Matthew D. Aichele [email protected]
800 Maine Ave SW May 21, 2021 Suite 200 Washington VIA EDIS DC 20004 The Honorable Lisa R. Barton Secretary to the Commission U.S. International Trade Commission 500 E Street, SW, Room 112 Tel 202.664.0623 Washington, DC 20436 www.raklaw.com Re: Certain Power Inverters and Converters, Vehicles Containing The Same, and Components Thereof, Investigation No. 337-TA-____
Dear Secretary Barton:
Enclosed for filing on behalf of Complainant Arigna Technology Limited are documents in support of Complainant’s request that the Commission commence an investigation pursuant to Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, concerning certain power inverters and converters, vehicles containing the same, and components thereof. A request for confidential treatment of Confidential Exhibits 6.1C, 6.2C, 7C, 8C, 78C, and 79C is also being submitted.
In accordance with the Commission’s Temporary Change to the Filing Procedures dated March 16, 2020 (“Temporary Procedures”), and the guidance provided on the Commission’s “COVID- 19-RELATED QUESTIONS” webpage, Complainant submits the following documents for filing via EDIS:
1. A Statement on the Public Interest with respect to the remedial orders Complainant seeks in the Complaint, pursuant to Commission Rule 210.8(b).
2. One (1) electronic copy of Complainant’s Verified Complaint pursuant to Commission Rule 210.8(a)(l)(i);
3. One (1) electronic copy of the non-confidential exhibits to the Complaint, pursuant to Commission Rule 210.8(a)(l)(i);
4. One (1) electronic copy of the confidential exhibits to the Complaint, pursuant to Commission Rules 201.6(c) and 210.8(a)(l)(ii);
5. One (1) electronic certified copy of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,247,867 and 8,289,082, included with the Complaint as Exhibits 1 and 2, pursuant to Commission Rule 210.12(a)(9)(i);
6. One (1) electronic certified copy of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office prosecution histories for U.S. Patent Nos. 8,247,867 and 8,289,082, included with the Complaint as Appendices A1 and B1, pursuant to Commission Rule 210.12(C)(1); May 21, 2021 Page 2
7. One (1) electronic certified copy of the Assignment Records for U.S. Patent Nos. 8,247,867 and 8,289,082, included with the Complaint as Exhibits 3 and 4, pursuant to Commission Rule 210.12(a)(9)(ii);
8. One (1) electronic copy of each technical reference cited in the prosecution history for U.S. Patent Nos. 8,247,867 and 8,289,082, included with the Complaint as Appendices A2 and B2, pursuant to Commission Rule 210.12(c)(2); and
9. A letter and certification requesting confidential treatment for the information contained in Confidential Exhibits 6.1C, 6.2C, 7C, 8C, 78C, and 79C to the Complaint, pursuant to Commission Rules 201.6(b) and 210.5(d).
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please contact me should you have any question concerning this submission.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Matthew D. Aichele
Matthew D. Aichele
Enclosures Matthew D. Aichele [email protected] 800 Maine Ave SW May 21, 2021 Suite 200 Washington VIA EDIS DC 20004 The Honorable Lisa R. Barton Secretary to the Commission U.S. International Trade Commission Tel 202.664.0623 500 E Street, SW, Room 112 www.raklaw.com Washington, DC 20436
Re: Certain Power Inverters and Converters, Vehicles Containing The Same, and Components Thereof, Investigation No. 337-TA-____
Dear Secretary Barton:
Complainant Arigna Technology Limited by counsel hereby requests, pursuant to 19 C.F.R. §§ 210.5 and 201.6, confidential treatment of the confidential business information contained in Confidential Exhibits 6.1C, 6.2C, 7C, 8C, 78C, and 79C to Complainant’s Complaint transmitted herewith.
Confidential Exhibits 6.1C and 6.2C disclose confidential financial information from Complainant’s licensee. Confidential Exhibit 7C identifies the licensees of the Asserted Patents. Confidential Exhibit 8C is a confidential license agreement. Confidential Exhibits 78C and 79C include confidential technical information from Complainant’s licensee.
The information described above qualifies as confidential information pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 201.6 because:
a. it is not available to the public; b. unauthorized disclosure of such information could cause substantial harm to the competitive position of Complainant and its licensees; and c. its disclosure could impair the Commission’s ability to obtain information necessary to perform its statutory function.
Please contact me should you have any question concerning this submission.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Matthew D. Aichele
Matthew D. Aichele UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C.
In the Matter Of
CERTAIN POWER INVERTERS AND Investigation No. _____ CONVERTERS, VEHICLES CONTAINING THE SAME, AND COMPONENTS THEREOF
COMPLAINANT ARIGNA TECHNOLOGY LIMITED’S STATEMENT REGARDING THE PUBLIC INTEREST
Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.8(b), 19 C.F.R. § 210.8(b), Complainant Arigna
Technology Limited (“Arigna” or “Complainant”) respectfully submits this Statement Regarding the Public Interest. By filing its Complaint, Arigna seeks the Commission’s assistance in protecting
Arigna’s licensee’s domestic industry and its intellectual property from companies importing infringing products into the U.S. market that use the technology protected by the Asserted Patents.
Arigna seeks a limited exclusion order directed to each of the proposed Respondents1 excluding from entry into the United States certain power inverters and converters, vehicles containing the same, and components thereof (the “Accused Products”) that infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867 (the “’867 Patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 (the “’082 Patent”)
(collectively, the “Asserted Patents”). Arigna also seeks permanent cease and desist orders
1 The proposed Respondents are Audi AG and its wholly owned subsidiary Audi of America, LLC; Bayerische Motoren Werke AG and its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary BMW of North America, LLC; Bentley Motors Limited and Bentley Motors, Inc.; General Motors Company and its wholly owned subsidiary General Motors LLC; Automobili Lamborghini S.p.A. and Automobili Lamborghini America, LLC; Daimler AG and its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC; Porsche AG and its U.S. subsidiary Porsche Cars North America, Inc.; and Volkswagen AG and its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. (collectively, the “proposed Respondents”).
1 prohibiting the proposed Respondents, their subsidiaries, parents, related companies, and agents from engaging in the importation, sale for importation, marketing and/or advertising, distribution, offering for sale, sale, use after importation, sale after importation, or other transfer within the
United States of certain power inverters and converters, vehicles containing the same, and components thereof that infringe one or more claims of the Asserted Patents.
The remedies requested do not implicate any compelling public interest that weighs against entry of a limited exclusion order or a cease and desist order against any proposed Respondent.
The Accused Products do not implicate any particular public health, safety, or welfare concerns and their exclusion would not “deprive the public of products necessary for some important health or welfare need.” Spansion, Inc. v. U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 629 F.3d l33l, 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2010).
U.S. consumers do not face any potential shortage of competitive products, because the Accused
Products are limited to a subset of proposed Respondents’ vehicle offerings, the proposed
Respondents are but a subset of automobile manufacturers, and the automobile market contains competitive offerings from other third-party automobile manufacturers that consumers may choose instead of the Accused Products. Further, the U.S. production of like or directly competitive articles should not be impacted by any remedy requested in Arigna’s Complaint.
Thus, the requested remedial orders will provide effective—and proportional—relief in the face of ongoing and open patent infringement in the United States by the proposed Respondents.
Protecting intellectual property rights through the requested remedial orders will accordingly serve the public interest while having little or no adverse effect on public health and welfare. Further, because Arigna’s licensee and other companies supply the market for power inverters and converters, vehicles containing the same, and components thereof, consumers would not face any significant shortage of like or competitive products in the United States. As described in the
2 Complaint, Arigna’s licensee, as well as third parties, supply power inverters and converters and
components to the U.S. market. Thus, this Investigation does not present an instance where a
compelling public interest would supersede entry of the requested remedial orders.
I. EXPLANATION OF HOW THE ARTICLES POTENTIALLY SUBJECT TO THE REMEDIAL ORDERS ARE USED IN THE UNITED STATES
The Accused Products include certain power inverters and converters and proposed
Respondents’ products containing the same, and components thereof, including without limitation
a subset of the proposed Respondents’ respective vehicle offerings. Specifically, as set forth in the
Complaint, the Accused Products include, for example: Audi’s SQ7, BMW’s i3, BMW’s 330e,
BMW’s 540i, Bentley’s Bentayga, General Motors’ Chevrolet Bolt, Lamborghini’s Urus,
Mercedes-Benz’s S-Class, Porsche’s Panamera, and Volkswagen’s ID.4. The Accused Products are used primarily for personal transportation.
II. THERE ARE NO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE CONCERNS RELATING TO THE REQUESTED REMEDIAL ORDERS
Issuance of the requested remedial orders would have no adverse effect on the public
health, safety, or welfare in the United States. In general, concerns about a negative impact on
public health, safety, or welfare have arisen in cases involving pharmaceuticals, essential
equipment for medical treatment, or key national interests. See Spansion, 629 F.3d at 1360. For
example, the Commission has previously concluded that access to essential medical equipment
used to treat burn victims is a significant public interest consideration because the equipment
“provide[s] benefits unavailable from any other device or method of treatment.” Certain Fluidized
Supporting Apparatus & Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-182/188, USITC Pub. 1667,
Comm’n Op. at 23-25 (Oct. 1984). None of these concerns are present here. And as discussed further below, the requested remedial orders will not significantly impact the overall market for
3
aut omobiles or power inverters and converters in the United States.
Accordingly, access to the Accused Products does not implicate any meaningful public health, safety, or welfare concern. Indeed, the requested relief serves the public interest because, as previously recognized by the Commission, there is a strong public interest in protecting intellectual property rights. See, e.g., Certain Baseband Processor Chips and Chipsets,
Transmitter and Receiver (Radio) Chips, Power Control Chips, and Products Containing Same,
Including Cellular Telephone Handsets, Inv. No. 337-TA-543, Comm’n Op. at 136–37 (June 19,
2007). This strong interest in protecting Arigna’s intellectual property rights and the domestic industry set forth in the Complaint far outweighs any hypothetical adverse effect on the public.
III. IDENTIFICATION OF LIKE OR DIRECTLY COMPETITIVE ARTICLES THAT COMPLAINANT, ITS LICENSEES, OR THIRD PARTIES MAKE WHICH COULD REPLACE THE SUBJECT ARTICLES IF THEY WERE TO BE EXCLUDED
Vehicles, vehicle power inverters and converters, and components thereof are already
available from multiple sources with which proposed Respondents compete. Arigna’s licensee and
others supply the market and will continue to do so irrespective of whether the requested remedial
orders are issued. Moreover, the proposed Respondents are a subset of the many suppliers of
vehicles and power inverters and converters in the United States market, and proposed
Respondents’ products do not contain any unique health or safety-related features. No public
interest concerns exist where the market contains an adequate supply of competitive or substitute
products for those subject to a remedial order. See, e.g., Certain Lens Fitted Film Packages, Inv.
No. 337-TA-406, Comm’n Op. at 18 (June 28, 1999). The automobile market is highly
competitive, and numerous companies have the capacity and incentive to replace proposed
Respondents’ infringing products in the United States market without delay.
4 IV. INDICATION OF WHETHER COMPLAINANT, COMPLAINANT’S LICENSEES, AND/OR THIRD-PARTY SUPPLIERS HAVE THE CAPACITY TO REPLACE THE VOLUME OF ARTICLES SUBJECT TO THE REQUESTED REMEDIAL ORDERS IN A COMMERCIALLY REASONABLE TIME
Power inverters and converters, vehicles containing the same, and components thereof are
currently available in the United States, including products from Arigna’s licensees and non-
Respondent third parties. Arigna’s licensees and the non-Respondent third parties have the
capacity to increase domestic production of power inverters and converters should demand require.
In addition, non-infringing power inverters and converters and vehicles containing them will also
continue to be available from third-party suppliers. Consequently, consumers would have access
to competitive non-infringing products from Arigna’s licensees and third parties should the
Accused Products be excluded from the United States.
V. STATEMENT OF HOW THE REQUESTED REMEDIAL ORDER WOULD IMPACT CONSUMERS
Consumers will have available to them in the United States marketplace a wide variety of
power inverters and converters and vehicles, including those supplied by Arigna’s licensees, as well as other competitive non-infringing power inverters and converters and vehicles, if the
Accused Products are excluded from the United States. In view of the availability of commercial alternatives to the Accused Products, the exclusion of the infringing power inverters and converters, vehicles containing the same, and components thereof will not negatively impact consumers in the United States. Permitting unlicensed entities like the proposed Respondents to
import and sell infringing power inverters and converters and vehicles not only would devalue the
licenses granted by Arigna to other companies but also would undermine future investment in
similar technology. See Certain Display Controllers and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-
TA-491/481, Comm’n Op. at 66 (Feb. 2005).
5
Dated: May 21, 2021 Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Matthew D. Aichele Matthew R. Berry Rachel S. Black Andres Healy John Schiltz Danielle Nicholson Nicholas Crown SUSMAN GODFREY LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800 Seattle, Washington 98101-3000 Phone: (206) 516-3880 Fax: (206) 516-3883
Oleg Elkhunovich SUSMAN GODFREY LLP 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 950 Los Angeles, California 90067-6029 Phone: (310) 789-3100 Fax: (310) 789-3150
Bryce T. Barcelo Tom DelRosario SUSMAN GODFREY LLP 1000 Louisiana, Suite 5100 Houston, TX 77002 Phone: (713) 651-9366 Fax: (713) 654-6666
Reza Mirzaie RUSS AUGUST & KABAT 12424 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90025 Telephone: (310) 826-7474
Matthew D. Aichele RUSS AUGUST & KABAT 800 Maine Ave SW, Suite 200 Washington, DC. 20024 Telephone: (202) 664-0623
Counsel for Arigna Technology Limited
6 UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C.
In the Matter of
CERTAIN POWER INVERTERS AND Investigation No. _____ CONVERTERS, VEHICLES CONTAINING THE SAME, AND COMPONENTS THEREOF
VERIFIED COMPLAINT OF ARIGNA TECHNOLOGY LIMITED UNDER SECTION 337 OF THE TARIFF ACT OF 1930, AS AMENDED
COMPLAINANT PROPOSED RESPONDENTS Arigna Technology Limited Volkswagen AG The Hyde Building Berliner Ring 2 Carrickmines, Suite 23 38440 Wolfsburg, Germany Dublin 18, Ireland +49-5361-9-0 + 353 1 691 7015 Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. COUNSEL FOR COMPLAINANT 2200 Ferdinand Porsche Drive Herndon, Virginia 20171 Andres Healy (248) 754-5000 Matthew R. Berry Rachel S. Black John Schiltz Audi AG Danielle Nicholson Auto-Union-Straße 1 Nicholas Crown 85057 Ingolstadt, Germany +49-841-89-0 SUSMAN GODFREY LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800 Seattle, WA 98101-3000 Audi of America, LLC Phone: (206) 516-3880 2200 Ferdinand Porsche Drive Fax: (206) 516-3883 Herndon, Virginia 20171 (800) 822-2834 Oleg Elkhunovich SUSMAN GODFREY LLP Bentley Motors Limited 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 950 Los Angeles, CA 90067-6029 Pyms Lane Phone: (310) 789-3100 Crewe, Cheshire, CW1 3PL, England Fax: (310) 789-3150 +44-1270-255-155
Bryce T. Barcelo Bentley Motors, Inc. Tom DelRosario 2003 Edmund Halley Drive SUSMAN GODFREY LLP Suite 300 1000 Louisiana, Suite 5100 Reston, Virginia 20191 Houston, TX 77002 (866) 369-4450 Phone: (713) 651-9366 Fax: (713) 654-6666 Automobili Lamborghini America, LLC 2200 Ferdinand Porsche Drive Reza Mirzaie Herndon, Virginia 20171 RUSS AUGUST & KABAT (866) 681-6276 12424 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90025 Automobili Lamborghini S.p.A. Telephone: (310) 826-7474 Via Modena 12 40019 Sant’Agata Bolognese, Italy Matthew D. Aichele +39-051-681-7611 RUSS AUGUST & KABAT 800 Maine Avenue SW, Suite 200 Porsche AG Washington, DC 20024 Porscheplatz 1 Telephone: (202) 664-0623 D-70435 Stuttgart, Germany +49-0711-911-0
Porsche Cars North America, Inc. One Porsche Drive Atlanta, Georgia 30354 (770) 290-3500
Daimler AG Mercedesstrasse 120 70372 Stuttgart, Germany +49-711-17-0
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC One Mercedes-Benz Drive Sandy Springs, Georgia 30328 (800) 367-6372
Bayerische Motoren Werke AG Petuelring 130 D-80788 Munich, Germany +49-89-382-0
BMW of North America, LLC 300 Chestnut Ridge Road Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey 07677 (201) 307-4000
General Motors Company 300 Renaissance Center Detroit, Michigan 48243 (313) 556-5000 General Motors LLC 300 Renaissance Center Suite L1 Detroit, Michigan 48243 (313) 410-2704 TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXHIBIT LIST ...... iv
APPENDICES ...... vi
I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1
II. COMPLAINANT ...... 2
III. PROPOSED RESPONDENTS ...... 4
A. Audi Respondents ...... 4
B. BMW Respondents ...... 5
C. Bentley Respondents ...... 5
D. General Motors Respondents ...... 6
E. Lamborghini Respondents ...... 6
F. Mercedes -Benz Respondents ...... 7
G. Pors che Respondents ...... 8
H. Volkswagen Respondents ...... 8
IV. THE TECHNOLOGY AND PRODUCTS AT ISSUE ...... 9
V. THE ASSERTED PATENTS ...... 9
A. U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867...... 10
i. Identification of the ’867 Patent and Ownership by Arigna ...... 10
ii. Nontechnical Description of the ’867 Patent ...... 10
iii. Foreign Counterparts to the ’867 Patent ...... 11
iv. Licensees of the ’867 Patent ...... 11
B. U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082...... 11
i. Identification of the ’082 Patent and Ownership by Arigna ...... 11
ii. Nontechnical Description of the ’082 Patent ...... 12
i iii. Foreign Counterparts to the ’082 Patent ...... 13
iv. Licensees of the ’082 Patent ...... 13
VI. SPECIFIC INSTANCES OF IMPORTATION AND SALE ...... 14
A. Audi...... 14
B. BMW...... 15
C. Bentley ...... 17
D. General Motors ...... 18
E. Lamborghini ...... 19
F. Mercedes -Benz ...... 20
G. Porsche ...... 21
H. Volkswagen...... 22
VII. UNLAWFUL AND UNFAIR ACTS OF THE PROPOSED RESPONDENTS ...... 23
A. Audi...... 24
B. BMW...... 25
C. Bentley ...... 28
D. General Motors ...... 29
E. Lamborghini ...... 30
F. Mercedes -Benz ...... 32
G. Porsche ...... 33
H. Volkswagen...... 34
VIII. CLASSIFICATION OF THE ACCUSED PRODUCTS UNDER THE HARMONIZED TARIFF SCHEDULE ...... 36
IX. RELATED LITIGATION ...... 36
X. THE DOMESTIC INDUSTRY ...... 36
A. Technical Prong ...... 37
B. Economic Prong ...... 37
ii XI. RELIEF REQUESTED ...... 39
iii EXHIBIT LIST
Exhibit No. Description 1 Certified Copy of U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867 2 Certified Copy of U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 3 Certified Assignment Records For U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867 4 Certified Assignment Records For U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 5 List of Foreign Counterparts to the Asserted Patents 6.1C Confidential Domestic Industry Statement of Rudy Jaramillo 6.2C Confidential Domestic Industry Statement of Stephanus Duvenhage 7C Confidential List of Licensees of the Asserted Patents 8C Microchip License Agreement 9 Corporate Overview of Microchip 10 Article Discussing Importation of Volkswagen, Audi, Bentley, and Lamborghini Vehicles 11 Audi SQ7 Sales Listing in Plano, Texas 12 Audi SQ7 Place of Manufacture 13 Audi SQ7 VIN Decoder Results 14 Import Record for Audi SQ7 15 Audi SQ7 Self Study Programme 651 16 External Photograph of Audi SQ7 Bosch 48V Converter 17 Internal Photograph of Bosch 48V Converter 18 BMW i3 Sales Listing in Dallas, Texas 19 BMW i3 Manufacturing Sticker 20 BMW i3 VIN Decoder Results 21 Import Records for BMW i3 22 External Photograph of BMW i3 Inverter 23 BMW 330e Sales Listing in Dallas, Texas 24 BMW 330e VIN Decoder Results 25 Article Discussing Sale of BMW 330e Through U.S. Dealers 26 Import Records for BMW 3 Series 27 External Photograph of BMW 330e Inverter 28 BMW 540i Sales Listing in Tyler, Texas 29 BMW 540i VIN Decoder Results 30 BMW 540i Build Sheet 31 BMW Model Year 2021 Update Information 32 Dual Voltage Power Supply System with 48 Volt 33 German Carmakers Agree on 48V On-Board Supply, Charging Plug 34 48V HEV System Introduction and Infineon Approach for 48V 35 Internal Photograph of Hella 48V Converter 36 Bentley Bentayga Sales Listing in Austin, Texas
iv Exhibit No. Description 37 Bentley Bentayga VIN Decoder 38 Import Record for Bentley Bentayga 39 Bentley Bentayga OEM 48V Voltage Transformer 40 External Photograph of Bentley Bentayga Bosch 48V Converter 41 Chevrolet Bolt Sales Listing in Dallas, Texas 42 Import Records for Chevrolet Bolt Inverter 43 Article Discussing Chevrolet Bolt Production 44 Article Regarding LG Production of Chevrolet Bolt Components 45 Lamborghini Urus Sales Listing in Long Island, New York 46 Lamborghini Urus VIN Decoder Results 47 Import Record for Lamborghini Urus 48 Lamborghini Urus OEM 48V Voltage Transformer 49 External Photograph of Lamborghini Urus Bosch 48V Converter 50 Mercedes-Benz S-Class Sales Listing in Tyler, Texas 51 Mercedes-Benz S-Class VIN Decoder Results 52 Import Record for Mercedes-Benz S-Class 53 Under the Microscope: 48 Volt System: More Power, Performance, Flexibility, Comfort and Efficiency 54 48 V by Mercedes-Benz 55 External Photograph of Mercedes-Benz S-Class Hella 48V Converter 56 Porsche Panamera Sales Listing in Brentwood, Tennessee 57 Porsche Panamera VIN Decoder Results 58 Import Record for Porsche Panamera 59 Porsche Panamera with PDCC Sport Sales Listing 60 Porsche USA Press Release re PDCC Sport 61 Screenshot of Porsche Panamera Bosch 48V Converter 62 Porsche Panamera Article re Audi 48V System 63 Volkswagen ID.4 Sales Listing in Tyler, Texas 64 Volkswagen ID.4 VIN Decoder Results 65 Article Discussing ID.4 Production in Germany and Importation into the U.S. 66 Volkswagen ID.4 Reservation Page 67 Import Records for Volkswagen ID.4 68 Infringement Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 to Audi (Audi SQ7) 69 Infringement Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867 to BMW (BMW i3) 70 Infringement Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867 to BMW (BMW 330e) 71 Infringement Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 to BMW (BMW 540i) 72 Infringement Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 to Bentley (Bentley Bentayga) 73 Infringement Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867 to General Motors (Chevrolet Bolt)
v Exhibit No. Description 74 Infringement Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 to Lamborghini (Lamborghini Urus) 75 Infringement Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 to Mercedes-Benz (Mercedes-Benz S-Class) 76 Infringement Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 to Porsche (Porsche Panamera) 77 Infringement Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867 to Volkswagen (Volkswagen ID.4) 78C Confidential Domestic Industry Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867 (Microchip Trench FET) 79C Confidential Domestic Industry Claim Chart for U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 (Microchip ATMXT540S)
APPENDICES
Appendix Description
A1 Certified copy of the prosecution history of U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867 A2 References cited in the prosecution history of U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867 B1 Certified copy of the prosecution history of U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 B2 References cited in the prosecution history of U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082
vi I. INTRODUCTION
1. Arigna Technology Limited (“Arigna” or “Complainant”) requests that the United
States International Trade Commission institute an investigation pursuant to Section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 1337 (“Section 337”), to remedy the unlawful
importation, sale for importation, and/or sale after importation by the proposed Respondents of
certain power inverters and converters, vehicles containing the same, and components thereof (the
“Accused Products”). The Accused Products infringe, either literally or under the doctrine of
equivalents, certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867 (the “’867 Patent,” attached hereto as
Exhibit 1) and U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 (the “’082 Patent,” attached hereto as Exhibit 2)
(collectively, the “Asserted Patents”).
2. The Accused Products infringe at least the following claims of one or more
Asserted Patents in violation of Section 337(a)(1)(B)(i) and 35 U.S.C. § 271(a)-(c), either literally
or under the doctrine of equivalents:
Asserted Patent Asserted Independent Claims Asserted Dependent Claims U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867 1, 8 2, 9 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21, U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082 1, 17 22, 29
3. The proposed Respondents are Audi AG and its wholly owned subsidiary Audi of
America, LLC; Bayerische Motoren Werke AG and its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary BMW of
North America, LLC; Bentley Motors Limited and Bentley Motors, Inc.; General Motors
Company and its wholly owned subsidiary General Motors LLC; Automobili Lamborghini S.p.A.
and Automobili Lamborghini America, LLC; Daimler AG and its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC; Porsche AG and its U.S. subsidiary Porsche Cars North America, Inc.;
and Volkswagen AG and its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.
(collectively, the “proposed Respondents”).
1 4. On information and belief, and as set forth in this Complaint, each of the proposed
Respondents imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States, sells in
the United States after importation, and/or instructs other proposed Respondents regarding the use, manufacture, or importation of one or more Accused Products that infringe one or more of the
Asserted Patents, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.
5. A domestic industry exists under 19 U.S.C. § 1337(a)(2) and (3) as the result of activities and investments in the United States related to products that practice the Asserted
Patents. These activities include the current and continuing significant and substantial domestic
investments in plants, equipment, labor, and capital of licensee Microchip Technology
Incorporated (“Microchip”), a U.S. company licensed to practice the Asserted Patents.
6. Complainant seeks, as relief for the unfair acts of proposed Respondents, the
following relief from the Commission: (i) an investigation into proposed Respondents’ violations;
(ii) a public hearing; (iii) a limited exclusion order barring from entry into the United States the
Accused Products manufactured by or on behalf of, or imported by or on behalf of, the proposed
Respondents that infringe one or more of the Asserted Patents; (iv) a cease and desist order prohibiting the sale for importation, importation, sale after importation, distribution, offering for sale, promoting, marketing, advertising, testing, demonstrating, warehousing inventory for distribution, solicitation of sales, programming, repairing, maintaining, using, transferring, and other commercial activity relating to the Accused Products; (v) the imposition of a bond on importation and sales of Accused Products during the Presidential Review Period pursuant to 19
U.S.C. § 1337(j); and (vi) such other relief as the Commission deems appropriate.
II. COMPLAINANT
7. Complainant Arigna Technology Limited is an Irish company conducting business
at The Hyde Building, Carrickmines, Suite 23, Dublin 18, Ireland. Arigna is the sole owner by
2 assignment of all right, title, and interest in each Asserted Patent. See Exhibits 3-4.
8. One of Arigna’s domestic licensees is Microchip, a U.S. company incorporated in
Delaware and headquartered at 2355 W. Chandler Boulevard, Chandler, Arizona 85224.
Microchip is a predecessor-in-interest of the ’082 Patent. Microchip has a non-exclusive license to practice each of the Asserted Patents. A corporate overview of Microchip is attached as Exhibit
9. The confidential licensing agreement between Arigna and Microchip is attached as Exhibit 8C.
19 C.F.R. § 210.12(a)(9)(iv).
9. Microchip was founded and is still headquartered in the United States, and its strategic focus is on “secure embedded control solutions.” Exhibit 9. Microchip provides connected and secure embedded control solutions to U.S. customers in the automotive, industrial, aerospace, defense, and computing markets. In the automotive industry specifically, Microchip supplies an array of automotive-grade products, including analog, connectivity, memory, microcontroller, security, timing, and touch systems. As discussed in further detail herein,
Microchip has made and continues to make substantial investments in labor, equipment, and capital related to devices that practice and are protected by the Asserted Patents.
10. Recently, due to the widespread importation of vehicles and components that infringe the Asserted Patents, Microchip’s market standing has eroded and its domestic industry related to the Asserted Patents has been injured. Complainant Arigna, as owner of a portfolio of patents covering power semiconductors for applications in a wide variety of automobiles and consumer electronics products, including modern vehicles, and in partnership with Microchip, has undertaken the task of counteracting these unfair and unlawful acts. Specifically, Arigna and
Microchip have partnered to advance applications of the patented semiconductor and current amplifier technologies, and Microchip continues to substantially invest in the patented
3 technologies through domestic labor, capital, and equipment at its facilities in Chandler, Arizona
and Colorado Springs, Colorado, among others. See Exhibits 6.1C, 6.2C.
11. The partnership between Arigna and Microchip is intended to protect and increase
American-made goods and American jobs, including jobs at Microchip’s Arizona and Colorado
facilities. Although Microchip is a third party, its interest in this case is sincere. Under the terms
of Microchip’s confidential license agreement with Arigna, Microchip has agreed to provide
Arigna any requested technical or economic information pertaining to Microchip’s products in a
reasonable and timely manner for at least two years from the agreement’s effective date of June
26, 2020. See Exhibit 8C at ¶ 2(b). With Microchip’s assistance, Arigna strives to protect the
domestic industry interests of Microchip and others by enforcing the Asserted Patents.
III. PROPOSED RESPONDENTS
A. Audi Respondents
12. Volkswagen AG is a German corporation; is headquartered at Berliner Ring 2,
38440 Wolfsburg, Germany; and has as its wholly owned subsidiary Audi AG. Audi AG is a
German corporation; is headquartered at Auto-Union-Straße 1, 85057 Ingolstadt, Germany; and has as its wholly owned subsidiary Audi of America, LLC, a Delaware limited liability corporation headquartered at 2200 Ferdinand Porsche Drive, Herndon, Virginia 20171 (collectively, “Audi
Respondents” or “Audi”).
13. Upon information and belief, Audi AG designs, develops, manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States, and/or sells in the United
States after importation Accused Products that infringe the ’082 Patent. See Exhibits 10-15.
14. Upon information and belief, Audi of America, LLC designs, develops, manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States, and/or sells in the United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the ’082 Patent.
4 See Exhibits 10-15.
B. BMW Respondents
15. Bayerische Motoren Werke AG is a German corporation; is headquartered at
Petuelring 130, D-80788 Munich, Germany; and has as its wholly owned subsidiary BMW of
North America, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company with its headquarters at 300 Chestnut
Ridge Road, Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey 07677 (collectively, “BMW Respondents” or “BMW”).
16. Upon information and belief, Bayerische Motoren Werke AG designs, develops,
manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States,
and/or sells in the United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the Asserted
Patents. See Exhibits 18-21, 23-26, 28-34.
17. Upon information and belief, BMW of North America, LLC designs, develops,
manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States,
and/or sells in the United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the Asserted
Patents. See Exhibits 18-21, 23-26, 28-34.
C. Bentley Respondents
18. Volkswagen AG is a German corporation; is headquartered at Berliner Ring 2,
38440 Wolfsburg, Germany; and has as its wholly owned subsidiary Bentley Motors Limited.
Bentley Motors Limited is a British corporation and is headquartered at Pyms Lane, Crewe,
Cheshire, CW1 3PL, England. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. is a New Jersey corporation; is headquartered at 2200 Ferdinand Porsche Drive, Herndon, Virginia 20171; and has as its wholly owned subsidiary Bentley Motors, Inc., a Delaware corporation with its headquarters at 2003
Edmund Halley Drive, Suite 300, Reston, Virginia 20191. The Complaint refers to these entities collectively as “Bentley Respondents” or “Bentley.”
19. Upon information and belief, Bentley Motors Limited designs, develops,
5 manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States,
and/or sells in the United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the ’082 Patent.
See Exhibits 36-39.
20. Upon information and belief, Bentley Motors, Inc. designs, develops,
manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States,
and/or sells in the United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the ’082 Patent.
See Exhibits 36-39.
D. General Motors Respondents
21. General Motors Company is a Delaware corporation; is headquartered at 300
Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan 48243; and has as its wholly owned subsidiary General
Motors LLC, a Delaware limited liability company with its headquarters at 300 Renaissance
Center, Suite L1, Detroit, Michigan 48243 (collectively, “General Motors Respondents” or
“General Motors”).
22. Upon information and belief, General Motors Company designs, develops,
manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States,
and/or sells in the United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the ’867 Patent.
See Exhibits 41-44.
23. Upon information and belief, General Motors LLC designs, develops,
manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States,
and/or sells in the United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the ’867 Patent.
See Exhibits 41-44.
E. Lamborghini Respondents
24. Volkswagen AG is a German corporation; is headquartered at Berliner Ring 2,
38440 Wolfsburg, Germany; and has as its wholly owned subsidiaries Audi AG and Volkswagen
6 Group of America, Inc. Audi AG has as its wholly owned subsidiary Automobili Lamborghini
S.p.A., an Italian corporation headquartered at Via Modena, 12, Sant’Agata Bolognese, Italy.
Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. has as its wholly owned subsidiary Automobili Lamborghini
America, LLC, a Delaware corporation headquartered at 2200 Ferdinand Porsche Drive, Herndon,
Virginia 20171. The Complaint refers to these entities collectively as “Lamborghini Respondents” or “Lamborghini.”
25. Upon information and belief, Automobili Lamborghini S.p.A. designs, develops, manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States, and/or sells in the United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the ’082 Patent.
See Exhibits 45-48.
26. Upon information and belief, Automobili Lamborghini America, LLC designs, develops, manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United
States, and/or sells in the United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the ’082
Patent. See Exhibits 45-48.
F. Mercedes-Benz Respondents
27. Daimler AG is a German corporation; is headquartered at Mercedesstraße 120,
70372 Stuttgart, Germany; and has as its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary Mercedes-Benz USA,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company with its headquarters at One Mercedes-Benz Drive,
Sandy Springs, Georgia 30328 (collectively, “Mercedes-Benz Respondents” or “Mercedes-
Benz”).
28. Upon information and belief, Daimler AG designs, develops, manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States, and/or sells in the United
States after importation Accused Products that infringe the ’082 Patent. See Exhibits 50-54.
29. Upon information and belief, Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC designs, develops,
7 manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States,
and/or sells in the United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the ’082 Patent.
See Exhibits 50-54.
G. Porsche Respondents
30. Volkswagen AG is a German corporation; is headquartered at Berliner Ring 2,
38440 Wolfsburg, Germany; and has as its wholly owned subsidiary Dr. Ing. h.c.F. Porsche AG
(“Porsche AG”). Porsche AG is a German corporation; is headquartered at Porscheplatz 1, D-
70435 Stuttgart, Germany; and has as its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary Porsche Cars North
America, Inc., a Delaware corporation headquartered at One Porsche Drive, Atlanta, Georgia
30354 (collectively, “Porsche Respondents” or “Porsche”).
31. Upon information and belief, Porsche AG designs, develops, manufactures, and
imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States, and/or sells in the United
States after importation Accused Products that infringe the ’082 Patent. See Exhibits 56-60.
32. Upon information and belief, Porsche Cars North America, Inc. designs, develops,
manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States,
and/or sells in the United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the ’082 Patent.
See Exhibits 56-60.
H. Volkswagen Respondents
33. Volkswagen AG is a German corporation; is headquartered at Berliner Ring 2,
38440 Wolfsburg, Germany; and has as its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc., a New Jersey corporation headquartered at 2200 Ferdinand Porsche Drive,
Herndon, Virginia 20171 (collectively, “Volkswagen Respondents” or “Volkswagen”).
34. Upon information and belief, Volkswagen AG designs, develops, manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United States, and/or sells in the
8 United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the Asserted Patents. See Exhibits
10-14, 36-39, 45-48, 63-67.
35. Upon information and belief, Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. designs,
develops, manufactures, and imports into the United States, sells for importation into the United
States, and/or sells in the United States after importation Accused Products that infringe the
Asserted Patents. See Exhibits 10-14, 36-39, 45-48, 63-67.
IV. THE TECHNOLOGY AND PRODUCTS AT ISSUE
36. Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 210.12(a)(12), the categories of products accused of
infringing one or more of the Asserted Patents are certain power inverters and converters, vehicles
containing the same, and components thereof.
37. Proposed Respondents infringe the Asserted Patents through the sale for
importation into the United States, importation into the United States, and/or sale within the United
States after importation of such Accused Products. Exemplary identifications of such infringing
products are provided in Sections VI and VII below.
38. Without discovery, Arigna cannot exhaustively identify all devices sold for importation into the United States, imported into the United States, and/or sold within the United
States after importation that infringe the Asserted Patents. Arigna reserves its right to supplement
its allegations, to further amend this Complaint, and to add respondents and accused products in
the future if necessary based on discovery received during the Investigation.
V. THE ASSERTED PATENTS
39. The Asserted Patents relate to novel offset cancellation techniques and trench gate structures for high-voltage current amplifiers and power semiconductors.
40. The identification, ownership, non-technical description, foreign counterparts, and
licensees for each Asserted Patent are identified below.
9 A. U.S. Patent No. 8,247,867
i. Identification of the ’867 Patent and Ownership by Arigna
41. The ’867 Patent, titled “Semiconductor Device,” issued on August 21, 2012,
naming Kazunari Nakata, Atsushi Narazaki, Shigeto Honda, and Kaoru Motonami as the
inventors. Exhibit 1 (’867 Patent) at 1. The ’867 Patent is based on U.S. Patent Application No.
US12/836,922 filed July 15, 2010, and claims priority to Japanese Patent Application
JP2009241266A, filed on October 20, 2009, now Japanese Patent No. JP2011091086A. The ’867
Patent expires on October 6, 2030.
42. Arigna owns by assignment the entire right, title, and interest in the ’867 Patent.
See Exhibit 3. A certified copy of the ’867 Patent is attached as Exhibit 1. Pursuant to Commission
Rule 210.12(c), Arigna submits a certified copy of the prosecution history of the ’867 Patent, as
well as copies of the applicable pages from each technical reference cited in the prosecution
history. See Appendices A1 and A2.
ii. Nontechnical Description of the ’867 Patent1
43. The ’867 Patent generally claims a semiconductor device with a trench gate
structure and trench contact structure that is capable of minimizing a cell size while keeping a low
on-resistance. This semiconductor device is used in, as one example, the traction inverter of an
electric vehicle to take supply voltage from the vehicle’s battery and deliver power to the vehicle’s wheels. The following exemplary diagram, taken from Figure 1 of the ’867 Patent, depicts a cross-
sectional view of one semiconductor device embodiment claimed by the patented invention:
1 This section does not, and is not intended to, construe or limit the scope or meaning of the ’867 Patent or its claims.
10
iii. Foreign Counterparts to the ’867 Patent
44. Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.12(a)(9)(v), Arigna submits the attached list of foreign patents, foreign patent applications (not already issued as a patent), and each foreign patent application that has been denied, abandoned, or withdrawn that relate to the ’867 Patent. See
Exhibit 5.
iv. Licensees of the ’867 Patent
45. Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.12(a)(9)(iii), Exhibit 7C identifies the licensees of the ’867 Patent, which include Microchip. As outlined in more detail below, Arigna relies on the activities of its licensee Microchip to establish a domestic industry with respect to the ’867
Patent. Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.12(a)(9)(iv), the license agreement between Microchip and Arigna is attached as Exhibit 8C.
B. U.S. Patent No. 8,289,082
i. Identification of the ’082 Patent and Ownership by Arigna
46. The ’082 Patent, titled “Circuit and Method for Adjusting an Offset Output Current for an Input Current Amplifier,” issued on October 16, 2012, naming Armin Prohaska, Terje
11 Saether, and Holger Vogelmann as the inventors. Exhibit 2 (’082 Patent) at 1. The ’082 Patent is
based on U.S. Patent Application No. US12/977,034 filed December 22, 2010, and claims priority
both to German Patent Application No. DE 10 2009 060 504.4, filed on December 23, 2009, now
German Patent No. 10 2009 060 504 B4, and to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No.
US61/289,846, filed on December 23, 2009. The ’082 Patent expires on December 22, 2030.
47. Arigna owns by assignment the entire right, title, and interest in the ’082 Patent.
See Exhibit 4. A certified copy of the ’082 Patent is attached as Exhibit 2. Pursuant to Commission
Rule 210.12(c), Arigna submits a certified copy of the prosecution history of the ’082 Patent, as well as copies of the applicable pages from each technical reference cited in the prosecution history. See Appendices B1 and B2.
ii. Nontechnical Description of the ’082 Patent2
48. The ’082 Patent claims a current amplifier used in, as one example, a vehicle’s 48- volt to 12-volt voltage converter to measure current, correct offset, and protect against high and low voltages, reverse polarity, and high temperatures, resulting in higher precision current amplification and less error in the face of rapidly changing common-mode voltages. The patented technology enables automotive vehicle manufacturers like the proposed Respondents to add 48- volt electrical systems to their latest vehicles in order to implement, for example, mild-hybrid systems with advanced “start-stop” and/or power recuperation functions, as well as other high power load vehicle components such as electronic anti-roll stabilization systems, electronic turbo chargers, or even air conditioner compressors. Such systems offer many benefits to proposed
Respondents and their end consumers alike, including for example, increased low-end torque,
2 This section does not, and is not intended to, construe or limit the scope or meaning of the ’082 Patent or its claims.
12 enhanced fuel efficiency, decreased emissions, and enhanced safety features—all of which can be
achieved by proposed Respondents more quickly than and at a fraction of the cost of moving to a fully electric vehicle. One preferred embodiment of the patented invention, taken from exemplary
Figure 2a of the ’082 Patent, is shown in the following diagram:
iii. Foreign Counterparts to the ’082 Patent
49. Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.12(a)(9)(v), Arigna submits the attached list of foreign patents, foreign patent applications (not already issued as a patent), and each foreign patent application that has been denied, abandoned, or withdrawn that correspond to the ’082 Patent. See
Exhibit 5.
iv. Licensees of the ’082 Patent
50. Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.12(a)(9)(iii), Exhibit 7C identifies the licensees
of the ’082 Patent, which include Microchip. As outlined in more detail below, Arigna relies on
the activities of its licensee Microchip to establish a domestic industry with respect to the ’082
Patent. As previously noted, the license agreement between Microchip and Arigna is attached as
13 Exhibit 8C.
VI. SPECIFIC INSTANCES OF IMPORTATION AND SALE
51. The specific instances of importation and sale of the Accused Products set forth below are illustrative and non-exhaustive examples of the proposed Respondents’ unlawful importation and sale of Accused Products that infringe the Asserted Patents literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents.
A. Audi
52. On information and belief, Audi is importing, selling for importation, and/or selling
within the United States after importation, for example, Audi SQ7 vehicles equipped with 48-volt
electrical systems and/or components thereof that infringe the ’082 Patent. The specific instances
set forth below are representative examples of Audi’s unlawful importation, sale for importation,
and/or sale within the United States after importation of infringing products.
53. Audi imports Audi SQ7 vehicles into the United States, where the vehicles then are
sold at Audi dealerships nationwide. For example, Exhibit 10 is an article discussing Audi’s
importation of Audi vehicles through ports across the United States, including the Port of
Baltimore. Exhibit 11 is a page from the website of an authorized Audi dealer in Plano, Texas
(“Audi Plano”), showing that the dealer is offering for sale in the United States the Audi SQ7
vehicle bearing the vehicle identification number (“VIN”) WA1AWBF71MD010581. Exhibit 12
is a photo of the same vehicle from the Audi Plano website showing that the Audi SQ7 vehicle for
sale in Plano, Texas was manufactured in Slovakia. Exhibit 13 are the results of the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”) VIN Decoder application, confirming that the
Audi SQ7 vehicle bearing the VIN WA1AWBF71MD010581 was manufactured in Bratislava,
Slovakia. An import record attached as Exhibit 14 shows a shipment of Audi SQ7 vehicles from
Germany to proposed Respondent Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. Attached as Exhibit 15 is
14 an excerpt from the Audi SQ7 Self Study Programme 651 showing that the Audi SQ7 vehicles
contain a 48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter manufactured by Bosch that infringes the ’082
Patent. Attached as Exhibit 16 is another photograph of the Audi SQ7 vehicles’ Bosch 48-volt to
12-volt voltage converter, bearing exemplary Volkswagen AG product number 4M0959663B and
stating “Made in Hungary.” Attached as Exhibit 17 is an internal photograph of the Bosch 48-volt
to 12-volt voltage converter containing an infringing current sense amplifier, the Analog Devices
AD8418.
B. BMW
54. On information and belief, BMW is importing, selling for importation, and/or
selling within the United States after importation, for example, BMW i3 and BMW 330e vehicles
and/or components thereof that infringe the ’867 Patent. The specific instances set forth below are
representative examples of BMW’s unlawful importation, sale for importation, and/or sale within
the United States after importation of infringing products.
55. BMW imports BMW i3 vehicles into the United States, where the vehicles then are sold at BMW Centers nationwide. For example, Exhibit 18 is a page from the website of an
authorized BMW Center in Dallas, Texas (“BMW Dallas”), showing that the BMW Center is
offering for sale in the United States the BMW i3 vehicle bearing the VIN
WBY8P2C04M7H44849. Exhibit 19 is a photo of the same vehicle from the BMW Dallas website
showing that the BMW i3 vehicle for sale in Dallas, Texas was manufactured by BMW AG.
Exhibit 20 are the results of the NHTSA VIN Decoder application, confirming that the BMW i3
vehicle bearing the VIN WBY8P2C04M7H44849 was manufactured in Leipzig, Germany. Import records attached as Exhibit 21 show shipments of i3 vehicles from Germany to proposed
Respondent BMW of North America, LLC. Attached as Exhibit 22 is a photograph of the BMW i3’s inverter that contains the Infineon FS900R08A2P2_B31 that infringes the ’867 Patent.
15 56. BMW also imports BMW 330e vehicles into the United States, where the vehicles then are sold at BMW Centers nationwide. For example, Exhibit 23 is a page from the website of an authorized BMW Center in Dallas, Texas (“BMW Dallas”), showing that the dealer is offering for sale in the United States the BMW 330e vehicle bearing the VIN WBA8E1C51HK479964.
Exhibit 24 are the results of the NHTSA VIN Decoder application, confirming that the BMW 330e vehicle bearing the VIN WBA8E1C51HK479964 was manufactured in Munich, Germany. Exhibit
25 is an article discussing BMW’s decision to sell the BMW 330e through BMW Centers in the
United States. Import records attached as Exhibit 26 show shipments of BMW 3 Series vehicles sent to proposed Respondent BMW of North America, LLC. Attached as Exhibit 27 is a photograph of the BMW 330e’s inverter that contains the Infineon AIGW50N65F5 that infringes the ’867 Patent.
57. On information and belief, BMW is importing, selling for importation, and/or selling within the United States after importation, for example, BMW 540i vehicles equipped with
48-volt electrical systems that infringe the ’082 Patent. The specific instances set forth below are representative examples of BMW’s unlawful importation, sale for importation, and/or sale within the United States after importation of infringing products.
58. BMW imports BMW 540i vehicles into the United States, where the vehicles then are sold at BMW Centers nationwide. For example, Exhibit 28 is a page from the website of an authorized BMW Center in Tyler, Texas (“BMW of Tyler”), showing that the dealer is offering for sale in the United States the BMW 540i vehicle bearing the VIN WBA53BJ04MWX01230.
Exhibit 29 are the results of the NHTSA VIN Decoder application, confirming that the BMW 540i vehicle bearing the VIN WBA53BJ04MWX01230 was manufactured in Graz, Austria. Attached as Exhibit 30 is an “Original Window Sticker / Build Sheet” provided on the BMW of Tyler
16 website stating that the BMW 540i contains a 48-volt mild hybrid electrical system. Attached as
Exhibit 31 is a BMW USA press release, titled “BMW Model Year 2021 Update Information,” confirming that the BMW 540i vehicles contain a 48-volt mild hybrid electrical system. Attached as Exhibit 32 is a technical paper from the BMW Group, titled “Dual Voltage Power Supply
System with 48 Volt,” stating that BMW developed its 48-volt mild hybrid electrical system and associated OEM-specific standards in collaboration with proposed Respondents Audi, Daimler,
Porsche, and Volkswagen; and confirming that BMW, like the other German OEMs, would likewise include a 48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter containing a current monitor. See also
Exhibit 33 (“German carmakers agree on 48V on-board supply, charging plug”); Exhibit 34 at 9,
12 (“48V PowerNet, a German Initiative”). Attached as Exhibit 35 is an internal photograph of a
Hella 48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter containing an infringing current sense amplifier, the
Analog Devices AD8417.
C. Bentley
59. On information and belief, Bentley is importing, selling for importation, and/or selling within the United States after importation, for example, Bentley Bentayga vehicles equipped with 48-volt electrical systems and/or components thereof that infringe the ’082 Patent.
The specific instances set forth below are representative examples of Bentley’s unlawful importation, sale for importation, and/or sale within the United States after importation of infringing products.
60. Bentley imports Bentley Bentayga vehicles into the United States, where the vehicles then are sold at Bentley dealerships nationwide. Bentley has admitted that it imports into and then sells in the United States the Bentley Bentayga vehicles. See Bentley Answer, ECF 341
¶ 148, Jaguar Land Rover Limited v. Bentley Motors Limited and Bentley Motors, Inc., 2:18-cv-
00320-MSD-LRL (E.D. Va.); see also Exhibit 10 (article discussing the importation of Bentley
17 vehicles into the Port of Baltimore). For example, Exhibit 36 is a page from the website of an
authorized Bentley dealer in Austin, Texas (“Bentley Austin”), showing that the dealer is offering
for sale in the United States the Bentley Bentayga vehicle bearing the VIN
SJAAM2ZV4LC030139. Exhibit 37 are the results of the NHTSA VIN Decoder application,
confirming that the Bentley Bentayga vehicle bearing the VIN SJAAM2ZV4LC030139 was
manufactured in Crewe, England. An import record attached as Exhibit 38 shows a shipment of
Bentley Bentayga vehicles from England to proposed Respondent Bentley Motors, Inc. Attached
as Exhibit 39 is a webpage from a Bentley OEM parts website for the Bentley Bentayga’s 48-volt
voltage transformer (# 21 in diagram), with exemplary part numbers 4M0959663G and
4M9959663E, manufactured by Bosch and that infringes the ’082 Patent. Attached as Exhibit 40
is a photograph of the Bentley Bentayga’s Bosch 48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter, bearing
exemplary Volkswagen AG product number 4M0959663E and stating “Made in Hungary.”
Attached as Exhibit 17 is an internal photograph of the Bosch 48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter containing an infringing current sense amplifier, the Analog Devices AD8418.
D. General Motors
61. On information and belief, General Motors is importing, selling for importation,
and/or selling within the United States after importation, for example, Chevrolet Bolt vehicles
and/or components thereof that infringe the ’867 Patent. The specific instances set forth below are representative examples of General Motors’ unlawful importation, sale for importation, and/or sale within the United States after importation of infringing products.
62. General Motors sells and offers for sale Chevrolet Bolt vehicles, containing
imported infringing components, at General Motors dealerships nationwide. For example, Exhibit
41 is a page from the website of an authorized General Motors dealer in Dallas, Texas (“Freedom
Chevrolet Buick GMC”), showing that the dealer is offering for sale in the United States the
18 Chevrolet Bolt vehicle bearing the VIN 1G1FZ6S08L4125642. General Motors imports the
Chevrolet Bolt’s inverter that contains the Infineon FS820R08A6P2 that infringes the ’867 Patent
and then sells the Chevrolet Bolt with that component within the United States after importation.
Attached as Exhibit 42 are import records showing shipments of Chevrolet Bolt inverters from LG
Electronics, Inc. in South Korea to proposed Respondent General Motors’ Orion, Michigan plant,
where the Chevrolet Bolt is manufactured. See Exhibit 43 (article discussing Chevrolet Bolt
production at Orion plant), Exhibit 44 (article discussing LG production of Chevrolet Bolt
components).
E. Lamborghini
63. On information and belief, Lamborghini is importing, selling for importation,
and/or selling within the United States after importation, for example, Lamborghini Urus vehicles
equipped with 48-volt electrical systems and/or components thereof that infringe the ’082 Patent.
The specific instances set forth below are representative examples of Lamborghini’s unlawful
importation, sale for importation, and/or sale within the United States after importation of
infringing products.
64. Lamborghini imports Lamborghini Urus vehicles into the United States, where the
vehicles then are sold at Lamborghini dealerships nationwide. Lamborghini has admitted that it
imports into and then sells in the United States the Lamborghini Urus vehicles. See Lamborghini
Response to ITC Complaint ¶¶ 6.2, 7.1, In re Certain Vehicle Controls Systems, Vehicles
Containing the Same, and Components Thereof, No. 337-TA-1235; see also Exhibit 10 (article
discussing the importation of Lamborghini vehicles into the Port of Baltimore). For example,
Exhibit 45 is a page from the website of an authorized Lamborghini dealer in Long Island, New
York (“Lamborghini Long Island”), showing that the dealer is offering for sale in the United States the Lamborghini Urus vehicle bearing the VIN ZPBUA1ZL6MLA12541. Exhibit 46 are the results
19 of the NHTSA VIN Decoder application, confirming that the Lamborghini Urus vehicle bearing
the VIN ZPBUA1ZL6MLA12541 was manufactured in Italy. An import record attached as Exhibit
47 shows a shipment of Lamborghini Urus vehicles from Italy to proposed Respondent Automobili
Lamborghini America, LLC. Attached as Exhibit 48 is a webpage from a Lamborghini OEM parts
website for the Lamborghini Urus’ 48-volt voltage transformer (# 3 in diagram), with exemplary
part numbers 4M0959663G, manufactured by Bosch and that infringes the ’082 Patent. Attached
as Exhibit 49 is a photograph of a Bosch 48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter, bearing exemplary
Volkswagen AG product number 4M0959663G and stating “Made in Hungary.” Attached as
Exhibit 17 is an internal photograph of a Bosch 48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter containing an
infringing current sense amplifier, the Analog Devices AD8418.
F. Mercedes-Benz
65. On information and belief, Mercedes-Benz is importing, selling for importation, and/or selling within the United States after importation, for example, Mercedes-Benz S-Class vehicles equipped with 48-volt electrical systems and/or components thereof that infringe the ’082
Patent. The specific instances set forth below are representative examples of Mercedes-Benz’s unlawful importation, sale for importation, and/or sale within the United States after importation of infringing products.
66. Mercedes-Benz imports Mercedes-Benz S-Class vehicles into the United States,
where the vehicles then are sold at Mercedes-Benz dealerships nationwide. For example, Exhibit
50 is a page from the website of an authorized Mercedes-Benz dealer in Tyler, Texas (“Mercedes-
Benz of Tyler”), showing that the dealer is offering for sale in the United States the Mercedes-
Benz S-Class vehicle bearing the VIN WDDUG6GBXLA514076. Exhibit 51 are the results of the
NHTSA VIN Decoder application, confirming that the Mercedes-Benz S-Class vehicle bearing the VIN WDDUG6GBXLA514076 was manufactured in Sindelfingen, Germany. An import
20 record attached as Exhibit 52 shows a shipment of Mercedes-Benz S-Class vehicles from Germany to proposed Respondent Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC. Attached as Exhibit 53 is a Daimler AG press release, titled “Under the Microscope: 48 Volt System: More Power, Performance, Flexibility,
Comfort and Efficiency,” which confirms that the Mercedes-Benz S-Class vehicles contain a 48-
volt mild hybrid electrical system. Attached as Exhibit 54 is a technical paper from Daimler AG,
titled “48 V by Mercedes-Benz,” describing the components and functionality of the Mercedes-
Benz 48-volt electrical system, including its 48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter. Attached as
Exhibit 55 is a photograph of the Mercedes-Benz S-Class vehicles’ co-branded Accumotive/Hella
48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter, stating “Made in Germany.” Attached as Exhibit 35 is an internal photograph of a Hella 48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter containing an infringing current sense amplifier, the Analog Devices AD8417.
G. Porsche
67. On information and belief, Porsche is importing, selling for importation, and/or
selling within the United States after importation, for example, Porsche Panamera vehicles
equipped with 48-volt electrical systems and/or components thereof that infringe the ’082 Patent.
The specific instances set forth below are representative examples of Porsche’s unlawful
importation, sale for importation, and/or sale within the United States after importation of
infringing products.
68. Porsche imports Porsche Panamera vehicles into the United States, where the vehicles then are sold at Porsche dealerships nationwide. For example, Exhibit 56 is a page from
the website of an authorized Porsche dealer in Brentwood, Tennessee (“Porsche of Nashville”),
showing that the dealer is offering for sale in the United States the Porsche Panamera vehicle
bearing the VIN WP0AF2A71LL150261. Exhibit 57 are the results of the NHTSA VIN Decoder application, confirming that the Porsche Panamera vehicle bearing the VIN
21 WP0AF2A71LL150261 was manufactured in Leipzig, Germany. An import record attached as
Exhibit 58 shows a shipment of Porsche Panamera vehicles from Germany to proposed
Respondent Porsche Cars North America, Inc. Attached as Exhibit 59 is a Porsche of Nashville online sales listing, confirming that the Porsche Panamera vehicle includes the Porsche Dynamic
Chassis Control Sport (“PDCC Sport”) system. Attached as Exhibit 60 is a Porsche USA press release describing the 48-volt electrical system in the Porsche Panamera vehicles’ PDCC Sport system. Attached as Exhibit 61 is a screenshot from the video accompanying that same Porsche
USA press release showing that the Porsche Panamera vehicles contain a Bosch 48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter. See also Exhibit 62 (noting that Porsche Panamera vehicles will “adopt the 48- volt electrical system Audi is already using”). Attached as Exhibit 49 is a photograph of a Bosch
48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter, bearing exemplary Volkswagen AG product number
4M0959663G and stating “Made in Hungary.” Attached as Exhibit 17 is an internal photograph of a Bosch 48-volt to 12-volt voltage converter containing an infringing current sense amplifier, the
Analog Devices AD8418.
H. Volkswagen
69. On information and belief, Volkswagen is importing, selling for importation, and/or selling within the United States after importation, for example, Volkswagen ID.4 vehicles and/or components thereof that infringe the ’867 Patent. The specific instances set forth below are representative examples of Volkswagen’s unlawful importation, sale for importation, and/or sale within the United States after importation of infringing products.
70. Volkswagen imports Volkswagen ID.4 vehicles into the United States, where the vehicles then are sold at Volkswagen dealerships nationwide. For example, Exhibit 63 is a page from the website of an authorized Volkswagen dealer in Tyler, Texas (“Patterson Volkswagen
Tyler”), showing that the dealer is offering for sale in the United States the Volkswagen ID.4
22 vehicle bearing the VIN WVGDMPE26MP019282. Exhibit 64 are the results of the NHTSA VIN
Decoder application, confirming that the Volkswagen ID.4 vehicle bearing the VIN
WVGDMPE26MP019282 was manufactured in Zwickau, Germany. Volkswagen imports into the
United States the Volkswagen ID.4, which incorporates an inverter that contains the Infineon
FS950R08A6P2B that infringes the ’867 Patent. See Exhibit 65 (article discussing the ID.4’s production in Germany and importation into the United States). Volkswagen currently advertises the opportunity to reserve an ID.4 and track the vehicle’s “journey . . . as it leaves the factory, travels across the ocean to the US, and arrives at your local dealer.” See Exhibit 66; see also
Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.’s Statement on the Public Interest (May 1, 2020), In re
Certain Lithium Ion Batteries, Battery Cells, Battery Modules, Battery Packs, Components
Thereof, and Processes Therefor, No. 337-TA-1159 (noting that Volkswagen’s electric vehicles will not be manufactured in the United States until 2022). Import records attached as Exhibit 67 show shipments of Volkswagen ID.4 vehicles from Germany to proposed Respondent Volkswagen
Group of America, Inc. See also Exhibit 10 (article discussing the importation of Volkswagen vehicles through eight ports across the United States, including the Port of Baltimore).
VII. UNLAWFUL AND UNFAIR ACTS OF THE PROPOSED RESPONDENTS
71. Arigna asserts that proposed Respondents infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least the following claims of the Asserted Patents, in violation of 35
U.S.C. §§ 271(a), (b), and (c). Without discovery, Arigna cannot exhaustively identify all devices sold for importation into the United States, imported into the United States, and/or sold within the
United States after importation that infringe the Asserted Patents. Arigna reserves its right to supplement its allegations, to further amend this Complaint, and to add respondents and accused products in the future if necessary based on discovery received during the Investigation.
23 Respondent ’867 Patent ’082 Patent Audi 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 29 BMW 1, 2, 8, 9 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 29 Bentley 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 29 General Motors 1, 2, 8, 9 Lamborghini 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 29 Mercedes-Benz 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 29 Porsche 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 29 Volkswagen 1, 2, 8, 9
A. Audi
i. Infringement of the ’082 Patent
72. On information and belief, Audi imports, sells for importation, and/or sells within
the United States after importation certain Accused Products (the “Audi Accused Products”), such
as the Audi SQ7, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of the equivalents, at
least claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent in violation of 35
U.S.C. § 271(a). The Audi Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent at the time of importation into the United
States.
73. Audi also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of at least claims 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
Through the filing and service of this Complaint, and also through the filing and service of the related District Court complaint referenced in Section IX, Audi has had knowledge of the ’082
Patent and the infringing nature of the Audi Accused Products. Despite this knowledge of the ’082
Patent, Audi continues to actively encourage and instruct its customers and end users (for example, through its marketing, user manuals, and online instruction materials) to use the Audi Accused
Products in ways that directly infringe the ’082 Patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents. Audi does so knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit
24 these infringing acts. Audi also continues to import, sell for importation, and/or sell in the United
States the Audi Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’082 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and inducing its customers to infringe the ’082 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary use of the Audi Accused Products.
74. Audi also contributorily infringes the ’082 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) by selling or offering to sell within the United States or import into the United States vehicles and components thereof that incorporate or constitute a material part of the inventions claimed by the
’082 Patent. Audi does so knowing that these components are especially made or especially adapted for uses that infringe the ’082 Patent, and not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
75. A claim chart comparing independent claims 1 and 17 of the ’082 Patent to a representative Audi Accused Product, the Audi SQ7, and including photographs and drawings where applicable, is attached as Exhibit 68.
B. BMW
i. Infringement of the ’867 Patent
76. On information and belief, BMW imports, sells for importation, and/or sells within the United States after importation certain Accused Products (the “BMW Accused Products”), such as the BMW i3 and BMW 330e, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of the equivalents, at least claims 1, 2, 8, and 9 of the ’867 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
The BMW Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1, 2, 8, and 9 of the ’867 Patent at the time of importation into the United States.
77. BMW also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of at least claims 1,
2, 8, and 9 of the ’867 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint, and also through the filing and service of the related District Court complaint
25 referenced in Section IX, BMW has had knowledge of the ’867 Patent and the infringing nature of
the BMW Accused Products. Despite this knowledge of the ’867 Patent, BMW continues to
actively encourage and instruct its customers and end users (for example, through its marketing,
user manuals, and online instruction materials) to use the BMW Accused Products in ways that
directly infringe the ’867 Patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents. BMW does so
knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit these infringing acts. BMW
also continues to import, sell for importation, and/or sell in the United States the BMW Accused
Products, despite its knowledge of the ’867 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and inducing
its customers to infringe the ’867 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary use of the
BMW Accused Products.
78. BMW also contributorily infringes the ’867 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C.
§ 271(c) by selling or offering to sell within the United States or import into the United States
vehicles and components thereof that incorporate or constitute a material part of the inventions
claimed by the ’867 Patent. BMW does so knowing that these components are especially made or
especially adapted for uses that infringe the ’867 Patent, and not staple articles or commodities of
commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
79. A claim chart comparing independent claims 1 and 8 of the ’867 Patent to a
representative BMW Accused Product, the BMW i3, and including photographs and drawings
where applicable, is attached as Exhibit 69. A claim chart comparing independent claim 8 of the
’867 Patent to a second representative BMW Accused Product, the BMW 330e, and including photographs and drawings where applicable, is attached as Exhibit 70.
ii. Infringement of the ’082 Patent
80. On information and belief, BMW imports, sells for importation, and/or sells within the United States after importation certain BMW Accused Products, such as the BMW 540i, that
26 directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of the equivalents, at least claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). The
BMW Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent at the time of importation into the United States.
81. BMW also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of at least claims 1,
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
Through the filing and service of this Complaint, and also through the filing and service of the
related District Court complaint referenced in Section IX, BMW has had knowledge of the ’082
Patent and the infringing nature of the BMW Accused Products. Despite this knowledge of the
’082 Patent, BMW continues to actively encourage and instruct its customers and end users (for
example, through its marketing, user manuals, and online instruction materials) to use the BMW
Accused Products in ways that directly infringe the ’082 Patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents. BMW does so knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit these infringing acts. BMW also continues to import, sell for importation, and/or sell in the United
States the BMW Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’082 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and inducing its customers to infringe the ’082 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary use of the BMW Accused Products.
82. BMW also contributorily infringes the ’082 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C.
§ 271(c) by selling or offering to sell within the United States or import into the United States vehicles and components thereof that incorporate or constitute a material part of the inventions claimed by the ’082 Patent. BMW does so knowing that these components are especially made or especially adapted for uses that infringe the ’082 Patent, and not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
27 83. A claim chart comparing independent claims 1 and 17 of the ’082 Patent to a
representative BMW Accused Product, the BMW 540i, and including photographs and drawings
where applicable, is attached as Exhibit 71.
C. Bentley
i. Infringement of the ’082 Patent
84. On information and belief, Bentley imports, sells for importation, and/or sells
within the United States after importation certain Accused Products (the “Bentley Accused
Products”), such as the Bentley Bentayga, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine
of the equivalents, at least claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082
Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). The Bentley Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent at the time of importation into the United States.
85. Bentley also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of at least claims 1,
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
Through the filing and service of this Complaint, and also through the filing and service of the related District Court complaint referenced in Section IX, Bentley has had knowledge of the ’082
Patent and the infringing nature of the Bentley Accused Products. Despite this knowledge of the
’082 Patent, Bentley continues to actively encourage and instruct its customers and end users (for example, through its marketing, user manuals, and online instruction materials) to use the Bentley
Accused Products in ways that directly infringe the ’082 Patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents. Bentley does so knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit these infringing acts. Bentley also continues to import, sell for importation, and/or sell in the United States the Bentley Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’082 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and inducing its customers to infringe the ’082 Patent through the
28 customers’ normal and customary use of the Bentley Accused Products.
86. Bentley also contributorily infringes the ’082 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C.
§ 271(c) by selling or offering to sell within the United States or import into the United States
vehicles and components thereof that incorporate or constitute a material part of the inventions
claimed by the ’082 Patent. Bentley does so knowing that these components are especially made
or especially adapted for uses that infringe the ’082 Patent, and not staple articles or commodities
of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
87. A claim chart comparing independent claims 1 and 17 of the ’082 Patent to a
representative Bentley Accused Product, the Bentley Bentayga, and including photographs and
drawings where applicable, is attached as Exhibit 72.
D. General Motors
i. Infringement of the ’867 Patent
88. On information and belief, General Motors imports, sells for importation, and/or
sells within the United States after importation certain Accused Products (the “General Motors
Accused Products”), such as the Chevrolet Bolt, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the
doctrine of the equivalents, at least claims 1, 2, 8, and 9 of the ’867 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C.
§ 271(a). The General Motors Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1, 2, 8, and
9 of the ’867 Patent at the time of importation into the United States.
89. General Motors also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of at least claims 1, 2, 8, and 9 of the ’867 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint, and also through the filing and service of the related District Court complaint referenced in Section IX, General Motors has had knowledge of the ’867 Patent and the infringing nature of the General Motors Accused Products. Despite this knowledge of the ’867
Patent, General Motors continues to actively encourage and instruct its customers and end users
29 (for example, through its marketing, user manuals, and online instruction materials) to use the
General Motors Accused Products in ways that directly infringe the ’867 Patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents. General Motors does so knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit these infringing acts. General Motors also continues to import, sell for importation, and/or sell in the United States the General Motors Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’867 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and inducing its customers to infringe the ’867 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary use of the
General Motors Accused Products.
90. General Motors also contributorily infringes the ’867 Patent in violation of 35
U.S.C. § 271(c) by selling or offering to sell within the United States or import into the United
States vehicles and components thereof that incorporate or constitute a material part of the inventions claimed by the ’867 Patent. General Motors does so knowing that these components
are especially made or especially adapted for uses that infringe the ’867 Patent, and not staple
articles or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
91. A claim chart comparing independent claims 1 and 8 of the ’867 Patent to a representative General Motors Accused Product, the Chevrolet Bolt, and including photographs and drawings where applicable, is attached as Exhibit 73.
E. Lamborghini
i. Infringement of the ’082 Patent
92. On information and belief, Lamborghini imports, sells for importation, and/or sells
within the United States after importation certain Accused Products (the “Lamborghini Accused
Products”), such as the Lamborghini Urus, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine
of the equivalents, at least claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082
Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). The Lamborghini Accused Products satisfy all claim
30 limitations of claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent at the time of importation into the United States.
93. Lamborghini also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of at least claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C.
§ 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint, and also through the filing and service of the related District Court complaint referenced in Section IX, Lamborghini has had knowledge of the ’082 Patent and the infringing nature of the Lamborghini Accused Products. Despite this knowledge of the ’082 Patent, Lamborghini continues to actively encourage and instruct its customers and end users (for example, through its marketing, user manuals, and online instruction materials) to use the Lamborghini Accused Products in ways that directly infringe the ’082 Patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents. Lamborghini does so knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit these infringing acts. Lamborghini also continues to import, sell for importation, and/or sell in the United States the Lamborghini Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’082 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and inducing its customers to infringe the ’082 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary use of the
Lamborghini Accused Products.
94. Lamborghini also contributorily infringes the ’082 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C.
§ 271(c) by selling or offering to sell within the United States or import into the United States vehicles and components thereof that incorporate or constitute a material part of the inventions claimed by the ’082 Patent. Lamborghini does so knowing that these components are especially made or especially adapted for uses that infringe the ’082 Patent, and not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
95. A claim chart comparing independent claims 1 and 17 of the ’082 Patent to a
31 representative Lamborghini Accused Product, the Lamborghini Urus, and including photographs
and drawings where applicable, is attached as Exhibit 74.
F. Mercedes-Benz
i. Infringement of the ’082 Patent
96. On information and belief, Mercedes-Benz imports, sells for importation, and/or sells within the United States after importation certain Mercedes-Benz Accused Products, such as the Mercedes-Benz S-Class, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of the equivalents, at least claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent in
violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). The Mercedes-Benz Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations
of claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent at the time of
importation into the United States.
97. Mercedes-Benz also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of at least
claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C.
§ 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint, and also through the filing and service
of the related District Court complaint referenced in Section IX, Mercedes-Benz has had
knowledge of the ’082 Patent and the infringing nature of the Mercedes-Benz Accused Products.
Despite this knowledge of the ’082 Patent, Mercedes-Benz continues to actively encourage and
instruct its customers and end users (for example, through its marketing, user manuals, and online
instruction materials) to use the Mercedes-Benz Accused Products in ways that directly infringe
the ’082 Patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents. Mercedes-Benz does so knowing
and intending that its customers and end users will commit these infringing acts. Mercedes-Benz
also continues to import, sell for importation, and/or sell in the United States the Mercedes-Benz
Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’082 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and
32 inducing its customers to infringe the ’082 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary
use of the Mercedes-Benz Accused Products.
98. Mercedes-Benz also contributorily infringes the ’082 Patent in violation of 35
U.S.C. § 271(c) by selling or offering to sell within the United States or import into the United
States vehicles and components thereof that incorporate or constitute a material part of the
inventions claimed by the ’082 Patent. Mercedes-Benz does so knowing that these components are
especially made or especially adapted for uses that infringe the ’082 Patent, and not staple articles
or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
99. A claim chart comparing independent claims 1 and 17 of the ’082 Patent to a
representative Mercedes-Benz Accused Product, the Mercedes-Benz S-Class, and including
photographs and drawings where applicable, is attached as Exhibit 75.
G. Porsche
i. Infringement of the ’082 Patent
100. On information and belief, Porsche imports, sells for importation, and/or sells
within the United States after importation certain Accused Products (the “Porsche Accused
Products”), such as the Porsche Panamera, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine
of the equivalents, at least claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082
Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). The Porsche Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent at the time of importation into the United States.
101. Porsche also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of at least claims 1,
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 29 of the ’082 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
Through the filing and service of this Complaint, and also through the filing and service of the related District Court complaint referenced in Section IX, Porsche has had knowledge of the ’082
33 Patent and the infringing nature of the Porsche Accused Products. Despite this knowledge of the
’082 Patent, Porsche continues to actively encourage and instruct its customers and end users (for example, through its marketing, user manuals, and online instruction materials) to use the Porsche
Accused Products in ways that directly infringe the ’082 Patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents. Porsche does so knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit these infringing acts. Audi also continues to import, sell for importation, and/or sell in the
United States the Porsche Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’082 Patent, thereby specifically intending for and inducing its customers to infringe the ’082 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary use of the Porsche Accused Products.
102. Porsche also contributorily infringes the ’082 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C.
§ 271(c) by selling or offering to sell within the United States or import into the United States
vehicles and components thereof that incorporate or constitute a material part of the inventions
claimed by the ’082 Patent. Porsche does so knowing that these components are especially made
or especially adapted for uses that infringe the ’082 Patent, and not staple articles or commodities
of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
103. A claim chart comparing independent claims 1 and 17 of the ’082 Patent to a
representative Porsche Accused Product, the Porsche Panamera, and including photographs and
drawings where applicable, is attached as Exhibit 76.
H. Volkswagen
i. Infringement of the ’867 Patent
104. On information and belief, Volkswagen imports, sells for importation, and/or sells
within the United States after importation certain Accused Products (the “Volkswagen Accused
Products”), such as the Volkswagen ID.4, that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine
of the equivalents, at least claims 1, 2, 8, and 9 of the ’867 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
34 The Volkswagen Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of claims 1, 2, 8, and 9 of the ’867
Patent at the time of importation into the United States.
105. Volkswagen also knowingly and intentionally induces infringement of at least
claims 1, 2, 8, and 9 of the ’867 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Through the filing and service of this Complaint, and also through the filing and service of the related District Court complaint referenced in Section IX, Volkswagen has had knowledge of the ’867 Patent and the infringing nature of the Volkswagen Accused Products. Despite this knowledge of the ’867 Patent,
Volkswagen continues to actively encourage and instruct its customers and end users (for example, through its marketing, user manuals, and online instruction materials) to use the Volkswagen
Accused Products in ways that directly infringe the ’867 Patent literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents. Volkswagen does so knowing and intending that its customers and end users will commit these infringing acts. Volkswagen also continues to import, sell for importation, and/or sell in the United States the Volkswagen Accused Products, despite its knowledge of the ’867
Patent, thereby specifically intending for and inducing its customers to infringe the ’867 Patent through the customers’ normal and customary use of the Volkswagen Accused Products.
106. Volkswagen also contributorily infringes the ’867 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C.
§ 271(c) by selling or offering to sell within the United States or import into the United States vehicles and components thereof that incorporate or constitute a material part of the inventions claimed by the ’867 Patent. Volkswagen does so knowing that these components are especially made or especially adapted for uses that infringe the ’867 Patent, and not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
107. A claim chart comparing independent claims 1 and 8 of the ’867 Patent to a representative Volkswagen Accused Product, the Volkswagen ID.4, and including photographs
35 and drawings where applicable, is attached as Exhibit 77.
VIII. CLASSIFICATION OF THE ACCUSED PRODUCTS UNDER THE HARMONIZED TARIFF SCHEDULE
108. The Accused Products are classified under at least the following classifications of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States: 8703, 8703.90.00, 8704, 8706.00, 8708,
8501, 8504, 8504.40, 8504.40.90, 8504.40.9570, 8537.10.6000, 8541, 8542, and 9032.89. These classifications are exemplary in nature, are intended for illustration only, and are not intended to restrict the scope of the Accused Products, the investigation, any exclusion order, or any of the other relief requested.
IX. RELATED LITIGATION
109. Complainant Arigna has filed complaints in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Texas against the proposed Respondents, alleging infringement of one or more claims of the ’867 and ’082 Patents that have been asserted in this Complaint. See Arigna
Technology Ltd. v. Volkswagen AG, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-00054, Dkt. 28 (E.D. Tex.); Arigna
Technology Ltd. v. Porsche AG, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-00173, Dkt. 1 (E.D. Tex.).
110. Other than the litigations specified above, to Arigna’s knowledge, the Asserted
Patents are not and have not been the subject of any current or prior litigation.
X. THE DOMESTIC INDUSTRY
111. A domestic industry exists under Section 1337(a)(2) and 1337(a)(3). In particular, a domestic industry exists as a result of Microchip’s (an Arigna licensee) significant investment in plant and equipment and significant employment of labor and capital with respect to Microchip products that practice and are protected by the Asserted Patents. 19 U.S.C. § 1337(a)(3)(A)-(B).
Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.12(a)(9)(iv), Complainant has attached as Confidential Exhibit
8C a copy of the Microchip license agreement.
36 A. Technical Prong
112. Microchip makes significant and substantial investments in plant and equipment, labor and capital, and engineering and research and development with respect to products that practice one or more claims of the Asserted Patents (the “Domestic Industry Products”), including the exemplary Microchip Trench FET (“Microchip Trench FET”)3 and the Microchip
ATMXT540S maXTouch controller (“Microchip ATMXT540S”).
113. Confidential Exhibits 78C and 79C are claim charts demonstrating that the
Microchip Domestic Industry Products practice the Asserted Patents. The following table identifies the exemplary Microchip Domestic Industry Product with the corresponding Asserted
Patent and Exemplary Practiced Claims.
Asserted Patent Exemplary Practiced Claims Exemplary Domestic Industry Product
8,247,867 4 Microchip Trench FET 8,289,082 1 Microchip ATMXT540S
114. An exemplary claim chart showing how the Microchip Domestic Industry Products practice an exemplary claim of the ’867 Patent is attached as Confidential Exhibit 78C. This claim chart provides a basis for the domestic industry relating to the ’867 Patent.
115. An exemplary claim chart showing how the Microchip Domestic Industry Products practice an exemplary claim of the ’082 Patent is attached as Confidential Exhibit 79C. This claim chart provides a basis for the domestic industry relating to the ’082 Patent.
B. Economic Prong
116. Microchip has in the United States, with respect to the Domestic Industry Products, significant investments in plant and equipment, significant employment of labor and capital, and
3 The name of the Microchip Trench FET is subject to change.
37 substantial investments in exploitation of the Asserted Patents. These investments and employment
are all tied to the Asserted Patents. By virtue of a license granted by Complainant, Microchip is
fully licensed to practice each of the Asserted Patents. See Confidential Exhibit 8C. Within the
United States, Microchip designs, develops, manufactures, sells, and supports products that use
technology claimed by the Asserted Patents.
117. Microchip was founded in 1989 and is headquartered in Chandler, Arizona.
Microchip is a leader in touch and gesture technology. Microchip’s Chandler headquarter campus
is the nerve center and worldwide headquarters for all of its touch and gesture-related products and
businesses. See Exhibit 9.
118. Certain Microchip embedded control products have been identified as Domestic
Industry Products because they practice one or more of the claims of the Asserted Patents. This
list is exemplary, and there may be additional Microchip products that practice at least one claim
of each Asserted Patent. The Domestic Industry Products and the Asserted Patents they practice
are summarized below in chart format:
Asserted Patent Exemplary Domestic Industry Product 8,247,867 Microchip Trench FET 8,289,082 Microchip ATMXT540S
119. Over the years, Microchip has invested—and continues to invest—millions of dollars per year in the United States in labor and capital, plant and equipment, and research and development relating to the Domestic Industry Products. Details relating to Microchip’s domestic expenditures on labor and capital, plant and equipment, and research and development are set forth in Exhibits 6.1C and 6.2C, Complainant’s Confidential Domestic Industry Statements.
120. Microchip’s domestic investments and activities are significant and substantial both in absolute terms and relative to Microchip’s overall operations and the relevant marketplace.
38 Microchip’s investments and activities are important to the protected articles and represent significant domestic added value, particularly where the protected articles are designed, developed, and substantially produced domestically.
XI. RELIEF REQUESTED
121. Proposed Respondents have infringed and will continue to infringe the Asserted
Patents as specified in Sections VI and VII above, unless the Commission prohibits the importation and sale within the United States after importation of the Accused Products.
122. Accordingly, Complainant Arigna respectfully requests that the United States
International Trade Commission:
(a) institute an immediate investigation pursuant to Section 337 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 1337, into proposed Respondents’ violations of
Section 337 arising from the sale for importation into the United States,
importation, and/or sale within the United States after importation of certain power
inverters and converters, vehicles containing the same, and components thereof;
(b) schedule and conduct a hearing, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1337(c), for purposes of
receiving evidence and hearing argument concerning whether proposed
Respondents have violated Section 337 and, following the hearing, find that
proposed Respondents have violated Section 337;
(c) issue a permanent limited exclusion order, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1337(d),
excluding from entry into the United States proposed Respondents’ power inverters
and converters, vehicles containing the same, and components thereof that infringe,
literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, one or more claims of the
Asserted Patents, including, without limitation, the specific Accused Products
identified in this Complaint and the exhibits hereto;
39 (d) issue permanent orders, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1337(f), directing proposed
Respondents to cease and desist from importing, selling, selling for importation,
offering for sale, using, demonstrating, promoting, marketing, and/or advertising in
the United States proposed Respondents’ power inverters and converters, vehicles
containing the same, and components thereof that infringe, literally and/or under
the doctrine of equivalents, one or more claims of the Asserted Patents, including,
without limitation, the specific Accused Products identified in this Complaint and
the exhibits hereto;
(e) impose a bond on importation and sales of infringing products during the 60-day
Presidential review period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1337(j); and
(f) grant all such other and further relief as it deems appropriate under the law, based
upon the facts complained of herein and as determined by the investigation.
Dated: May 21, 2021 Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Matthew D. Aichele Matthew R. Berry Rachel S. Black Andres Healy John Schiltz Danielle Nicholson Nicholas Crown SUSMAN GODFREY LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800 Seattle, WA 98101-3000 Phone: (206) 516-3880 Fax: (206) 516-3883
Oleg Elkhunovich SUSMAN GODFREY LLP 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 950
40 Los Angeles, CA 90067-6029 Phone: (310) 789-3100 Fax: (310) 789-3150
Bryce T. Barcelo Tom DelRosario SUSMAN GODFREY LLP 1000 Louisiana, Suite 5100 Houston, TX 77002 Phone: (713) 651-9366 Fax: (713) 654-6666
Reza Mirzaie RUSS AUGUST & KABAT 12424 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90025 Telephone: (310) 826-7474
Matthew D. Aichele RUSS AUGUST & KABAT 800 Maine Avenue SW, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20024 Telephone: (202) 664-0623
Counsel for Arigna Technology Limited
41