1- John V. Picone III, Bar No. 187226 Jpicone@Hopkin
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
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.