Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 1 of 17 Page ID #:1
`
`Simon Franzini (Cal. Bar No. 287631)
`simon@dovel.com
`Gregory S. Dovel (Cal. Bar No. 135387)
`greg@dovel.com
`DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
`201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
`Santa Monica, California 90401
`Telephone: (310) 656-7066
`Facsimile: (310) 656-7069
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff SpeakWare, Inc.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`Case No. 8:18-CV-01293
`
`Patent Infringement Complaint
`
`Demand for Jury Trial
`
`SPEAKWARE, INC.,
`a California corporation,
`
` Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
`a Washington corporation,
`
` Defendant.
`
`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
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 2 of 17 Page ID #:2
`
`
`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
`
`
`Plaintiff SpeakWare, Inc. (“SpeakWare”) files this complaint against Defendant
`Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”), alleging direct and indirect infringement of U.S.
`Patent 6,397,186. The accused products are Microsoft’s voice-activated systems for
`controlling appliances.
`Plaintiff SpeakWare and the asserted patent.
`Plaintiff SpeakWare, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under
`1.
`the laws of the State of California. SpeakWare is managed by lead inventor of U.S.
`Patent 6,397,186, William Stuart Bush.
`2.
`SpeakWare is the owner of U.S. Patent 6,397,186, entitled “Hands-Free,
`Voice-Operated Remote Control Transmitter,” which issued on May 28, 2002. The
`’186 patent is well-known in the industry and has been cited in 163 issued patents.
`Defendant Microsoft Corporation has known of or been willfully blind to the existence
`of the ’186 patent since at least May 27, 2011. A copy of the ’186 patent is attached as
`Exhibit 1.
`
`Defendant Microsoft and the accused products.
`3. Defendant Microsoft Corporation is a Washington corporation with
`business offices in California, including in this district.
`4. Microsoft has developed, manufactured, imported, offered for sale, sold,
`and used voice-activated systems for controlling appliances that infringe the ’186
`patent. These systems include computing devices operating Microsoft Windows 10
`and Harman Kardon Invoke smart speakers, all of which use Microsoft’s voice-
`activated virtual assistant, Cortana, to control appliances. These systems can also
`include associated servers owned or controlled by Microsoft that enable and work in
`connection with the accused devices to control appliances.
`Nature of the action, jurisdiction and venue.
`Plaintiff SpeakWare, Inc. asserts claims for patent infringement against
`5.
`Defendant Microsoft Corporation under the patent laws of the United States, including
`
`1
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 3 of 17 Page ID #: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
`
`
`35 U.S.C. §§ 271 and 281, et seq. The Court has original jurisdiction over
`SpeakWare’s patent infringement claims under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a).
`6.
`The Court has personal jurisdiction over Microsoft. Microsoft has
`committed acts of infringement in this district, including selling infringing systems in
`this district and using infringing systems in this district.
`7. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §1400(b). Microsoft has
`committed acts of infringement in this district and has several established places of
`business in this district. These include numerous Microsoft Store retail locations,
`including at Brea Mall, 1065 Brea Mall, Brea, California 92821-5718; Westfield
`Topanga, 6600 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Canoga Park, California 91303; Los Cerritos
`Center, 331 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, California 90703-5424; South Coast Plaza,
`3333 Bristol Street, Suite 1249, Costa Mesa, California 92626-1803; Glendale
`Galleria, 2140 Glendale Galleria, JCPenney Court, Glendale, California 91210-2101;
`Westfield Century City, 10250 Santa Monica Blvd., Los Angeles, California 90067-
`6609; and The Shops at Mission Viejo, 578 The Shops at Mission Viejo, Mission
`Viejo, California 92691-6512.
`
`https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/locations/all-locations.
`In addition, they include Microsoft offices, for example Microsoft’s
`8.
`offices at 13031 W. Jefferson Blvd., Ste. 200, Playa Vista, California 90094.
`9.
`These locations are regular and established places of business of
`Microsoft for purposes of §1400(b) because each (i) is a physical place in the Central
`District of California (each consisting of a building or a part of a building from which
`
`2
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 4 of 17 Page ID #:4
`
`
`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
`
`
`business is conducted); (ii) operates the business of Microsoft in a regular, steady,
`uniform, orderly, settled, fixed, and permanent manner; and (iii) is owned or leased by
`Microsoft, and has been ratified by Microsoft as a place of business. Moreover, these
`locations are represented by Microsoft as its places of business in the district and are
`listed and advertised by Microsoft on its website.
`Claim for patent infringement.
`10. SpeakWare incorporates by reference each of the allegations in
`paragraphs 1-9 above and further alleges as follows:
`11. On May 28, 2002, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued
`U.S. Patent 6,397,186, entitled “Hands-Free, Voice-Operated Remote Control
`Transmitter.” Ex. 1.
`12. SpeakWare is the owner of the ’186 patent with full rights to pursue
`recovery of royalties for damages for infringement, including full rights to recover past
`and future damages.
`Validity of the ’186 patent.
`13. Each claim of the ’186 patent is valid and enforceable.
`Patent eligibility of the ’186 patent.
`14. Each claim of the ’186 patent is patent eligible.
`15. Each claim is directed to a specific improvement in technology, and not
`an abstract idea.
`16. The claims improve technology for remotely controlling electronic
`appliances. Indeed, the specification explains that the patent involves technology “for
`remotely controlling electronic equipment” and, more specifically, a “voice-activated
`and voice-operated remote control system for controlling appliances.” ’186 patent,
`1:6-9.
`17. The claims of the ’186 patent are directed to a specific improvement in
`voice-activated remote control technology.
`
`3
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 5 of 17 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
`
`
`Indeed, the claims are directed to improving existing technological
`18.
`solutions for remotely controlling electronic appliances.
`19. The patent is entitled “hands-free, voice-operated remote control
`transmitter” and generally “relates to devices for remotely controlling electronic
`equipment, and more particularly, to a wireless, user-programmable, voice activated
`and voice operated remote control system for controlling appliances.” ’186 patent,
`1:6-9.
`20. The specification describes the conventional way of remotely controlling
`electronic appliances:
`“Historically, appliances, for example, electronic appliances, such as,
`televisions, VCRs, digital satellite systems, audio systems, and related
`accessories, have been remotely controlled by hand-held transmitters used to
`generate signals to receivers incorporated into the electronics of the remotely
`controlled appliances. Signals for such appliances correspond to control
`commands, such as channel selection/tuning, power on/off, audio volume
`adjustment, and muting controls, typically generated by the user by depressing
`buttons on a remote control transmitter keypad. The basic composition and
`operation of such remote control systems are well known in the art.”
`’186 patent, 1:11-22.
`21. The specification also explains that these conventional systems had
`numerous drawbacks. For example:
`“[T]he small size and mobility [of such systems] often contribute to
`misplacement or loss of the transmitter. Also, for device operators with
`restricted physical mobility or sight limitations, hand-held remote controls may
`not provide sufficient access to the command controls of the remotely controlled
`appliances. Also, if an operator’s hands are engaged in an activity, an
`interruption in the activity may be required to operate the hand-held remote
`
`4
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 6 of 17 Page ID #:6
`
`
`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
`
`
`control, causing inconvenience to the operator and potentially having an adverse
`effect on productivity.”
`’186 patent, 1:26-35.
`“As the number of separate remote control transmitters increases, locating,
`distinguishing, and locating the appropriate transmitters becomes increasingly
`difficult.”
`’186 patent, 1:37-41.
`Such systems “require the user to establish physical contact, typically in the
`form of manually depressing keypad buttons, to transmit a control command to
`the remotely controlled appliance,” but “are often misplaced causing frustration
`to the user.”
`’186 patent, 2:1-6.
`22. Although a handful of “voice-operated remote control systems have
`recently been developed,” ’186 patent, 2:7-8, those newly developed systems also had
`serious drawbacks.
`23. One such drawback was that “such systems are not truly hands-free,
`requiring manual intervention by the user during use. In particular, such remote
`control systems as disclosed in the above-mentioned patents, are all based upon the use
`of a ‘talk switch’; which must be manually depressed to enter a voice command when
`the transmission of a remote control signal is desired.” ’186 patent, 2:15-21. In
`particular, with respect to one such system, the specification explains that “[t]he
`transmitter operates depending on whether the talk switch has been depressed. If the
`talk switch has been depressed, the transmitter is enabled to remote control signals.
`Once the talk switch is released, the transmitter is kept in a low power consumption
`mode, waiting for voice commands to be applied. As indicated above, the means for
`generating and transmitting a remote control signal based on the recognized spoken
`voice command is not hands-free, requiring the manual intervention of pressing a talk
`switch to accomplish these functions.” Id. at 2:32-42.
`
`5
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 7 of 17 Page ID #:7
`
`
`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
`
`
`24. Another such drawback was that certain systems required “physical
`interconnections between the control system and the appliance which makes it difficult
`for a user to add additional appliances or change controlled appliances.” ’186 patent,
`2:42-49.
`25. The claims are directed to improving these existing technological
`solutions for remotely controlling electronic appliances. For example, claim 1 recites
`an “audio signal activated control system for controlling appliances” that includes “a
`microphone for receiving audio signals and converting said audio signals to electrical
`signals,” “a speech recognition system for receiving said electrical signals,” and an
`“appliance control circuit” that is configured to “transmit one or more application
`control signals” to control appliances. ’186 patent, claim 1. The system has “a low
`power sound activation mode” and a “speech recognition mode” and is “configured to
`automatically switch from said sound activation mode to said speech recognition mode
`as a function of the amplitude of said electrical signals.” Id.
`26. This system of claim 1 provides numerous improvements over existing
`technological solutions for remotely controlling electronic appliances based on control
`signals generated by the user by depressing buttons on a remote control transmitter
`keypad. For example, it avoids the need for users to hold the remote control
`transmitter, and thus avoids the need for locating such a transmitter (and the risk of
`losing such transmitter in the first place). As a second example, it provides a device
`operator with restricted physical mobility with greater access to (and better ability to
`control) electronic appliances. As a third example, it allows the operator of an
`electronic appliance to control that appliance without interrupting an activity in which
`his or her hands are engaged. As a fourth example, it allows the operator to control
`multiple appliances and therefore eliminates the need to locate and distinguish the
`appropriate transmitter for a particular appliance.
`27. The system of claim 1 also provides numerous benefits over the newly
`developed voice-operated remote control systems that existed at the time (which were
`
`6
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 8 of 17 Page ID #:8
`
`
`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
`
`
`themselves unconventional). For example, it had two modes, one low power and one
`for speech recognition. As a second example, it avoided the need to have a “talk
`switch” by taking advantage of signal characteristics to switch from a low power sound
`activation mode to a speech recognition mode. This made it truly “hands free” and
`thus achieved all of the benefits identified above. See, e.g., ’186 patent, 7:12-16 (“An
`important aspect of the invention relates to the ability of the system to switch from a
`sleep mode to an active mode solely by voice commands, to provide true hands-free
`remote operation.”). In addition, it allowed the system to limit power consumption and
`preserve battery life by staying in a low power mode until the system determined that it
`should switch modes. Furthermore, it made the system more reliable by ensuring that
`it would not issue commands to appliances based on background noise.
`28.
`In addition, the claims do not merely recite a desired outcome, but instead
`recite a specific technical improvement to achieve a desired outcome. For example,
`the system of claim 1 is one particular way of designing a system for controlling
`appliances and claim 1 recites the specific arrangement of specific components that
`achieves the benefits identified above. There are many other ways of designing a
`system for controlling appliances, including many other ways of designing a system
`for controlling appliances based on audio signals, including the ones described in the
`prior art patents described in the specification.
`29.
`In addition, the claims recite unconventional technical steps that improve
`technology.
`30.
`Indeed, the claims recite a technical solution to a technical problem: an
`audio signal activated control system for controlling appliances that solved technical
`problems with existing systems for controlling appliances. For example, as explained
`above, claim 1 did this using an “audio signal activated control system for controlling
`appliances” that includes “a microphone for receiving audio signals and converting
`said audio signals to electrical signals,” “a speech recognition system for receiving said
`electrical signals,” and an “appliance control circuit” that is configured to “transmit
`
`7
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 9 of 17 Page ID #:9
`
`
`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
`
`
`one or more application control signals” to control appliances. ’186 patent, claim 1.
`The system has “a low power sound activation mode” and “a speech recognition
`mode” and is “configured to automatically switch from said sound activation mode to
`said speech recognition mode as a function of the amplitude of said electrical signals.”
`Id.
`
`31. The particular combination of components and requirements was
`unconventional, went against conventional wisdom, and, in fact, had never been done
`before. Indeed, as explained above, at the time of the invention, it was conventional to
`control appliances by using hand-held transmitters to generate signals to receivers
`incorporated into the electronics of the remotely controlled appliances. Furthermore, it
`was conventional for such signals to be generated by the user by depressing buttons on
`a remote control transmitter keypad. And it was conventional to have multiple such
`controllers for each appliance. Moreover, even the systems that used speech
`recognition—which were themselves unconventional—made use of a “talk switch”
`and did not rely on properties of electrical signals such as amplitude to switch to
`speech recognition mode, much less from a low power mode.
`32. Each claim recites numerous additional unconventional technical steps,
`each of which is independently sufficient to confer patent-eligibility.
`Microsoft’s infringement of the ’186 patent.
`33. Microsoft has directly infringed and continues to directly infringe the
`claims of the ’186 patent by making, using, offering to sell, selling, and importing the
`accused products. Microsoft infringes numerous claims of the ’186 patent, including
`independent claim 1. An example way that Microsoft’s accused products infringe
`claim 1 is provided below for reference.
`“An audio signal activated control system for controlling appliances comprising:”
`• Computing devices operating Microsoft Windows 10, Harman Kardon Invoke
`smart speakers, and other Cortana-enabled devices—alone and, alternatively, in
`combination with Microsoft servers and/or additional electronic equipment—are
`
`8
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 10 of 17 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
`
`
`an “audio signal activated control system for controlling appliances”: they
`consist of a system activated by audio signals (for example, signals representing
`audio such as spoken words) for controlling appliances (for example, appliances
`identified as compatible with Cortana on Microsoft’s website:
`https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/cortana/skills/featured).
`“a microphone for receiving audio signals and converting said audio signals to
`electrical signals;”
`• The “audio signal activated control system for controlling appliances” identified
`above includes “a microphone for receiving audio signals and converting said
`
`9
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 11 of 17 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
`
`
`audio signals to electrical signals.” For example, a Harman Kardon Invoke
`smart speaker includes seven far-field microphones:
`https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/cortana/devices/invoke.
`“a speech recognition system for receiving said electrical signals,”
`• The “audio signal activated control system for controlling appliances” identified
`above includes “a speech recognition system for receiving said electrical
`signals” (for example, components within the computing devices operating
`Microsoft Windows 10, Harman Kardon Invoke smart speakers, other Cortana-
`enabled devices, and/or Microsoft servers) meeting each of the requirements of
`the claim as shown below.
`“said speech recognition system including a processor”
`• The “speech recognition system” identified above includes one or more
`processors. For example, the Harman Kardon Invoke smart speaker includes
`one or more processors. As a second example, Microsoft servers include
`numerous processors.
`“and having a low power sound activation mode for detecting the presence of said
`electrical signals and a speech recognition mode for converting said electrical
`signals to electrical representative signals, decoding said electrical representative
`signals and generating control signals for controlling one or more appliances,
`wherein in said speech recognition mode said processor decodes said electrical
`representative signals and wherein in said sound activation mode said processor is in
`a low power state,”
`• The “speech recognition system” identified above has “a low power sound
`activation mode for detecting the presence of said electrical signals” (for
`example, when the system detects the presence of electrical signals from the
`microphone, such as signals corresponding to the wake words “Hey Cortana”) in
`which “said processor is in a low power state” (for example, a state in which the
`processor consumes less power, such as a “sleep” state).
`
`10
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 12 of 17 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
`
`
`• The “speech recognition system” identified above also has “a speech
`recognition mode” (for example, a mode in which the system recognizes spoken
`commands, for example the spoken commands given by a user to Microsoft’s
`virtual assistant, Cortana) “for converting said electrical signals to electrical
`representative signals, decoding said electrical representative signals and
`generating control signals for controlling one or more appliances,” (for
`example, for converting the electrical signals from the microphone into
`electrical representative signals, for example signals representing sound waves;
`decoding those signals, for example to process them, to determine whether they
`represent audio signals or contain spoken commands, or to determine the content
`or meaning of those spoken commands; and generating control signals for
`controlling one or more appliances, for example instructions for an appliance
`identified above to perform one or more functions such as powering on) in
`which “said processor decodes said electrical representative signal” (performs
`the “decoding” identified above).
`“said speech recognition system configured to automatically switch from said sound
`activation mode to said speech recognition mode as a function of the amplitude of
`said electrical signals”
`• The “speech recognition system” identified above is “configured to
`automatically switch from said sound activation mode to said speech
`recognition mode as a function of the amplitude of said electrical signals”: it is
`configured to automatically switch from the “sound activation mode” identified
`above to the “speech recognition mode” identified above as a function of the
`amplitude of the “electrical signals” from the microphone, for example as a
`function of the amplitude of the electrical signals corresponding to the wake
`words “Hey Cortana.”
`“an appliance control circuit which includes a transmitter, said appliance control
`circuit configured to receive said control signals from said speech recognition system
`
`11
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 13 of 17 Page ID #:13
`
`
`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
`
`
`and generate and automatically transmit one or more appliance control signals to
`said one or more appliances”
`• The “audio signal activated control system for controlling appliances” includes
`“an appliance control circuit” that includes a transmitter (for example a radio
`transceiver) that is “configured to receive said control signals” (to receive the
`control signals identified above) and “generate and automatically transmit one
`or more appliance control signals to said one or more appliances” (for example,
`to generate and transmit application control signals such as Wi-Fi signals that
`contain instructions to control one of the appliances identified above).
`Indirect infringement.
`34. Microsoft has also indirectly infringed and continues to indirectly infringe
`the ’186 patent.
`35. Microsoft has actively induced and continues to actively induce users of
`its accused products to infringe the ’186 patent.
`36. Microsoft has offered and continues to offer its accused products for sale
`both at Microsoft Store retail locations and on its website. By doing so, Microsoft
`encourages its customers to make and use systems that infringe the ’186 patent as
`shown above, and to perform methods that infringe the ’186 patent.
`37.
`In addition, Microsoft has instructed and continues to instruct its
`customers, developers, and resellers to make and use systems that infringe the ’186
`patent as shown above, and to perform methods that infringe the ’186 patent. For
`example, on its website, Microsoft provides instructions encouraging its customers to
`make and use systems that include accused products that infringe the system claims of
`the ’186 patent as shown above, and to use those systems to carry out methods that
`infringe the method claims of the ’186 patent. For example:
`
`
`12
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 14 of 17 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
`
`
`https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/cortana/devices/invoke.
`38. As a second example, Microsoft’s employees encourage and instruct
`Microsoft’s customers (resellers and end users) to make and use systems that include
`its accused products that infringe the system claims of the ’186 patent as shown above,
`and encourage and instruct Microsoft’s customers to use those systems to carry out
`methods that infringe the method claims of the ’186 patent.
`39. Furthermore, Microsoft knew or was willfully blind to the fact that its
`customers’ actions in response to such encouragement and instruction would infringe
`the ’186 patent.
`40. Microsoft was aware of or willfully blind to the ’186 patent since at least
`May 27, 2011. Moreover, Microsoft has been familiar with the teachings and claims
`of the ’186 patent, has understood those teachings, has understood what the ’186 patent
`claims, and has understood the relevance of those teachings and those claims to its
`accused products.
`41.
`Indeed, the ’186 patent is well-known in the art and has been cited 163
`times in subsequent issued patents. In addition, the ’186 patent has been cited in
`numerous patents and patent applications in the field of voice-activated systems,
`including in patents and patent applications assigned to each of Microsoft’s main
`competitors in the field. In addition, on May 27, 2011, a continuation of the ’186
`patent was cited and discussed during the prosecution of U.S. Patent Application
`11/831,862 (U.S. Patent 8,396,331), assigned to Microsoft. That continuation claims
`priority to the ’186 patent, and lists the ’186 patent on its face. In addition, that
`13
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 15 of 17 Page ID #:15
`
`
`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
`
`
`continuation of the ’186 patent has been cited and discussed during the prosecution of
`additional patents assigned to Microsoft. For example, during the prosecution of U.S.
`Patent Application 13/297,116 (U.S. Patent 9,031,847), the examiner cited disclosures
`in the continuation of the ’186 patent (also found, identically, in the ’186 patent) in
`rejecting certain pending claims. The examiner described those disclosures in detail.
`And Microsoft also described those disclosures in detail in making responsive
`arguments.
`42. Furthermore, Microsoft has known and has understood how its own
`accused products work, has known or has been willfully blind to the fact that the ’186
`patent was relevant to its accused products, and has known or has been willfully blind
`to the fact that making and using systems involving its accused products, including
`according to its instructions, would infringe the ’186 patent.
`43. Based on the foregoing, Microsoft knew that its customers’ use of the
`accused products would infringe the ’186 patent, or alternatively was aware that there
`was a high probability that its customers’ use of the accused products would infringe
`and took deliberate actions to avoid confirming this.
`44. As a result, Microsoft has indirectly infringed and continues to indirectly
`infringe the ’186 patent by inducing its customers to use its accused products in an
`infringing manner, and knowing or being willfully blind to the fact that such use would
`infringe the ’186 patent.
`Willful infringement.
`45. Microsoft’s infringement of the ’186 patent has been knowing, willful,
`and egregious.
`46. For the reasons stated in paragraphs 39-43 above, Microsoft knew that its
`accused products infringed and continue to infringe the ’186 patent, or alternatively
`took deliberate steps to avoid confirming this and was therefore willfully blind to these
`facts. SpeakWare incorporates by reference each of the allegations in these
`paragraphs.
`
`14
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 16 of 17 Page ID #:16
`
`
`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
`
`
`47. SpeakWare has been damaged by Microsoft’s infringement of the ’186
`patent and is entitled to reasonable royalty damages and enhanced damages due to
`Microsoft’s willful infringement.
`
`Jury demand.
`48. SpeakWare demands trial by jury of all issues.
`Relief requested.
`SpeakWare prays for the following relief:
`A. A judgment in favor of SpeakWare that Microsoft has infringed the
`asserted ’186 patent and that the patent is valid, enforceable, and patent-eligible;
`B. A judgment and order requiring Microsoft to pay SpeakWare
`compensatory damages, costs, expenses, and pre- and post-judgment interest for its
`infringement of the asserted patent, as provided under 35 U.S.C. §284;
`C. A judgment that Microsoft has willfully infringed the ’186 patent and that
`SpeakWare is entitled to enhanced damages as a result of such willful infringement;
`D. A finding that this case is exceptional under 35 U.S.C. §285, at minimum
`due to Microsoft’s willful infringement, and an award of SpeakWare’s reasonable
`attorney’s fees and costs; and
`E. Any and all other relief to which SpeakWare may be entitled.
`
`Dated: July 26, 2018
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Simon Franzini
`
`DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
`Simon Franzini (Cal. Bar No. 287631)
`simon@dovel.com
`Gregory S. Dovel (Cal. Bar No. 135387)
`greg@dovel.com
`201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
`Santa Monica, California 90401
`Telephone: (310) 656-7066
`
`15
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:18-cv-01293-DOC-DFM Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 17 of 17 Page ID #:17
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`Facsimile: (310) 656-7069
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff SpeakWare, Inc.
`
`16
`
`
`