This complaint alleges patent infringement against 22 defendants for their manufacture, use, sale and importation of various smartphones, tablets, and other consumer electronic devices. MicroUnity Systems Engineering alleges the defendants infringe patents related to graphics processing technologies. MicroUnity seeks damages and injunctive relief for patent infringement.
Recent selling efforts of Yahoo brought an attention regarding its more than 6000 patents. Several patent professionals expect that the value of patents could be reach around $4 B. Yahoo patents for Artificial Intelligence (AI) include 58 US issued patents. Yahoo AI patents cover diverse applications such as Search Engine, Online Advertisement, Email System, Web Applications, E-commerce, Data Management, and Social Networking. Some of key Yahoo AI patents are as follows.
In the beginning there was RPM (and Debian packages) and it was good. Certainly, Linux packaging has solved many problems and pain points for system admins and developers over the years -- but as software development and deployment have evolved, new pain points have cropped up that have not been solved by traditional packaging.
In this talk, Joe Brockmeier will run through some of the problems that admins and developers have run into, and some of the solutions that organizations should be looking at to solve their issues with developing and deploying software. This includes Software Collections, Docker containers, OStree and rpm-ostree, Platform-as-a-Service, and more.
Big data analytics is becoming important to process unimaginably large amounts of information and data in many applications. The typical big data analytics is Hadoop, an open-source software framework that supports data-intensive distributed applications, and the running of applications on large clusters of commodity hardware. Hadoop, that is based on the architectural framework MapReduce, collects both structured data and unstructured data, processes the collected data set in a distributed network cluster in parallel, and extracts valuable information from the processed data set within a short time. Followings illustrate some examples of patents that provide current status of the big data analytics applications.
Most of Apple's essential iPhone features began as R&D Projects published in patent applications. Recent Apple patent applications revile that future iPhone will be the smart personal assistance, intelligent care provider and control hub for the internet of things (IoT) applications exploiting artificial intelligence (AI).
Recent selling efforts of Yahoo brought an attention regarding its more than 6000 patents. Several patent professionals expect that the value of patents could be reach around $4 B. Yahoo patents for Artificial Intelligence (AI) include 58 US issued patents. Yahoo AI patents cover diverse applications such as Search Engine, Online Advertisement, Email System, Web Applications, E-commerce, Data Management, and Social Networking. Some of key Yahoo AI patents are as follows.
In the beginning there was RPM (and Debian packages) and it was good. Certainly, Linux packaging has solved many problems and pain points for system admins and developers over the years -- but as software development and deployment have evolved, new pain points have cropped up that have not been solved by traditional packaging.
In this talk, Joe Brockmeier will run through some of the problems that admins and developers have run into, and some of the solutions that organizations should be looking at to solve their issues with developing and deploying software. This includes Software Collections, Docker containers, OStree and rpm-ostree, Platform-as-a-Service, and more.
Big data analytics is becoming important to process unimaginably large amounts of information and data in many applications. The typical big data analytics is Hadoop, an open-source software framework that supports data-intensive distributed applications, and the running of applications on large clusters of commodity hardware. Hadoop, that is based on the architectural framework MapReduce, collects both structured data and unstructured data, processes the collected data set in a distributed network cluster in parallel, and extracts valuable information from the processed data set within a short time. Followings illustrate some examples of patents that provide current status of the big data analytics applications.
Most of Apple's essential iPhone features began as R&D Projects published in patent applications. Recent Apple patent applications revile that future iPhone will be the smart personal assistance, intelligent care provider and control hub for the internet of things (IoT) applications exploiting artificial intelligence (AI).
NVIDIA has countersued Samsung in the U.S. District Court in Virginia, citing four graphics patents beyond the seven cited in previous ITC and Delaware cases. The four patents are described in this latest filing.
We filed a patent lawsuit against Samsung, and Qualcomm, with the U.S. International Trade Commission in early September 2014, alleging that the company has chosen to deploy our patented GPU technology without proper compensation to us. When we did so, we fully anticipated that Samsung would sue us in response. It’s a classic reaction, which we factored into our strategic analysis before filing our suit. Here's a copy of Samsung's suit.
The Hells Angels Motorcycle Club's cyberpiracy and trademark infringement lawsuit against the seller of domain names that the HAMC charges infringe upon its intellectual property rights.
The State of the TCPA: Consent, Dialers, the FCC -- the Law is in Flux Ryan Thurman
With all of the recent rulings regarding the TCPA, how can companies navigate the TCPA waters, comply with the law, and still conduct their business? Join attorney David Kaminski for an in-depth review of the current law regarding dialers, consent under the TCPA and the FCC Rulings, and what companies face when seeking to comply with the current state of the law. For more info call 866-362-5478 or email info@dnc.com
Intangible assets, which account for up to 90% of a company's value, especially patents, which make up the largest proportion of these assets, are hardly ever utilized for corporate value creation despite their value. In this presentation, I introduce patent management solutions for the development of patents that can contribute to corporate value creation, using the latest digital technologies such as AI, blockchain, and Web 3.0. I also introduce measures to maximize the financial use of patent assets secured through such patent management. In particular, I will look into the domestic and overseas trends of STO (Security Token Offering), which have recently been gaining attention in S. Korea, and learn about strategies and methods for patent asset STO.
The Metaverse x AI x Web3 x Sustainability convergence presents a future vision that transforms how we interact with the digital realm, combining the expansive, immersive qualities of the Metaverse, the advanced computational abilities of AI, the decentralized nature of Web3, and the global imperative of sustainability.
Metaverse and AI Integration: AI technologies shape the Metaverse to be an immersive, interactive, and deeply engaging digital universe. Tools like the Meta AI Builder Bot, Nvidia's GANverse3D/GET3D, and Magic3D create 3D environments and objects, contributing to the Metaverse's realism. Lifelike human avatars, AI-powered digital fashion design, and immersive shopping experiences further enrich user engagement. Additionally, the Metaverse can become a testing ground for AI innovation, enabling developers to leverage its vast data generation and system testing capabilities.
AI and Web3 Integration: AI fortifies the decentralized Web3 ecosystem, creating unique digital assets for Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) and potential markets within the Metaverse. Furthermore, AI's capability to automate DeFi processes paves the way for more efficient, accessible financial services in the decentralized digital economy.
Web3 and Metaverse Integration: Blockchain technologies, the backbone of Web3, could be woven into the fabric of the Metaverse, giving rise to novel, decentralized commerce systems. It can enable peer-to-peer transactions and build decentralized marketplaces, providing users with greater control over their economic interactions in the virtual realm.
Metaverse and Sustainability Integration: The Metaverse offers a virtual platform to drive sustainable initiatives, reducing real-world resource consumption. In the Metaverse, renewable energy systems could be simulated and managed, virtual stores could advocate for sustainable products, and virtual factories could optimize sustainable manufacturing processes and supply chains. Furthermore, it could serve as a prototyping platform for sustainable smart cities, providing an efficient way to plan, simulate, and refine before real-world implementation.
To conclude, the convergence of Metaverse, AI, Web3, and Sustainability initiates a transformative movement toward a digital ecosystem that's immersive, intelligent, decentralized, and sustainable. This synergy could redefine digital experiences, promote efficient and fair economic interactions, and support global sustainability goals, signifying a new dawn in our digital evolution.
Tokenization, securitization, and monetization of real-world assets refer to the process of converting traditional assets into digital assets that can be traded, managed, and invested in a new way. Tokenization involves the creation of a digital token that represents ownership or a proof of authenticity of a real-world asset. The token can be traded on blockchain-based platforms, providing a secure and transparent record of ownership and enabling the creation of new markets for these assets. Securitization refers to the process of pooling together a set of assets and creating new securities backed by the underlying assets. In the context of tokenization, securitization involves the creation of asset-backed tokens that represent ownership in a portfolio of assets. Monetization refers to the process of generating revenue from an asset. In the context of tokenization and securitization, monetization can involve selling tokens or securities, licensing assets, or generating income from the underlying assets.
This webinar is designed to explore the tokenization, securitization, and monetization of real-world assets that have the potential to revolutionize the way we trade, manage, and invest in real-world assets, and to create new markets and opportunities for investors and asset owners.
Agenda:
Asset‐Backed Tokens
Security Token Offering (STO)
Securitization of Real-World Assets
NFT & DeFi for Securitization and Monetization of Real-World Assets
Metaverse for Monetization of Real-World Assets
Case Studies: Real Estates, Securities, Intangible Assets
IP Asset Tokenization, Valuation, Monetization: IPwe SIAM Platform
Patent information can be utilized in various ways depending on how it is understood. I have devised a method to extract useful insights for the development of new products or services from patents in specific technology fields by using the analysis and cognition capabilities of GPT-4 based ChatGPT. I have applied this to the fields of generative AI, metaverse, and Web3-based fintech.
For the case study, in the generative AI field, I examined Google's patent US10452978 "Attention-based sequence transduction neural networks" (this patent describes the transformer architecture, which is the basis of most large language models (LLMs) for generative AI); in the metaverse field, I looked at Meta's patent US11302063 "3D conversations in an artificial reality environment"; and in the Web3-based fintech field, I explored nChain's patent US10776761 "Virtual currency system."
I input into ChatGPT a guideline consisting of five key steps: identifying the main purpose of the patent invention, summarizing the technological innovations in the patent claims, describing potential products or services based on the technology, identifying the main industry participants, and evaluating competitive advantages. For more details, please refer to the attached file and evaluate the level of results at your discretion.
The outputs generated from the method described can provide valuable insights for various business applications:
Patent licensing promotion: By identifying the main purpose, technological innovations, and potential products or services related to a patent, businesses can better understand the value proposition of their intellectual property. This information can be used to showcase the benefits of the patented technology to potential licensees, making it more appealing for them to enter into licensing agreements. Thus, you can more effectively promote patent licensing.
Finding potential infringement: Summarizing the technological innovations in the patent claims helps businesses clearly understand the scope of their intellectual property protection. By comparing this information with competing products or services in the market, they can identify potential infringement cases and take appropriate legal actions to protect their intellectual property.
M&A target identification: Evaluating competitive advantages and identifying the main industry participants can help businesses spot potential acquisition targets. Companies with complementary technologies, strong market presence, or unique intellectual property could provide strategic opportunities for growth through mergers and acquisitions.
Product or service market fit: Describing potential products or services based on the patented technology can help businesses identify new opportunities for product development or market expansion. By understanding the potential applications and market demand for a particular technology, businesses can better tailor their offerings to meet customer needs.
Represented by ChatGPT, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become increasingly important in business over the past few years, and it has the potential to revolutionize many industries. One way to maximize the business value of AI is through patents. This webinar is designed to explore the strategy and practical ways to maximize the business value creation of AI utilizing patents.
Agenda
The state of the art AI innovation
AI innovation insight from patents
Commercial utilization of AI patents
Financial utilization of AI patents
AI patent development considering future technology/market evolution
IPwe SIAM platform for maximizing AI business value creation utilizing patents
Real-World Assets STO + Institutional DeFi Integration
Institutional DeFi refers to tokenize real-world assets with regulatory compliance and institutional-level controls for consumer protection. One of the main benefits of Institutional DeFi is the potential to transform the traditional financial system by making it more transparent, efficient, and accessible while maintaining the necessary safeguards for investor protection and financial stability. This can lead to new products, cost reduction, and faster settlement times for financial institutions.
STO (Security Token Offering) of real-world assets involves the issuance of security tokens that represent ownership of a real-world asset, such as a share of stock, bond, or real estate property. The tokenization and securitization process is carried out by an issuer who follows the necessary regulatory requirements. These security tokens can be listed, distributed, and traded on Institutional DeFi applications to automate various processes such as trading, settlement, and custody. This allows for greater security, efficiency, transparency, and liquidity.
#defi #fundraising #sto #tokenization #nft #securitization #security
Presentation of the Interoperable Metaverse x Web3 Development Webinar
Agenda:
Challenges in Building Interoperable Metaverse
3D Objects/Contents/Avatars/Assets Cross-Metaverse Interoperability
NFT Cross-Chain Interoperability
Interoperability in Metaverse Fashion
Metaverse Interoperability Standards
Speakers
Mikeldi Rodriguez, Metaverse Creative Technologist at Telefónica
"Avatar Interoperability Based On Metadata"
Leo Hilse, Founder at STYLE Protocol
"STYLE Protocol: NFT Inter-Metaverse Interoperability"
Alain Dessureaux, CTO at SpatialPort
"SpatialPort's Interoperable 3D eCommerce Platform"
This webinar is designed to explore the state of the art AI innovation and business applications for the web3 based metaverse development.
Agenda:
AI for Building Metaverse World
AI for 3D Objects/Contents/Avatars Creation
AI for Metaverse Commerce
AI for Metaverse Fashion
AI for NFT
AI for DAO
IP Issues with AI Created Assets
[Reminder] NFT•Web3•Metaverse Global Leaders Roundtable
Thais is a reminder that the NFT•Web3•Metaverse Global Leaders Roundtable will begin in three days on December 1 (Thursday) 2022, 12 pm ET (https://www.linkedin.com/events/nft-web3-metaversegloballeaders6988852388136640513/about/).
This roundtable is a hybrid Zoom + Metaverse event. At the start of the event, all participants will join the Zoom for a scheduled speaker introduction and networking. Those who want to participate in the metaverse event will join after the Zoom event.
Schedule:
12:00 - 12:05 EST "Introduction" Alex G. Lee, CEO & Founder at TechIPm
Part I. Zoom Meeting
12:05 - 12:20 EST “Reviews of NFT•Web3•Metaverse Global Leaders Presentations” Alex G. Lee
12:20 - 13:00 EST Speaker Introduction & Recap”
Matteo Gamberale, Founder & CEO at Zappy
Jens Laugesen, Founder at JENS_LAUGESEN DESIGN ADVISORY & KONsensX
Ofer Rubin, 3D/XR Executive Advisor at RealeyeZ3D
Erich Spangenberg, CEO & Co-Founder at IPwe
Tapan Lala, Founder at ZcureZ
Husam Yaghi, Group VP at Mawarid Media & Communications Group
Alex Bellesia, CEO & Founder at Spatial Port
Nick Cherukuri, CEO & Founder at ThirdEy
Doug Hohulin, Affiliate Faculty at Kansas University School of Nursing
Ruben Sananes, CEO & Founder at IMRSIVE
Se-Joon Chung, CEO & Co-Founder at AForm
James Costa, Founder at Clubhouse Archives
Tom Wallace, Founder at CreatedBy DAO
Aditya Mani, Founder at YOLOgram app
Aline Conus-Moulin, Managing Partner at E-NOTAM Ltd.
Vandana Taxali, Founder & CEO at Artcryption
Alex Di Giovanni, Founding Lawyer at Pando Law
13:00 - 13:15 EST
“Guidance for the Metaverse Event Places " Alex G. Lee
Part II. Metaverse Meeting
At the Metaverse Campus’ Lecture Hall (https://www.challau.com/college/techipm)
13:15 - 13:30 EST "Present and Future of NFT•Web3•Metaverse" Presentation by Doug Hohulin,
At the Metaverse Networking Place (https://www.challau.com/town-square/alex-g--lee)
13:30 - 14:00 EST “Networking with Speakers”
The fashion industry represents the estimated global revenues of $1.5T.
The global counterfeiting industry is expected to hit the $4.2T mark by 2022.
References
The fashion industry lost more than $50B in 2020 due to the sale of the counterfeit products:
Clothing appears to be the most counterfeited product followed by cosmetics and personal care, watches and jewelry, handbags and luggage.
The COVID-19 pandemic accelerates the digital transformation globally, and the fashion industry is no exception.
Citi expects the metaverse economy as large as $13T by 2030 and Gartner predicts that , and Gartner predicts that 25% of people will spend at least one hour a day
in the metaverse by 2026.
The creator economy has already exceeded a $100B market size. The NFT
market reaches $1.05T. The wearable NTF market is expected to be $11B in 2022.
Fashion industry lends well to the metaverse where the ecosystem includes metaverse fashion digitalization, metaverse fashion house/brand,
Ph i l f hi h d f hi k l il d h f hi k i d ygitalwear, metaverse fashion show and metaverse fashion marketplace/retail, and the metaverse fashion market is expected to increase
up to $55B by 2030.
As sustainability became the mainstream business the anti , the anti-sustainability and anti-circularity nature of the fashion business place
the sustainability as the top priority agenda in the fashion business practices.
Fashion digitalization and the metaverse fashion can be a potential solution for mitigating the anti-sustainability and anti-circularity nature
TechIPm, LLC
of the fashion business.
Gen Z and Gen Alpha become the future big spenders and sustainability advocates in fashion.
Schedule
12:00 - 12:10 EST
"Introduction" Alex G. Lee, CEO & Founder at TechIPm
12:10 - 12:25 EST
“JENS LAUGESEN X META\SENS Digital Collaboration in London Fashion Week” Jens Laugesen, Founder at JENS_LAUGESEN DESIGN ADVISORY
12:25 - 12:40 EST
"Ecoolska: Phygital Sustainable Fashion Brand" Olska Green, Founder at Ecoolska
12:40 - 12:55 EST
"WEARSPACES: Dress like a game-changer in Metaverse & IRL" Julien Chmilewsky, Co-Founder at WEARSPACES
12:55 - 13:10 EST
"Innovation in Fashion Brands Metaverse Shopping Experiences" Ruben Sananes, CEO & Founder at IMRSIVE
13:10 - 13:25 EST
"NEOMODEST: Inclusive, Accessible, Decentralized Metaverse Fashion" Afroja K, Founder at NEOMODEST
13:25 - 13:40 EST
"XTENDED iDENTiTY: The Experiential Digital Fashion Lab" Xing Yunjia, Co-Founder at XTENDED iDENTiTY
13:40 - 13:55 EST
“GAD (Garment Automated Digitisation)” Pietro Dalpane, CEO & Co-Founder at DeepGears
13:55 - 14:10 EST
"Fostering Interoperable Digital Fashion Through Graphics Technology" Se-Joon Chung, CEO & Co-Founder at AForm
14:10 - 14:25 EST Coffee Break
14:25 - 14:40 EST
“3D Garment Creation to Simulation - Connecting Digital Fashion with Digital Human” Kenneth Ryu, CSO at z-emotion
14:40 - 14:55 EST
"A Luxury Fashion Brand & Web3 Marketplace" James Costa, Founder at Clubhouse Archives
14:55 - 15:10 EST
"Marketing Digital Fashion with Avatar Generated Content" Diego Rios, Founder at Animalz
15:10 - 15:25 EST
"CreatedBy DAO: A Phygital NFT Ecosystem" Tom Wallace, Founder at CreatedBy DAO
15:25 - 15:40 EST
"MaisonDAO: Decentralized Digital Fashion Brand and ArtTech Collective" Elena Nazaroff, Co-Founder at MaisonDAO
15:40 - 16:05 EST
"Browzwear Innovative 3D Digital Fashion Solution" Afsha Iragorri, 3D Fashion Designer at 3D Fashion Solutions
16:05 - 16:20 EST
“Innovative 3D Digital Fashion Design” Olesya Pupchenko, Director at Global Rise Group
Agenda
Metaverse Fashion Design
Interoperable Metaverse Fashion
NFTs for Metaverse Fashion
Web3 for Metaverse Fashion
Metaverse Fashion Commerce
NFT financialization refers to bringing NFTs closer to financial use, mostly, by making NFT useful in DeFi protocols. NFT financialization is the most important element of NFT monetization innovation to overcome the low liquidity and high price volatility of almost all NFTs currently.
NFT Fractionalization splits a NFT into smaller fungible tokens that represent partial ownership of the NFT. The NFT is locked in a smart contract and the ownership remains with the original holder. Fractionalization can unlock liquidity for NFT owners and cheapens access to valuable NFTs, and improves the NFT market spectrum. An issue with fractionalization is a reconstitution after ractionalization. Buyout auctions alleviate the reconstitution problem to some extent.
*NFT fractionalization protocols: NFTX (https://nftx.io/), Fractional (https://fractional.art/), NFT20 (https://nft20.io/), Unic.ly (https://www.unic.ly/), Szns (https://www.szns.io/)
NFT Lending uses NFT as collateral for loans. In peer-to-peer lending, borrowers and lenders manually negotiate and come to an agreement for loan terms such as duration, interest rates and loan-to-value ratios in a peer-to-peer fashion. This lending enables a customizable loan terms without a need to rely on price oracles. Because the matching process is manual time-to-liquidity may be slow. In peer-to-pool lending, liquidity providers fungible tokens into pools and borrowers take up loans from these pools instantaneously. Borrowers should put up their NFTs as collateral by locking them in smart contracts (digital vaults). This lending, however, must rely on price oracles to automate loan terms.
*Peer-to-peer NFT lending protocols: NFTfi(https://www.nftfi.com/), Arcad (https://www.arcade.xyz/), MetaStreet (https://metastreet.xyz/)
*Peer-to-pool NFT lending protocols: Bridgesplit (https://www.bridgesplit.com/), BendDAO (https://www.benddao.xyz/en/, PINE (https://pine.loans/), JPEG’d (https://jpegd.io/)
NFT Rental market is where NFT owners can rent out their NFTs to receive income and renters can rent NFTs to use but without owning them. In collateral renting, renter has to put up collateral to rent the NFT to use (e.g., reNFT (https://www.renft.io/). Collateral-free renting separates ownership and utility of an NFT (e.g., IQ Protocol (https://iq.space/#top).
NFT Price Discovery uses AMMs (Automated Market Makers)/bonding curves for an automatic price discovery in DeFi exchange liquidity pools (e.g., Uniswap and Sushiswap).
*NFT Price Discovery protocols: Sudoswap (https://sudoswap.xyz/#/), Pilgrim (https://pilgrim.money/), Rootswap (https://rootswap.xyz/)
I. Metaverse Digital RevolutionMetaverse Revolution ImperativesMetaverse Present and Future InfographicsMetaverse Industry ApplicationsII. Metaverse Technology InnovationWhy Metaverse Now?Meta Metaverse XR Device PrototypesApple Metaverse XR Device Insights from PatentsRoblox Metaverse Game Platform Innovation Insights from PatentsDigital Twin Innovation Insights from PatentsMetaverse Patents Development Boom3D Metaverse Space Development: 3D Rendering 3D Metaverse Space Development: 2D to 3D Translation 3D Metaverse Object Development: 2D to 3D ConversionInteractive Experience Design: Multi-Sensory PerceptionVirtual Product Development: NFT Digital AssetsMeatavere Application Development: Retail ShoppingMeatavere Application Development: Automotive ShowroomMeatavere Application Development: TourMeatavere Application Development: MeetingMeatavere Application Development: Smart FactoryMetaverse Enterprise PlatformMetaverse Enterprise Platform System Components
III. Metaverse Business Development: Metaverse BM & InvestmentExperience EconomyMetaverse User Experiences (MUXs)Metaverse BM Innovation for New Experience EconomyMetaverse Angel/VC Investors IV. Metaverse Economic SystemNFT Functions and Legal Status NFT + DeFi ConvergenceMetaverse Economic System ComponentsMetaverse Economic System ArchitectureV. Metaverse + ESG ConvergenceESG/Sustainability ImperativeMetaverse Renewable Energy System ManagementMetaverse Factory for Sustainable Manufacturing/Supply ChainMetaverse for Sustainable Smart City Development Metaverse NFT/DeFi Based Sustainable FinancingDesigning Sustainable Metaverse Experiences (SMXs)Metaverse Impact on EnvironmentMetaverse Impact on People/Society
This webinar is designed to explore the innovative NFT monetization through the convergence of NFT securitization and DeFi.
Agenda
Reviews of NFT Monetization
NFT Valuation
NFT IP Licensing
NFT + DeFi Convergence: MetaFi, GameFi, DAOFi, ...
NFT Securitization Development
Legal Challenges of NFT Securitization
NFT Securitization Use Cases
NFT Securitization + DeFi Convergence
Schedule:
12:00 – 12:15 ET, Alex G. Lee
"Introduction & Overview"
12:15 – 12:30 ET, Ted Kim
"XBRIK: NFT Securitization & Brick Exchange & IBO DeFi Platform"
12:30 – 12:45 ET, Aditya Mani
"In-app monetization of NFTs for Style"
12:45 – 13:00 ET, Aline Conus-Moulin
"NFT Valuation: Challenges & Solutions"
13:00 – 13:15 ET, Yael Tamar
"NFTs in Real Estate"
13:15 – 13:30 ET, Vandana Taxali
"NFT IP Rights Licensing: Deep Dive"
13:30 – 13:45 ET, Joshua Hale
"NFTDAOs not spelled S A F E: Why the most interesting things you can do in crypto can land you in hot water!"
13:45 – 14:00 ET, Alex G. Lee
(Optional) Q&A/Discussion
KVA 한국기업·기술가치평가협회 주관으로 열린 웹3.0기반 메타버스 응용을 위한 NFT 가치개발과 가치평가 특강
내용:
메타버스, 웹3, NFT에 대한 기본을 이해하고 웹3 기반 메타버스 응용을 위한 NFT 가치개발에 대한 동향과 전망을 알아보고 NFT 수익화를 위한 NFT 지적재산(IP) 개발과 NFT 가치평가에 대해 알아본다.
세부내용:
기본과정 (1시간)
메타버스의 이해
웹3의 이해
NFT의 이해
고급과정 (1시간)
NFT 웹3 기반 메타버스 응용을 위한 가치개발
웹3 기반 메타버스 응용 NFT 지적재산 개발
웹3 기반 메타버스 응용 NFT에 의한 수익화
웹3 기반 메타버스 응용 NFT의 가치평가
This webinar is designed to explore the current status of the NFT ecosystem and monetization potentials exploiting the web3 based metaverse. If you are a tech-savvy IP legal professional, you will be interested in legal challenges and opportunities with the NFT/Web3/Metaverse/Cryptocurrency.
Please join on September 22 (Thu) at 12:00 ET to learn from legal experts in NFT, Web3, Metaverse, Tokenization, Intellectual Property:
"NFT IP Rights: Monetization Opportunities & Legal Challenges" from Vandana Taxali, Founder & CEO at Artcryption
"Legal Challenges of Web3 Gaming Studios and Platforms" from Andrew Cripps, Founder at MetaCounsel
Agenda:
Utility NFT for Metaverse Monetization
NFT for Customer Loyalty Program 3.0
NFT for X2E (Play-to-Earn, Wear-to-Earn, ...)
NFT Interoperability
NFT Valuation
NFT for Web2/Legacy to Web3/Metaverse Business Transition
NFT for Creator/Experience Tokenomics
NFT based Monetization for Metaverse Fashion & Other Industries
NFT for Monetizing IP Portfolio Development (NFT IP Securitization)
NFT IP Rights Legal Issues
NFT + DeFi Convergence: MetaFi, GameFi, DAOFi, ...
NFT for Physical + Virtual Convergence Economy/Commerce
Future of NFT: Composable NFT, Dynamic NFT, Consumable NFT, ...
Other speakers/topics:
"The Future of NFT" from Mohamed Hafiz, Advisor at First Abu Dhabi Bank
"NFT based Monetization for Metaverse Fashion & Other Industries" from Nova Lorraine, Director at Raine Drops NFT Art House
"Phygital Fashion with NFTs" from Fahmid Uddin, Founder at M3RCH.xyz
"Interoperable NFTs for GenZ: Gaming and Fashion" from Matteo Gamberale, Founder & CEO at Zappy
"NFT for Web2/Legacy to Web3/Metaverse Business Transition" from Gianfranco Lopane, President at Smarterverse
"Your Digital DNA & NFT: Monetization of Digital Identity in the Metaverse" from Kelvin Troy, CEO at Cross-Metaverse Avatars LLC
Fame Universe (https://fameuniverse.xyz/) is a platform builder that hyper connecting fashion “From Physical to Digital And From Digital to Physical.” Fame’s mission is to lead the “Sustainable Metaverse Fashion Ecosystem” that nourishes existing physical and digital fashion universes where we can build, create, enjoy, play, earn and shop in a sustainable way.
Fame Platform
Patent pending Fame platform is a sustainable metaverse fashion ecosystem building platform that provides a play ground where the ecosystem players and stakeholders can co-create a sustainable metaverse fashion ecosystem. Fame platform provides the interfaces for the ecosystem players and stakeholders can cooperate synergetically to build sustainable metaverse fashion ecosystem more efficiently and effectively. Fame platform provides/integrates the tools/solutions/knowledge/expertise for supporting a sustainable metaverse fashion ecosystem development.
Fame Fashion NFT Monetization Platform
Patent pending Fame fashion NFT monetization platform (FameFiTM) is a core element of the fame platform.
FameFiTM is designed to provide most innovative fashion monetization solution that can maximize opportunities and resolve many challenges in fashion NFT monetization.
FameFiTM is designed to employ various innovative monetization methods including fashion IP NFT licensing, securitization and NFTFi for maximizing monetary rewards to the Fame ecosystem/community members and for enabling financially sustainable Fame metaverse fashion ecosystem development.
FameFiTM is designed to resolve many legal issues in fashion NFT monetization and overcome several huddles in the fashion NFT valuation.
FameFiTM is designed to innovate the fashion NFT value creation through NFT scarcity, utility and sustainable tokenomics development.
C: The metaverse is designed to give like-minded communities of common interests digital sandboxes to play, earn, own, and socialize.
U: The decentralized economy is user controlled, not centrally governed.
T: The metaverse experience is possible through Web 3.0 technology, such as blockchain, 5G networks, VR, AR, and cloud computing.
E: Experiences and interactions give NFTs greater utility, which drives greater value.
R: A connection to the real world gives the metaverse value beyond entertainment as it augments real-world experiences and offers the potential for real financial gains as well.
Fame Universe (https://fameuniverse.xyz/)
Fame is a platform builder that hyper connecting fashion “From Physical to Digital And From Digital to Physical.”
Fame’s mission is to lead the “Sustainable Metaverse Fashion Ecosystem” that nourishes existing physical and digital fashion universes where we can build, create, enjoy, play, earn and shop in a sustainable way.
Fame Platform
Fame platform is a sustainable metaverse fashion ecosystem building platform that provides a play ground where the ecosystem players and stakeholders can co-create a sustainable metaverse fashion ecosystem.
Fame platform provides the interfaces for the ecosystem players and stakeholders can cooperate synergetically to build sustainable metaverse fashion ecosystem more efficiently and effectively.
Fame platform provides/integrates the tools/solutions/knowledge/expertise for supporting a sustainable metaverse fashion ecosystem development.
Fame Platform Design
Fame platform is designed to provide a simple way of embracing digital/web3 fashion business for legacy/web2 fashion business.
Fame platform is designed to provide a community building solution that the ecosystem players and stakeholders can participate with self-sovereignty and consensus.
Fame platform is designed to employ various innovative monetization methods for increasing market scalability.
Fame platform is designed to be modular considering current technology limitations and emerging technology expectations.
Fame platform is designed to resolve fashion’s inherent sustainability/circularity issues.
Synthetic Fiber Construction in lab .pptxPavel ( NSTU)
Synthetic fiber production is a fascinating and complex field that blends chemistry, engineering, and environmental science. By understanding these aspects, students can gain a comprehensive view of synthetic fiber production, its impact on society and the environment, and the potential for future innovations. Synthetic fibers play a crucial role in modern society, impacting various aspects of daily life, industry, and the environment. ynthetic fibers are integral to modern life, offering a range of benefits from cost-effectiveness and versatility to innovative applications and performance characteristics. While they pose environmental challenges, ongoing research and development aim to create more sustainable and eco-friendly alternatives. Understanding the importance of synthetic fibers helps in appreciating their role in the economy, industry, and daily life, while also emphasizing the need for sustainable practices and innovation.
A workshop hosted by the South African Journal of Science aimed at postgraduate students and early career researchers with little or no experience in writing and publishing journal articles.
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdfThiyagu K
This slides describes the basic concepts of ICT, basics of Email, Emerging Technology and Digital Initiatives in Education. This presentations aligns with the UGC Paper I syllabus.
Macroeconomics- Movie Location
This will be used as part of your Personal Professional Portfolio once graded.
Objective:
Prepare a presentation or a paper using research, basic comparative analysis, data organization and application of economic information. You will make an informed assessment of an economic climate outside of the United States to accomplish an entertainment industry objective.
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty, In...Dr. Vinod Kumar Kanvaria
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty,
International FDP on Fundamentals of Research in Social Sciences
at Integral University, Lucknow, 06.06.2024
By Dr. Vinod Kumar Kanvaria
Model Attribute Check Company Auto PropertyCeline George
In Odoo, the multi-company feature allows you to manage multiple companies within a single Odoo database instance. Each company can have its own configurations while still sharing common resources such as products, customers, and suppliers.
Acetabularia Information For Class 9 .docxvaibhavrinwa19
Acetabularia acetabulum is a single-celled green alga that in its vegetative state is morphologically differentiated into a basal rhizoid and an axially elongated stalk, which bears whorls of branching hairs. The single diploid nucleus resides in the rhizoid.
Complaint for Smartphone Lawsuit: Nokia Apple Micounity Samrtphone Technology
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 1 of 38
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTzuCT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSI{ALL DTVISION
MICROUNITY SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, $
INC., a California corporation, $
Plaintiff, $
v.$ CivilActionNo. 10-91
(1) ACER INC., a Republic of China corporation, $
(2) ACER AMERICA CORPORATION, a $
Califomia corporation, (3) APPLE, INC., $ JURY
a California corporation, (4) AT&T INC., a $
Delaware corporation, (5) AT&T MOBILITY $
LLC,aDelaware limited liability company, $
(6) CELLCO PARTNERSHIP, aDelaware $
parbrership, (7) ÐGDEA, INC., a Texas $
corporation, (8) GOOGLE INC., aDelaware $
corporation, (9) HTC CORPORATION, a Republic $
of China corporation, (10) HTC AMERICA' INC., $
a Texas corporatior¡ (11) LG Electronics, Inc., a $
Koreanlimitedcompany, (Lz)LcElectronics $
Mobilecornm U.S.A.,Inc., a Califomia corporation, $
(13) MOTOROLA,INC., aDelaware corporatior¡ $
(14) NOKIA CORPORATION a Finnish $
corporation, (15) NOKIA INC., a Delaware $
corporation, (16) PALM, INC., a Delaware $
corporation, (17) QUALCOMM INC., aDelaware $
corporation, ( 1 8) SAMSI-ING ELECTRONICS CO., $
LTD., aKorean limited company, (19) SAMSUNG, $
SEMICONDUCTOR INC., a California $
corporation, (20) SAMSUNG $
TELECOMMIINICATIONSAMERICA,LLC, $
aDelaware limited liability company, (21) SPRINT $
NEXTEL CORPORATION, aKansas corporation, $
QT)TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC., a Delaware $
corporation,
Defendants.
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT I¡¡'FRINGEMENT
PlaintitrMicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc., for its complaint against Defendants Acer,
Inc., Acer America Corporation, Apple, Inc., AT&T Inc., AT&T Mobility LLC, Cetlco Parbrership,
Exede4 Inc., Google Inc., HTC Corporation, HTC America, Inc., LG Elecfronics, lnc., LG
1019509v1/07503-01 1876
86. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 2 of 38
Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc., Motorola, Inc., Nokia Corporation, Nokia Inc., Palm, Inc.,
Qualcomm Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., LTD., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc', Samsung
Telecommunications Americ4 LLC, SprintNextel Corporation, and Texas Instruments Inc., alleges:
TIIE PARTIES
1. MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc. ('MicroUnity") is a corporation duly
organrzed and existing under the laws of the State of Califomia, with its principal place of business
at376 Martin Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050.
2. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant
Texas Instruments Inc. ('TI") is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state
of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 12500 TI Blvd., Dallas, TX 75226; that TI has
developed, manufactures, and sells its OMAP3 series of processors to the suppliers of cell phones
and other products; that TI has announced that it is developing its OMAP4 series of processors; that
OMAP3 and OMAP4 processors are designed, used, offered for sale and sold in this disúict; and that
products implementing such processors are designed, used, offered for sale and sold in this district
and throughout the United States and imported into the United States.
3. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant
the laws of the
Qualcomm, Inc. ('Qualcomm") is a corporation duly organized and existing under
state of Delaware, with its principat place of business at 5775 Morehouse Drive, San Diego, CA
9212I; that Qualcomm has developed, manufactures, and sells its Snapdragon series of processors,
including but not limited to its QSD8250 processors, to the suppliers of cell phones and other
products; and that products implementing such processors ate used, offered for sale and sold in this
district and throughout the United States and imported into the United States.
4. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant
Samsung Elecfionics Co., Ltd. ("Samsung") is a public limited company duly organized attd existing
87. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 3 of 38
under the laws of South Korea, with its principal place of business at#24 Nongseo-Dong, Kiheung-
Gu, Yongin-City, Kyungg-Do, Korea; that Defendant Samsung Semiconductor, Inc-, ("SSI") is a
wholly owned subsidiary of Samsung, and is a corporation duly organized and existing under the
laws of the state of Californi4 with its principal place of business at 3655 N. l't St', San Jose, CA
95134;that Sagsung and SSI have developed, manufacture, and sell processors such as the S5PCI00
to the suppliers of cell phones and other products; and that products implementing zuch processors
are used, offered for sale and sold in this disüict and throughout the United States and imported into
the United States.
5. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant
Motorola, Inc. ('Motorola") is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state
of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 1303 E. Algonquin Rd., Schaumburg, IL 60196;
and that cell phones such as the Droid are manufactured by Motorola and are used, offered for sale
and sold in this district and tluoughout the United States and imported into the United States by
Motorola.
6. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant
Nokia Corporation is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of Finland, with its
principal place of business at Keilalahdentie2-4, Espoo, FI-02-150, Finland; and that Defendant
Nokia Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Nokia Corporation, and is a corporation duly organized
and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 6000
Connection Drive, Irving, TX 75039. Nokia Corporation and Nokia Inc. are individually and
collectively referred to herein as 'Î.{okiâ-" MicroUnity is informed a¡rd believes, and on that basis
alleges, thæ cell phones such as the N900 are manufactured by Nokia and are used, offered for sale
88. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 4 of 38
and sold in this district and throughout the United States and imported into the United States by
Nokia.
7. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant
Palm, Inc. ('Palm") is a corporation duty organized and existing under the laws of the state of
Delaware, with its principal place of business at 950 W. Maude Ave., Sruuryvale, CA 94085; and
that cell phones such as the Pre are manufactured by Palm and are used, offered for sale and sold in
this district and throughout the United States and imported into the United States by Palm.
B. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant
Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC, ("STA") is wholly owned by Samsung, and is a
limited liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delawæe, with
its principat place of business at 1301 East Lookout Drive, Richardson, Collin County, TX75082;
that Samsung and STA manufacture cell phones such as the Galæry Spica GT-i5700 and OmniaHD
i89I0; and that such cell phones are used, offered for sale and sold in this district and throughout the
united staæs and imported into the united states by samsung and sTA.
g. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and onthat basis alleges, that Defendant Acer
Inc. is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the Republic of China (Taiwan),
with its principal place of business at 8F, 88, Sec. 1, Hsin Tai Mu Rd., Hsichih, Taipei Z2l,Tuwan,
ROC; and that Defendant Acer America Corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of Acer Inc., and
is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of California with its
principal place of business at 333 W. San Carlos St., Ste. 1 500, San Jose, CA 951 1 0. Acer Inc. and
Acer America Corporation are individually and collectively refened to herein as "Acer." MicroUnity
is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that cell phones such as the Liquid A1 and
4
89. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 5 of 38
neoTouch are manufactured by Acer and are used, offered for sale and sold in this distict
and
throughout the United States and imported into the United States by Acer'
10. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant HTC
Corporation, also known as High Tech Computer Corporation, is a public limited liability
company
d¡ly organized and existing gnder the laws of the Republic of Chin4 with its principal place of
business at 23 Xnghua Rd., Taoyuan 330, Taiwan, Republic of China; that Defendant HTC
America, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of HTC Corporation, tlrough an inærmediary
corporation, and is a corporation duly oryatized and existing under the laws of the state of
Texas,
with its principal place of business at L3920 SE Eastgate Way, Suite 400, Bellevue, WA 98005; and
that Exedea, Inc., is a wholly owned subsidiary of HTC Corporation, through an intermediary
corporation, and is a corporation duty organized and existing under the laws of the state
of Texas,
with its principat place of business at 5950 Corporate Drive, Houston, Texas 77036. HTC
to herein as
Corporation, HTC America, Inc. and Exedea are individually and collectively referred
..HTC,'
. 11. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant
Google Inc. ("Google") is a corporation duly organized, and existing under the laws of the state
of
Delaware, with its principal place of business at 1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy', Mountain
View, CA
94043;that HTC manufactures and Google sells cell phones such as the Nexus One;
that such cell
phones are used, oflered for sale and sold in this disûict and throughout the United States and
imported into the United States by Google and HTC; and that Google makes software for Nexus
One
and other cell phones that is used, offered for sale and sold in this distict and ttfoughout the United
States and imported into ttre United States by Google.
90. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 6 of 38
lZ. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant LG
Electronics, Inc., is a public limited company duly organized and existing under the laws of South
Kore4 with its principal place of business at LG T¡/in Towers, 20 Yeouido-dong, Yeoungdeuagpo-
gu, Seoul, 750-7-2l,South Korea; and that Defendant LG Electonics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc. is a
wholly owned subsidiary of LG Electonics, Inc., and is a corporation duly organized and existing
under the laws of the state of California with its principal place of business at 10101 Old Grove
Road, San Diego, CAgZl3l. LG Electronics, Inc. and LG Electonics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc. are
individually and collectively referred to herein as "LG." MicroUnity is informed.and believes, and
on that basis alleges, that LG manufactures and selis cell phones such as the eXpo and IQ; and that
such cell phones are used, offered for sale and sold in this distict and throughout the United States
and imported into the United States by LG.
13. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant
Apple, Inc. ('Apple') is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of
Califomia" with its principal place of business at 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino, CA 95014; that Apple
manufactures and sells products such as the iPhone 3GS cell phone and iPod Touch 32 arñ 64GB
(,ipod Touch 3G") and provides software for such products; and that such cell phones and other
products and software are used, offered for saie and sold in this district and throughout the United
States and imported into the United States by Apple.
14. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant
Cellco Partnership (Yerizon'), doing business as Verizon Wireless, is a general parbrership, duly
organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, between Verizon Communications
Inc., a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, and
Vodafone Group plc, a public liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of the
91. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 7 of 38
United Kingdom, with Verizon's principal place of business at 1 Verizon Way, Basking Ridge, NJ
07920; that Verizon sells cell phones such as the Motorola Droid and Palm Pre and other products,
and services utilizing and softwa¡e utilized by such products; and that such cell phones and other
products, services and software are used, offered for sale and sold in this district and tlrroughout the
United States and imported into the United States by Verizon.
15. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant
Sprint Nextel Corporation ("Sprint") is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of
the state of Kansas, with its princtpal place of business at 6500 Sprint Pkwy., Overland Park, KS
6625I; that Sprint sells cell phones and other products such as the Palm Pre, and services utilizing
and software utilized by such products; and that such cell phones and other products, services and
software are used, offered for sale and sold in this distict and throughout the United States and
imported into the United States by Sprint.
16. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Defendant
AT&T Inc. is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, with
its principal place of business at 208 S Akard St., Dallas, TX 75201; and that Defendant AT&T
Mobilþ LLC is wholly owned by AT&T Inc., and is a limited tiability company duly organirndatñ
existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 5565
Glenridge Connector, Atlant4 GA30342. AT&T Inc. and AT&T Mobility LLC are individually and
collectively refened to herein as "AT&T." MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis
alleges, that AT&T sells cell phones and other products such as the LG eXpo and IQ and Apple
iPhone 3GS, and services utilizing and software utilized by such products; and that such cell phones
and other products, services and software ate used, offlered for sale and sold in this dishict and
throughout the United States and imported into ttre United States by AT&T.
92. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 8 of 38
JI]RISDICTION AID VENTIE
17. The Court has subject matter jwisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $$ 1331 and
1338(a) because this action arises under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. $$ I et seq.
Venue is proper in this Federal District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $$ 1391(b)-(c) and 1400(b) in that the
defendants reside in this disftict, a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred in
this dishict, and the defendants have a regular and established place of business in this district and
have committed acts of infringement inthis district.
18. This case is related to, and involves some of the same patents involved in prior
actions, Micro(lnity Systems Engìneering, Inc. v. Intel Corporation and Dell, Inc.,C.A.No' 2-04CV-
120; MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc. v. Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc., C.A. No.
2-05CV-505; MitoUnity Systems Engineering, Inc. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., C.A'. No. 2-
06CV-486, all of which were filed in the United States Distict Court for the Eastem Distict of
Texas, Marshall Division.
INFRTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.5,737,547 Cl
19. On April 7, 1998, United States Patent No. 5,737,5 47 (the"'547 patenf') was duly
and legally issued for an invention entitled "system for Placing Entries of an Outstanding Processor
Request into a Free Pool After the Request Is Accepted by a Correqponding Peripheral Device."
MicroUnity was assigned the '547 patent and continues to hold all rights and interest tn lhe '547
patent. A true and correct copy of the '547 pa,ærrt.is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
20. Tlrrc'547 patent has been the subject of a reexamination proceeding, reexamination
request number 90/008,23fl in which the patentability of claims 10-16, 19 and 20 is confirmed,
claims 4-7 , 18 and 2l-25 are determined to be patentable as amended, claims 8, 9, 17 , 26 arñ 27 arc
dependent on an amended claim and are determined to be patentable, claims 28-48 have been added
93. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 9 of 38
and a¡e determined to be patentable, and claims 1-3 are canceled. A copy of Reexamination
Certificate 5,737,547 C1 is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
Zl. TI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the
claims of the '547 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their
infringing processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors and
infringement of the'547
Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors. TI and Qualcomm are liable for their
patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C . ç 27L.
22, Motorol4 Nokia, Palm, samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google and LG have
infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '547 patentby their manufacture,
use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their infringing cell phones and other products, including
but not limited to the Motorola Droid, NokiaN900, Palm Pre, Samsrurg Galaxy Spica GT-i5700 and
OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, Google/tlTC Nexus One, and LG eXpo and IQ.
Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google and LG are liable for their infringement
ofthe'547 patentpursuantto 35 U.S.C. ç271'
23. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of
the claims of the '547 patentby their use, sa1e, importration, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones
and other products. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '547 patent
pursuant to 35 U.S.C . 5 271.
24. TI, Qualcomm, Motorolq Nokia" Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG
Verizon, AT&T and Sprint's acts of infringement have caused darnage to MicroUnity, and
MicroUnity is entitled to recover from TI, Qualcomm, Motorol4 Nokia" Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer,
HTC, Google, LG Verizon, AT&T and Sprint the darnages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of
their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. TI, Qualcomm, Motorola, Nokia, Palm,
9
94. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 10 of 38
Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG Verizon, AT&T and Sprint's infringement of MicroUnity's
exclusive rights under the'547 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm
for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless e4joined by this Court.
25. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that TI, Samsung
and Motorola have had communications and contact with Microunity and are fully aware of
MicroUnity's technology and patent portfolio including the'547 patent; that TI, Samsung and
Motorola have proceeded to infringe the'547 patent vvith full and complete knowledge of the patent
and its applicability to their products without any attempt to take a license under the'547 patent and
without a good faith belief thaf the'547 patent is invalid or not infringed, and thus TI, Samsung and
Motorola's infringement of the '547 pafent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to
increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this
action under 35 U.S.C. $ 2S5. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the
remaining defendants' infringement of the '547 patentis willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity
to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting
this action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285.
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,742,840
26. On April 2I,lgg8, United States Patent No. 5,742,840 (the "'840 patent") was duly
and legally issued for an invention entitled "General Purpose, Multiple Precision Parallel Operation,
Programmable Media Processor." MicroUnity was assigned the '840 patent and continues to hold all
rights and interest in the '840 patent. A true and corect copy of the '840 patent is attached hereto as
Exhibit C.
27. The '840 patent has been the subject of a reexamination proceeding, reexamination
request number 901007,583, in which the patentability of cLaim 11 is confirmed, claim 1 is
10
95. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 11 of 38
determined to be patentable as amended, claims 2-6,8 and 9 are dependent on an amended claim and
are determined to be patentable, and claims 7 and 10 are canceled. A notice of intent to issue a
reexamination certificate has been issued by the Patent Office, and receipt of the reexamination
cefüftcate is pending.
28. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or
more of the claims of the '840 patent by their manufacûre, use, sale, importation, and/or offler to sell
their infringing processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors,
Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors. TI, Samsung,
SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '840 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. ç271.
29. Motorol4 Noki4 Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have
infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '840 patent by their manufacture,
use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their infringing cell phones and other products, including
but not limited to the Motorola Droid, NokiaN900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700 and
OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ, and
Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC,
Google, LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the '840 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
527r.
30. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of
the claims of the '840 patent by their use, salg importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones
and other products. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '840 patent
pursuantto 35 U.S.C. ç271.
31. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, md
MicroUnity is entitled to recover from defendants the damages sustained by MicroUnity as aresult of
11
96. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 12 of 38
their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at tial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's
exclusive rights under the '840 patent will continue to darnage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm
for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.
32. MicroUnity is informed and believeso and on that basis alleges, that TI, Samsung
and Motorola have had communications and contact with Microunity and are fully aware of
MicroUnity's technology and patent portfolio including the '840 patent; that TI, Samsung and
Motorola have proceeded to infringe the '840 patent with full and complete knowledge of the patent
and its applicability to their products without any attempt to take a license under the '840 patent and
without a good faith belief that the '840 patent is invalid or not infringed, and thus TI, Samsung and
Motorola's inûingement of the '840 patent is willflrl and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to
increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this
action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the
remaining defendants' infringement of the '840 patent is willftt and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity
to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incured in prosecuting
this action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285.
rNT'RTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.5,794,061 Cl
33. OnAugust 11, 1998, United States PatentNo.5,794,061 (the "'061 patenf) was
duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "General Purpose, Multiple Precision Parallel
Operation, Prograrnmable Media Processor." MicroUnity was assigned the '061 patent and continues
to hold all rights and interest in the '061 patent. A true and correct copy of the '061 patent is attached
hereto as Exhibit D.
34. The '061 patent has been the zubject of a reexamination proceeding, reexamination
request number 901007 ,563 , in which the patentability of claims 14, I 5 md 17 is confirmed, claim 16
12
97. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 13 of 38
is determined to be patentable as amended, claims 31-47 have been added and are determined to be
patentable, and claims 1-13 and 18-30 are canceled. A copy of Reexamination Certificate 5,794,06I
Cl is attached hereto as Exhibit E.
35. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or
more of the claims of the '061 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell
their infringing processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors,
Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processoïs, and Quatcomm's Snapdragon processors. TI, Samsung,
SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '061 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C . ç 271.
36. Motorol4 Nokia" Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have
infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '061 patent by their manufacture,
use, sale, importation, and/or offler to sell their infringing cell phones and other products, including
but not limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700 and
OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid Al and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ, and
Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Motorol4 Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC,
Google, LG and Appte a¡e liable for their infringement of the '061 patent pursuant to 35 U'S.C.
$ 271.
37. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of
phones
the claims of the '061 patent by their use, sale, imporüation, and./or offer to sell infringing cell
and other products. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '061 patent
pursuant to 35 U.S.C . 5 271.
38. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, ffid
MicroUnity is entitled to recover from defendants the damages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of
their wrongf,rl acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's
13
98. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 14 of 38
exclusive rights under the '061 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing ineparable harm
for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court'
39. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that TI, Samsung
and Motorola have had communications and contact with MicroUnity and are fully aware of
MicroUnity's technology and patent portfolio including the '061 patent; that TI, Samsung and
Motorola have proceeded to infringe the '061 patent with full and complete knowledge of the patent
and its applicabilþ to their products without any attempt to take a license under the '061 patent and
without a good faith belief that the '061 patent is invalid or not infringed, and thus TI, Samsung and
Motorola's infringement of the '061 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to
increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees and costs incured in prosecuting this
action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285, MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the
remaining defendants' infringement of the'061 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity
to increased damages urder 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting
this actionunder 35 U.S.C. $ 285.
INFRTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,812,799 Ct
40. On September 2,1998, United States Patent No. 5,812,799 (the "'799 patent') was
duly and legally issued for an invention entitled'lrlon-Blocking Load Buffer and a Multiple-Priority
Memory System for Real-Time Multiprocessing." MicroUnity was assigned the '799 patent and
continues to hold all rights and interest tnlhe'799 patent. A true and conect copy of the '799 paræfi
is attached hereto as Exhibit F.
41. the'799 patent has been the subject of a reexamination proceeding, reexamination
request number 901008,232, in which the patentability of claims 1-34 is confirmed. A copy of
Reexamination Certificate 5,812,799 Cl is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
t4
99. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/1 6/10 Page 15 of 38
42. Qualcomm has infringed and continues to infringe one or more of the claims of the
'799 patentby its manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell its processors, including but
not limited to its Snapdragon processors, and by its knowingly contributing to and inducing others to
manufacture, use, sell, import, and/or offer to sell cell phones and other products that infringe one or
more of the claims of the '799 patent Qualcomm is liable for its infringement of the '799 patent
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. ç271.
43. Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google and LG have infünged and continue to
infringe one or more of the claims of the '799 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation,
and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones and other products, including but not limited to the
Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, and LG
eXpo and IQ, and by their knowingly contibuting to and inducing others to manufacture, use, sell,
import and/or offer to sell products and services which practice processes that infringe one or more of
the claims of the '799 patent Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google and LG are liable for their
infringement of the '799 patent pusuant to 35 U'S'C ' ç 27I.
44. AT&T has infringed and continues to infringe one or more of the claims of the'799
patent by its use, sale, importatior¡ and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones and other products
which infringe and which practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '799
patent. AT&T is liable for its infringement of the '799 paßrrtpursuant to 35 U.S.C . 5 27I.
45. Qualcomm, Samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and AT&T's acts of
infringement have caused darnage to MicroUnity, and Microunity is entitled to recover from
Qualcormr, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and AT&T the damages sustained by
MicroUnity as a result of their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. Qualcomm,
Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and AT&T's infringement of MicroUnity's exclusive rights
15
100. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 16 of 38
under the,799 paûent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing ineparable harm for which there
is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.
46. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that Samsung has
had communications and contact with MicroUnity and is frrlly aware of MicroUnity's technology
and
patent portfolio including the '799 patent; that Samsung has proceeded to infringe the '799 patent
with full and complete knowledge of the patent and its applicability to its products without any
patent is
attempt to take a license under the'799 patent and without a good faith belief that the '799
invalid or not infringed, and thus Samsung's infringement of the '799 patent is willful and deliberate,
entitling MicroUnity to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs
incurred in prosecuting this action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege,
afrer discovery, that the remaining defendants' inûingement of the '799 patent is willful and
deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's
fees
and costs incuned inprosecuting this action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285'
IiFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,006'318 Cl
47. On Decemb er 2,1999, United States Patent No. 6,006,318 Cl (the "'318 patenf)
was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "General Purpose, Dynamic Partitioning,
programmable Media processor." MicroUnity was assigned the '318 patent and continues to hold all
rights and interest in the '3 18 patent. A true and correct copy of the '3 1 8 patent is attached hereto as
ExhibitH.
48. The '318 patent has been the subject of a reexamination proceeding, reexamination
request number 90/008,512, in whichthe patentability of claim 5 is con-firrned, claims 2-3,6-8 and
11
are determined to be patentable as amended, claims 4,9-10 and 12 are dependent on an amended
claim and are determined to be patentable, claims 17-19 have been added and are detennined to be
16
101. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 17 of 38
patentable, and claims 1 and 13-16 are canceled. A copy of Reexamination Certificate 6,006,318 Cl
is atüached hereto as Exhibit I.
49. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or
more of the claims of the '318 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell
their infringing processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors'
Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors. TI, Samsung,
SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '318 patent pursuant to 35 U.S'C. 5271.
50. Motorola, Noki4 Palm, samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have
infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '318 patent by their manufactwe,
use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their infringing cell phones and other products, including
but not limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galuy Spica GT-i5700 and
OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ, and
Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC,
Google, LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the'318 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
927t.
51. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to inûinge one or more of
the claims of the '318 patent by their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones
and other products. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '318 patent
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. ç 27L.
52. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnit}, and
MicroUnity is entitled to recover from defendants the damages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of
their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's
t7
102. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 18 of 38
exclusive rights under the '318 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm
for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.
53. MicroUnity is infomred and believes, and on that basis alleges, that TI, Samsung
and Motorola have had communications and contact with MicroUnity and are frrlly aware of
MicroUnity's technology and patent portfolio including the '318 patent; that TI, Samsung and
patent
Motorola have proceeded to infringe the '318 patent vt'ith full and complete knowledge of the
patent and
and its applicability to their products without any attempt to take a license under the '318
without a good faith belief that the '318 patent is invalid or not infringed, and thus TI, Samsung and
Motorola's infringement of the '318 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to
prosecuting this
increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees and costs incurred in
action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that
the
remaining defendants' infringement of the '318 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity
to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting
this action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285.
r¡IFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. RE39'500 E
54. On July 30,111z,United St¿tes Patent No. 6,427,190 was duly and legally issued
for an invention entitled "Configurable Cache Altowing Cache-Type and Buffer-Type Access." On
February TI,2007,United States PatentNo. 6,427,190 was duly and legally reissued as United States
Reissue patent No. RE39,500 E (the "500 patenf). MicroUnity was assigned the '500 patent and
patent
continues to hold alt rights and interest in the '500 patent. A true and conect copy of the '500
is attached hereto as Exhibit J.
55. TI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the
claims of the '500 patent by their manufactwe, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their
l8
103. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 19 of 38
processors, inctuding but not timited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors and Qualcomm's
Snapdragon processors, and by their knowingly contributing to and inducing others to
manufacture,
software which
use, sell, import and/or offer to sell cell phones and other products and services and
patent. TI
infringe and which practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '500
and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '500 patent prusuantto 35
U.S'C' 527I.
56. Motorola, Nokia, Palm, samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google and LG have
infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '500 patent by their manufacture,
use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their cell phones and other products, including but not
limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galæ<y Spica GT-i5700
and
and IQ, by
Ornnial{D i8910, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, Google/HTC Nexus One, and LG eXpo
providing software for use on such cell phones and other products, and by their knowingly
to sell products and
contributing to and inducing others to manufacture, use, sell, import and-/or offer
one or more of the
services and software which infringe and which practice processes that infringe
and LG are
claims of the '500 patent. Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google
g
liable for their infringement of the '500 patent pwsuant to 35 U.S.C. 27L
57. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of
the claims of the '500 patent by their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to setl
infringing cell phones
and other products and software which inÊinge and which practice processes that
inûinge one or
their
more of the claims of the '500 patent, and by their knowingly contributing to and inducing
customers to purchase arìd use services which practice processes that infringe one
or more of the
,500 patent. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the'500
claims of the
patent ptrsuantto 35 U.S.C. 927I.
t9
104. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 20 of 38
58. TI, Qualcomm, Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG,
Verizon, AT&T and Sprint's acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnitY, and
MicroUnity is entitled to recover from TI, Qualcomm, Motorol4 Nokia, Patrn, Samsung, STA, Acer,
HTC, Google, LG, Verizon, AT&T and Sprint the damages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of
their wrongflrl acts in an amount subject to proof at ftial. TI, Qualcomm, Motorola, Nokia, Palm,
Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG Verizon, AT&T and Sprint's infringement of MicroUnity's
exclusive rights under the '500 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing inepæable harm
for which there is no adequate remedy af law, unless enjoined by this Court.
59. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that TI and
Motorola have had communications and contact with MicroUnity and æe fully aware of
MicroUnity's technology and patent portfolio including United States Patent No. 6,427,190 from
which the '500 patent was reissued without change to many of the original claims; that TI and
Motorola have proceeded to infringe the '500 patent ¡vith full and complete knowledge of the patent
and its applicabilþ to their products without any attempt to take a license under the '500 patent and
without a good faith belief that the '500 patent is invalid or not infringed, and thus TI and Motorola's
infringement of the '500 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to increased damages
under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incuned in prosecuting this action under 35
U.S.C. $ 2S5. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the remaining defendants'
infringement of the '500 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to increased damages
under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this action under 35
u.s.c. $ 285.
20
105. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 21 of 38
TNFRTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.6,725,356 C1
60. On April 20,2004, United States Patent No. 6,725,356 Ct (the "'356 patenf') was
duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "system with Wide Operand Architecture, and
Method." MicroUnity was assigned the '356 patent and continues to hold all rights and interest in the
'356 patent. A true and correct copy of the '356 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit K.
6 1 . The '3 56 patent has been the subject of a reexamination proceeding, reexamination
request number 951000,100, in which the patentability of claims 30 and 44 is confirmed, claims 1, 2,
7, 8, 13, 15, 16, lg, 27-29, 31, 37, 39-43 and 45-48 are determined to be patentable as amended,
claims 3-6,9-12,14,!7,20-26,32-35and3Saredependentonanamendedclaimandaredetermined
to be patentable, claims 49-104 have been added and are detennined to be patentable, and claims 18
and 36 are canceled. A copy of Reexamination Certifi caÍe 6,725,356 Ct is attached hereto as Exhibit
L.
62. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or
more of the claims of the '356 patentby their manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell
their processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors, Samsung
and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors, and by their knowingly
contributing to and inducing others to manufacturs, use, sell, import and/or offer to sell cell phones
and other products and services which practice processes that infringe one or more of tlre claims of
the '356 patent. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '356 patent
pursuantto 35 U.S.C. ç271.
63. Motorola, Nokia" Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have
infringed and continue to infünge one or more of the claims of the '356 patentby their manufacture,
use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their cell phones and other products, including but not
limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700 and
21
106. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/1 0 Page 22 of 38
OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid Al and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ, and
Apple iphone 3GS, and by their knowingly contibuting to and inducing others to manufacture, use'
one or
sell, import and/or offer to sell products and services which practice processes that infringe
Google,
more of the claims of the '356 patent. Motorol4 Nokia, Palm, Sarnsung, STA, Acer, HTC,
LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the '356 patent pwsuant to 35 U.S.C . S 271-
64. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of
,356 patent by their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell cell phones and other
the claims of the
patent, and by
products which practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '356
which
their knowingly contributing to and inducing their customers to purchase and use services
practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '356 patent' Verizon, AT&T and
Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '356 patent pursuant to 35 U.S'C . ç 271-
65, Defendants' acts of infringement have caused darnage to MicroUnity, ffid
MicroUnity is entitled to recover from defendants the damages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of
their wrongfrrl acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. Defendants' infringement of
MicroUnity's
exclusive rights under the '356 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm
for which there is no adequate remedy af law, unless enjoined by this Court'
66. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, ttrat TI and
Motorola have had communications and contact with Microunity and are fully aware of
MicroUnity's technology and patent portfolio including the '356 patent; that TI and Motorola have
proceeded to infringe the '356 patent with full and complete knowledge of the patent and its
without
applicability to their products without any attempt to take a license under the '356 patent and
a good faith belief that the '356 patent is invalid or not infünged, and thus TI and Motorola's
,356 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to increased damages
infringement of the
22
107. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 23 of 38
under 35
under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this action
U.S.C. $ 285. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the remaining defendants'
,356 patent is wi[fu] and deliberate, entitling Microunity to increased damages
infringement of the
under 35 U.S.C. $ 2g4 and to attomey's fees and costs incuned in prosecuting this
action under 35
u.s.c. $ 285.
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT N0. 7,213'13182
67. On May l,2007,United States Patent No. 7,213,131B2 (the "'131 patent") was
duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "Programmable Processor and Method for
partitioned Group Element Selection Operation." MicroUnity was assigned the '131 patent and
continues to hold all rights and interest in the ' 13 1 patent. A tue and correct copy of the '131 patent
is attached hereto as Exhibit M.
68. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and contin-ue to infringe one or
offer to sell
more of the claims of the '131 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or
processors'
their infringing processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series
processors, and by
Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and Qualcomm's Snapdragon
to sell
knowingty contributing to and inducing others to manufacture, use, sell, import, and/or offer
patent. TI,
cell phones and other products that infringe one or more of the claims of the '131
Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '131 patent pursuant to 35
u.s.c. 527r.
69. Motorola" Noki4 Palm, Samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have
infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '131 patent by their manufacture,
use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones and other
products, including but not
limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700 and
23
108. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 24 of 38
OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ, and
Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Motorol4 Nokia" Palm, Sarnsung, STA, Acer, HTC,
Google, LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the'l3l patent pwsuant to 35 U.S.C.
s27t.
70. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of
the claims of the ' 1 3 1 patent by their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones
and other products. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '131 patent
pursuantto 35 U.S.C. $ 271.
71. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, md
MicroUnity is entitled to recover from defendants the damages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of
their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at tial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's
exclusive rights under the '131 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm
for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court'
72. MicroUnity is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that TI has had
communications and contact with MicroUnity and is fully aware of MicroUnity's technology and
patent portfolio including the '131 patent; that TI has proceeded to infringe the 'l3l patent'with fifl
and complete knowledge of the patent and its applicability to its products without any attempt to take
a license under the 'l3l patent and without a good faith belief that the '131 patent is invalid or not
infringed, and thus TI's infringement of the '131 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity
to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting
this action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that the
remaining defendants' infringement of the '131 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity
24
109. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/1 0 Page 25 of 38
in prosecuting
to increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees and costs incurred
r this actionunder 35 U'S.C. $ 285.
INT'RTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.7,216'2L7 82
On May B, 2007, United States Patent No. 7,216,217 BZ (the "'217
patenf') was
73.
duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "Programmable Processor
with Group Floating-Point
Operations.,, MicroUnity was assigne dthe'217 patent and continues
to hold all rights and interest in
the,2l7 patent. A true and correct copy of the '217 patentis attached hereto as ExhibitN'
74. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or
more of the claims of the '277 patent by knowingly conÍibuting to and
inducing others to
products that infringe one or
manufactwe, use, sell, import, and/or offer to sell cell phones and other
processors' including but not limited to
more of the claims of the '217 patent,by providing infringing
processors, and
TI,s OMAp3 and OMAP4 series processors, Samsung and SSI's S5PC100
TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their
Qualcomm',s Snapdragon pfocessors.
infringement of the'217 patentpursuant to 35 U'S'C' ç 27 l'
Motorol4 Noki4 Palm, sarnsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple
have
75.
patentby their manufacture,
infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '217
use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones and
other products, including but not
GT-i5700 and
limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galæq' Spica
omniaHD igglg, Acer Liquid Al and neoTouct¡ GooglelHTC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ, and
Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G, Motorol4 Nokia" Palm, Samsung, STA' Acer' HTC'
patent pursuant to 35 U'S'C'
Google, LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the '217
s271.
25
110. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 26 of 38
76. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of
phones
the claims of the '217 patentby their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell
and other products. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '2I7 paten|
pursuant to 35 U.S.C . ç271.
77. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, ffid
MicroUnity is entitled to recover from defendants the damages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of
their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's
exclusive rights under the'2!7 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing ineparable harm
for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.
1lg. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that defendants'
infringement of the
,2!7 patentis willful and deliberate, entitling Microunþ to increased damages
35
under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incuned in prosecuting this action under
u.s.c. $ 285.
TNT',RINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.7,260,70882
79. On August 21,2007, United States Patent No.7,260,708 B2 (the "'708 patenf')
was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "Programmable Processor and Method for
partitioned Group Shift." MicroUnity was assigned the '708 patent and continues to hold all rights
and interest in the '708 patent. A true and correct copy of the '708 patent is attached hereto as
Exhibit O.
80. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or
more of the claims of the '708 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation, andlor offer to sell
their processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors, Samsung
and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors, and by their knowingly
26
111. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 27 of 38
contributing to and inducing others to manufacture, use, sel[, import and/or offer to sell cell phones
and other products and services which infringe and which practice processes that
infringe one or
more of the claims of the '708 patent. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their
infringement ofthe '708 patentpursuantto 35 U'S.C. ç271'
81. Motorola, Nokia, Palm, samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have
by their manufacture,
infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '708 patent
products, including but not
use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their cell phones and other
limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, PaIm Pre, Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700
and
omniallD i8910, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ,
and
inducing others to
Apple iphone 3GS and ipod Touch 3G, and by their knowingly contributing to and
manufactgre, use, sell, import and/or offer to sell products and services which
infringe and which
Nokia" Palm,
practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '708 patent. Motorola"
of the '708
samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple are liable for their infringement
patent pursuantto 35 U.S.C' ç271.
g2. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more
of
the claims of the '708 patent by their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell
infringing cell phones
one or more of the
and other products which infringe and which practice processes that inûinge
.70g patent, and by their knowingly contibuting to and inducing their customers to
claims of the
purchase and use services which practice processes that infringe one or mole of the
claims of the
.70g patent. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '708 patent pursuant
to 35 U.S.C. ç27r.
g3. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, and
result of
MicroUnity is entitled to recover from defendants the da:nages sustained by MicroUnity as a
27
112. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 28 of 38
their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at tial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's
exclusive rights under the '708 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing ineparable harm
for which there is no adequate remedy af law, ualess enjoined by this Court'
84. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that defendants'
.70g patent is willful and deliberate, entitling Microunity to increased damages
infringement of the
under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this action under
35
u.s.c. $ 28s.
TNFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7'353"367 B2
*'367 patenf') was
85. On April 1, 2008, United States Patent No. 7,353,3 67 B2 (the
o'system and Software for Catenated Gtoup Shift
duly and legally issued for an invention entitled
interest in
Instruction." MicroUnity was assigned the'367 patent and continues to hold all rights and
the,367 patent. A true and correct copy of the '367 patentis att¿ched hereto as Exhibit P.
86. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or
more of the clairns of the '367 patent by knowingly contributing to and inducing others to
software that
manufacture, use, sell, import, and/or ofîer to sell cell phones and other products and
infringe one or more of the claims of the '367 patenÌ.,by providing processors such as TI's OMAP3
and OMAp4 series processors, Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processors, and Qualcomm's
of the '367
Snapdragon processors. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement
patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C . 5271.
87. Motorol4 Noki4 PaIm, samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have
infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '367 patentby their manufacture,
use, sale, importation, and/or offer to selt infringing cell phones and other
products, including but not
timited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, samsung Gataxy spica GT-i5700 and
113. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 29 of 38
and IQ' and
OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, LG eXpo
cell phones and
Apple iphone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G, and by providing software for use on such
other products. Motorol4 Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google,
LG and Apple are
liable for their infringement of the '367 patsntpursuant to 35 U.S.C. S27l-
gg. Verizor¡ AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more
of
,367 patentby their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones
the claims of the
and other products'
and other products, and by providing software for use on such cell phones
pa+sntpursuant to 35 U'S'C'
Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '367
ç271.
g9. Defendants, acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, md
as a result of
Microunity is entitled to recover from defendants the damages sustained by Microunity
infringement of MicroUnity's
their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at hial. Defendants'
will continue to damage Microunity, causing irreparable harm
exclusive rights under fhe'367 patent
for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court'
90. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that defendants'
,367 patentis willful and deliberate, entitling Microunity to increased damages
infringement of the
prosecuting this action urder 35
under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attorney's fees and costs incuned in
u.s.c. $ 285.
INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7'509"36682
gl. On March Z4,Z}}g,United States Patent No. 7,509,3 66 B2 (the "'366
patenf ') was
with Enhanced
duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "Multiplier Anay Processing System
and continues to hold all
Utilization at Lower precision." MicroUnity was assigued the '366 patent
29
114. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03i16/10 Page 30 of 38
is attached hereto as
,ights and interest in the '366 patent. A true and conect copy of the '366 patenl
Exhibit Q.
92. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or
and/or offer to sell
more of the claims of the '366 patentby their manufacture, use, sale, importation,
series processors' Samsung
their processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4
and SSI,s S5pC100 processors, and Qualcomm's Snapdragon
processors. Samsung and SSI have
to and induce others to
knowingly contributed to and induced and continue to knowingly conhibute
products and services which
manufacture, use, sell, import and/or offer to sell cell phones and other
of the '366 patent' TI,
infringe and which practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims
Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement
of the '366 patent pursuant to 35
u.s.c. ç27r.
Apple have
93. Motorola, Nokia, Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and
patent by their manufacture,
infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '366
use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their cell phones and other products, including but not
spica GT-i5700 and
limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, samsung Galaxy
LG eXpo and IQ, and
ornnial{D igglO, Acer Liquid A1 and neoTouch, Google/IITC Nexus one,
Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Apple has knowingly contributed to and induced and
use, sell, import and/or offer
continues to knowingly contibute to and induce others to manufacture,
that infringe one or more of
to sell products and services which infringe and which practice processes
Acer, HTC' Google' LG and
the claims of the '366 patent Motorol4 Nokia' Palm, Samsung, STA,
Appte are liable for their infringement of the '366 patent pursuant to 35 U'S'C ' ç271'
or more of
94. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one
the claims of the '366 patentby their use, sale, importation, and/or offer
to sell infringing cell phones
30
115. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 31 of 38
and other products which infringe one or more of the claims of the '366pa'ærrt.
AT&T has knowingly
induce its customers' use of
contributed to and induced and continues to knowingly contribute to and
more of the claims of the
services which infringe a¡d which practice processes that infringe one or
,366 patent Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their inûingement of the '366 patent pwsuant
to 35 U.S.C. ç27r.
95. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, and
aresult of
Microunity is entitled to recover ûom defendants the damages sustained by Microunity
as
infringement of MicroUnity's
their wrongfirl acts in an amount subject to proof at tial. Defendants'
exclusive rights under the '366 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing inepæable harm
for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court'
96. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that defendants'
,366 patentis willful and deliberate, entitling Microunity to increased damages
infringement of the
under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and ûo attomey's fees and costs incured
in prosecuting this action under 35
u.s.c. $ 285.
INFRTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.7'653'806 B2
patenf')
97. On January 26,2010, United States Patent No. 7,653,806 BZ (the "'806
was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "Method and Apparatus
for Performing
patent and continues
Improved Group Floating-Point Operations." MicroUnity was assigned the'806
of the '806 patent is attached
to hold all rights and interest in the '806 patent. A true and correct copy
hereto as ExhibitR.
9g. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or
and/or offer to sell
more of the claims of the '806 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation,
series plocessors,
their infringing processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4
31
116. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 32 of 38
Samsung and SSI's S5PC100 processors, ærd Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors. TI, Samsung,
SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '806 patent pursuant to 35 U'S.C. 527I.
gg. Motorol4 Nokia" Palm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have
infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '806 patent by their manufacture,
use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell their infringing cell phones and other products, including
but not limited to the Motorola Droid, NokiaN900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galaxy Spica GT-i5700 and
OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid Al and neoTouch, GoogleÆITC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ, and
Apple iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Motorol4 Nokia, PaIm, Samsung, STA, Acer, HTC,
Google, LG and Apple are liable for their infringement of the '806 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
s271.
100. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of
the claims of the '806 patent by their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to selI infringing cell phones
and other products. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement of the '806 patent
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. ç 271.
101. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, ffid
MicroUnity is entitled to recover from defendants the damages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of
their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at tial. Defendants' infringement of MicroUnity's
exclusive rights under the '806 patent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm
for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court.
102. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that defendants'
infringement of the '806 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to increased damages
under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this action under 35
u.s.c. $ 285.
32
117. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 33 of 38
TNFRTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,660'97282
*'972 patent")
103. On February g, 2010, United States Patent No. 7,660,972 B2 (the
was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "Method and Software for Partitioned Floating-
point Multiply-Add Operation." MicroUnity was assignedthe'972 patent and continues to hold all
rights and interest tnthe'972 patent. A true and correct copy of the '972 patent is attached hereto as
Exhibit S.
104. Samsung and SSI have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims
of the ,972 patent by their manufacture, use, sale, importation, andlor offer to sell their processors,
including but not timited to their S5PC100 processors, and by knowingly contributing to and
products
inducing others to manufacture, use, sell, import, and/or offer to sell cell phones and other
and services which practice processes and include software that infringe one or
more of the claims of
the
,972 patent. Samsung and SSI are liable for their infringement of the '972 patent pursuant to 35
u.s.c. ç27r.
105. Apple has infringed and continues to infringe one or more of the claims of the'972
patent by its manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones and other
products, inctuding but not limited to the Apple iPhone 3GS, which practice processes and include
for use
software that infringe one or more of the claims of the '972palent" and by providing software
on such cell phones and other products. Apple is liable for its infringement of the '972 patent
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. ç27I.
106. AT&T has infringed and continues to infringe one or more of the claims of the
,972 patentby its use, sale, importation and/or offer to seli infringing cell phones and other products
which practice processes and include software that infringe one or more of the claims of the '972
patent, by its knowingly contributing to and inducing its customers to purchase and use services
providing
which practice processes that infringe one or more of the claims of the '356 patent, and by
JJ
118. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/1 0 Page 34 of 38
software for use on such cell phones and other products. AT&T is liable for is inûingement of the
'gT2patentpursuantto 35 U.S.C. $ 271.
107. Samsung, SSI, Apple and AT&T's acts of infringement have caused damage to
MicroUnity, and Microunity is entitled to recover from Samsung, SSI, Apple and AT&T the
damages sustained by MicroUnity as a result of their wrongful acts in an amount subject to proof at
trial. Samsung, SSI, Apple and AT&T's infringement of MicroUnity's exclusive rights under the
,972 pafent will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm for which there is no
adequate remedy at law, unless enioined by this Court.
108. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that Samsung, SSI, Apple
and AT&T,s infringement of the '972 patent is willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to
increased damages under 35 U.S.C. $ 284 and to attomey's fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this
action under 35 U.S.C. $ 285'
TNFRTNGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO.7,660,97382
109. On February g,2O1O, United States Patent No. 7,660,973 BZ (the "'973 patenf')
was duly and legally issued for an invention entitled "system and Apparatus for Group Data
Operations.', MicroUnity was assþe dthe'973 patent and continues to hold all rights and interest in
the'973 patent. A true and conect copy of the '973 patentis attached hereto as Exhibit T.
110. TI, Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm have infringed and continue to infringe one or
more of the claims of the '973 patentby their manufacture, use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell
their infringing processors, including but not limited to TI's OMAP3 and OMAP4 series processors,
Samsung and SSI's S5PC|00 processors, and Quatcomm's Snapdragon processors, and by
knowingly contributing to and inducing others to manufacture, use, sell, import, and/or offer to sell
cell phones and other products thæ infringe one or more of the claims of the '973 patent. TI,
34
119. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 35 of 38
Samsung, SSI and Qualcomm are liable for their infringement of the '973 patenl pursuant to 35
u.s.c. s27r.
111. Motorol4 Noki4 Palm, samsung, STA, Acer, HTC, Google, LG and Apple have
manufacture'
infringed and continue to infringe one or more of the claims of the '973 pa''f.:rrtby their
products, including but not
use, sale, importation, and/or offer to sell infringing cell phones and other
GT-i5700 and
limited to the Motorola Droid, Nokia N900, Palm Pre, Samsung Galaxy Spica
OmniaHD i8910, Acer Liquid Al and neoTouch, Google/HTC Nexus One, LG eXpo and IQ' and
Appte iPhone 3GS and iPod Touch 3G. Motorol4 Nokia, Palm, samsung, sTA, Acer, HTC,
patent pwsuant to 35 U'S'C'
Google, LG and Apple are liable for their in.fringement of the '973
ç271.
ll2. Verizor¡ AT&T and Sprint have infringed and continue to infringe one or more of
sell infringing cell phones
the claims of the '973 patentby their use, sale, importation, and/or offer to
of the '973 patent
and other products. Verizon, AT&T and Sprint are liable for their infringement
pursuantto 35 U.S.C. ç271.
113. Defendants' acts of infringement have caused damage to MicroUnity, and
as a result of
MicroUnity is entitled to recover from defendants the damages sustained by MicroUnity
of MicroUnity's
their wrongflrl acts in an amount subject to proof at trial. Defendants' infringement
will continue to damage MicroUnity, causing irreparable harm
exclusive righa under the'973 patent
for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless enjoined by this Court'
ll4. MicroUnity reserves the right to allege, after discovery, that defendants'
,973 patentis willful and deliberate, entitling MicroUnity to increased damages
infringement of the
prosecuting this action under 35
under 35 U.S.C. $ 2g4 and to atüomey's fees and costs incuned in
u.s.c. $ 28s.
35
120. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 36 of 38
JTIRY DEMAND
115. MicroUnity demands a trial by jury on all issues.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintitr MicroUnity Systems Engineering, fnc., requests entry of
judgment in its favor and against defendants as follows:
a) Declaration that defendants have infringed U.S. Patent Nos' 5,737,547 Ct,
5,742,840, 5,794,06! Cl, 5,812,799 Cr,6,006,318 Cl, R839,500 E, 6,725,356 Cl, 7,213,13182,
7,2L6,2r7 Pjz, 7,260,708 82, 7,353,367 F,2,7,509,366 B,2, 7,653,806 B.2,7,660,972 B2 and
7,660,973B.2;
b) Awarding the damages arising out of defendants' infringement of U.S. Patent Nos'
5,737,547 C7,5,742,840, 5,794,061 Cl, 5,812,799 Cl, 6,006,318 Cl, R839,500 8,6,725,356 Ct,
7,2I3,I3182,7,216,217 82,7,260,708P,2,7,353,367 B.2,7,509,36682,7,653,80682,7,660,972
B2 and 7,660,973 B2, including enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. $ 284, to MicroUnity,
together with prejudgment and post-judgment interest, in an amount according to proof;
c) Permanently enjoining defendants and their respective officers, agents, employees,
and those acting in privity with them, from frirther infringement, including contributory
infringement and/or inducing infringement, of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,737,547 CI, 5,742,840,
5,794,061 Cl,5,8l2,7gg C1,6,006,318 Cl, RE39,500F',6,725,356 Cl, 7,213,131B.2,7,216,217
82,7,260,708 82, 7,353,367 B¡2,7,509,36682,7,653,806B2,7,660,97282 and7,660,973B.2, or
in the alternative, a post-judgment royalty for post-judgment infringement;
d) An award of attorney's fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. $ 285 or as otherwise permitted
by law; and
e) For such other costs and ftrther relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
DATED: March 16,2010
121. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03116110 Page 37 of 38
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ Stephen D. Susman
Stephen D. Susman, Attomey-in-Charge
State BarNo. 1952100
ssusman@susmangodfrey. com
Max L. Tribble, Jr.
State Bar No. 20213950
müibble@susmangodfr ey. com
Joseph S. Grinstein
St¿te BarNo.24002188
j grinstein@susmangodfr ey. com
SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5100
Houston, Texas 7704?
Telephone: (7 13) 651-9366
Facsimile: (713) 654-6666
Sidney Calvin Capshaw
State BarNo. 03783900
ccap shaw@capshawlaw. com
CAPSIIAW DERTEI-TX, L.L.P.
1127 Judson Rd - Ste 220
PO Box 3999
Longview, TX 7 5601-5157
(903) 236-9800
Fax: (903) 236-8787
Otis W. Caroll
State BarNo.00794219
nancy@icklaw.com
IRELAND, CARROLL & KELLEY, P.C.
6101 South Broadway, Suite 500
Tyler, TX75703
Telephone: (903) 561-1600
Facsimile: (903) 58 1-1071
Michael F. Heim
State BarNo. 09380923
mheim@hpcllp.com
}DIM, PAYNE & CHORUSH, L.L.P.
600 Travis, Suite 6710
Houston, Texas 77002
Telephone: (7 13) 221 -2000
Facsimile: Q L3) 221-2021
37
122. Case 2:10-cv-00091 Document 1 Filed 03i 16/1 0 Page 38 of 38
Douglas R. Wilson
State BarNo.24037719
dwilson@hpcllp.com
FGIM PAYNE & CHORUSH, L.L.P.
9 442 Capttal of Texas Hwy.
PlazaI, Suite 500-146
Austin, Texas 78759
Teþhone: (512) 3 43 -3 622
Facsimile: (512) 345 -2924
George M. Schwab
State BarNo. 58250 (CA)
gschwab@ gmspatent. com
LAV/ OFFICES OF GEORGE M. SCHWAB
235 Montgomery St., Suite 1026
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (41 5) 889-52 1 0
Attomeys for MICROUNITY SYSTEMS
ENGINEERING, TNC.
38
123. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
│
SMARTPHONE TECHNOLOGIES │
LLC., │
│
Plaintiff, │
│
v. │
│
(1) RESEARCH IN MOTION CORP. │
(2) RESEARCH IN MOTION LTD. │ CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:10cv74
(3) SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS │
CO. LTD. │
(4) SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS │
AMERICA, INC. │
(5) SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNIC- │ JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
ATIONS AMERICA, LLC. │
(6) SANYO ELECTRIC CO., LTD. │
(7) SANYO ELECTRONIC DEVICE │
(U.S.A.), INC. │
(8) LG ELECTRONICS, INC. │
(9) LG ELECTRONICS USA, INC. │
(10) MOTOROLA, INC. │
(11) APPLE, INC. │
(12) PANTECH WIRELESS, INC. │
(13) INSIGHT ENTERPRISES, INC. │
(14) AT&T INC. and │
(15) AT&T MOBILITY LLC. │
│
Defendants. │
│
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
This is an action for patent infringement in which plaintiff, SmartPhone
Technologies LLC (“SmartPhone”), complains against defendants, Research In Motion
Corporation (“RIM”), Research In Motion Ltd. (“RIM Ltd.”), Samsung Electronics Co.
Ltd. (“Samsung”), Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“Samsung USA”), Samsung
124. Telecommunications America LLC (“Samsung Telecom”), Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd.
(“Sanyo”), Sanyo Electronic Device (U.S.A.), Inc. (“Sanyo USA”), LG Electronics, Inc.
(“LG”), LG Electronics USA, Inc. (“LG USA”), Motorola, Inc. (“Motorola”), Apple, Inc.
(“Apple”), Pantech Wireless, Inc. (“Pantech”), Insight Enterprises, Inc. (Insight”), AT&T
Inc. (“AT&T”) and AT&T Mobility LLC (“AT&T Mobile”) as follows:
THE PARTIES
1. SmartPhone is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of
business at 6136 Frisco Square Boulevard, Suite 400, Frisco, Texas 75034.
2. On information and belief, RIM is a Delaware corporation with a principal
place of business at 122 W. John Carpenter Parkway, Suite 430, Irving, Texas 75039 and
does business in this judicial district by, among other things, committing jointly, directly
and/or indirectly the tort of patent infringement giving rise to this complaint. RIM’s
registered agent for service of process in Texas is CT Corporation System, 350 N. St.
Paul Street, Dallas, Texas 75201.
3. On information and belief, RIM Ltd. is a Canadian corporation with a
principal place of business at 295 Phillip Street, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3W8 Canada and
does business in this judicial district by, among other things, committing jointly, directly
and/or indirectly the tort of patent infringement giving rise to this complaint. RIM Ltd.
may be served at its principal place of business at 295 Phillip Street, Waterloo, Ontario
N2L 3W8 Canada by International Registered Mail.
4. Upon information and belief, Samsung is a Korean corporation with a
principal place of business at Samsung Main Building, 250 2-ka, Taepyuung-Ro, Chung-
Ku, Seoul, Korea and does business in this judicial district by, among other things,
2