Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page1 of 51

1 John V. Picone III, Bar No. 187226 [email protected] 2 Jennifer S. Coleman, Bar No. 213210 [email protected] 3 Christopher A. Hohn, Bar No. 271759 [email protected] 4 HOPKINS & CARLEY A Law Corporation 5 The Letitia Building 70 South First Street 6 San Jose, CA 95113-2406 7 mailing address: P.O. Box 1469 8 San Jose, CA 95109-1469 Telephone: (408) 286-9800 9 Facsimile: (408) 998-4790

10 Daniel R. Scardino Jeffery R. Johnson 11 Cabrach J. Connor Chad Ennis 12 REED & SCARDINO LLP 301 Congress Avenue, Suite 1250 13 Austin, TX 78701 Tel. (512) 474-2449 14 Fax (512) 474-2622 [email protected] 15 [email protected] [email protected] 16 [email protected] 17 Attorneys for Plaintiff EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC 18 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 20 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 21 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

22 EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC, CASE NO. 3:12-cv-01011 EMC 23 Plaintiff, PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 24 v. 25 SPRINT SPECTRUM, L.P.; ARUBA NETWORKS, INC.; BROADSOFT, INC.; 26 CLAVISTER AB; CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.; MAVENIR SYSTEMS, INC.; 27 MERU NETWORKS, INC.; SERCOMM CORPORATION; SONUS NETWORKS, 28 INC.; STOKE, INC.; TAQUA, LLC; HTC

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -1- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page2 of 51

1 AMERICA, INC.; UNITED STATES CELLULAR CORPORATION; 2 MOTOROLA MOBILITY HOLDINGS, INC.; MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC.; 3 KINETO WIRELESS, INC.; and AIRVANA, INC., 4 Defendants. 5 6 Plaintiff EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC (“EON”) files this Third Amended Complaint for 7 patent infringement against Aruba Networks, Inc. (“Aruba Networks”); Broadsoft, Inc. 8 (“Broadsoft”); Clavister AB (“Clavister”); Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Cisco”); Mavenir Systems, Inc. 9 (“Mavenir”); Meru Networks, Inc. (“Meru”); SerComm Corporation (“SerComm”); Sonus 10 Networks, Inc. (“Sonus”); Sprint Spectrum, L.P. (“Sprint”); Stoke, Inc. (“Stoke”); Taqua, LLC 11 (“Taqua”); HTC America, Inc. (“HTC”); United States Cellular Corporation (“US Cellular”); 12 Motorola Mobility Holdings, Inc. (“Motorola Mobility”); Motorola Solutions, Inc. (“Motorola 13 Solutions”); Kineto Wireless, Inc. (“Kineto”); and Airvana, Inc. (“Airvana”)(collectively, the 14 “Defendants”) for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,592,491 (the “’491 Patent”) pursuant to 35 15 U.S.C. §271. 16 THE PARTIES 17 1. Plaintiff EON is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of 18 business at 719 W. Front Street, Suite 108, Tyler, Texas 75702. 19 2. Defendant Aruba Networks is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of 20 business at 1344 Crossman Ave., Sunnyvale, California 94089. In addition to Aruba Networks 21 continuously and systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against Aruba 22 Networks arose from or are connected with Aruba Networks’s purposeful acts committed in 23 Texas, including Aruba Networks’s making, using, importing, offering for sale, selling, or 24 inducing the sale of infringing communication networks, dual-mode related network components, 25 subscriber units, associated services, or data systems that fall within the scope of or constitute a 26 material portion of at least one claim of the ’491 Patent. Aruba Networks may be served with 27 process through its registered agent, CT Corporation System, 350 N. St. Paul St., Suite 2900, 28 Dallas, Texas 75201.

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -2- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page3 of 51

1 3. Defendant Broadsoft is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business 2 at 220 Perry Parkway, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20877. In addition to Broadsoft continuously and 3 systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against Broadsoft arose from or 4 are connected with Broadsoft’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, including Broadsoft’s 5 making, using, importing, offering for sale, selling, or inducing the sale of infringing 6 communication networks, dual-mode related network components, subscriber units, associated 7 services, or data systems that fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of at least 8 one claim of the ’491 Patent. Broadsoft engages in business in but does not maintain a regular 9 place of business in Texas and has not designated or maintained a resident agent for service of 10 process. Accordingly, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, section 17.044 of the Texas 11 Civil Practice and Remedies Code, and Articles 2.11 of the Texas Business Corporations Act, the 12 Texas Secretary of State is designated as Broadsoft’s agent for service of process in this action. 13 The Texas Secretary of State Citations Unit may be served at P.O. Box 12079, Austin, Texas 14 78711-2079 by certified mail, return receipt requested. Pursuant to section 17.045(a) of the Civil 15 Practice and Remedies Code, the Secretary of State shall forward citation and a copy of this 16 Complaint to Broadsoft’s home or home office, c/o Corporation Service Company, 2711 17 Centerville Rd., Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware 19808. 18 4. Defendant Clavister is a Swedish company with its principal place of business at 19 Sjögatan 6 J SE-891 60, Örnsköldsvik, Sweden. In addition to Clavister continuously and 20 systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against Clavister arose from or 21 are connected with Clavister’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, including Clavister’s making, 22 using, importing, offering for sale, selling, or inducing the sale of infringing communication 23 networks, dual-mode related network components, subscriber units, associated services, or data 24 systems that fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of at least one claim of the 25 ’491 Patent. Clavister engages in business in but does not maintain a regular place of business in 26 Texas and has not designated or maintained a resident agent for service of process. Accordingly, 27 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, section 17.044 of the Texas Civil Practice and 28 Remedies Code, and Articles 2.11 of the Texas Business Corporations Act, the Texas Secretary of

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -3- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page4 of 51

1 State is designated as Clavister’s agent for service of process in this action. The Texas Secretary 2 of State Citations Unit may be served at P.O. Box 12079, Austin, Texas 78711-2079 by certified 3 mail, return receipt requested. Pursuant to section 17.045(a) of the Civil Practice and Remedies 4 Code, the Secretary of State shall forward citation and a copy of this Complaint to Clavister’s 5 home or home office, Sjögatan 6 J SE-891 60, Örnsköldsvik, Sweden. 6 5. Defendant Cisco is a California corporation with its principal place of business at 7 170 W. Tasman Dr., San Jose, California 95134. In addition to Cisco continuously and 8 systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against Cisco arose from or are 9 connected with Cisco’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, including Cisco’s making, using, 10 importing, offering for sale, selling, or inducing the sale of infringing communication networks, 11 dual-mode related network components, subscriber units, associated services, or data systems that 12 fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of at least one claim of the ’491 Patent. 13 Cisco may be served with process through its registered agent, Prentice Hall Corporation System, 14 211 E. 7th St., Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701. 15 6. Defendant Mavenir is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business 16 at 1651 N. Glenville Dr., Suite 216, Richardson, Texas 75081. In addition to Mavenir 17 continuously and systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against 18 Mavenir arose from or are connected with Mavenir’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, 19 including Mavenir’s making, using, importing, offering for sale, selling, or inducing the sale of 20 infringing communication networks, dual-mode related network components, subscriber units,

21 associated services, or data systems that fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of 22 at least one claim of the ’491 Patent. Mavenir may be served with process through its registered 23 agent, Corporation Service Company, 211 E. 7th St., Austin, Texas 78701. 24 7. Defendant Meru is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 25 894 Ross Dr., Sunnyvale, California 94089. In addition to Meru continuously and systematically 26 conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against Meru arose from or are connected with 27 Meru’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, including Meru’s making, using, importing, offering 28 for sale, selling, or inducing the sale of infringing communication networks, dual-mode related

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -4- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page5 of 51

1 network components, subscriber units, associated services, or data systems that fall within the 2 scope of or constitute a material portion of at least one claim of the ’491 Patent. Meru engages in 3 business in but does not maintain a regular place of business in Texas and has not designated or 4 maintained a resident agent for service of process. Accordingly, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 5 Procedure 4, section 17.044 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, and Articles 2.11 of 6 the Texas Business Corporations Act, the Texas Secretary of State is designated as Meru’s agent 7 for service of process in this action. The Texas Secretary of State Citations Unit may be served at 8 P.O. Box 12079, Austin, Texas 78711-2079 by certified mail, return receipt requested. Pursuant 9 to section 17.045(a) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, the Secretary of State shall forward 10 citation and a copy of this Complaint to Meru’s home or home office, c/o Corporation Service 11 Company, 2711 Centerville Rd., Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware 19808. 12 8. Defendant SerComm is a Taiwanese company with its United States headquarters 13 at 200 Brown Rd., Suite 203, Fremont, California 94539. In addition to SerComm continuously 14 and systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against SerComm arose 15 from or are connected with SerComm’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, including 16 SerComm’s making, using, importing, offering for sale, selling, or inducing the sale of infringing 17 communication networks, dual-mode related network components, subscriber units, associated 18 services, or data systems that fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of at least 19 one claim of the ’491 Patent. SerComm engages in business in but does not maintain a regular 20 place of business in Texas and has not designated or maintained a resident agent for service of 21 process. Accordingly, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, section 17.044 of the Texas 22 Civil Practice and Remedies Code, and Articles 2.11 of the Texas Business Corporations Act, the 23 Texas Secretary of State is designated as SerComm’s agent for service of process in this action. 24 The Texas Secretary of State Citations Unit may be served at P.O. Box 12079, Austin, Texas 25 78711-2079 by certified mail, return receipt requested. Pursuant to section 17.045(a) of the Civil 26 Practice and Remedies Code, the Secretary of State shall forward citation and a copy of this 27 Complaint to SerComm’s home or home office, 200 Brown Rd., Suite 203, Fremont, California 28 94539.

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -5- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page6 of 51

1 9. Defendant Sonus is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 7 2 Technology Park Dr., Westford, Massachusetts 01886. In addition to Sonus continuously and 3 systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against Sonus arose from or are 4 connected with Sonus’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, including Sonus’s making, using, 5 importing, offering for sale, selling, or inducing the sale of infringing communication networks, 6 dual-mode related network components, subscriber units, associated services, or data systems that 7 fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of at least one claim of the ’491 Patent. 8 Sonus may be served with process through its registered agent, Corporation Service Company, 9 211 E. 7th St., Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701. 10 10. Defendant Sprint is a Delaware limited partnership with its principal place of 11 business at 6500 Sprint Parkway, Overland Park, Kansas 66251. In addition to Sprint 12 continuously and systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against Sprint 13 arose from or are connected with Sprint’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, including Sprint’s 14 making, using, importing, offering for sale, selling, or inducing the sale of infringing 15 communication networks, dual-mode related network components, subscriber units, associated 16 services, or data systems that fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of at least 17 one claim of the ’491 Patent. Sprint may be served with process through its registered agent, 18 Corporation Service Company, 211 E. 7th St., Austin, Texas 78701. 19 11. Defendant Stoke is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 20 5403 Betsy Ross Drive, Santa Clara, California 95454. In addition to Stoke continuously and 21 systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against Stoke arose from or are 22 connected with Stoke’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, including Stoke’s making, using, 23 importing, offering for sale, selling, or inducing the sale of infringing communication networks, 24 dual-mode related network components, subscriber units, associated services, or data systems that 25 fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of at least one claim of the ’491 Patent. 26 Stoke engages in business in but does not maintain a regular place of business in Texas and has 27 not designated or maintained a resident agent for service of process. Accordingly, pursuant to 28 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, section 17.044 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code,

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -6- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page7 of 51

1 and Articles 2.11 of the Texas Business Corporations Act, the Texas Secretary of State is 2 designated as Stoke’s agent for service of process in this action. The Texas Secretary of State 3 Citations Unit may be served at P.O. Box 12079, Austin, Texas 78711-2079 by certified mail, 4 return receipt requested. Pursuant to section 17.045(a) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, 5 the Secretary of State shall forward citation and a copy of this Complaint to Stoke’s home or 6 home office, c/o Incorporating Services, LTD., 3500 S. Dupont Highway, Dover, Delaware 7 19901. 8 12. Defendant Taqua is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the 9 State of Texas, with its principle place of business at 740 East Campell Road, Richardson, Texas 10 75081. In addition to Taqua continuously and systematically conducting business in Texas and 11 California, the cause of action against Tatara arose from or are connected with Taqua’s 12 purposeful acts committed in Texas and California, including Taqua’s making, using, importing, 13 offering for sale, selling or inducing the sale of infringing communication networks, dual-mode 14 related network components, subscriber units, associated services, data systems, and other 15 applications that fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of at least one claim of 16 the ‘491 Patent. In addition, on August 28, 2012, a Joint Motion to Substitute Party was filed by 17 Taqua, requesting that the above-captioned Court should substitute Taqua into the above- 18 captioned case as the proper entity to this lawsuit. The Joint Motion to Substitute Party was 19 granted on August 30, 2012. Taqua may be served with process through its registered agent, 20 National Registered Agents, Inc., 2875 Michelle Dr., Suite 100, Irvine, CA 92606. 21 13. Defendant HTC is a Texas corporation with its North American corporate 22 headquarters located at 13920 SE Eastgate Way, Suite 400, Bellevue, Washington 98005. In 23 addition to HTC continuously and systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of 24 action against HTC arose from or are connected with HTC’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, 25 including HTC’s making, using, importing, offering for sale, selling, or inducing the sale of 26 infringing communication networks, dual-mode related network components, subscriber units, 27 / / / 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -7- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page8 of 51

1 associated services, or data systems that fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of 2 at least one claim of the ’491 Patent. HTC may be served with process through its registered 3 agent, c/o Law Office of Christina C. Hsu, 15224 Interlachen Drive, Austin, Texas 78717. 4 14. Defendant US Cellular is a Delaware corporation with its corporate headquarters at 5 8410 West Bryn Mawr, Suite 700, Chicago, Illinois 60631. In addition to US Cellular 6 continuously and systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against US 7 Cellular arose from or are connected with US Cellular’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, 8 including US Cellular’s making, using, importing, offering for sale, selling, or inducing the sale 9 of infringing communication networks, dual-mode related network components, subscriber units, 10 associated services, or data systems that fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of 11 at least one claim of the ’491 Patent. US Cellular engages in business in but does not maintain a 12 regular place of business in Texas and has not designated or maintained a resident agent for 13 service of process. Accordingly, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, section 17.044 of 14 the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, and Articles 2.11 of the Texas Business 15 Corporations Act, the Texas Secretary of State is designated as US Cellular’s agent for service of 16 process in this action. The Texas Secretary of State Citations Unit may be served at P.O. Box 17 12079, Austin, Texas 78711-2079 by certified mail, return receipt requested. Pursuant to section 18 17.045(a) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, the Secretary of State shall forward citation 19 and a copy of this Complaint to US Cellular’s home or home office, c/o Mark Krohse, 8410 West 20 Bryn Mawr, Suite 700, Chicago, Illinois 60631 and c/o The Prentice-Hall Corporation System, 21 Inc., 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware 19808. 22 15. Defendant Motorola Mobility is a Delaware corporation with its corporate 23 headquarters at 600 North US Highway 45, Libertyville, Illinois 60048. Defendant Motorola 24 Solutions is a Delaware corporation with its corporate headquarters at 1303 East Algonquin Road, 25 Schaumburg, Illinois 60196. Motorola Mobility and Motorola Solutions are collectively referred 26 to as “Motorola.” In addition to Motorola continuously and systematically conducting business in 27 Texas, the causes of action against Motorola arose from or are connected with Motorola’s 28 purposeful acts committed in Texas, including Motorola’s making, using, importing, offering for

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -8- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page9 of 51

1 sale, selling, or inducing the sale of infringing communication networks, dual-mode related 2 network components, subscriber units, associated services, or data systems that fall within the 3 scope of or constitute a material portion of at least one claim of the ’491 Patent. Motorola 4 Mobility engages in business in but does not maintain a regular place of business in Texas and 5 has not designated or maintained a resident agent for service of process. Accordingly, pursuant to 6 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, section 17.044 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, 7 and Articles 2.11 of the Texas Business Corporations Act, the Texas Secretary of State is 8 designated as Motorola Mobility’s agent for service of process in this action. The Texas 9 Secretary of State Citations Unit may be served at P.O. Box 12079, Austin, Texas 78711-2079 by 10 certified mail, return receipt requested. Pursuant to section 17.045(a) of the Civil Practice and 11 Remedies Code, the Secretary of State shall forward citation and a copy of this Complaint to 12 Motorola Mobility’s home or home office, c/o The Corporation Trust Company, Corporation 13 Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801. Motorola Solutions may be 14 served with process through its registered agent, CT Corp System, 350 North Saint Paul Street, 15 Suite 2900, Dallas, Texas 75201-4234. 16 16. Defendant Kineto is a Delaware corporation with its corporate headquarters at 17 1601 McCarthy Boulevard, Milpitas, California 95035. In addition to Kineto continuously and 18 systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against Kineto arose from or are 19 connected with Kineto’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, including Kineto’s making, using, 20 importing, offering for sale, selling, or inducing the sale of infringing communication networks, 21 dual-mode related network components, subscriber units, associated services, or data systems that 22 fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of at least one claim of the ’491 Patent. 23 Kineto engages in business in but does not maintain a regular place of business in Texas and has 24 not designated or maintained a resident agent for service of process. Accordingly, pursuant to 25 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, section 17.044 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, 26 and Articles 2.11 of the Texas Business Corporations Act, the Texas Secretary of State is 27 designated as Kineto’s agent for service of process in this action. The Texas Secretary of State 28 Citations Unit may be served at P.O. Box 12079, Austin, Texas 78711-2079 by certified mail,

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -9- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page10 of 51

1 return receipt requested. Pursuant to section 17.045(a) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, 2 the Secretary of State shall forward citation and a copy of this Complaint to Kineto’s home or 3 home office, c/o The Corporation Trust Company, Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, 4 Wilmington, Delaware 19801. 5 17. Defendant Airvana is a Delaware corporation with its corporate headquarters at 19 6 Alpha Road, Chelmsford, Massachusetts 01824-4124. In addition to Airvana continuously and 7 systematically conducting business in Texas, the causes of action against Airvana arose from or 8 are connected with Airvana’s purposeful acts committed in Texas, including Airvana’s making, 9 using, importing, offering for sale, selling, or inducing the sale of infringing communication 10 networks, dual-mode related network components, subscriber units, associated services, or data 11 systems that fall within the scope of or constitute a material portion of at least one claim of the 12 ’491 Patent. Airvana may be served with process through its registered agent, Luis Pajares, 9901 13 East Valley Ranch Parkway, Suite 2000, Irving, Texas 75063. 14 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 15 18. This is an action for patent infringement under the Patent Laws of the United 16 States, Title 35 of the United States Code. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this 17 action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1331 and 1338(a). Venue lies in this judicial district pursuant to 18 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b). 19 19. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants under the laws of the 20 State of Texas, including the Texas long-arm statute, TX. CIV. PRAC. & REM §17.042 and

21 under the laws of California. 22 20. This Court has personal jurisdiction over each Defendant. Plaintiff incorporates 23 herein all statements of jurisdiction in the preceding paragraphs. Upon information and belief, 24 each Defendant has conducted and does conduct business within the State of Texas and/or 25 California, directly or through intermediaries or agents, or offers for sale, sells, imports, 26 advertises (including through the provision of interactive web pages) products or services, or uses 27 or induces others to use services or products in Texas and/or California that infringe the ’491 28 Patent, or knowingly contributes to infringement of the asserted patent.

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -10- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page11 of 51

1 THE PATENT-IN-SUIT 2 21. On January 7, 1997, the United States Patent and Trademark Office duly and 3 legally issued the ’491 Patent, titled “Wireless Modem,” after a full and fair examination. A true 4 and correct copy of the ’491 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A. EON is an assignee under an 5 exclusive license of all rights, title and interest in and to the ’491 Patent and possesses all rights of 6 recovery under the ’491 Patent, including the right to recover for past infringement. The ’491 7 Patent is valid and enforceable. 8 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 9 DEFENDANT MOBILE NETWORK OPERATORS 10 Sprint 11 22. Sprint and Sprint subscribers directly infringe because they make, use, offer for 12 sale, and sell two-way network employing CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV-DO, 13 Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, and Wi-Fi communication 14 technologies in a way that embodies or practices the claims of the ’491 Patent. 15 23. Sprint’s network includes dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi-Fi) subscriber 16 devices. 17 24. Sprint’s network includes base stations (also referred to by Sprint as cell towers) 18 that communicate via wireless signals to and from Sprint subscriber devices. 19 25. Sprint’s network includes equipment within the Sprint network for routing 20 communications to and from Sprint subscriber devices.

21 26. Sprint provides femtocells to its subscribers that extend the range Sprint’s 22 network. 23 27. Sprint dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices are capable 24 of communicating via wireless signals with Wi-Fi Access Points using standard communications 25 protocols (i.e. IEEE 802.11). 26 28. Sprint’s subscribers with dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi-Fi) subscriber 27 devices are capable of accessing Facebook via a Sprint base station and a Wi-Fi Access Point. 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -11- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page12 of 51

1 29. Sprint’s subscribers with dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi-Fi) subscriber 2 devices are capable of accessing the same internet content via a Sprint base station and a Wi-Fi 3 Access Point. 4 30. Email services (such as Gmail, Microsoft Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise 5 Servers, and Yahoo! email) route message to and from Sprint subscriber devices. 6 31. Users of Sprint’s subscriber devices can access internet content via Sprint’s 7 cellular macro network and through an Airave Access Point. 8 32. Sprint’s Airave Access Point transfers communications between Sprint subscriber 9 devices and the Sprint access network. 10 33. Sprint’s Airave Access Point transfers communications between Sprint subscriber 11 devices and the Sprint core network. 12 34. An electronic switch is a basic building block of consumer electronics. 13 35. Sprint dual-mode (cellular + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices contain one or more 14 electronic switches that activate the Wi-Fi or cellular communication capabilities in the device to 15 transmit communications via the Wi-Fi or cellular channel. 16 36. Femtocells in Sprint’s network modulate an analog carrier signal to encode digital 17 information, and demodulate such a carrier signal to decode the transmitted digital information. 18 37. Wireless access points in Sprint’s network modulate an analog carrier signal to 19 encode digital information, and demodulate such a carrier signal to decode the transmitted digital 20 information. 21 38. Wi-Fi routers in Sprint’s network modulate an analog carrier signal to encode 22 digital information, and demodulate such a carrier signal to decode the transmitted digital 23 information. 24 39. Sprint’s network includes mobile hotspots (e.g., a Sierra Wireless 4G LTE Tri-Fi 25 Hotspot). 26 40. Mobile hotspots in Sprint’s network modulate an analog carrier signal to encode 27 digital information, and demodulate such a carrier signal to decode the transmitted digital 28 information.

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -12- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page13 of 51

1 41. Subscriber devices using Sprint’s network receive messages from and transmit 2 messages to Sprint’s mobile core network through base stations. 3 42. Subscriber devices using Sprint’s network receive messages from and transmit 4 messages to Sprint’s mobile core network through femtocells. 5 43. Dual mode (Wi-Fi + Cellular) subscriber devices using Sprint’s network receive 6 messages from and transmit messages to Sprint’s mobile core network through Wi-Fi access 7 points. 8 44. Subscriber devices using Sprint’s network are capable of receiving messages from 9 and transmitting messages to Sprint’s base stations through mobile hotspots. 10 45. Sprint contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 11 United States material components, including dual-mode subscriber units, femtocells and mobile 12 hot spots, for use by end-users (e.g., Sprint subscribers) who directly infringe. Since at least the 13 filing of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Sprint was effectively 14 served with the original complaint, Sprint contributorily infringed knowing that these components 15 would become a material part of a method, system or apparatus that infringes the ’491 Patent. 16 Sprint’s components are made especially for infringing networks because they include multi- 17 mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only intended for use in the 18 infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable 19 for substantial noninfringing use. Sprint has been and is presently infringing at least one claim of 20 the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and elsewhere, literally or under the 21 doctrine of equivalents. 22 46. Sprint induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its customers 23 to make and use infringing networks. Sprint induces infringement through its provision of 24 technical support, advertisements, marketing materials, instruction booklets, applications, mail 25 services, and service manuals regarding the infringing networks or components of infringing 26 networks that it provides. Sprint actively promotes the advantages that the accused networks can 27 offer its customers. End-users (e.g., Sprint subscribers) of infringing networks directly infringe 28 the apparatuses and methods of ’491 Patent by making and using the infringing networks. Since

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -13- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page14 of 51

1 at least the filing of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Sprint was 2 effectively served with the original complaint, Sprint’s actions have been intentional and done 3 with knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 4 US Cellular 5 47. US Cellular and US Cellular subscribers directly infringe because they make, use, 6 offer for sale, and sell two-way network employing CDMA (including, for example, 1xEV-DO, 7 Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, and Wi-Fi communication 8 technologies in a way that embodies or practices the claims of the ’491 Patent. 9 48. US Cellular’s network includes dual-mode (cellular + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices. 10 49. US Cellular’s network includes base stations (also referred to by US Cellular as 11 cell towers) that communicate via wireless signals to and from US Cellular subscriber devices. 12 50. US Cellular’s network includes equipment within the US Cellular network for 13 routing communications to and from US Cellular subscriber devices. 14 51. US Cellular dual-mode (cellular + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices are capable of 15 communicating via wireless signals with Wi-Fi Access Points using standard communications 16 protocols (i.e., IEEE 802.11). 17 52. US Cellular’s subscribers with dual-mode (cellular + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices are 18 capable of accessing Facebook via a US Cellular base station and a Wi-Fi Access Point. 19 53. US Cellular’s subscribers with dual-mode (cellular + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices are 20 capable of accessing the same internet content via a US Cellular base station and a Wi-Fi Access 21 Point. 22 54. Email services (such as Gmail, Microsoft Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise 23 Servers, and Yahoo! email) route message to and from US Cellular subscriber devices. 24 55. An electronic switch is a basic building block of consumer electronics. 25 56. US Cellular dual-mode (cellular + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices contain one or more 26 electronic switches that activate the Wi-Fi or cellular communication capabilities in the device to 27 transmit communications via the Wi-Fi or cellular channel. 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -14- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page15 of 51

1 57. Wireless access points in US Cellular’s network modulate an analog carrier signal 2 to encode digital information, and demodulate such a carrier signal to decode the transmitted 3 digital information. 4 58. Wi-Fi routers in US Cellular’s network modulate an analog carrier signal to 5 encode digital information, and demodulate such a carrier signal to decode the transmitted digital 6 information. 7 59. US Cellular’s network includes mobile hotspots (e.g., Samsung SCH-LC11). 8 60. Mobile hotspots in US Cellular’s network modulate an analog carrier signal to 9 encode digital information, and demodulate such a carrier signal to decode the transmitted digital 10 information. 11 61. Subscriber devices using US Cellular’s network receive messages from and 12 transmit messages to Sprint’s mobile core network through base stations. 13 62. Subscriber devices using US Cellular’s network are capable of receiving messages 14 from and transmitting messages to US Cellular’s base stations through mobile hotspots. 15 63. Dual mode (Wi-Fi + Cellular) subscriber devices using US Cellular’s network are 16 capable of receiving messages from and transmitting messages to US Cellular’s mobile core 17 network through Wi-Fi access points. 18 64. US Cellular contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into 19 the United States material components, including dual-mode subscriber units and mobile hot 20 spots, for use by end-users (e.g., US Cellular subscribers) who directly infringe. Since at least the 21 filing of the amended complaint in this case on January 11, 2011, or the date US Cellular was 22 effectively served with the amended complaint, US Cellular contributorily infringed knowing that 23 these components would become a material part of a method, system or apparatus that infringes 24 the ’491 Patent. US Cellular’s components are made especially for infringing networks because 25 they include multi-mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only intended for 26 use in the infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce 27 / / / 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -15- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page16 of 51

1 suitable for substantial noninfringing use. US Cellular has been and is presently infringing at 2 least one claim of the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and elsewhere, literally 3 or under the doctrine of equivalents. 4 65. US Cellular induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its 5 customers to make and use infringing networks. US Cellular induces infringement through its 6 provision of technical support, advertisements, marketing materials, instruction booklets, 7 applications, mail services, and service manuals regarding the infringing networks or components 8 of infringing networks that it provides. US Cellular actively promotes the advantages that the 9 accused networks can offer its customers. End-users (e.g. US Cellular subscribers) of infringing 10 networks directly infringe the apparatuses and methods of ’491 Patent by making and using the 11 infringing networks. Since at least the filing of the amended complaint in this case on January 11, 12 2011, or the date US Cellular was effectively served with the amended complaint, US Cellular’s 13 actions have been intentional and done with knowledge that its actions induced infringement of 14 the ’491 Patent. 15 DEFENDANT EQUIPMENT/SOLUTION MANUFACTURERS 16 Aruba 17 66. Aruba Networks makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells dual-mode related 18 network components, associated services, data systems (e.g., Unlicensed Mobile Access 19 (“UMA”) capable systems), or related software solutions that fall within the scope of the claims 20 of the ’491 Patent or are specially configured for use in and constitute a material portion of the

21 patented invention (e.g., multi-mode communication networks comprising subscriber units, base 22 station repeater cells/digital transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that 23 facilitate switching between communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the 24 ’491 Patent). 25 67. Such multi-mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, 26 for example, IS-95A, 1xEV-DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, and 27 / / / 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -16- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page17 of 51

1 Wi-Fi technologies, such as Sprint’s network or may include CDMA (including, for example, 2 1xEV-DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), LTE, and Wi-Fi technologies such as US 3 Cellular’s network, which are both described in detail above. 4 68. The accused multi-mode communication networks may also include GSM, 5 Unlicensed Mobile Access (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), and Wi-Fi technologies, 6 such as deployed in AT&T or T-Mobile’s networks, which employ the same, substantially 7 similar, and/or the GSM equivalent components to those described above in relation to Sprint and 8 US Cellular’s networks. 9 69. In addition to MNO components, equipment, software, and devices, third parties 10 may operate Network Hub Switching Centers in accused infringing networks that are accessible 11 and used by MNOs and end users. For example, MNO customers can connect to third-party email 12 servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), 13 social networks (such as Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), 14 search engines (such as Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based services using 15 subscriber units provided by the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network 16 or through a Wi-Fi communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, such 17 as public hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network equipment 18 through roaming agreements. 19 70. Exemplar Aruba Networks accused components include dual-mode related 20 network equipment (e.g., MMC (multi-service mobility controller) 3000 series, and MMC 6000 21 series; Aruba WLAN access point devices: 90 Series, 100 Series, 130 Series, and 175 Series; 22 Aruba AP-124/AP-125; Aruba AP-93H; and Aruba AP-68/AP-68P) which enable subscriber 23 devices (e.g., UMA devices) to switch between communication paths having radio access 24 network components and Wi-Fi network components in accordance with the claims of the ’491 25 Patent. 26 71. Aruba Networks contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing 27 into the United States the above dual-mode related network components for use in infringing 28 networks. End-Users of infringing networks and Mobile Network Operators (“MNOs” e.g., at

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -17- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page18 of 51

1 least, Verizon, NCR, Bell Canada, and Telstra) directly infringe by making, selling, offering to sell, 2 and/or using the infringing networks. Since at least the filing of the original complaint in this 3 case on October 22, 2010, or the date Aruba Networks was effectively served with the original 4 complaint, Aruba Networks contributorily infringed knowing that its dual-mode related network 5 components would become a material part of a method, system or apparatus that infringes the 6 ’491 Patent. Aruba Networks’s dual-mode related network components are made especially for 7 infringing networks (which include features and functions that themselves are not a staple article 8 or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses) because they include 9 multi-mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only intended for use in the 10 infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable 11 for substantial noninfringing use. Aruba Networks has been and is presently infringing at least 12 one claim of the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and elsewhere, literally or 13 under the doctrine of equivalents. 14 72. Aruba Networks induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its 15 MNO and other customers to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Aruba 16 products by touting the advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing 17 technical assistance in integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service 18 manuals or other instructions explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. Aruba 19 Networks actively promotes the advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers.

20 Aruba Network’s customers that are MNOs (e.g., Verizon, NCR, Bell Canada, and Telstra,) and 21 end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses and methods of ’491 Patent by 22 making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing networks. Since at least the filing of 23 the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Aruba Networks was 24 effectively served with the original complaint, Aruba Networks’ actions have been intentional and 25 done with knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -18- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page19 of 51

1 Broadsoft 2 73. Broadsoft makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells software and equipment 3 systems that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are specially configured for 4 use in and constitute a material portion of the patented invention (e.g., multi-mode 5 communication networks comprising subscriber units, base station repeater cells/digital 6 transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that facilitate switching between 7 communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent). Such multi- 8 mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV- 9 DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, GSM, Unlicensed Mobile Access 10 (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) and Wi-Fi technologies. In addition to MNO 11 components, equipment, software, and devices, third parties may operate Network Hub Switching 12 Centers in accused infringing networks that are accessible and used by MNOs and end users. For 13 example, MNO customers can connect to third-party email servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft 14 Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), social networks (such as 15 Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), search engines (such as 16 Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based services using subscriber units provided by 17 the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network or through a wireless access 18 point communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, such as public 19 hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network equipment through 20 roaming agreements. 21 74. Exemplar Broadsoft software solutions (e.g., IMS Express) facilitate subscriber 22 devices to switch between communication paths having radio access network components and 23 Wi-Fi network components in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent. 24 Broadsoft’s IMS Xpress solution implements Voice over IP, Voice over LTE, and Fixed Mobile 25 Convergence. This solution is designed to be incorporated into accused networks and to enable 26 the transfer of mobile phone data from cellular networks to Wi-Fi networks. 27 / / / 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -19- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page20 of 51

1 75. Broadsoft contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 2 United States the above dual-mode solutions and related network components for use in 3 infringing networks. End-Users of infringing networks and MNOs directly infringe by making, 4 selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since at least the filing of the 5 original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Broadsoft was effectively served 6 with the original complaint, Broadsoft contributorily infringed knowing that its dual-mode related 7 network components would become a material part of a method, system or apparatus that 8 infringes the ’491 Patent. Broadsoft’s dual-mode related network components are made 9 especially for infringing networks (which include features and functions that themselves are not a 10 staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses) because 11 they include multi-mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only intended for 12 use in the infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce 13 suitable for substantial noninfringing use. Broadsoft has been and is presently infringing at least 14 one claim of the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and elsewhere, literally or 15 under the doctrine of equivalents. 16 76. Broadsoft induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its 17 customers to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Broadsoft products by 18 touting the advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing technical 19 assistance in integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service manuals or other 20 instructions explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. Broadsoft actively 21 promotes the advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers. Broadsoft’s 22 customers that are MNOs and end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses 23 and methods of ’491 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing 24 networks. Since at least the filing of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or 25 the date Broadsoft was effectively served with the original complaint, Broadsoft’s actions have 26 been intentional and done with knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 27 Patent. 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -20- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page21 of 51

1 Clavister 2 77. Clavister makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells dual-mode related network 3 components, associated services, data systems, or related software solutions that fall within the 4 scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are specially configured for use in and constitute a 5 material portion of the patented invention (e.g., multi-mode communication networks comprising 6 subscriber units, base station repeater cells/digital transmitters, and/or network hub switching 7 centers, and modems that facilitate switching between communication paths in accordance with 8 one or more claims of the ’491 Patent). Such multi-mode communication networks may be based 9 on CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV-DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G 10 LTE, 4G WiMAX, GSM, Unlicensed Mobile Access (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), 11 and Wi-Fi technologies. In addition to MNO components, equipment, software, and devices, third 12 parties may operate Network Hub Switching Centers in accused infringing networks that are 13 accessible and used by MNOs and end users. For example, MNO customers can connect to third- 14 party email servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and 15 Yahoo! email), social networks (such as Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and 16 Google Maps), search engines (such as Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based 17 services using subscriber units provided by the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an 18 MNO Network or through a wireless access point communications link. Third parties may also 19 provide access to modems, such as public hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide 20 radio access network equipment through roaming agreements. 21 78. Exemplar Clavister dual-mode related network solutions and components (e.g., I- 22 WLAN/TTG Blade; 20 FemtocelliSEGW Blade; and Clavister Security System 6002 Chasis) are 23 incorporated into accused networks to facilitate multi-mode communication including cellular 24 communication paths and wireless local area network paths. 25 79. Clavister contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 26 United States the above dual-mode solutions and related network components for use in 27 infringing networks. End-Users of infringing networks and MNOs directly infringe by making, 28 selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since at least the filing of the

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -21- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page22 of 51

1 original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Clavister was effectively served 2 with the original complaint, Clavister contributorily infringed knowing that its dual-mode related 3 network components would become a material part of a method, system or apparatus that 4 infringes the ’491 Patent. Clavister’s dual-mode related network components are made especially 5 for infringing networks (which include features and functions that themselves are not a staple 6 article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses) because they 7 include multi-mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only intended for use 8 in the infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce 9 suitable for substantial noninfringing use. Clavister has been and is presently infringing at least 10 one claim of the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and elsewhere, literally or 11 under the doctrine of equivalents. 12 80. Clavister induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its 13 customers to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Clavister products by 14 touting the advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing technical 15 assistance in integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service manuals or other 16 instructions explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. Clavister actively 17 promotes the advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers. Clavister’s customers 18 that are MNOs and end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses and 19 methods of ’491 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing networks. 20 Since at least the filing of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date 21 Clavister was effectively served with the original complaint, Clavister’s actions have been 22 intentional and done with knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 23 Cisco 24 81. Cisco makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells dual-mode related network 25 components, associated services, data systems, or related software solutions that fall within the 26 scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are specially configured for use in and constitute a 27 material portion of the patented invention (e.g., multi-mode communication networks comprising 28 subscriber units, base station repeater cells/digital transmitters, and/or network hub switching

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -22- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page23 of 51

1 centers, and modems that facilitate switching between communication paths in accordance with 2 one or more claims of the ’491 Patent). Such multi-mode communication networks may be based 3 on CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV-DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G 4 LTE, 4G WiMAX, and Wi-Fi technologies, such as Sprint’s network or may include CDMA 5 (including, for example, 1xEV-DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), LTE, and Wi-Fi 6 technologies such as US Cellular’s network, which are both described in detail above. The 7 accused multi-mode communication networks may also include GSM, Unlicensed Mobile Access 8 (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), and Wi-Fi technologies, such as deployed in AT&T or 9 T-Mobile’s networks, which employ the same, substantially similar, and/or the GSM equivalent 10 components to those described above in relation to Sprint and US Cellular’s networks. In 11 addition to MNO components, equipment, software, and devices, third parties may operate 12 Network Hub Switching Centers in accused infringing networks that are accessible and used by 13 MNOs and end users. For example, MNO customers can connect to third-party email servers 14 (such as Gmail, Microsoft Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), social 15 networks (such as Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), search 16 engines (such as Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based services using subscriber 17 units provided by the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network or through 18 a wireless access point communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, 19 such as public hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network 20 equipment through roaming agreements. 21 82. Exemplar Cisco dual-mode related network solutions and components (e.g., ASR 22 5000, ASR 5500, ASR 1000, Cisco Intelligent Services Gateway, Access Zone Router, SP Wi-Fi 23 Service Managers, Cisco Access Registrar and associated components, AAA Servers, CNS 24 Access Registrar versions 4.0 and higher, Mobile Switching Centers, Home Agent, Cisco 25 7600/6500 and Cisco 7206vxr,Cisco Broadband Wireless Gateway on Cisco 7600 and 7301 26 Routers, Cisco Flex 7500 Series Wireless Controller, Cisco 5500 Series Wireless LAN 27 Controller, Cisco 2500 Series Wireless Controller, Cisco Wireless Services Module 2 for 28 Catalyst, 6500 Series Switches, Cisco Wireless Controller Software for ISR G2, wireless routers,

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -23- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page24 of 51

1 Cisco® Enhanced UMA Security Gateway Solution, the Cisco CNS Access Registrar, the Cisco 2 IP Transfer Point, the Cisco AS5400 Series Universal Gateway, a range of Linksys® access 3 points, Cisco 3G Femtocell,Cisco Femtocell Gateway,Cisco Femtocell Management and 4 Provisioning Systems, ASR 5000) are incorporated into accused networks to facilitate multi- 5 mode communication including cellular communication paths and wireless local area network 6 paths. 7 83. Cisco directly infringes by testing its products in manners that meet every element 8 of the ’491 Patent. 9 84. Cisco contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 10 United States the above dual-mode solutions and related network components for use in 11 infringing networks. End-Users of infringing networks and MNOs directly infringe by making, 12 selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since at least the filing of the 13 original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Cisco was effectively served with 14 the original complaint, Cisco contributorily infringed knowing that its dual-mode related network 15 components would become a material part of a method, system or apparatus that infringes the 16 ’491 Patent. Cisco’s dual-mode related network components are made especially for infringing 17 networks (which include features and functions that themselves are not a staple article or 18 commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses) because they include multi- 19 mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only intended for use in the 20 infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable 21 for substantial noninfringing use. Cisco has been and is presently infringing at least one claim of 22 the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and elsewhere, literally or under the 23 doctrine of equivalents. 24 85. Cisco induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its customers 25 to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Cisco products by touting the 26 advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing technical assistance in 27 integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service manuals or other instructions 28 explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. Cisco actively promotes the

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -24- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page25 of 51

1 advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers. Cisco’s customers that are MNOs 2 and end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses and methods of ’491 Patent 3 by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing networks. Since at least the filing 4 of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Cisco was effectively 5 served with the original complaint, Cisco’s actions have been intentional and done with 6 knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 7 Mavenir 8 86. Mavenir makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells software and equipment 9 systems that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are specially configured for 10 use in and constitute a material portion of the patented invention (e.g., multi-mode 11 communication networks comprising subscriber units, base station repeater cells/digital 12 transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that facilitate switching between 13 communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent). Such multi- 14 mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV- 15 DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, GSM, Unlicensed Mobile Access 16 (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), and Wi-Fi technologies. In addition to MNO 17 components, equipment, software, and devices, third parties may operate Network Hub Switching 18 Centers in accused infringing networks that are accessible and used by MNOs and end users. For 19 example, MNO customers can connect to third-party email servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft 20 Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), social networks (such as 21 Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), search engines (such as 22 Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based services using subscriber units provided by 23 the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network or through a wireless access 24 point communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, such as public 25 hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network equipment through 26 roaming agreements. 27 / / / 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -25- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page26 of 51

1 87. Exemplar Mavenir dual-mode related network solutions and components (e.g., 2 Mavenir’s Convergence Telephony Application Server, Mobility Application Server, and mOne 3 Convergence Platform) are incorporated into accused networks to facilitate multi-mode 4 communication including cellular communication paths and wireless local area network paths. 5 88. Mavenir contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 6 United States the above dual-mode solutions and related network components for use in

7 infringing networks. End-Users of infringing networks and MNOs (including at least Vodafone,

8 Telefonica Moviles, T-Mobile; Telstra, Bharti; Viettel, MetroPCS, Leap Wireless, and Bell Mobility) 9 directly infringe by making, selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since 10 at least the filing of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Mavenir 11 was effectively served with the original complaint, Mavenir contributorily infringed knowing that 12 its dual-mode related network components would become a material part of a method, system or 13 apparatus that infringes the ’491 Patent. Mavenir’s dual-mode related network components are

14 made especially for infringing networks (which include features and functions that themselves are

15 not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use) because 16 they include multi-mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only intended for 17 use in the infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce 18 suitable for substantial noninfringing use. Mavenir has been and is presently infringing at least 19 one claim of the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and elsewhere, literally or 20 under the doctrine of equivalents.

21 89. Mavenir induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its 22 customers to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Mavenir products by 23 touting the advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing technical 24 assistance in integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service manuals or other 25 instructions explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. Mavenir actively 26 promotes the advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers. Mavenir’s customers 27 that are MNOs and end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses and 28 methods of ’491 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing networks.

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -26- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page27 of 51

1 Since at least the filing of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date 2 Mavenir was effectively served with the original complaint, Mavenir’s actions have been 3 intentional and done with knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 4 Meru 5 90. Meru makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells software and equipment 6 systems that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are specially configured for 7 use in and constitute a material portion of the patented invention (e.g., multi-mode 8 communication networks comprising subscriber units, base station repeater cells/digital 9 transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that facilitate switching between 10 communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent). Such multi- 11 mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV- 12 DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, GSM, Unlicensed Mobile Access 13 (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), and Wi-Fi technologies. In addition to MNO 14 components, equipment, software, and devices, third parties may operate Network Hub Switching 15 Centers in accused infringing networks that are accessible and used by MNOs and end users. For 16 example, MNO customers can connect to third-party email servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft 17 Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), social networks (such as 18 Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), search engines (such as 19 Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based services using subscriber units provided by 20 the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network or through a wireless access 21 point communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, such as public 22 hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network equipment through 23 roaming agreements. 24 91. Exemplar Meru dual-mode related network solutions and components (e.g., Meru 25 WLAN solutions and components, Meru Virtualized WLAN; System Director; AP 110; AP 1000 26 6 Series; AP 300 Series; AP 433i, AP433 is, and AP 433e; and OAP 380 and OAP 433e) are 27 incorporated into accused networks to facilitate multi-mode communication including cellular 28 communication paths and wireless local area network paths.

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -27- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page28 of 51

1 92. Meru contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 2 United States the above dual-mode solutions and related network components for use in

3 infringing networks. End-Users of infringing networks and MNOs (including at least T-Mobile) 4 directly infringe by making, selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since 5 at least the filing of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Meru was 6 effectively served with the original complaint, Meru contributorily infringed knowing that its 7 dual-mode related network components would become a material part of a method, system or

8 apparatus that infringes the ’491 Patent. Meru’s dual-mode related network components are

9 made especially for infringing networks (with features and functions that themselves are not a staple

10 article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non- infringing use) because they include 11 multi-mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only intended for use in the 12 infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable 13 for substantial noninfringing use. Meru has been and is presently infringing at least one claim of 14 the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and elsewhere, literally or under the 15 doctrine of equivalents. 16 93. Meru induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its customers 17 to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Meru products by touting the 18 advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing technical assistance in 19 integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service manuals or other instructions 20 explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. Meru actively promotes the

21 advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers. Meru’s customers that are MNOs 22 and end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses and methods of ’491 Patent 23 by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing networks. Since at least the filing 24 of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Meru was effectively 25 served with the original complaint, Meru’s actions have been intentional and done with 26 knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 27 / / / 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -28- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page29 of 51

1 SerComm 2 94. SerComm makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells software and equipment 3 systems that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are specially configured for 4 use in and constitute a material portion of the patented invention (e.g., multi-mode 5 communication networks comprising subscriber units, base station repeater cells/digital 6 transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that facilitate switching between 7 communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent). Such multi- 8 mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV- 9 DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, GSM, Unlicensed Mobile Access 10 (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), and Wi-Fi technologies. In addition to MNO 11 components, equipment, software, and devices, third parties may operate Network Hub Switching 12 Centers in accused infringing networks that are accessible and used by MNOs and end users. For 13 example, MNO customers can connect to third-party email servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft 14 Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), social networks (such as 15 Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), search engines (such as 16 Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based services using subscriber units provided by 17 the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network or through a wireless access 18 point communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, such as public 19 hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network equipment through 20 roaming agreements. 21 95. Exemplar SerComm dual-mode related network solutions and components (e.g., 22 AD1006 11N Wireless ADSL Gateway, Cable RG Cable Residential Gateway, FR1088BR 23 Triple-Play Residential Gateway, IP1006GR 11N Wireless Gigabit Gaming Router, IP1006RRv2 24 11N Wireless BroadBand Router, IP1006SR150N Wireless BroadBand Router, AP101nA 11N 25 Wireless Access Point, and femtocells such as FC07xU Series, FC17xU Series, FC23xU Series, 26 FC270U) are incorporated into accused networks to facilitate multi-mode communication 27 including cellular communication paths and wireless local area network paths. 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -29- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page30 of 51

1 96. SerComm contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 2 United States the above dual-mode solutions and related network components for use in 3 infringing networks. End-Users of infringing networks and MNOs directly infringe by making, 4 selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since at least the filing of the 5 original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date SerComm was effectively served 6 with the original complaint, SerComm contributorily infringed knowing that its dual-mode related 7 network components would become a material part of a method, system or apparatus that 8 infringes the ’491 Patent. SerComm’s dual-mode related network components are made 9 especially for infringing networks (which include features and functions that themselves are not a 10 staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses) because 11 they include multi-mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only intended for 12 use in the infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce 13 suitable for substantial noninfringing use. SerComm has been and is presently infringing at least 14 one claim of the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and elsewhere, literally or 15 under the doctrine of equivalents. 16 97. SerComm induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its 17 customers to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate SerComm products by 18 touting the advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing technical 19 assistance in integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service manuals or other 20 instructions explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. SerComm actively 21 promotes the advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers. SerComm’s 22 customers that are MNOs and end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses 23 and methods of ’491 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing 24 networks. Since at least the filing of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or 25 the date SerComm was effectively served with the original complaint, SerComm’s actions have 26 been intentional and done with knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 27 Patent. 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -30- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page31 of 51

1 Sonus 2 98. Sonus makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells software and equipment 3 systems that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are specially configured for 4 use in and constitute a material portion of the patented invention (e.g., multi-mode 5 communication networks comprising subscriber units, base station repeater cells/digital 6 transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that facilitate switching between 7 communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent). Such multi- 8 mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV- 9 DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, GSM, Unlicensed Mobile Access 10 (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS),and Wi-Fi technologies. In addition to MNO 11 components, equipment, software, and devices, third parties may operate Network Hub Switching 12 Centers in accused infringing networks that are accessible and used by MNOs and end users. For 13 example, MNO customers can connect to third-party email servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft 14 Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), social networks (such as 15 Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), search engines (such as 16 Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based services using subscriber units provided by 17 the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network or through a wireless access 18 point communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, such as public 19 hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network equipment through 20 roaming agreements. 21 99. Exemplar Sonus dual-mode related network solutions and components (e.g., Sonus 22 Centralized Policy Server, IMS Breakout Gateway Control Function Routing Server, Sonus GSX 23 series, ASX Voice Application Server, ASX Telephony Application Server, and Access Directory 24 Server) are incorporated into accused networks to facilitate multi-mode communication including 25 cellular communication paths and wireless local area network paths. 26 100. Sonus contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 27 United States the above dual-mode solutions and related network components for use in 28 infringing networks. End-Users of infringing networks and Mobile Network Operators (including

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -31- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page32 of 51

1 at least, Cable and Wireless International, Global Crossing, Interoute, Level 3, NTT

2 Communications, Qwest, Telenet, Time Warner Telecom, and Verizon) directly infringe by making, 3 selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since at least the filing of the 4 original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Sonus was effectively served with 5 the original complaint, Sonus contributorily infringed knowing that its dual-mode related network 6 components would become a material part of a method, system or apparatus that infringes the 7 ’491 Patent. Sonus’s dual-mode related network components are made especially for infringing 8 networks (which include features and functions that themselves are not a staple article or 9 commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses) because they include multi- 10 mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only intended for use in the 11 infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable 12 for substantial noninfringing use. Sonus has been and is presently infringing at least one claim of 13 the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and elsewhere, literally or under the 14 doctrine of equivalents. 15 101. Sonus induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its customers 16 to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Sonus products by touting the 17 advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing technical assistance in 18 integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service manuals or other instructions 19 explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. Sonus actively promotes the 20 advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers. Sonus’s customers that are MNOs 21 and end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses and methods of ’491 Patent 22 by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing networks. Since at least the filing 23 of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Sonus was effectively 24 served with the original complaint, Sonus’s actions have been intentional and done with 25 knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -32- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page33 of 51

1 Stoke 2 102. Stoke makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells software and equipment 3 systems that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are specially configured for 4 use in and constitute a material portion of the patented invention (e.g., multi-mode 5 communication networks comprising subscriber units, base station repeater cells/digital 6 transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that facilitate switching between 7 communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent). Such multi- 8 mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV- 9 DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, GSM, Unlicensed Mobile Access 10 (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), and Wi-Fi technologies. In addition to MNO 11 components, equipment, software, and devices, third parties may operate Network Hub Switching 12 Centers in accused infringing networks that are accessible and used by MNOs and end users. For 13 example, MNO customers can connect to third-party email servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft 14 Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), social networks (such as 15 Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), search engines (such as 16 Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based services using subscriber units provided by 17 the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network or through a wireless access 18 point communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, such as public 19 hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network equipment through 20 roaming agreements. 21 103. Exemplar Stoke dual-mode related network solutions and components (e.g., model 22 SSX 3000) are incorporated into accused networks to facilitate multi-mode communication 23 including cellular communication paths and wireless local area network paths. 24 104. Stoke contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 25 United States the above dual-mode solutions and related network components for use in 26 infringing networks. End-Users of infringing networks and MNOs directly infringe by making, 27 selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since at least the filing of the 28 original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Stoke was effectively served with

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -33- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page34 of 51

1 the original complaint, Stoke contributorily infringed knowing that its dual-mode related network 2 components would become a material part of a method, system or apparatus that infringes the 3 ’491 Patent. Stoke’s dual-mode related network components are made especially for infringing 4 networks (which include features and functions that themselves are not a staple article or 5 commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses) because they include multi- 6 mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only intended for use in the 7 infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable 8 for substantial noninfringing use. Stoke has been and is presently infringing at least one claim of 9 the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and elsewhere, literally or under the 10 doctrine of equivalents. 11 105. Stoke induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its customers 12 to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Stoke products by touting the 13 advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing technical assistance in 14 integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service manuals or other instructions 15 explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. Stoke actively promotes the 16 advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers. Stoke’s customers that are MNOs 17 and end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses and methods of ’491 Patent 18 by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing networks. Since at least the filing 19 of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Stoke was effectively 20 served with the original complaint, Stoke’s actions have been intentional and done with 21 knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 22 Motorola Solutions 23 106. Motorola Solutions makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells software and 24 equipment systems that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are specially 25 configured for use in and constitute a material portion of the patented invention (e.g., multi-mode 26 communication networks comprising subscriber units, base station repeater cells/digital 27 transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that facilitate switching between 28 communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent). Such multi-

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -34- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page35 of 51

1 mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV- 2 DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, GSM, Unlicensed Mobile Access 3 (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), and Wi-Fi technologies. In addition to MNO 4 components, equipment, software, and devices, third parties may operate Network Hub Switching 5 Centers in accused infringing networks that are accessible and used by MNOs and end users. For 6 example, MNO customers can connect to third-party email servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft 7 Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), social networks (such as 8 Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), search engines (such as 9 Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based services using subscriber units provided by 10 the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network or through a wireless access 11 point communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, such as public 12 hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network equipment through 13 roaming agreements. 14 107. Exemplar Motorola Solutions dual-mode related network solutions and 15 components (e.g., AP 300, AP 650, MC 802, AP 6511, AP 5132, AP 5181, VMM 4300, AP 16 7131, AP 7181, RFS 4000, RFS 6000, RFS 7000; Motorola Backhaul devices: PTP 100, PTP 17 200, PTP 500, PTP 600, PTP 800, PMP 100, PMP 320, PMP 430; and Motorola mobile 18 computers and handsets: ES400, MC65, MC75A, MC9500k, MC959B, VC69096) are 19 incorporated into accused networks to facilitate multi-mode communication including cellular 20 communication paths and wireless local area network paths. 21 108. Motorola Solutions contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or 22 importing into the United States the above dual-mode solutions and related network components 23 for use in infringing networks. End-Users of infringing networks and MNOs directly infringe by 24 making, selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since at least the filing of 25 the amended complaint in this case on January 11, 2011, or the date Motorola Solutions was 26 effectively served with the amended complaint, Motorola Solutions contributorily infringed 27 knowing that its dual-mode related network components would become a material part of a 28 method, system or apparatus that infringes the ’491 Patent. Motorola Solutions’ dual-mode

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -35- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page36 of 51

1 related network components are made especially for infringing networks (which include features 2 and functions that themselves are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for 3 substantial non-infringing uses) because they include multi-mode or multi-mode enabling features 4 and functions that are only intended for use in the infringing networks and, therefore, are not 5 staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. Motorola 6 Solutions has been and is presently infringing at least one claim of the ’491 Patent in this District, 7 the State of California, and elsewhere, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. 8 109. Motorola Solutions induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging 9 its customers to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Motorola Solutions 10 products by touting the advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing 11 technical assistance in integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service 12 manuals or other instructions explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. 13 Motorola Solutions actively promotes the advantages that the accused networks can offer its 14 customers. Motorola Solutions’s customers that are MNOs and end-users of infringing networks 15 directly infringe the apparatuses and methods of ’491 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or 16 offering to sell the infringing networks. Since at least the filing of the amended complaint in this 17 case on January 11, 2011, or the date Motorola Solutions was effectively served with the 18 amended complaint, Motorola Solutions’s actions have been intentional and done with knowledge 19 that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 20 Taqua 21 110. Taqua makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells software, equipment systems, 22 telecommunications systems and applications that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’491 23 Patent or are specially configured for use in and constitute a material portion of the patented 24 invention (e.g., multi-mode communication networks comprising subscriber units, base station 25 repeater cells/digital transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that 26 facilitate switching between communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the 27 ’491 Patent). Such multi-mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, for 28 example, IS-95A, 1xEV-DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, GSM,

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -36- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page37 of 51

1 Unlicensed Mobile Access (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), and Wi-Fi technologies. In 2 addition to MNO components, equipment, software, and devices, third parties may operate 3 Network Hub Switching Centers in accused infringing networks that are accessible and used by 4 MNOs and end users. For example, MNO customers can connect to third-party email servers 5 (such as Gmail, Microsoft Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), social 6 networks (such as Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), search 7 engines (such as Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based services using subscriber 8 units provided by the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network or through 9 a wireless access point communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, 10 such as public hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network 11 equipment through roaming agreements. 12 111. Exemplar Taqua dual-mode related network solutions and components (e.g., 13 T7000 Intelligent Switching Systems, TCS6100 Convergence Servers, TaquaWorks, W-Series 14 NLOS Backhaul Systems, and the Taqua Android VoIP Client App) are incorporated into 15 accused networks to facilitate multi-mode communication including cellular communication 16 paths and wireless local area network paths. 17 112. Taqua contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 18 United States the above dual-mode solutions and related network components for use in

19 infringing networks. End-Users of infringing networks and MNOs (including, at least, Vodafone,

20 Bell Mobility, British Telecom, Telus Mobility, Pine Belt Telephone Company, Inc. and Cozad

21 Telephone Co.) directly infringe by making, selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing 22 networks. Since at least the filing of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or 23 the date Taqua was effectively served with the original complaint, Taqua contributorily infringed 24 knowing that its dual-mode related network components would become a material part of a 25 method, system or apparatus that infringes the ’491 Patent. Taqua’s dual-mode related network 26 components are made especially for infringing networks (which include features and functions 27 that themselves are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non- 28 infringing uses) because they include multi-mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -37- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page38 of 51

1 that are only intended for use in the infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or 2 commodities of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. Taqua has been and is 3 presently infringing at least one claim of the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, 4 and elsewhere, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. 5 113. Taqua induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its customers 6 to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Taqua products by touting the 7 advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing technical assistance in 8 integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service manuals or other instructions 9 explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. Taqua actively promotes the 10 advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers. Taqua’s customers that are MNOs 11 and end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses and methods of ’491 Patent 12 by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing networks. Since at least the filing 13 of the original complaint in this case on October 22, 2010, or the date Taqua was effectively 14 served with the original complaint, Taqua’s actions have been intentional and done with 15 knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 16 Kineto 17 114. Kineto makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells software and equipment 18 systems that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are specially configured for 19 use in and constitute a material portion of the patented invention (e.g., multi-mode 20 communication networks comprising subscriber units, base station repeater cells/digital

21 transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that facilitate switching between 22 communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent). Such multi- 23 mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV- 24 DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, GSM, Unlicensed Mobile Access 25 (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), and Wi-Fi technologies. In addition to MNO 26 components, equipment, software, and devices, third parties may operate Network Hub Switching 27 Centers in accused infringing networks that are accessible and used by MNOs and end users. For 28 example, MNO customers can connect to third-party email servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -38- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page39 of 51

1 Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), social networks (such as 2 Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), search engines (such as 3 Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based services using subscriber units provided by 4 the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network or through a wireless access 5 point communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, such as public 6 hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network equipment through 7 roaming agreements. 8 115. Exemplar Kineto dual-mode related network solutions and components (e.g., 9 Smart Wi-Fi and Smart VoIP Solutions, Smart Wi-Fi Gateway) are incorporated into accused 10 networks to facilitate multi-mode communication including cellular communication paths and 11 wireless local area network paths. 12 116. Kineto contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 13 United States the above dual-mode solutions and related network components for use in 14 infringing networks. End-Users of infringing networks and MNOs (including at least T-Mobile) 15 directly infringe by making, selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since 16 at least the filing of the amended complaint in this case on January 11, 2011, or the date Kineto 17 was effectively served with the amended complaint, Kineto contributorily infringed knowing that 18 its dual-mode related network components would become a material part of a method, system or 19 apparatus that infringes the ’491 Patent. Kineto’s dual-mode related network components are 20 made especially for infringing networks (which include features and functions that themselves are 21 not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses) 22 because they include multi-mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only 23 intended for use in the infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities 24 of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. Kineto has been and is presently 25 infringing at least one claim of the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and 26 elsewhere, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. 27 / / / 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -39- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page40 of 51

1 117. Kineto induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its customers 2 to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Kineto products by touting the 3 advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing technical assistance in 4 integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service manuals or other instructions 5 explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. Kineto actively promotes the 6 advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers. Kineto’s customers that are MNOs 7 and end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses and methods of ’491 Patent 8 by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing networks. Since at least the filing 9 of the amended complaint in this case on January 11, 2011, or the date Kineto was effectively 10 served with the amended complaint, Kineto’s actions have been intentional and done with 11 knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 12 Airvana 13 118. Airvana makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells software and equipment 14 systems that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are specially configured for 15 use in and constitute a material portion of the patented invention (e.g., multi-mode 16 communication networks comprising subscriber units, base station repeater cells/digital 17 transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that facilitate switching between 18 communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent). Such multi- 19 mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV- 20 DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, GSM, Unlicensed Mobile Access

21 (UMA), IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), and Wi-Fi technologies. In addition to MNO 22 components, equipment, software, and devices, third parties may operate Network Hub Switching 23 Centers in accused infringing networks that are accessible and used by MNOs and end users. For 24 example, MNO customers can connect to third-party email servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft 25 Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), social networks (such as 26 Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), search engines (such as 27 Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based services using subscriber units provided by 28 the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network or through a wireless access

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -40- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page41 of 51

1 point communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, such as public 2 hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network equipment through 3 roaming agreements. 4 119. Exemplar Airvana dual-mode related network solutions and components (e.g., 5 Femtocell base station models Airvana HubBub CDMA, Airvana HubBub UMTS, Airave) are 6 incorporated into accused networks to facilitate multi-mode communication including cellular 7 communication paths and wireless local area network paths. 8 120. Airvana’s Airave contains special functionality to provide communication access 9 to Sprint subscribers where cellular is impaired inadequate or complete unavailable. 10 121. Airvana provides instructions to its customers to use the Airave an infringing 11 manner. 12 122. Airvana contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 13 United States the above dual-mode solutions and related network components for use in 14 infringing networks. End-Users of infringing networks and MNOs (including at least Sprint) 15 directly infringe by making, selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since 16 at least the filing of the amended complaint in this case on January 11, 2011, or the date Airvana 17 was effectively served with the amended complaint, Airvana contributorily infringed knowing 18 that its dual-mode related network components would become a material part of a method, system 19 or apparatus that infringes the ’491 Patent. Airvana’s dual-mode related network components are 20 made especially for infringing networks (which include features and functions that themselves are 21 not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses) 22 because they include multi-mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions that are only 23 intended for use in the infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or commodities 24 of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. Airvana has been and is presently 25 infringing at least one claim of the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of California, and 26 elsewhere, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. 27 / / / 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -41- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page42 of 51

1 123. Airvana induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its 2 customers to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Airvana products by 3 touting the advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing technical 4 assistance in integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service manuals or other 5 instructions explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. Airvana actively 6 promotes the advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers. Airvana’s customers 7 that are MNOs and end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses and 8 methods of ’491 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing networks. 9 Since at least the filing of the amended complaint in this case on January 11, 2011, or the date 10 Airvana was effectively served with the amended complaint, Airvana’s actions have been 11 intentional and done with knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 12 SUBSCRIBER DEVICE MANUFACTURERS 13 HTC 14 124. HTC makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells dual-mode (Wi-Fi + cellular) 15 subscriber units that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are specially 16 configured for use in and constitute a material portion of the patented invention (e.g., multi-mode 17 communication networks comprising subscriber units, base station repeater cells/digital 18 transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that facilitate switching between 19 communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent). Such multi- 20 mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, for example, IS-95A, 1xEV-

21 DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, and Wi-Fi technologies, such as 22 Sprint’s network or may include CDMA (including, for example, 1xEV-DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, 23 Rel. 0, and 1X), LTE, and Wi-Fi technologies such as US Cellular’s network, which are both 24 described in detail above. In addition to MNO components, equipment, software, and devices, 25 third parties may operate Network Hub Switching Centers in accused infringing networks that are 26 accessible and used by MNOs and end users. For example, MNO customers can connect to third- 27 party email servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft Exchange, Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and 28 Yahoo! email), social networks (such as Facebook), location services (such as MapQuest and

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -42- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page43 of 51

1 Google Maps), search engines (such as Yahoo!, Google, and Bing), and other internet based 2 services using subscriber units provided by the MNO, a handset manufacturer, or retailer via an 3 MNO Network or through a wireless access point communications link. Third parties may also 4 provide access to modems, such as public hotspots and private wireless access points, or provide 5 radio access network equipment through roaming agreements. 6 125. Exemplar HTC dual-mode subscriber units (e.g.,HTC Arrive, HTC Hero with 7 Google, HTC EVO Design 4G, HTC EVO 4G LTE, HTC EVO 3D,HTC EVO 4G, HTC One V, 8 HTC Merge, HTC Wildfire S,HTC 7 Pro, HTC Desire, HTC Touch Pro 2, HTC Hero S) are 9 incorporated into accused networks to facilitate multi-mode communication including cellular 10 communication paths and wireless local area network paths. Dual-mode subscriber units are 11 devices that can access a base station repeater cell (i.e., the radio access network) or a network 12 hub switching center (i.e., a mobile core network or third party web server) through a base station 13 or a modem (e.g., Wi-Fi access point). All dual-mode devices sold by HTC are accused 14 subscriber units. 15 126. HTC manufactures and sells dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi-Fi) subscriber 16 devices for the Sprint network. 17 127. HTC manufactures and sells dual-mode (cellular + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices for 18 the US Cellular network. 19 128. HTC dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices are capable of 20 communicating via wireless signals with Wi-Fi Access Points using standard communications 21 protocols (i.e. IEEE 802.11). 22 129. HTC dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices are capable of 23 accessing Facebook via a base station and a Wi-Fi Access Point. 24 130. HTC dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices are capable of 25 accessing the same internet content via a base station and a Wi-Fi Access Point. 26 131. Users of HTC subscriber devices can access internet content via Sprint’s cellular 27 macro network and through an Airave Access Point. 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -43- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page44 of 51

1 132. An electronic switch is a basic building block of consumer electronics. 2 133. HTC dual-mode (cellular + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices contain one or more 3 electronic switches that activate the Wi-Fi or cellular communication capabilities in the device to 4 transmit communications via the Wi-Fi or cellular channel. 5 134. HTC contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing into the 6 United States the above dual-mode subscriber units for use in infringing networks. End-Users of 7 infringing networks and MNOs (including at least Sprint and US Cellular) directly infringe by 8 making, selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since at least the filing of 9 the amended complaint in this case on January 11, 2011, or the date HTC was effectively served 10 with the amended complaint, HTC contributorily infringed knowing that its dual-mode subscriber 11 units would become a material part of a method, system or apparatus that infringes the ’491 12 Patent. HTC’s dual-mode subscriber units are made especially for infringing networks (which 13 include features and functions that themselves are not a staple article or commodity of commerce 14 suitable for substantial non-infringing uses) because they include multi-mode or multi-mode 15 enabling features and functions that are only intended for use in the infringing networks and, 16 therefore, are not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial 17 noninfringing use. HTC has been and is presently infringing at least one claim of the ’491 Patent 18 in this District, the State of California, and elsewhere, literally or under the doctrine of 19 equivalents. 20 135. HTC induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging its customers 21 to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate HTC products by touting the 22 advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing technical assistance in 23 integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service manuals or other instructions 24 explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. HTC actively promotes the 25 advantages that the accused networks can offer its customers. HTC’s customers that are MNOs 26 and end-users of infringing networks directly infringe the apparatuses and methods of ’491 Patent 27 by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the infringing networks. Since at least the filing 28 of the amended complaint in this case on January 11, 2011, or the date HTC was effectively

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -44- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page45 of 51

1 served with the amended complaint, HTC’s actions have been intentional and done with 2 knowledge that its actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 3 Motorola Mobility 4 136. Motorola Mobility makes, uses, imports, offers for sale, or sells dual-mode (Wi-Fi 5 + cellular) subscriber units that fall within the scope of the claims of the ’491 Patent or are 6 specially configured for use in and constitute a material portion of the patented invention (e.g., 7 multi-mode communication networks comprising subscriber units, base station repeater 8 cells/digital transmitters, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that facilitate 9 switching between communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 10 Patent). Such multi-mode communication networks may be based on CDMA (including, for 11 example, IS-95A, 1xEV-DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), 4G LTE, 4G WiMAX, and Wi- 12 Fi technologies, such as Sprint’s network or may include CDMA (including, for example, 1xEV- 13 DO, Rev. A, 1xEV-DO, Rel. 0, and 1X), LTE, and Wi-Fi technologies such as US Cellular’s 14 network, which are both described in detail above. In addition to MNO components, equipment, 15 software, and devices, third parties may operate Network Hub Switching Centers in accused 16 infringing networks that are accessible and used by MNOs and end users. For example, MNO 17 customers can connect to third-party email servers (such as Gmail, Microsoft Exchange, 18 Blackberry Enterprise Servers, and Yahoo! email), social networks (such as Facebook), location 19 services (such as MapQuest and Google Maps), search engines (such as Yahoo!, Google, and 20 Bing), and other internet based services using subscriber units provided by the MNO, a handset 21 manufacturer, or retailer via an MNO Network or through a wireless access point 22 communications link. Third parties may also provide access to modems, such as public hotspots 23 and private wireless access points, or provide radio access network equipment through roaming 24 agreements. 25 137. Exemplar Motorola Mobility dual-mode subscriber units (e.g., Motorola XPRT, 26 Motorola PHOTON 4G, Motorola ADMIRAL, Motorola TITANIUM, Motorola Electrify are 27 incorporated into accused networks to facilitate multi-mode communication including cellular 28 communication paths and wireless local area network paths. Dual-mode subscriber units are

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -45- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page46 of 51

1 devices that can access a base station repeater cell (i.e., the radio access network) or a network 2 hub switching center (i.e., a mobile core network or third party web server) through a base station 3 or a modem (e.g., Wi-Fi access point). All dual-mode devices sold by Motorola Mobility are 4 accused subscriber units. 5 138. Motorola Mobility manufactures and sells dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi- 6 Fi) subscriber devices for the Sprint network. 7 139. Motorola Mobility manufactures and sells dual-mode (cellular + Wi-Fi) subscriber 8 devices for the US Cellular network. 9 140. Motorola Mobility dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices 10 are capable of communicating via wireless signals with Wi-Fi Access Points using standard 11 communications protocols (i.e. IEEE 802.11). 12 141. Motorola Mobility dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices 13 are capable of accessing Facebook via a base station and a Wi-Fi Access Point. 14 142. Motorola Mobility dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices 15 are capable of accessing the same internet content via a base station and a Wi-Fi Access Point. 16 143. Users of Motorola Mobility subscriber devices can access internet content via 17 Sprint’s cellular macro network and through an Airave Access Point. 18 144. An electronic switch is a basic building block of consumer electronics. 19 145. Motorola Mobility dual-mode ((cellular or WiMAX) + Wi-Fi) subscriber devices 20 contain one or more electronic switches that activate the Wi-Fi or cellular communication 21 capabilities in the device to transmit communications via the Wi-Fi or cellular channel. 22 146. Email services (such as Gmail) route message to and from Motorola Mobility 23 subscriber devices. 24 147. Motorola Mobility contributorily infringes by selling, offering to sell, or importing 25 into the United States the above dual-mode subscriber units for use in infringing networks. End- 26 Users of infringing networks and MNOs (including at least Sprint and US Cellular) directly 27 infringe by making, selling, offering to sell, and/or using the infringing networks. Since at least 28 the filing of the amended complaint in this case on January 11, 2011, or the date Motorola

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -46- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page47 of 51

1 Mobility was effectively served with the amended complaint, Motorola Mobility contributorily 2 infringed knowing that its dual-mode subscriber units would become a material part of a method, 3 system or apparatus that infringes the ’491 Patent. Motorola Mobility’s dual-mode subscriber 4 units are made especially for infringing networks (which include features and functions that 5 themselves are not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non- 6 infringing uses) because they include multi-mode or multi-mode enabling features and functions 7 that are only intended for use in the infringing networks and, therefore, are not staple articles or 8 commodities of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use. Motorola Mobility has been 9 and is presently infringing at least one claim of the ’491 Patent in this District, the State of 10 California, and elsewhere, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. 11 148. Motorola Mobility induces infringement by actively instructing and encouraging 12 its customers to build, maintain, and use infringing networks that incorporate Motorola Mobility 13 products by touting the advantages that its products can provide to such networks, by providing 14 technical assistance in integrating its products into such networks, or by providing service 15 manuals or other instructions explaining how to use their products in infringing manners. 16 Motorola Mobility actively promotes the advantages that the accused networks can offer its 17 customers. Motorola Mobility’s customers that are MNOs and end-users of infringing networks 18 directly infringe the apparatuses and methods of ’491 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or 19 offering to sell the infringing networks. Since at least the filing of the amended complaint in this 20 case on January 11, 2011, or the date Motorola Mobility was effectively served with the amended 21 complaint, Motorola Mobility’s actions have been intentional and done with knowledge that its 22 actions induced infringement of the ’491 Patent. 23 INFRINGEMENT OF THE EON PATENT-IN-SUIT 24 149. EON repeats and realleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 22-148 as if those 25 allegations have been fully set forth herein. 26 150. Defendants, without authorization or license and in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, 27 have been and/or are now infringing at least one claim of the ’491 Patent in this District, the State 28 of California, and elsewhere by making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing dual-mode

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -47- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page48 of 51

1 related network components, associated services, data systems or related software solutions that 2 fall within the scope of at least one claim of the ’491 Patent or are specially configured for use in 3 and constitute a material portion of the patented invention (e.g., dual-mode communication 4 networks comprising subscriber units, base stations, and/or network hub switching centers, and 5 modems that facilitate switching between communication paths in accordance with one or more 6 claims of the ’491 Patent). Defendants are and/or have been infringing literally or under the 7 doctrine of equivalents, directly or indirectly by knowingly and specifically intending to 8 contribute to or induce infringement by others, alone or through their relationships with network 9 component manufacturers, wireless network operators, wireless customers and/or end-users. 10 151. Defendants have acted in the manners described in the above paragraphs with 11 knowledge of the ’491 Patent, knowledge that their respective product or component directly 12 infringes and/or would be used in a method, system or apparatus that infringes the ’491 Patent, 13 knowledge that their respective product or component is especially made or adapted for use in a 14 method, system or apparatus that infringes the ’491 Patent and is not a staple article or 15 commodity suitable for substantial noninfringing use, and knowledge that their product or 16 component would constitute a material part of a method, system or apparatus (e.g., dual-mode 17 communication networks comprising subscriber units, base stations, and/or network hub 18 switching centers, and modems that facilitate switching between communication paths in 19 accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent) that infringes the ’491 Patent. 20 Defendants acted in the manners described above knowing and intending that their acts would 21 induce infringement by others. 22 152. In addition to the allegations of direct infringement alleged in the preceding 23 paragraphs, EON also alleged indirect infringement under 35 U.S.C. §§271(b) and (c) against the 24 Defendants. In relation to EON’s indirect infringement claims, the corresponding direct 25 infringers are those people or entities, including but not limited to the people and entities listed in 26 paragraphs 22-148, that are induced by or receive contributions from the indirect infringers and 27 directly, either literally or jointly, infringe the ’491 Patent. These direct infringers include but are 28 not limited to the literal direct infringers, for example MNOs, wireless operators, wireless

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -48- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page49 of 51

1 customers, and end-users (e.g. MNO subscribers) which have in the past or presently make, use, 2 sell, offer for sale, or import infringing communication networks comprising subscriber units, 3 base stations, and/or network hub switching centers, and modems that facilitate switching 4 between communication paths in accordance with one or more claims of the ’491 Patent, as well 5 as any other person or entity that jointly infringes the ’491 Patent. 6 153. Defendants’ infringement of the ’491 Patent, with the exception of HTC, US 7 Cellular, Kineto, Airvana, Motorola Mobility and Motorola Solutions, has been deliberate and 8 willful at least since the date of the filing of the original complaint in this action or since the date 9 they were effectively served with the original complaint. 10 154. HTC, US Cellular, Kineto, Airvana, Motorola Mobility and Motorola Solutions 11 infringement of the ‘491 Patent has been deliberate and willful at least since the date of the filing 12 of the amended complaint in this action or since the date they were effectively served with the 13 amended complaint. 14 155. The Defendants in this action, with the exception of HTC, US Cellular, Kineto, 15 Airvana, Motorola Mobility and Motorola Solutions, have been on notice of the patent-in-suit and 16 of EON's allegations of infringement since the filing of the original complaint in this matter on 17 October 22, 2010. Since that time, no Defendant has changed its behavior relating to the conduct 18 at issue in this case. The Defendants have continued to act in this manner despite a high 19 likelihood that they infringe the patent-in-suit. 20 156. HTC, US Cellular, Kineto, Airvana, Motorola Mobility and Motorola Solutions 21 have been on notice of the patent-in-suit and of EON's allegations of infringement since the filing 22 of the amended complaint in this matter on January 11, 2011. Since that time, none of these 23 defendants have changed their behavior relating to the conduct at issue in this case. These 24 defendants have continued to act in this manner despite a high likelihood that they infringe the 25 patent-in-suit. 26 157. EON is in compliance with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 287. 27 158. Defendants’ infringement will continue unless enjoined by this Court. 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -49- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page50 of 51

1 159. EON has suffered, and will continue to suffer, irreparable injury as a result of 2 Defendants’ infringement. 3 160. EON has been damaged by Defendants’ infringement, and will continue to be 4 damaged until this Court enjoins Defendants. 5 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 6 WHEREFORE, EON prays for the following relief: 7 A. That each Defendant be adjudged to have infringed the ’491 Patent, directly or 8 indirectly by way of inducement or contributory infringement, literally or under the doctrine of 9 equivalents; 10 B. That each Defendant, its officers, directors, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, 11 affiliates, divisions, branches, parents, and those persons in active concert or participation with 12 any of them, be preliminarily and permanently restrained and enjoined from directly or indirectly 13 infringing the ’491 Patent; 14 C. An award of damages pursuant to 34 U.S.C. §284 sufficient to compensate EON 15 for the Defendants’ past infringement and any continuing or future infringement up until the date 16 Defendant is finally and permanently enjoined from further infringement, including compensatory 17 damages; 18 D. An assessment of pre-judgment and post-judgment interest and costs against 19 Defendants, together with an award of such interest and costs, in accordance with 35 U.S.C.

20 § 284;

21 E. That Defendants be directed to pay enhanced damages, including EON’s 22 attorneys’ fees incurred in connection with this lawsuit pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285; and 23 F. That EON have such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and 24 proper. 25 / / / 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / /

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -50- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC

Case3:12-cv-01011-EMC Document539 Filed09/17/12 Page51 of 51

1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 2 EON demands a trial by jury of any and all issues triable of right before a jury. 3

4 Dated: September 17, 2012 HOPKINS & CARLEY A Law Corporation 5 6 By: /s/ John V. Picone III 7 John V. Picone III Attorneys for Plaintiff 8 EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

HOPKINS & CARLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 692\941554.3 -51- SAN JOSE PLAINTIFF EON CORP. IP HOLDINGS, LLC’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 3:12-CV 01011 EMC