271.



their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's

exclusive rights under the'2!7 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing ineparable harm


1lg. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that defendants'

infringement of the ,2!7 patentis willful and deliberate, entitling Microunþ to increased damages

under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incuned in prosecuting this action under 35

u.s.c. $ 285.

TNT',RINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.7,260,70882

79. On August 21,2007, United States Patent No.7,260,708 B2 (the "'708 patenf')

was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "Programmable Processor and Method for

partitioned Group Shift." MicroUnity was assigned the '708 patent and continues to hold all rights

and interest in the '708 patent. A true and correct copy of the '708 patent is attached hereto as

Exhibit O.


more of the claims of the '708 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation, andlor offer to sell

their processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors, Samsung

and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors, and by their knowingly

26


contributing to and inducing others to manufacture, use, sel[, import and/or offer to sell cell phones

and other products and services which infringe and which practice processes that infringe one or

more of the claims of the '708 patent. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their

infringement ofthe '708 patentpursuantto 35 U'S.C. ç271'

81. Motorola, Nokia, Palm, samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have



limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, PaIm Pre, Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700 and

omniallD i8910, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ, and

Apple iphone 3GS and ipod Touch 3G, and by their knowingly contributing to and inducing others to

manufactgre, use, sell, import and/or offer to sell products and services which infringe and which

practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '708 patent. Motorola" Nokia" Palm,

samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the '708

patent pursuantto 35 U.S.C' ç271.

g2. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of

the claims of the '708 patent by their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones

and other products which infringe and which practice processes that inûinge one or more of the

claims of the .70g patent, and by their knowingly contibuting to and inducing their customers to

purchase and use services which practice processes that infringe one or mole of the claims of the

.70g patent. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '708 patent pursuant

to 35 U.S.C. ç27r.

g3. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, and

MicroUnity is entitled to recover from defendants the da:nages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of

27



exclusive rights under the '708 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing ineparable harm

for which there is no adequate remedy af law, ualess enjoined by this Court'

84. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that defendants'

infringement of the .70g patent is willful and deliberate, entitling Microunity to increased damages


u.s.c. $ 28s.

TNFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7'353"367 B2

85. On April 1, 2008, United States Patent No. 7,353,3 67 B2 (the *'367 patenf') was

duly and legally issued for an invention entitled o'system and Software for Catenated Gtoup Shift

Instruction." MicroUnity was assigned the'367 patent and continues to hold all rights and interest in

the,367 patent. A true and correct copy of the '367 patentis att¿ched hereto as Exhibit P.


more of the clairns of the '367 patent by knowingly contributing to and inducing others to

manufacture, use, sell, import, and/or ofîer to sell cell phones and other products and software that

infringe one or more of the claims of the '367 patenÌ.,by providing processors such as TI's OMAP3

and OMAp4 series processors, Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and Qualcomm's

Snapdragon processors. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '367

patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C . 5271.

87. Motorol4 Noki4 PaIm, samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have


use, sale, importation, and/or offer to selt infringing cell phones and other products, including but not

timited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, samsung Gataxy spica GT-i5700 and


OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ' and

Apple iphone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G, and by providing software for use on such cell phones and

other products. Motorol4 Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple are

liable for their infringement of the '367 patsntpursuant to 35 U.S.C. S27l-

gg. Verizor¡ AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of

the claims of the ,367 patentby their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones

and other products, and by providing software for use on such cell phones and other products'

Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '367 pa+sntpursuant to 35 U'S'C'

ç271.

g9. Defendants, acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, md

Microunity is entitled to recover from defendants the damages sustained by Microunity as a result of

their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at hial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's

exclusive rights under fhe'367 patent will continue to damage Microunity, causing irreparable harm



infringement of the ,367 patentis willful and deliberate, entitling Microunity to increased damages

under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees and costs incuned in prosecuting this action urder 35

u.s.c. $ 285.

INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7'509"36682

gl. On March Z4,Z}}g,United States Patent No. 7,509,3 66 B2 (the "'366 patenf ') was

duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "Multiplier Anay Processing System with Enhanced

Utilization at Lower precision." MicroUnity was assigued the '366 patent and continues to hold all

29

Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03i16/10 Page 30 of 38

,ights and interest in the '366 patent. A true and conect copy of the '366 patenl is attached hereto as

Exhibit Q.



their processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors' Samsung

and SSI,s S5pC100 processors, and Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors. Samsung and SSI have

knowingly contributed to and induced and continue to knowingly conhibute to and induce others to

manufacture, use, sell, import and/or offer to sell cell phones and other products and services which

infringe and which practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '366 patent' TI,

Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '366 patent pursuant to 35

u.s.c. ç27r.

93. Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have



limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, samsung Galaxy spica GT-i5700 and

ornnial{D igglO, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, Google/IITC Nexus one, LG eXpo and IQ, and

Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Apple has knowingly contributed to and induced and

continues to knowingly contibute to and induce others to manufacture, use, sell, import and/or offer

to sell products and services which infringe and which practice processes that infringe one or more of

the claims of the '366 patent Motorol4 Nokia' Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC' Google' LG and

Appte are liable for their infringement of the '366 patent pursuant to 35 U'S'C ' ç271'



30


and other products which infringe one or more of the claims of the '366pa'ærrt. AT&T has knowingly

contributed to and induced and continues to knowingly contribute to and induce its customers' use of

services which infringe a¡d which practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the

,366 patent Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their inûingement of the '366 patent pwsuant

to 35 U.S.C. ç27r.

95. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, and

Microunity is entitled to recover ûom defendants the damages sustained by Microunity as aresult of

their wrongfirl acts in an amount subject to proof at tial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's

exclusive rights under the '366 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing inepæable harm



infringement of the ,366 patentis willful and deliberate, entitling Microunity to increased damages

under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and ûo attomey's fees and costs incured in prosecuting this action under 35

u.s.c. $ 285.

INFRTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.7'653'806 B2

97. On January 26,2010, United States Patent No. 7,653,806 BZ (the "'806 patenf')

was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "Method and Apparatus for Performing

Improved Group Floating-Point Operations." MicroUnity was assigned the'806 patent and continues

to hold all rights and interest in the '806 patent. A true and correct copy of the '806 patent is attached

hereto as ExhibitR.

9g. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or


their infringing processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series plocessors,

31


Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processors, ærd Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors. TI, Samsung,

SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '806 patent pursuant to 35 U'S.C. 527I.

gg. Motorol4 Nokia" Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have



but not limited to the Motorola Droid, NokiaN900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700 and


Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Motorol4 Nokia, PaIm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC,

Google, LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the '806 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C.

s271.


the claims of the '806 patent by their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to selI infringing cell phones


pursuant to 35 U.S.C. ç 271.









u.s.c. $ 285.

32


TNFRTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,660'97282

103. On February g, 2010, United States Patent No. 7,660,972 B2 (the *'972 patent")

was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "Method and Software for Partitioned Floating-

point Multiply-Add Operation." MicroUnity was assignedthe'972 patent and continues to hold all

rights and interest tnthe'972 patent. A true and correct copy of the '972 patent is attached hereto as

Exhibit S.

104. Samsung and SSI have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims

of the ,972 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation, andlor offer to sell their processors,

including but not timited to their S5PC100 processors, and by knowingly contributing to and

inducing others to manufacture, use, sell, import, and/or offer to sell cell phones and other products

and services which practice processes and include software that infringe one or more of the claims of

the ,972 patent. Samsung and SSI are liable for their infringement of the '972 patent pursuant to 35

u.s.c. ç27r.

105. Apple has infringed and continues to infringe one or more of the claims of the'972

patent by its manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones and other

products, inctuding but not limited to the Apple iPhone 3GS, which practice processes and include

software that infringe one or more of the claims of the '972palent" and by providing software for use

on such cell phones and other products. Apple is liable for its infringement of the '972 patent

pursuant to 35 U.S.C. ç27I.

106. AT&T has infringed and continues to infringe one or more of the claims of the

,972 patentby its use, sale, importation and/or offer to seli infringing cell phones and other products

which practice processes and include software that infringe one or more of the claims of the '972

patent, by its knowingly contributing to and inducing its customers to purchase and use services

which practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '356 patent, and by providing

JJ


software for use on such cell phones and other products. AT&T is liable for is inûingement of the

'gT2patentpursuantto 35 U.S.C. $ 271.

107. Samsung, SSI, Apple and AT&T's acts of infringement have caused damage to

MicroUnity, and Microunity is entitled to recover from Samsung, SSI, Apple and AT&T the

damages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at

trial. Samsung, SSI, Apple and AT&T's infringement of MicroUnity's exclusive rights under the

,972 pafent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm for which there is no

adequate remedy at law, unless enioined by this Court.

108. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that Samsung, SSI, Apple

and AT&T,s infringement of the '972 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to

increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this

action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285'

TNFRTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.7,660,97382

109. On February g,2O1O, United States Patent No. 7,660,973 BZ (the "'973 patenf')

was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "system and Apparatus for Group Data

Operations.', MicroUnity was assþe dthe'973 patent and continues to hold all rights and interest in

the'973 patent. A true and conect copy of the '973 patentis attached hereto as Exhibit T.




Samsung and SSI's S5PC|00 processors, and Quatcomm's Snapdragon processors, and by

knowingly contributing to and inducing others to manufacture, use, sell, import, and/or offer to sell

cell phones and other products thæ infringe one or more of the claims of the '973 patent. TI,

34


Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable

u.s.c. s27r.

for their infringement of the '973 patenl pursuant to 35

111. Motorol4 Noki4 Palm, samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have

infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '973 pa''f.:rrtby their manufacture'



OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid Al and neoTouch, Google/HTC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ' and

Appte iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Motorol4 Nokia, Palm, samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC,

Google, LG and Apple are liable for their in.fringement of the '973 patent pwsuant to 35 U'S'C'

ç271.

ll2. Verizor¡ AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of




113. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, and


their wrongflrl acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's

exclusive righa under the'973 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm


ll4. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that defendants'

infringement of the ,973 patentis willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to increased damages

under 35 U.S.C. $ 2g4 and to atüomey's fees and costs incuned in prosecuting this action under 35

u.s.c. $ 28s.

35


JTIRY DEMAND

115. MicroUnity demands a trial by jury on all issues.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintitr MicroUnity Systems Engineering, fnc., requests entry of

judgment in its favor and against defendants as follows:

a) Declaration that defendants have infringed U.S. Patent Nos' 5,737,547 Ct,

5,742,840, 5,794,06! Cl, 5,812,799 Cr,6,006,318 Cl, R839,500 E, 6,725,356 Cl, 7,213,13182,

7,2L6,2r7 Pjz, 7,260,708 82, 7,353,367 F,2,7,509,366 B,2, 7,653,806 B.2,7,660,972 B2 and

7,660,973B.2;

b) Awarding the damages arising out of defendants' infringement of U.S. Patent Nos'

5,737,547 C7,5,742,840, 5,794,061 Cl, 5,812,799 Cl, 6,006,318 Cl, R839,500 8,6,725,356 Ct,

7,2I3,I3182,7,216,217 82,7,260,708P,2,7,353,367 B.2,7,509,36682,7,653,80682,7,660,972

B2 and 7,660,973 B2, including enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. $ 284, to MicroUnity,

together with prejudgment and post-judgment interest, in an amount according to proof;

c) Permanently enjoining defendants and their respective officers, agents, employees,

and those acting in privity with them, from frirther infringement, including contributory

infringement and/or inducing infringement, of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,737,547 CI, 5,742,840,

5,794,061 Cl,5,8l2,7gg C1,6,006,318 Cl, RE39,500F',6,725,356 Cl, 7,213,131B.2,7,216,217

82,7,260,708 82, 7,353,367 B¡2,7,509,36682,7,653,806B2,7,660,97282 and7,660,973B.2, or

in the alternative, a post-judgment royalty for post-judgment infringement;

d) An award of attorney's fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. $ 285 or as otherwise permitted

by law; and

e) For such other costs and ftrther relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

DATED: March 16,2010


Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ Stephen D. Susman

Stephen D. Susman, Attomey-in-ChargeState BarNo. 1952100

ssusman@susmangodfrey. comMax L. Tribble, Jr.

State Bar No. 20213950müibble@susmangodfr ey. comJoseph S. GrinsteinSt¿te BarNo.24002188j grinstein@susmangodfr ey. comSUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5100

Houston, Texas 7704?Telephone: (7 13) 651-9366Facsimile: (713) 654-6666

Sidney Calvin CapshawState BarNo. 03783900ccap shaw@capshawlaw. comCAPSIIAW DERTEI-TX, L.L.P.1127 Judson Rd - Ste 220PO Box 3999Longview, TX 7 5601-5157(903) 236-9800Fax: (903) 236-8787

Otis W. CarollState [email protected], CARROLL & KELLEY, P.C.

6101 South Broadway, Suite 500

Tyler, TX75703Telephone: (903) 561-1600Facsimile: (903) 58 1-1071

Michael F. HeimState BarNo. [email protected]}DIM, PAYNE & CHORUSH, L.L.P.600 Travis, Suite 6710Houston, Texas 77002Telephone: (7 13) 221 -2000Facsimile: Q L3) 221-2021

37

Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03i 16/1 0 Page 38 of 38

Douglas R. WilsonState [email protected] PAYNE & CHORUSH, L.L.P.9 442 Capttal of Texas Hwy.PlazaI, Suite 500-146Austin, Texas 78759Teþhone: (512) 3 43 -3 622Facsimile: (512) 345 -2924

George M. SchwabState BarNo. 58250 (CA)gschwab@ gmspatent. comLAV/ OFFICES OF GEORGE M. SCHWAB235 Montgomery St., Suite 1026

San Francisco, CA 94104Telephone: (41 5) 889-52 1 0

Attomeys for MICROUNITY SYSTEMSENGINEERING, TNC.

38

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

TYLER DIVISION

│ SMARTPHONE TECHNOLOGIES │ LLC., │ │ Plaintiff, │ │ v. │ │ (1) RESEARCH IN MOTION CORP. │ (2) RESEARCH IN MOTION LTD. │ CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:10cv74 (3) SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS │ CO. LTD. │ (4) SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS │ AMERICA, INC. │ (5) SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNIC- │ JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ATIONS AMERICA, LLC. │ (6) SANYO ELECTRIC CO., LTD. │ (7) SANYO ELECTRONIC DEVICE │ (U.S.A.), INC. │ (8) LG ELECTRONICS, INC. │ (9) LG ELECTRONICS USA, INC. │ (10) MOTOROLA, INC. │ (11) APPLE, INC. │ (12) PANTECH WIRELESS, INC. │ (13) INSIGHT ENTERPRISES, INC. │ (14) AT&T INC. and │ (15) AT&T MOBILITY LLC. │ │ Defendants. │ │

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT This is an action for patent infringement in which plaintiff, SmartPhone

Technologies LLC (“SmartPhone”), complains against defendants, Research In Motion

Corporation (“RIM”), Research In Motion Ltd. (“RIM Ltd.”), Samsung Electronics Co.

Ltd. (“Samsung”), Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“Samsung USA”), Samsung

2

Telecommunications America LLC (“Samsung Telecom”), Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd.

(“Sanyo”), Sanyo Electronic Device (U.S.A.), Inc. (“Sanyo USA”), LG Electronics, Inc.

(“LG”), LG Electronics USA, Inc. (“LG USA”), Motorola, Inc. (“Motorola”), Apple, Inc.

(“Apple”), Pantech Wireless, Inc. (“Pantech”), Insight Enterprises, Inc. (Insight”), AT&T

Inc. (“AT&T”) and AT&T Mobility LLC (“AT&T Mobile”) as follows:

THE PARTIES

1. SmartPhone is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of

business at 6136 Frisco Square Boulevard, Suite 400, Frisco, Texas 75034.

2. On information and belief, RIM is a Delaware corporation with a principal

place of business at 122 W. John Carpenter Parkway, Suite 430, Irving, Texas 75039 and

does business in this judicial district by, among other things, committing jointly, directly

and/or indirectly the tort of patent infringement giving rise to this complaint. RIM’s

registered agent for service of process in Texas is CT Corporation System, 350 N. St.

Paul Street, Dallas, Texas 75201.

3. On information and belief, RIM Ltd. is a Canadian corporation with a

principal place of business at 295 Phillip Street, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3W8 Canada and

does business in this judicial district by, among other things, committing jointly, directly

and/or indirectly the tort of patent infringement giving rise to this complaint. RIM Ltd.

may be served at its principal place of business at 295 Phillip Street, Waterloo, Ontario

N2L 3W8 Canada by International Registered Mail.

4. Upon information and belief, Samsung is a Korean corporation with a

principal place of business at Samsung Main Building, 250 2-ka, Taepyuung-Ro, Chung-

Ku, Seoul, Korea and does business in this judicial district by, among other things,

3

committing jointly, directly and/or indirectly the tort of patent infringement giving rise to

this complaint. Samsung may be served in accordance with the terms of the Hague

Convention at its principal place of business at Samsung Main Building, 250 2-ka,

Taepyuung-Ro, Chung-Ku, Seoul, Korea.

5. On information and belief, Samsung USA is a New York corporation with

its principal place of business at 105 Challenger Road, Ridgefield Park, New Jersey

07660 and does business in this judicial district by, among other things, committing

jointly, directly and/or indirectly the tort of patent infringement giving rise to this

complaint. Samsung USA’s registered agent for service of process in Texas is CT

Corporation System, 350 N. St. Paul Street, Dallas, Texas 75201.

6. On information and belief, Samsung Telecom is a Delaware corporation

with its principal place of business at 1301 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, Texas 75082

and does business in this judicial district by, among other things, committing jointly,

directly and/or indirectly the tort of patent infringement giving rise to this complaint.

Samsung’s registered agent for service of process in Texas is Corporation Service

Company d/b/a CSC - Lawyers Inc., 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701.

7. On information and belief, Sanyo is a Japanese corporation with a

principal place of business at 2-5-5 Keihan-Hondori, Moriguchi-ku, Osaka 570-8677,

Japan and does business in this judicial district by, among other things, committing


complaint. Sanyo may be served in accordance with the terms of the Hague Convention

at its principal place of business at 2-5-5 Keihan-Hondori, Moriguchi-ku, Osaka 570-

8677, Japan.

4

8. On information and belief, Sanyo USA is a Delaware corporation with its

principal place of business at 2600 Network Boulevard, 6th Floor, Frisco, Texas 75034


directly and/or indirectly the tort of patent infringement giving rise to this complaint.

Sanyo’s registered agent for service of process in Texas is Prentice Hall Corporation, 701

Brazos Street, Suite 1050, Austin, Texas 78701.

9. Upon information and belief, LG is a Korean corporation with a principal

place of business at LG Twin Towers 20, Yeouido-dong, Yeongdeunspo-gu, Seoul 150-

721, Korea and does business in this judicial district by, among other things, committing


complaint. LG may be served in accordance with the terms of the Hague Convention at

its principal place of business at LG Twin Towers 20, Yeouido-dong, Yeongdeunspo-gu,

Seoul 150-721, Korea.

10. On information and belief, LG USA is a Delaware corporation with its

principal place of business at 1000 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey 07632


directly and/or indirectly the tort of patent infringement giving rise to this complaint. LG

USA’s registered agent for service of process in Texas is United States Corporation Co.,

211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701.

11. On information and belief, Motorola is a Delaware corporation with its

principal place of business at 1303 East Algonquin Road, Schaumberg, Illinois 60196 and

does business in this judicial district at 5000 Legacy Drive, Suite 325, Plano, Texas

75024, and by, among other things, committing directly and/or indirectly the tort of

5

patent infringement giving rise to this complaint. Motorola’s registered agent for service

of process in Texas is CT Corporation System, 350 N. St. Paul Street, Dallas, Texas

75201.

12. On information and belief, Apple is a California corporation with its

principal place of business at 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino, California 95014 and does

business in this judicial district at 6121 West Park Boulevard, Plano, Texas 75093, and

by, among other things, committing directly and/or indirectly the tort of patent

infringement giving rise to this complaint. Apple’s registered agent for service of process

in Texas is CT Corporation System, 350 N. St. Paul Street, Dallas, Texas 75201.

13. On information and belief, Pantech is a Georgia corporation with its

principal place of business at 5607 Glenridge Drive, Atlanta, Georgia 30342 and does

business in this judicial district by, among other things, committing directly and/or

indirectly the tort of patent infringement giving rise to this complaint. Pantech’s

registered agent for service of process is CT Corporation System, 111 Eighth Avenue,

New York, New York 10011. Alternatively, Pantech may be served with process by

serving the Secretary of State of the State of Texas pursuant to the Texas Long Arm

Statute, Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 17.044 and asking the Secretary of

State to serve Pantech at its principal place of business at 5607 Glenridge Drive, Atlanta,

Georgia 30342 via Certified Mail -- Return Receipt Requested.

14. On information and belief Insight is a Delaware corporation with its

principal place of business at 6829 South Harl Avenue, Tempe, Arizona 85283 and does

and does business in this judicial district at 3480 Lotus Drive, Plano, Texas 75075 and

by, among other things, committing jointly, directly and/or indirectly the tort of patent

6

infringement giving rise to this complaint. Insight’s registered agent for service of

process is National Registered Agents, Inc., 638 North Fifth Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona

85003. Alternatively, Insight may be served with process by serving the Secretary of

State of the State of Texas pursuant to the Texas Long Arm Statute, Texas Civil Practice

& Remedies Code § 17.044 and asking the Secretary of State to serve Insight at its

principal place of business at 6829 South Harl Avenue, Tempe, Arizona 85283 via

Certified Mail -- Return Receipt Requested.

15. On information and belief, AT&T is a Delaware corporation with its

principal place of business at 208 South Akard Street, Dallas, Texas 75202 and does

business in this judicial district by, among other things, committing jointly, directly

and/or indirectly the tort of patent infringement giving rise to this complaint. AT&T’s

registered agent for service of process in Texas is CT Corporation System, 350 N. St.

Paul St., Dallas, Texas 75201.

16. On information and belief, AT&T Mobile is a Delaware corporation with

its principal place of business at Glenridge Highlands Two, 5565 Glenridge Connector,

Atlanta, Georgia 30342 and does business in this judicial district by, among other things,

committing jointly, directly and/or indirectly the tort of patent infringement giving rise to

this complaint. AT&T Mobile’s registered agent for service of process in Texas is CT

Corporation System, 350 N. St. Paul St., Dallas, Texas 75201.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

17. This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of

the United States Code. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§§ 1331 and 1338(a).

7

18. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(c)

and 1400(b). On information and belief, each defendant has purposely transacted

business in this judicial district and has committed acts of joint, direct and/or indirect

infringement in this judicial district.

19. On information and belief, each defendant is subject to this Court’s

specific and general personal jurisdiction pursuant to due process and/or the Texas Long

Arm Statute, due at least to their substantial business in this forum, including: (A) at least

part of their infringing activities alleged herein, and (B) regularly doing or soliciting

business, engaging in others persistent causes of conduct, and/or deriving substantial

revenue from goods and services provided to persons and other entities in Texas and this

judicial district.

COUNT I (INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,950,645)

20. SmartPhone is the exclusive licensee of United States patent number

6,950,645, entitled “Power Conserving Intuitive Device Discovery Technique In A

Bluetooth Environment” (“the ‘645 patent”) with the right to sue and recover damages

for the past and future infringement thereof. A true and correct copy of the ‘645 patent is

attached as Exhibit A.

21. On information and belief, RIM and RIM Ltd. are jointly, directly and/or

indirectly infringing at least one claim of the ‘645 patent in this judicial district and

elsewhere in Texas and the United States by, among other things, making, using, offering

for sale, selling and/or importing computerized communications devices including

without limitation the Curve 8520. RIM and RIM Ltd. are thereby jointly and severally

liable for infringement of the ‘645 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271 and has thereby

8

caused damage and to SmartPhone, which infringement and damage will continue unless

and until RIM and RIM Ltd. are enjoined.

22. On information and belief, Samsung, Samsung Telecom and Samsung

USA are jointly, directly and/or indirectly infringing at least one claim of the ‘645 patent

in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas and the United States by, among other

things, making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing computerized

communications devices including without limitation the OMNIA II smartphone.

Samsung, Samsung Telecom and Samsung USA are thereby jointly and severally liable

for infringement of the ‘645 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271 and has thereby caused

damage and to SmartPhone, which infringement and damage will continue unless and

until Samsung, Samsung Telecom and Samsung USA are enjoined.

23. On information and belief, LG USA and LG are jointly, directly and/or




without limitation the INCITE smartphone. LG USA and LG are thereby jointly and

severally liable for infringement of the ‘645 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271 and has

thereby caused damage to SmartPhone, which infringement and damage will continue

unless and until LG USA and LG are enjoined.

24. On information and belief, Motorola is directly and/or indirectly infringing

at least one claim of the ‘645 patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas and

the United States by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or

importing computerized communications devices including without limitation the

9

DROID smartphone. Motorola is thereby liable for infringement of the ‘645 patent

pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271 and has thereby caused damage to SmartPhone, which

infringement and damage will continue unless and until Motorola is enjoined.

25. On information and belief, Apple is directly and/or indirectly infringing at

least one claim of the ‘645 patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in Texas and the

United States by, among other things, making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or

importing computerized communications devices including without limitation the Apple

iPhone. Apple is thereby liable for infringement of the ‘645 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C.

§ 271 and has thereby caused damage to SmartPhone, which infringement and damage

will continue unless and until Apple is enjoined.

26. On information and belief, AT&T and AT&T Mobile are jointly, directly

and/or indirectly infringing at least one claim of the ‘645 patent in this judicial district

and elsewhere in Texas and the United States by, among other things, making, using,

offering for sale, selling and/or importing computerized communications devices

including without limitation the iPhone. AT&T and AT&T Mobile are thereby jointly

and severally liable for infringement of the ‘645 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271 and

have thereby caused damage to SmartPhone, which infringement and damage will

continue unless and until AT&T and AT&T Mobile are enjoined.

27. To the extent that facts learned in discovery show that any of the

defendant’s acts of infringement is or has been willful, SmartPhone reserves the right to

request such a finding at time of trial.

10

COUNT II (INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,076,275)


7,076,275, entitled “Method And System For Single-Step Enablement Of Telephony

Functionality For A Portable Computer System” “the ‘275 patent”) with the right to sue

and recover damages for the past and future infringement thereof. A true and correct

copy of the ‘275 patent is attached as Exhibit B.







caused damage to SmartPhone, which infringement and damage will continue unless and

until RIM and RIM Ltd. are enjoined.








damage to SmartPhone, which infringement and damage will continue unless and until

Samsung, Samsung Telecom and Samsung USA are enjoined.

11






















will continue unless and until Motorola is enjoined.

12

34. On information and belief, Pantech is directly and/or indirectly infringing




MATRIX PRO smartphone. Pantech is thereby liable for infringement of the ‘275 patent


infringement and damage will continue unless and until Pantech is enjoined.

35. On information and belief, AT&T and AT&T Mobile are jointly, directly




including without limitation the iPhone. AT&T and AT&T Mobile are thereby jointly


have thereby caused damage to SmartPhone, which infringement and damage will

continue unless and until AT&T and AT&T Mobile are enjoined.




COUNT III (INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,742,905)


5,742,905, entitled “Personal Communications Internetworking” (“the ‘905 patent”) with

the right to sue and recover damages for the past and future infringement thereof. A true

and correct copy of the ‘905 patent is attached as Exhibit D.

13





without limitation the BOLD 9700 smartphone. RIM and RIM Ltd. are thereby jointly


has thereby caused damage to SmartPhone, which infringement and damage will continue

unless and until RIM and RIM Ltd. are enjoined.





communications devices including without limitation the OMNIA II and INSTINCT

smartphones. Samsung, Samsung Telecom and Samsung USA are thereby jointly and



unless and until Samsung, Samsung Telecom and Samsung USA are enjoined.




importing computerized communications devices including without limitation the CLIQ

smartphone. Motorola is thereby liable for infringement of the ‘905 patent pursuant to 35

14

U.S.C. § 271 and has thereby caused damage to SmartPhone, which infringement and

damage will continue unless and until Motorola is enjoined.




COUNT IV (INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,506,064)


7,506,064, entitled “Handheld Computer System That Attempts To Establish An

Alternative Network Link Upon Failing To Establish A Requested Network Link” (“the

‘064 patent”) with the right to sue and recover damages for the past and future

infringement thereof. A true and correct copy of the ‘064 patent is attached as Exhibit D.













15




















47. On information and belief, AT&T and AT&T Mobile are directly and/or




16

without limitation the iPhone. AT&T and AT&T Mobile are thereby jointly and

severally liable for infringement of the ‘064 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271 and have


unless and until AT&T and AT&T Mobile are enjoined.




COUNT V (INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,533,342)


6,533,342, entitled “System And Method Of A Personal Computer Device Providing

Telephone Capability” “the ‘342 patent”) with the right to sue and recover damages for

the past and future infringement thereof. A true and correct copy of the ‘342 patent is

attached as Exhibit E.





without limitation the STORM smartphone. RIM and RIM Ltd. are thereby jointly and



unless and until RIM and RIM Ltd. are enjoined.



17








52. On information and belief, Sanyo and Sanyo USA are jointly, directly




including without limitation the INCOGNITO smartphone. Sanyo and Sanyo USA are

thereby jointly and severally liable for infringement of the ‘342 patent pursuant to 35


damage will continue unless and until Sanyo and Sanyo USA are enjoined.









18
























19










COUNT VI (INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,711,609)


6,711,609, entitled “Method And Apparatus For Synchronizing An Email Client On A

Portable Computer System With An Email Client On A Desktop Computer” (“the ‘609

patent”) with the right to sue and recover damages for the past and future infringement

thereof. A true and correct copy of the ‘609 patent is attached as Exhibit F.





without limitation the Blackberry Enterprise Server. RIM and RIM Ltd. are thereby

jointly and severally liable for infringement of the ‘609 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §

271 and has thereby caused damage to SmartPhone, which infringement and damage will

continue unless and until RIM and RIM Ltd. are enjoined.

20





MobileMe. Apple is thereby liable for infringement of the ‘609 patent pursuant to 35


damage will continue unless and until Apple is enjoined.

62. On information and belief, Insight is directly and/or indirectly infringing




Blackberry Exchange Server. Insight is thereby liable for infringement of the ‘609 patent


infringement and damage will continue unless and until Insight is enjoined.




COUNT VII (INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. RE. 40,459)

64. SmartPhone is the exclusive licensee of United States reissue patent

number 40,459, entitled “Method And Apparatus For Communicating Information Over

Low Bandwidth Communications Networks” (“the ‘459 patent”) with the right to sue and

recover damages for the past and future infringement thereof. A true and correct copy of

the ‘459 patent is attached as Exhibit G.

21
























22
























23












PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Wherefore, SmartPhone respectfully requests that this Court enter:

A. A judgment in favor of SmartPhone that each defendant has infringed the

‘645, ‘275, ‘905, ‘064, ‘342 ‘609 and ‘459 patents as aforesaid and that such

infringement was willful;

B. A permanent injunction enjoining each defendant, its officers, directors,

agents, servants, affiliates, employees, divisions, branches, subsidiaries, parents and all

others acting in active concert or privity therewith from direct, indirect and or joint

infringement of the ‘645, ‘275, ‘905, ‘064, ‘342, ‘609 and ‘459 patents as aforesaid

pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283;

24

C. A judgment and order requiring each defendant to pay SmartPhone its

damages, including enhanced damages, costs and expenses, together with pre- and post-

judgment interest thereon pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284;

D. A judgment and order finding that this is an exceptional case and awarding

SmartPhone its reasonable attorneys fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285, and

E. Any and all further relief to which the Court may deem SmartPhone

entitled.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

SmartPhone requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable by right pursuant to

Fed. R. Civ. P. 38.

Respectfully submitted,

SMARTPHONE TECHNOLOGIES LLC Date: March 3, 2010 By: T. John Ward, Jr. Texas State Bar. No. 00794818 J. Wesley Hill Texas State Bar. No. 24032294 WARD & SMITH LAW FIRM P.O. Box 1231 Longview, Texas 75601 Tel: (903) 757-6400 Fax: (903) 757-2323 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiff SmartPhone Technologies, Inc.

25

Of counsel: Paul J. Hayes Dean G. Bostock MINTZ, LEVIN, COHN, FERRIS, GLOVSKY and POPEO, P.C. One Financial Center Boston, Massachusetts 02111 Tel: (617) 542-6000 Fax: (617) 542-2241

complaint for smartphone lawsuit: nokia apple micounity samrtphone technology

Technology

delaware corporation

htc corporation

califomia corporation

akansas corporation

sprintnextel corporation

defendantnokia corporation

acer america corporation

republic of china corporation