Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 1 of 79 Page ID #:1
`
`
`
`
`Alan P. Block (SBN 143783)
`ablock@mckoolsmithhennigan.com
`MCKOOL SMITH HENNIGAN, P.C.
`300 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2900
`Los Angeles, California 90071
`Telephone: (213) 694-1200
`Facsimile: (213) 694-1234
`
`Ryan B. McBeth (TX SBN 24078955)*
`rmcbeth@mckoolsmith.com
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`600 Travis Street, Suite 7000
`Houston, TX 77002
`Telephone: (713) 485-7300
`Facsimile: (713) 485-7344
`
`Ashley N. Moore (TX SBN 24074748)*
`amoore@mckoolsmith.com
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500
`Dallas, Texas 75201
`Telephone: (214) 978-4000
`Facsimile: (214) 978-4044
`
`*Pro hac vice application forthcoming
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`Samesurf, Inc.
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`SAN DIEGO DIVISION
`
`
`
`Samesurf, Inc.,
`
`vs.
`
`Intuit, Inc.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 2:22-cv-2060
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT
`INFRINGEMENT
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 2 of 79 Page ID #:2
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Samesurf, Inc. (“Samesurf”) files this Original Complaint for patent
`infringement and injunctive relief against Defendant Intuit, Inc. (“Intuit”). In May of
`2015, Intuit contacted Samesurf to explore integrating Samesurf’s patented co-
`browsing (also known as synchronized browsing) technology into Intuit’s consumer
`products. During the discussions, Samesurf’s team of developers created a functioning
`prototype, showcasing Samesurf’s patented co-browsing technology as part of Intuit’s
`TurboTax offering in anticipation that Intuit would hire and/or otherwise enter into a
`business relationship with Samesurf. Instead, Intuit learned Samesurf’s methods,
`copied Samesurf’s ideas, disregarded Samesurf’s patents and left Samesurf with no
`choice but to bring this action against Intuit for patent infringement.
`In support thereof, Samesurf respectfully alleges as follows:
`THE PARTIES
`Samesurf is a Delaware corporation authorized to do business in the State
`1.
`of California with its principal place of business at 10877 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite
`1407, Los Angeles, CA 90024.
`On information and belief, Intuit is a Delaware corporation authorized to
`2.
`do business in the State of California with a corporate office and regular and established
`place of business at 7535 Torrey Santa Fe Rd, San Diego, CA 92129.
`On information and belief, Intuit is registered with the California Secretary
`3.
`of State.
`On information and belief, Intuit’s most current Certificate of Status with
`4.
`the Secretary of State of California is dated February 2, 2022 and shows that Intuit is
`active, in good standing, and qualified to transact intrastate business in California.
`Intuit may be served through its registered agent for service of process,
`5.
`Corporation Service Company, which does business in California as CSC-Lawyers
`Incorporating Service, 2710 Gateway Oaks Drive, Suite 150N, Sacramento, CA 95833.
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`CASE NO. 2:22-CV-2060
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 3 of 79 Page ID #:3
`
`
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`This is an action arising under the patent laws of the United States, 35
`6.
`U.S.C. §§ 1, et seq. Accordingly, this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this
`action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question) and 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a) (action
`arising under an Act of Congress relating to patents).
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Intuit because it is a resident of
`7.
`California and has been doing business in the state of California in a continuous and
`systematic way as to render it at home in California. Intuit has purposefully and
`voluntarily availed itself of the privileges of conducting business in the Unites States,
`in the State of California, and in this District by continuously and systematically placing
`goods and services into the stream of commerce through established distribution
`channels with the expectation that they will be purchased by consumers in this District.
`Intuit directly and/or through intermediaries (including distributors, sales agents, and
`others), makes, ships, distributes, offers for sale, sells, advertises, markets, and/or uses
`its products and services (including, but not limited to, the products and services that
`are accused of patent infringement in this lawsuit) in the Unites States, the State of
`California, and this District.
`Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400
`8.
`because Intuit has committed, and continues to commit, acts of infringement in this
`District and has a regular and established place of business in this District. On
`information and belief, Intuit maintains regular and established places of business in
`this District at 7535 Torrey Santa Fe Rd, San Diego, CA 92129.
`Jurisdiction and Venue is further proper in this District pursuant to the
`9.
`foregoing facts.
`10. On information and belief, Intuit has been providing and continues to
`provide services to clients throughout California, including in the Southern District of
`California, and throughout the United States.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 4 of 79 Page ID #:4
`
`
`
`11. On information and belief, the Accused Instrumentalities, including at
`least Intuit’s TurboTax Online, QuickBooks Online, TurboTax Live, QuickBooks Live,
`Smartlook, and other co-browse enabled Intuit products and services are offered to
`clients throughout California, including in this District.
`12. On information and belief and since at least 1993, Intuit has and/or had a
`regular and established place of business in San Diego, California.1
`13. On information and belief and since at least 1993, Intuit has and/or had a
`regular and established place of business in San Diego, California at 7535 Torrey Santa
`Fe Rd, San Diego, CA 92129. Intuit states that this office is the headquarters for the
`TurboTax and Turbo teams.2 See below photograph of Intuit Offices in San Diego,
`California.3
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`1 See https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-09-02-fi-30906-story.html.
`2 Source: https://www.intuit.com/careers/locations/united-states/.
`3 Source: https://goo.gl/maps/HQZi9nnW1P8tJBq47, also shown above.
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 5 of 79 Page ID #:5
`
`
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`14. On information and belief, Intuit has over 1,000 employees that work for
`Intuit in San Diego, California, including developers, managers, executives and senior
`executives.4
`15. On information and belief, Intuit currently has posted over 300 open
`positions that may be filled in or within a 50-mile radius of San Diego, California.5
`information and belief,
`Intuit employs numerous software
`16. On
`development employees in and around San Diego, California.6
`17. On information and belief, numerous Intuit employees that work out of
`Intuit’s San Diego office were essential in procuring and integrating co-browsing
`technology into Intuit’s TurboTax Online, QuickBooks Online, TurboTax Live,
`QuickBooks Live, Smartlook, and other co-browse enabled Intuit products.
`18. On information and belief, numerous of Intuit’s employees that work out
`of Intuit’s San Diego office continue to develop and integrate co-browsing technology
`into Intuit’s TurboTax Online, QuickBooks Online, TurboTax Live, QuickBooks Live,
`Smartlook, and other co-browse enabled Intuit products.
`19. On information and belief, Intuit’s Vice President of Design, Mike Perez,
`works for Intuit in San Diego, California.7 He was the Design Director for TurboTax
`Live, one of the Accused Instrumentalities in this case, and was the design leader that
`took TurboTax Live from Beta through the live release. Id.
`20. On information and belief, Lance Williams - Intuit’s current Senior Vice
`President, Product Management, for the TurboTax Global Platform and prior Vice
`President of TurboTax Live Product - works for Intuit in San Diego, California where
`
`4 See https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/economy/sdut-intuit-atmosphere-to-excel-
`2014nov09-htmlstory.html
`5 See https://jobs.intuit.com/search-jobs/San%20Diego%2C%20CA/27595/4/6252001-5332921-
`5391832-5391811/32x71571/-117x16472/50/2
`6 See https://www.glassdoor.com/Location/Intuit-San-Diego-Location-EI_IE2293.0,6_IL.7,16_IC
`1147311.htm
`7 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/mike-perez-755247/
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 6 of 79 Page ID #:6
`
`
`
`he served as the leader of the product management organization and cross functional
`segment team responsible for building and growing “human-enabled Live products”
`such as TurboTax Live, one of the Accused Instrumentalities in this case.8
`21. On information and belief, Intuit’s Vice President of Product Management
`and Services at Intuit, Stacie Herring, works for Intuit in San Diego, California.9 Ms.
`Herring received an internal Intuit award for Intuit’s SmartLook, one of the Accused
`Instrumentalities in this case. Id. Her LinkedIn profile states that, “[u]nder her strategic
`services leadership, TurboTax Live has grown to a multi-million dollar product line,
`and one of the fastest growing businesses in the company's history” Id. TurboTax Live
`is also one of the Accused Instrumentalities in this case.
`22. On information and belief, Intuit’s Design Director of TurboTax Live at
`Intuit, Ian Cameron, works for Intuit in San Diego, California.10 Mr. Cameron was
`formerly the Head of Product Design, Group Design Manager for TurboTax Live, one
`of the Accused Instrumentalities in this case. Id. Prior to that role, he was a Product
`Design Strategist and Principal Product Designer for the TurboTax Live consumer
`experience. Id.
`23. On information and belief, Intuit’s Distinguished Architect of TurboTax
`Live, Vinay Kumar, works for Intuit in San Diego, California and “[d]rove rapid
`development of TurboTax's assisted offerings by leveraging Intuit technology assets
`and extending the platform to deliver new strategic capabilities.” 11 Mr. Kumar likely
`has significant knowledge of TurboTax Live, one of the Accused Instrumentalities in
`this case, due to his role as an architect and his knowledge regarding the development,
`function, and functionality of TurboTax Live. Id.
`
`
`8 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/lancewilliams/
`9 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/stacie-herring-5061b42/
`10 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/iancamerondesign/
`11 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/sdvinay/
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 7 of 79 Page ID #:7
`
`
`
`24. On information and belief, Intuit’s Group Design Manager, Virtual Expert
`Platform, Juan Hernandez, works for Intuit in San Diego, California and has been
`employed by Intuit in multiple roles designing and developing TurboTax Live, one of
`the Accused Instrumentalities in this case. Mr. Hernandez’s roles have included:
`Principal Product Designer, TurboTax Live from Feb 2020 to Apr 2020 and Senior
`Product Designer, TurboTax Live from Mar 2018 to Jan 2020.12
`25. On information and belief, Intuit’s Product Leader and Group Product
`Manager at Intuit, Julia Zhuang, works for Intuit in San Diego, California and worked
`to develop TurboTax Live as part of a three person team “that led the fastest revenue
`growth initiative in company history.”13 Based on Ms. Zhuang’s LinkedIn profile, she
`had a significant role in the early development of TurboTax Live, one of the Accused
`Instrumentalities of this case. Id.
`26. On information and belief, Intuit’s Director, Product Management Digital
`Platforms at Intuit, Nikos Ioannou, works for Intuit in San Diego, California and as part
`of his role, “[p]rototyped and rolled out “Smart Look,” a one-click support experience
`with video and co-browse capabilities. These capabilities were foundational in
`launching TurboTax Live, an assisted TurboTax offering for the first time in 2016.”14
`Mr. Ioannou helped to develop Intuit’s Smartlook product which is one of the Accused
`Instrumentalities in this case. Id.
`27. On information and belief, Intuit’s Principal Software Architect, Paul
`Hubbard, works for Intuit in San Diego, California.15 Paul Hubbard was the original
`Intuit employee who contacted Samesurf about integrating Samesurf’s co-browsing
`technology in 2015. See Intuit correspondence referenced supra.
`
`
`12 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/jmhrdz/
`13 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/jzhuang/
`14 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/nikosioannou/
`15 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulhubbard/
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 8 of 79 Page ID #:8
`
`
`
`28. On information and belief, Intuit’s Senior Software Engineer, Matt Gage,
`works for Intuit in San Diego, California.16 Matt Gage had direct discussions with
`Samesurf when Intuit contacted Samesurf about integrating Samesurf’s co-browsing
`technology in 2015. See Intuit correspondence referenced supra.
`29. On information and belief, Intuit’s Principal Software Engineer, Amir
`Eftekhari, works for Intuit in San Diego, California and developed Intuit’s Smartlook
`product, one of the Accused Instrumentalities in the case.17
`30. On information and belief, Intuit’s Group Manager, Intuit Customer
`Success, Digital Platforms, Louis Barkley, works for Intuit in San Diego, California
`and was involved in the design and support of Intuit’s Smartlook product, one of the
`Accused Instrumentalities in the case.18
`31. On information and belief, Intuit’s Group Product Manager, Maureen
`Stafford, works for Intuit in San Diego, California and helped lead the launching and
`scaling of TurboTax Live, one of the Accused Instrumentalities, as an end-to-end
`Expert Group Product Manager.19
`32. On information and belief, numerous Intuit tax professionals, accounting
`professionals, and customers have used the co-browse functionality of the following
`products and services in this District: Intuit’s TurboTax Online, QuickBooks Online,
`TurboTax Live, QuickBooks Live, Smartlook, and other co-browse enabled Intuit
`products.
`Intuit has derived substantial revenues from its infringing acts occurring
`33.
`within the State of California and within this District.
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`16 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/mattgage93/
`17 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/amireftekhari/
`18 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/louis-barkley-6601585/
`19 See https://www.linkedin.com/in/maureenstafford/
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 9 of 79 Page ID #:9
`
`
`
`34. Venue is also convenient in this District. This is at least true because of
`this District’s close ties to this case—including the technology, relevant witnesses, and
`sources of proof—and its ability to quickly and efficiently move this case to resolution.
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`A.
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`Samesurf
`35. Samesurf was established in 2009 by co-founders K. David Pirnazar, Jerry
`A. Greenberg and Adam Flaherty with the idea to bring a simpler, more robust and
`ultra-secure mechanism for real time collaboration to market. With this pursuit in mind,
`K. David Pirnazar, a co-founder and CEO of Samesurf, invented and established a new
`standard for visual communication that is highly efficient and one that protects sensitive
`information during shared browsing sessions. This technology is now popularly known
`as co-browsing, synchronized browsing, collaborative browsing, and/or shared web
`browsing.
`36. Through years of research and development, Samesurf has developed an
`extensive background of technology in the fields of co-browsing, synchronized
`browsing, synchronized form filling, co-form filling, co-watching, co-experience
`sharing and other forms of remote visually oriented engagement by multiple parties
`who require the ability to share the same online experiences in real time from remote
`locales.
`37. Samesurf first launched its co-browsing platform in 2011 and has
`continued to develop and optimize it over the years.
`38. Samesurf owns a portfolio of patents relating to the fields of co-browsing,
`synchronized browsing, synchronized form filling, co-form filling, co-watching, co-
`experience sharing and other forms of remote visually oriented engagement by multiple
`parties who require the ability to share the same online experiences in real time from
`remote locales.
`39. Through the development and application of this technology, Samesurf
`has enabled extensive technological growth in the aforementioned fields.
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 10 of 79 Page ID #:10
`
`
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`40. As Samesurf has continued to grow and market the Samesurf co-browsing
`platform, many companies have sought out and hired Samesurf to help them integrate
`Samesurf’s co-browsing technology into their existing products and/or to deliver a co-
`browsing solution to their customers and employees.
`41. On information and belief, Intuit sought out Samesurf in an effort to
`integrate Samesurf’s co-browse technology as part of Intuit’s tax preparation and
`accounting products and services as a mutually beneficial offering.
`42. Samesurf entered into discussions with Intuit regarding Samesurf’s co-
`browsing technology as early as May 18, 2015 when Paul Hubbard, a software engineer
`in Intuit’s San Diego office, initially contacted Samesurf via the “Contact Us”
`component of the Samesurf website. See Exhibit D.
`43. Beginning in May of 2015, Intuit began evaluating Samesurf’s co-
`browsing technology for integration into its TurboTax and QuickBooks products.
`44. From May of 2015 to July of 2015, Samesurf and Intuit communicated on
`several occasions about integrating Samesurf’s co-browsing technology into its
`TurboTax and QuickBooks products.
`45. From May of 2015 to July of 2015, the CEO and co-founder of Samesurf,
`K. David Pirnazar, communicated with Paul Hubbard, Matt Gage, Erik Kaasila, Joyce
`Yeh and Loren Lacy of Intuit.
`Intuit began requesting information from Samesurf about how Samesurf’s
`46.
`co-browsing technology functioned, at least as early as May 18, 2015.
`47. At least as early as May of 2015, Samesurf provided information to Intuit
`regarding its co-browsing technology and how to integrate it within Intuit’s own web
`experiences in anticipation that Intuit would hire and/or otherwise enter into a business
`relationship with Samesurf. To this end, Samesurf’s Chief Technology Officer and
`other engineers worked to add customized functionality to its own suite of offerings at
`the specific request of and for the specific use of Intuit. One example of this special
`form of functionality was the creation of an online queuing system that would enable
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 11 of 79 Page ID #:11
`
`
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`Intuit personnel and/or partners to seamlessly join online visitors within co-browsing
`sessions by clicking a single link.
`48. Based on specific instructions given to Intuit and after learning how
`Samesurf’s co-browsing technology functioned, Intuit proceeded to integrate
`Samesurf’s co-browsing technology into Intuit’s TurboTax Online, QuickBooks
`Online, TurboTax Live, QuickBooks Live, Smartlook, and other co-browse enabled
`Intuit products, as well as the underlying infrastructure supporting these products,
`without Samesurf.
`Intuit has infringed Samesurf’s Patents including, at least, U.S. Patent Nos.
`49.
`9,483,448, 9,185,145, and 8,527,591 (the “Patents-in-Suit” or “Samesurf’s Patents”) by
`utilizing Samesurf’s patented technology as part of TurboTax Online, QuickBooks
`Online, TurboTax Live, QuickBooks Live, Smartlook, and other co-browse enabled
`Intuit products and/or online experiences.
`50. On June 5, 2015, the CEO and co-founder of Samesurf, K. David Pirnazar,
`sent Intuit employee Paul Hubbard an email stating in-part, the following:
`Hope you’re well. I wanted to reach out to you and give you
`a status report as to progress in supporting the Turbotax
`portion of the Intuit.com site in its current state. We are appx.
`75% complete in terms of developing and supporting a
`completely new iteration of our patented co-browsing
`technology that will essentially ignore the complicating
`coding elements that exist on this portion of your website.
`This approach will make the items you referenced as errors
`you’ve discovered with your own site moot.
`(emphasis added). See Exhibit D.
`51. On June 15, 2015 and in following up with the companies’ comprehensive
`interactions on the development side, Samesurf was approached via email by Johan
`Johansson – Intuit’s Strategic Sourcing Leader – to gain further information.
`52. On June 17, 2015 and in response to Mr. Johansson’s formal inquiry,
`Samesurf provided substantive information to Intuit, where the Samesurf cobrowse
`feature was expressly described as “Patented Co-Browsing by Samesurf.”
`11
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 12 of 79 Page ID #:12
`
`
`
`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
`
`53. On July 9, 2015, the CEO and co-founder of Samesurf, K. David Pirnazar,
`sent Intuit employees Joyce Yeh, Matt Gage, and Paul Hubbard an email stating in-
`part, the following:
`Patents: Despite any emerging collaboration technologies
`that you hear about during your technical diligence process,
`it's imperative to know that Samesurf is the ONLY company
`in
`the
`industry
`that holds multiple US patents on
`synchronized web browsing. These are patents that have
`already been granted in addition to the multiple others that we
`now have pending that also relate back to the original filing
`date of May 2010. These are patents that relate to synched
`browsing on both desktop and mobile devices and they are
`quite broad. We have been focused exclusively on install-
`free collaboration since 2009 and our patents and innovations
`in this area continue to define us as the undisputed leader in
`the field of collaborative, install-free co-browsing.
`
`See Exhibit D.
`54. On March 21, 2016, the CEO and co-founder of Samesurf, K. David
`Pirnazar, sent Intuit employees Paul Hubbard and Benny Joseph, an email stating in-
`part, the following:
`As I mentioned in my message from earlier today, we would
`love to make ourselves available to give you a preview of a
`significantly enhanced version of our install-free, cross
`platform co-browsing technology that has not yet been
`revealed to the general public. This version flows directly
`form our patented technology and “just works” without
`install or coding requirements on all portions of the
`Intuit.com family of sites.
`
`(emphasis added). See Exhibit D.
`55. Samesurf has regularly maintained a listing of each of Samesurf’s patents
`on Samesurf’s own website. See Samesurf.com archives from the Wayback Machine,
`available at: https://web.archive.org by entering the following Samesurf.com URL into
`the Wayback Machine: http://www.samesurf.com/technology.html#patents. The
`following archives are available: Samesurf.com archive dated January 15, 2016 – listing
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 13 of 79 Page ID #:13
`
`
`
`’145 and ’591 patents among others,20 Samesurf.com archive dated March 10, 2016 –
`listing ’145 and ’591 patents among others,21 Samesurf.com archive dated June 4, 2016
`– listing ’145 and ’591 patents among others,22 Samesurf.com archive dated July 31,
`2016 – listing ’145 and ’591 patents among others,23 Samesurf.com archive dated
`December 3, 2020 – listing ’448, ’145 and ’591 patents among others.24
`56. Based on the above referenced correspondence with Intuit, the
`Samesurf.com website, and Intuit employees’ knowledge of the Samesurf.com website,
`Intuit has had knowledge of Samesurf’s Patents, since at least as early as June 5, 2015,
`including at least, U.S. Patent Nos. 9,483,448, 9,185,145, and 8,527,591.
`57. Based on the above referenced correspondence with Intuit, the
`Samesurf.com website, and Intuit employees’ knowledge of the Samesurf.com website,
`Intuit has had knowledge of Samesurf’s Patent Applications, since at least as early as
`June 5, 2015, including, at least, Pat. App. Ser. Nos. 12/783,735, 14/830,710,
`13/951,789, and 12/783,743.
`58. Co-browsing is a vast improvement over existing technologies. Among
`other advancements, it is ultra-secure, uses significantly less data than traditional
`systems, is less processor intensive than traditional systems, allows for advanced yet
`ultra-secure interactivity between users, has performance advantages for sharing rich
`media content and video, and is highly scalable in terms of supported participant counts.
`59. For at least these reasons, Intuit approached Samesurf with a “specific”
`ask for co-browsing 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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`
`20https://web.archive.org/web/20160115212654/http://www.samesurf.com/technology.html#patents
`21https://web.archive.org/web/20160310191255/http:/www.samesurf.com:80/technology.html#pate
`nts
`22https://web.archive.org/web/20160604120517/http://www.samesurf.com/technology.html#patents
`23https://web.archive.org/web/20160731043532/http:/www.samesurf.com/technology.html#patents
`24https://web.archive.org/web/20201203164900/https:/www.samesurf.com/technology.html#patents
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 14 of 79 Page ID #:14
`
`
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`In contrast to legacy solutions, co-browsing is a considerably more
`60.
`resource efficient technology in that it involves the detection and replication of web
`browsing interactions from one device to one or more other devices through a
`synchronization server. Samesurf’s co-browsing claimed methods and apparatuses
`further allow for co-browsing with significantly lower latency and bandwidth, CPU and
`GPU utilization levels. This is achieved, at least in part, by each device independently
`fetching website elements rather than traditional methods of requiring host screen
`video-data to be constantly uploaded, encoded and decoded through a server for
`transmission to and receipt by one or more participating guest devices.
`61. Samesurf’s technology further allows for enhanced network and computer
`security which is achieved through limiting co-browsing session sharing to, for
`example, (1) single browser tab sharing where a given users other screen elements and
`desktop are not shared, and (2) the ability to distinguish between “shared” and “non-
`shared” data so that certain sensitive content such as credit card numbers are not passed
`within this process and sensitive information is thus not viewable by unauthorized
`parties such as Intuit tax experts during shared sessions with online clients. Samesurf’s
`co-browsing claimed methods and apparatuses further allow for the simultaneous and
`synchronous viewing of video and rich media content by large volumes of users without
`the latency and choppiness that are inherent by-products of traditional systems.
`62. For companies in highly regulated industries such as finance, accounting,
`insurance and healthcare, privacy, data, network and computer security have all become
`increasingly important and significantly more stringent over the years. With security,
`regulatory compliance and privacy in mind, the ability of Samesurf’s co-browsing
`technology to safeguard sensitive customer data during shared sessions by
`distinguishing between screen elements that are classified as “sharable web browsing
`interactions” versus “non-sharable web browsing interactions” enables sensitive
`content such as credit card and/or social security numbers to be “masked” or not made
`viewable by unauthorized parties such as company agents during shared online
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 15 of 79 Page ID #:15
`
`
`
`interactions. This unique option within Samesurf’s co-browsing technology is a
`particularly sought out and desired benefit that distinguishes co-browsing from
`traditional systems.
`In more general terms, the comparative advantages of co-browsing over
`63.
`prior technologies are enhancements to multi-way, simultaneous interactivity, sensitive
`data security, computing resource and bandwidth utilization level efficiencies,
`computer and network security, the ability for multiple users to simultaneously view
`and listen to rich media content without latency or choppiness, and scalability to levels
`that were not possible with prior technology.
`Intuit
`B.
`64. On information and belief, Intuit provides co-browse technology and
`software that Intuit utilizes as part of Intuit TurboTax Online, QuickBooks Online,
`TurboTax Live, QuickBooks Live, Smartlook, and other co-browse enabled Intuit
`products.
`65. On information and belief, Intuit provides co-browse capabilities to Intuit
`customers as part of Intuit TurboTax Online, QuickBooks Online, TurboTax Live,
`QuickBooks Live, Smartlook, and other co-browse enabled Intuit products.
`66. On information and belief, Intuit tax preparation and accounting
`professionals co-browse with Intuit customers as part of Intuit TurboTax Online,
`QuickBooks Online, TurboTax Live, QuickBooks Live, Smartlook, and other co-
`browse enabled Intuit products.
`67. On information and belief, Intuit TurboTax Online, QuickBooks Online,
`TurboTax Live, QuickBooks Live, Smartlook, and other co-browse enabled Intuit
`products, each utilize a synchronization server as part of providing co-browse
`technology to Intuit’s customers.
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`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
`
`MCKOOL SMITH, P.C.
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-02060 Document 1 Filed 03/29/22 Page 16 of 79 Page ID #:16
`
`
`
`C.
`
`Intuit is Infringing Samesurf’s ’448, ’145 and ’591 Patents (“Samesurf
`Patents”)
`
`68. On November 1, 2016, the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`duly and legally issued United States Patent No. 9,483,448 (“the ’448 Patent”), titled
`“Method and Apparatus for the Implementation of a Real-Time Sharable Browsing
`Experience on a Host Device.” Samesurf, Inc. is the owner of the ’448 Patent.
`69. Samesurf ho